That is a good thing, but a lot of good engineering has been lost to time. Many of today's Engineers completely rely on computer design and programs and what is not there or in they're school books are sadly regarded as insignificant.
I have worked with several engineers, that have absolutely zero practical understanding of what they are educated in, good they can do math and calculations helped by they're PC. But it does not help anything when they fail to comprehend the most basic things in the subject they were educated in, that is a more and more common thing today it seems, sadly.
I started from the bottom and took the education further while working, unlike most of them.
And the field i work in mostly, well lets just say progress is not always progress again, as failure rates on equipment skyrockets with new and fancy technologies and solutions, because the simple task of reliability is forgotten in favor of fancy widgets and fancy exteriors. Sad but true in many cases.
And not so fun when downtime, costs customers 100 000$ an hour or more.
Anyways lets get back to compression drivers as the subject of the thread intended 🙂
Last edited:
Just to be clear, those preferences were from notnyt, not me. I am open to try anything if it is a meaningful measurable and audible improvement.
Agreed. Other than a serial protection cap, I use amplification with a lot less gain, so no padding on the CD's.
Thanks. Just to clarify, I am not here to preach or sell anything to anyone. I am looking for ways to improve my own personal setup with a new CD and/or waveguide.. Still looking...
Hi Mitchba,
Also running unpadded HF and mid CDs in my case with relatively low gain (16dB) 300B DHT SE amps, I do not use serial protection caps since the turn off transient is a couple of mV. (That was my design goal and somehow it worked out.) My only problems over almost 5 years have been self-inflicted, mostly malfunctions with acoustical measurement hardware.. lol
Bass handled by an Icepower 125ASX2 into Iconic 165-8G in Onken boxes, asymmetrical cross to mids at ~600Hz.
All DSP based here basically MiniDSP SHD Studio (Dirac3) into a heavily modified DCX via AES/EBU for the bass, mids, and HF crossovers and a touch of EQ on mids and tweeters. Subs are handled by a separate DAC, analog via ADC.
I've talked about the TD-4001/Yuichi A-290 and HF10AK/STH100 elsewhere in this thread.
Also running unpadded HF and mid CDs in my case with relatively low gain (16dB) 300B DHT SE amps, I do not use serial protection caps since the turn off transient is a couple of mV. (That was my design goal and somehow it worked out.) My only problems over almost 5 years have been self-inflicted, mostly malfunctions with acoustical measurement hardware.. lol
Bass handled by an Icepower 125ASX2 into Iconic 165-8G in Onken boxes, asymmetrical cross to mids at ~600Hz.
All DSP based here basically MiniDSP SHD Studio (Dirac3) into a heavily modified DCX via AES/EBU for the bass, mids, and HF crossovers and a touch of EQ on mids and tweeters. Subs are handled by a separate DAC, analog via ADC.
I've talked about the TD-4001/Yuichi A-290 and HF10AK/STH100 elsewhere in this thread.
I like them a lot, but had to make a lot of changes to my room to make them sound good, and of course I wrote extensively about the joys of using a wildly inappropriate driver choice on them. (Naive in the extreme) Problems with the sound that no amount of fiddling with DSP could hide and even though I was able to achieve relatively flat frequency response it required 4 bands of PEQ to do it, and didn't sound right. I ended up purchasing a pair of well cared for Tad TD-4001 which are working very well with the Yuichi horn and require very minimal EQ to do so.
Previously I always had horns with narrower horizontal directivity and gave very little thought to early reflections and room acoustics in general. (Of course I did not realize this until after the fact.)
Whether I would do this again I am not really sure, there were some nail biting moments for sure. I've made a lot of progress, but there is some distance to go. I am not sure I am done with room treatment although I don't think a lot is needed.
Simultaneously I struggled with the decision to go with DSP and a predominantly digital signal path until the power amplifiers. The DCX is not a great device to pair with a high efficiency horn based system due to the level and nature of the noise generated by a stock unit. I definitely inflicted this on myself, but I am emerging from the other side and am no longer embarrassed at the prospect of others hearing my system.
Previously I always had horns with narrower horizontal directivity and gave very little thought to early reflections and room acoustics in general. (Of course I did not realize this until after the fact.)
Whether I would do this again I am not really sure, there were some nail biting moments for sure. I've made a lot of progress, but there is some distance to go. I am not sure I am done with room treatment although I don't think a lot is needed.
Simultaneously I struggled with the decision to go with DSP and a predominantly digital signal path until the power amplifiers. The DCX is not a great device to pair with a high efficiency horn based system due to the level and nature of the noise generated by a stock unit. I definitely inflicted this on myself, but I am emerging from the other side and am no longer embarrassed at the prospect of others hearing my system.
I use both, passive parts and DSP, problems solved 😉 With passive parts one can manage impedances both ways, for driver backEMF to reduce acoustic distortion, but also can experiment if amplifier performs poorly with reactive loads and do something about that too. Even if there wasn't audible difference one now knows better which way to go, back to passives, to DSP or some kind of hybrid.
Crossover in a speaker is mostly for the filters, and only acoustic filters matter, which both passive and DSP can do equally. Difference between the two is in the circuit impedance and how much one has control over the frequency response. Obviously DSP can do nothing about circuit impedance, and passive network isn't very convenient for control. Using both enables independent control on circuit impedance and acoustic response.
Only downside to DSP in my opinion is increased complexity for the system, but that is not audio quality related trade-off and for that reason I see DSP only positive thing for audio quality. Its everyones to decide if its worth the investment. Electronics need to be very low noise so the cheapest solution won't do. Perhaps passive system sounds best still, trying to promote possibility for exploration 🙂
Crossover in a speaker is mostly for the filters, and only acoustic filters matter, which both passive and DSP can do equally. Difference between the two is in the circuit impedance and how much one has control over the frequency response. Obviously DSP can do nothing about circuit impedance, and passive network isn't very convenient for control. Using both enables independent control on circuit impedance and acoustic response.
Only downside to DSP in my opinion is increased complexity for the system, but that is not audio quality related trade-off and for that reason I see DSP only positive thing for audio quality. Its everyones to decide if its worth the investment. Electronics need to be very low noise so the cheapest solution won't do. Perhaps passive system sounds best still, trying to promote possibility for exploration 🙂
Last edited:
It’s clear that for some audiophiles , what i old , expensive and unobtainable is the must.
We must be happy that nowadays some cheap stuff can compete old goodies . I have been satisfied to play with Tad , Onken , vitavox and altec and others legendary speaker but can also appreciate the quality of a modern Faital HF driver even if it cost just 100€ . At the end just count the mesures and the pleasure 😉
We must be happy that nowadays some cheap stuff can compete old goodies . I have been satisfied to play with Tad , Onken , vitavox and altec and others legendary speaker but can also appreciate the quality of a modern Faital HF driver even if it cost just 100€ . At the end just count the mesures and the pleasure 😉
Yeah its a hobby, full of problems which are mostly solvable if allowing oneself to use what ever means and not sticking to something just because 🙂 Although if goal is to have vintage set, then obviously modern stuff does not fit to it. Or small streamer with bluetooth to carry on the beach, obviously big horns don't fit. If goal is to have best possible sound then use what ever, old or new, unicorns, box store stuff, doesn't matter if it makes sound better. Limiting some tech out from options because of belief just lowers ceiling of reachable performance. Which is also fine, what ever makes fun time 🙂
Last edited:
not exactly the same the bandwith seems shorter than the DCM50 6K vs 10K , it seems the same as the medium part of the DCX464 without the big bump in the 5K zone ?
It's the same medium part as DCX464.
It seems the MF filter is the main cause for the response difference?
MF filter
Really want to hear the sound of DCX464.
Joseph Crowe has reviewed BMS 4591 and gives good comment on it (similar to the midrange of DCX464).
BMS 4591 with Horn No. 1670
It seems the MF filter is the main cause for the response difference?
MF filter
Really want to hear the sound of DCX464.
Joseph Crowe has reviewed BMS 4591 and gives good comment on it (similar to the midrange of DCX464).
BMS 4591 with Horn No. 1670
curious if anyone here knows what the exit angle of a JBL 2447 (1.5" exit) compression driver is? Am trying to see if they would be a decent match to the Yuichi A290? Am under the impression the Yuichi has a 10 degree entrance angle. Was considering using JBL 2452-sl smooth aquaplas diaphragms in the 2447 to help extend the top end a little. Thanks for any help as I can't seem to find this info on line.
here is a cut and past of a post made by Marco Gea at the Lansing Heritage forum it contains angles for some drivers. I thought this might be a good list to start with. This kind of measurement is above my skill level to make. Manufacturers will often supply this information if requested. I just wanted to see if the drivers that are at hand for me would be a decent option for a Yuichi a-290 horn project and thought that finding out if they have a matching angle or are close to a match would be a good place see if a project was worth considering. Thanks to Marco.
Classic compression drivers internal throat geometries
i just found some more on line here they are.
BMS
4550 – 14°
4552 – 24°
4554 – 26.7°
4555 - 30°
B & C
DE250 14.6°
DE10 7.7°
DE12 24°
DE400TN 20.7°
DE400 31°
DE500 17°
DE200 9.9°
DE85TN 34.5°
DE750TN 22°
DE950TN 17°
JBL
2450 10+°
Radian
950 20.3°
Celestion
CDX1-1745 20.16° total
CDX1-1730 20.16°
CDX1-1731 20.16°
CDX1-1746 7.6°
Beyma
CP750Nd – 24º
CP850Nd – 7º
CP755Nd – 12º60’
SMC65Nd – 15º
CP385Nd – 16º30’
SMC225Nd – 13º1’
BMS
4550 – 14°
4552 – 24°
4554 – 26.7°
4555 - 30°
B & C
DE250 14.6°
DE10 7.7°
DE12 24°
DE400TN 20.7°
DE400 31°
DE500 17°
DE200 9.9°
DE85TN 34.5°
DE750TN 22°
DE950TN 17°
JBL
2450 10+°
Radian
950 20.3°
Celestion
CDX1-1745 20.16° total
CDX1-1730 20.16°
CDX1-1731 20.16°
CDX1-1746 7.6°
Beyma
CP750Nd – 24º
CP850Nd – 7º
CP755Nd – 12º60’
SMC65Nd – 15º
CP385Nd – 16º30’
SMC225Nd – 13º1’
Faital pro lets download a spreadsheet with all the data.
FaitalPRO HF Drivers exit angle Comparison Table
FaitalPRO HF Drivers exit angle Comparison Table
| PRODUCT NAME | EXIT ANGLE |
| HF2000 | 30° Conical |
| HF201 | 36° Conical |
| HF206 | 30° Conical |
| HF204 | 30° Conical |
| HF200 | 24° Conical |
| HMF200 | Combined Exit |
| HF1460 | Cylindrical |
| HF1440 | Combined Exit |
| HF1400 | 12° Conical |
| HF148C | 15° Conical |
| HF141 | 6° Conical |
| HF143 | 6° Conical |
| HF144 | 29° Conical |
| HF146 | 29° Conical |
| HF142 | 29° Conical |
| HF146R | 29° Conical |
| HF140 | 7° Conical |
| HF1000 | 0° Cylindrical |
| HF107 | Combined Exit |
| HF10AK | 21° Conical |
| HF108R | 31° Conical |
| HF106 | Combined Exit |
| HF108 | 31° Conical |
| HF109 | 13° Conical |
| HF103 | 13° Conical |
| HF104 | Combined Exit |
| HF111 | 18° Conical |
| HF105 | Combined Exit |
| HF102 | 9° Conical |
| HF100 | 9° Conical |
| FD371 | N/A |
| FD375 | N/A |
Last edited:
As i ask on the B&C DC464 thread anyone
has compared the B&C DCX464 / DMC420 to the previous DCX50 / DMC50 ? for hifi use 400 / 5K
thanks.
has compared the B&C DCX464 / DMC420 to the previous DCX50 / DMC50 ? for hifi use 400 / 5K
thanks.
In camplo's thread I've briefly shared my experiences, but I'll add some details.
First a translated quote from a dutch website.
"It was hard work to get everything ready on time. From all the preparations in advance, the layout of the room, the acoustic properties to be obtained and of course what to bring with you to give a top demonstration. Having functioning room acoustics is absolutely desirable and necessary for performance. That is why it was decided to make a large frame that was mainly made up of wood-up panels. These highly decorative panels contribute to obtaining very good conditions for sound reproduction. The combination of both damping and diffusion is very desirable for reproduction and it also looks very nice. The panels are available in various types of real wood veneer. To obtain a correct bass reproduction, we have placed Bass Chunkz behind the frame."
And some additional stilted, diamond clad marketing blurb:
"Setup and tuning
The challenge remains during such an event to obtain enough sound, tranquility, space and definition from the system. That is why importer Symphonie Audio decided to supply equipment from Angstrom's exclusive Stella series. We played with the Angstrom Stella ZPR 22 preamp and ZMA 180 monoblocks. These are "all tube" designs and have amazing control with a very rich sound spectrum. The Magico M2 brought along by AudioXperience were effortlessly controlled by the Stellas, thanks to the circuit operating in class A. No less than 180 watts per mono power amplifier! As source we brought the dCS Rossini Apex player with accompanying master clock. A fantastic high performance streaming audio player with CD transport. New at AudioXperience is TechDAS. This idiosyncratic manufacturer from Japan supplies and makes one of the most beautiful turntables on the market and fits perfectly in terms of level in this system. Crystal Cable debuted with the van Gogh Art series cabling; never before have we become acquainted with interconnects and speaker cables of such a high level. Exceptional refinement and very rich sound structures filled the room with music! We opted for a tuning in which the aforementioned aspects were fully present in the reproduction. We were thrilled with how incredibly rich this system sounded with a very wide and deep soundstage. The playability was also fantastic, you didn't have to look for that one recording that works. In short, we were delighted and given the number of positive reactions, the audience present was too!"
I have absolutely no need to speak on behalf of 'the audience', because about 15 years ago I disconnected myself from the high end audio world.
Nevertheless, my expectations were high and I was counting on a certain 'quality experience', even though I knew in advance this setup would never meet my philosophical and technological ideals.
Fortunately, Sunday afternoon was considerably quieter than the day before, so there were no queues for most rooms.
Definitely one of the more expensive setups, with a total price north of $250,000.
I sat down in the same chair as the slumped man in the black sweater on the right.
I often close my eyes to avoid visual distractions.
A blues track was played, not exactly the type of blues I would listen to myself, but certainly not standard MOR high end music.
Over the years I have developed a (personal) frame of reference > a combination of experiences (including live/acoustic music), knowledge and a more philosophical contemplation on these matters and more.
Under the influence of imagination, a kind of 'inner knowing' has arisen through which, when listening, everything immediately snaps into place, or not.
The snap does not imply 'perfection' in any way, but consists of certain basic qualities through which the experience reaches a certain level. Non-rational terms such as 'authenticity'/naturalness and 'credibility' come to mind.
In the Magico room I wasn't touched/involved, so there was no 'snap'.
In fact, in typical audiophile fashion, my attention was immediately drawn to all kinds of details in the reproduction instead of the music as a whole.
In other words, it was mainly a static, technical presentation in which the inspiration/soul of the music was missing. My brother and our buddy both agreed.
Was the rendering bad? Evidently not, but the sterile, analytical character suits studio monitors better in my opinion.
Last edited: