Hi Peter,
I do stock vs dipole but not with an enlarged enclosure, which is next on the list. To my ears, it sounds more open and relaxed dipole but difficult to say if its due to letting it breathe freely without the back cup or just from the typical dipole effects (directivity, rear-wall reflections).
Some measurements of the JA-8008 can be found here. Old version but guessing polars will be similar for new version so can still be used to compare directivity with the TPL at intended crossover.
FYI in July 2010 the German Hobby Hifi magazine tested El Nino, a 2-way monitor based on the JA-8008 (in BR) and the Mundorf AMT 2510c (not too dissimilar from the TPL-150). You'd think the 8" would have to be "quick" (start-and-stop) for this to succeed. Well, Hobby Hifi meant they had not heard a better book shelf monitor... The biggest problem I see with it is its limited power handling in the company of the TPL and a pro-woofer.
Hi InOtIn,
Thanks for responding - and please report back when you have tried the TPL with the enlarged back chamber
.
Thanks also for the link regarding the 'ElNino'. Note that in that monitor, the JA8008 is used for bass too. In the mids it actually has a sensitivity around 94-95 dB/1w which means that a pair mounted in parallel will match the sensitivity of the TPL-150H well. The new version of the JA8008 has much higher Qms and a phase plug. More info on the new driver design considerations and measurements can be found here:
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008-HMQ.htm
PS: Just for the record, I have no affiliation with Troels Gravesen, who designed the driver.
Best regards
Peter
Thanks for responding - and please report back when you have tried the TPL with the enlarged back chamber
.Thanks also for the link regarding the 'ElNino'. Note that in that monitor, the JA8008 is used for bass too. In the mids it actually has a sensitivity around 94-95 dB/1w which means that a pair mounted in parallel will match the sensitivity of the TPL-150H well. The new version of the JA8008 has much higher Qms and a phase plug. More info on the new driver design considerations and measurements can be found here:
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JA8008-HMQ.htm
PS: Just for the record, I have no affiliation with Troels Gravesen, who designed the driver.
Best regards
Peter
Will do
Yes it seems like a nice (SEAS-made) driver. I quickly modeled it in WBCD; 7L sealed, 1st order HPF @ 150Hz, and 200W (e.g. Ncore NC400). The sim file is attached. I haven't seen the Pe rating for the JA-8008 but if it can take that sort of power thermally, SPL won't be an issue in the midrange (for me at least) within its Xmax rating of ±3.5mm.
5th Element is taking delivery and giving some impressions on the new JA-8008 HMQ in this thread. As I'm sure you're aware, Zaph has tested the old version. A good discussion thread about efficient 8" drivers in general, to mate with the TPL-150H, can be found here.
When you say a pair mounted in parallel to match sensitivity, do you mean in an MTM or TMM config? Theoretically, MTM is a disaster with respect to CTC spacing (but real-world might be different, as experienced by Peter earlier in this thread or by Lennart here. Even MT is a compromise (CTC with TPL and 8008 is 23cm, more than one wavelength at 2kHz), but probably a smaller one, so that's what I would use and keep it active to balance levels.
Yes it seems like a nice (SEAS-made) driver. I quickly modeled it in WBCD; 7L sealed, 1st order HPF @ 150Hz, and 200W (e.g. Ncore NC400). The sim file is attached. I haven't seen the Pe rating for the JA-8008 but if it can take that sort of power thermally, SPL won't be an issue in the midrange (for me at least) within its Xmax rating of ±3.5mm.
5th Element is taking delivery and giving some impressions on the new JA-8008 HMQ in this thread. As I'm sure you're aware, Zaph has tested the old version. A good discussion thread about efficient 8" drivers in general, to mate with the TPL-150H, can be found here.
When you say a pair mounted in parallel to match sensitivity, do you mean in an MTM or TMM config? Theoretically, MTM is a disaster with respect to CTC spacing (but real-world might be different, as experienced by Peter earlier in this thread or by Lennart here. Even MT is a compromise (CTC with TPL and 8008 is 23cm, more than one wavelength at 2kHz), but probably a smaller one, so that's what I would use and keep it active to balance levels.
Hi InOtIn,
Thanks for the links! IIRC the power rating of the original JA8008 was 80 watts continuously according to Troels, and for the new version it should be the same, so sufficient headroom for domestic use (in my opinion).
I have also wondered whether it the best configuration was MTM or MTT, and as you point out MMT should be better - at least theoretically.
Best regards
Peter
Thanks for the links! IIRC the power rating of the original JA8008 was 80 watts continuously according to Troels, and for the new version it should be the same, so sufficient headroom for domestic use (in my opinion).
I have also wondered whether it the best configuration was MTM or MTT, and as you point out MMT should be better - at least theoretically.
Best regards
Peter
Will do
Yes it seems like a nice (SEAS-made) driver. I quickly modeled it in WBCD; 7L sealed, 1st order HPF @ 150Hz, and 200W (e.g. Ncore NC400). The sim file is attached. I haven't seen the Pe rating for the JA-8008 but if it can take that sort of power thermally, SPL won't be an issue in the midrange (for me at least) within its Xmax rating of ±3.5mm.
5th Element is taking delivery and giving some impressions on the new JA-8008 HMQ in this thread. As I'm sure you're aware, Zaph has tested the old version. A good discussion thread about efficient 8" drivers in general, to mate with the TPL-150H, can be found here.
When you say a pair mounted in parallel to match sensitivity, do you mean in an MTM or TMM config? Theoretically, MTM is a disaster with respect to CTC spacing (but real-world might be different, as experienced by Peter earlier in this thread or by Lennart here. Even MT is a compromise (CTC with TPL and 8008 is 23cm, more than one wavelength at 2kHz), but probably a smaller one, so that's what I would use and keep it active to balance levels.
Hi Angelo and fellows,
Any new réflexions or testimonials around on how you mid-bassed the tpl150(H) ?
Angelo, if starting from scratch again, will you keep the 12p80nd and putt in a smaller sealed enclosure to cross it higher (around 100 hz) ?
On the paper I like this 3 scenarios :
- the 12" from Beyma (why not in OB with an other driver between 800 hz and the TPL150.... 5" neodynium from PRV Audio e.g. (Angelo, any feed back about this bRazilian driver?)
- a 10" from PHL, maybe two in MTM for a better matching of the sensivity of the tpl150
- same as above with 2X FR from Tangbang ! (assymetric MTM XO ?)
It seems better to have a XO bellow 120 hz max, so the choices of bass cabinets and driver could be very different according the scenario choosed above !
a 15" crossed at 200/300 hz for lighter 8" or 10" drivers above is not the same thing than a 12" starting from 80 or 100 hz ! (I like the idea than a driver is cover at minima the same aera of the human voice and bass localisation in the room (<120 hz?) !
Is there really no problem to cross as high the 12p80nd at 1600 hz while
crossing it as low below 80 hz (regarding the cone breakups for such a wide range and the beaming in the highs above let says 1300/1400 hz ?).
WHat are the best alternativ about mid-bass ? : Audax PR18m0 ? I have the feeling no pro drivers but the audax/PHL had a true concensus ?! As the Beyma JBL replica : too shiny because the aluminium central dust cone !
thanks a lot if you made new experiments about those drivers combo around a 3 ways solution (even OB or sealed )
regards,
Eldam
Any new réflexions or testimonials around on how you mid-bassed the tpl150(H) ?
Angelo, if starting from scratch again, will you keep the 12p80nd and putt in a smaller sealed enclosure to cross it higher (around 100 hz) ?
On the paper I like this 3 scenarios :
- the 12" from Beyma (why not in OB with an other driver between 800 hz and the TPL150.... 5" neodynium from PRV Audio e.g. (Angelo, any feed back about this bRazilian driver?)
- a 10" from PHL, maybe two in MTM for a better matching of the sensivity of the tpl150
- same as above with 2X FR from Tangbang ! (assymetric MTM XO ?)
It seems better to have a XO bellow 120 hz max, so the choices of bass cabinets and driver could be very different according the scenario choosed above !
a 15" crossed at 200/300 hz for lighter 8" or 10" drivers above is not the same thing than a 12" starting from 80 or 100 hz ! (I like the idea than a driver is cover at minima the same aera of the human voice and bass localisation in the room (<120 hz?) !
Is there really no problem to cross as high the 12p80nd at 1600 hz while
crossing it as low below 80 hz (regarding the cone breakups for such a wide range and the beaming in the highs above let says 1300/1400 hz ?).
WHat are the best alternativ about mid-bass ? : Audax PR18m0 ? I have the feeling no pro drivers but the audax/PHL had a true concensus ?! As the Beyma JBL replica : too shiny because the aluminium central dust cone !
thanks a lot if you made new experiments about those drivers combo around a 3 ways solution (even OB or sealed
)regards,
Eldam
Hi Angelo and fellows,
Any new réflexions or testimonials around on how you mid-bassed the tpl150(H) ?
Angelo, if starting from scratch again, will you keep the 12p80nd and putt in a smaller sealed enclosure to cross it higher (around 100 hz) ?
On the paper I like this 3 scenarios :
- the 12" from Beyma (why not in OB with an other driver between 800 hz and the TPL150.... 5" neodynium from PRV Audio e.g. (Angelo, any feed back about this bRazilian driver?)
- a 10" from PHL, maybe two in MTM for a better matching of the sensivity of the tpl150
- same as above with 2X FR from Tangbang ! (assymetric MTM XO ?)
It seems better to have a XO bellow 120 hz max, so the choices of bass cabinets and driver could be very different according the scenario choosed above !
a 15" crossed at 200/300 hz for lighter 8" or 10" drivers above is not the same thing than a 12" starting from 80 or 100 hz ! (I like the idea than a driver is cover at minima the same aera of the human voice and bass localisation in the room (<120 hz?) !
Is there really no problem to cross as high the 12p80nd at 1600 hz while
crossing it as low below 80 hz (regarding the cone breakups for such a wide range and the beaming in the highs above let says 1300/1400 hz ?).
WHat are the best alternativ about mid-bass ? : Audax PR18m0 ? I have the feeling no pro drivers but the audax/PHL had a true concensus ?! As the Beyma JBL replica : too shiny because the aluminium central dust cone !
thanks a lot if you made new experiments about those drivers combo around a 3 ways solution (even OB or sealed
regards,
Eldam
hi Eldam
in my experience, you realise the setbacks of a system specially when you compare with something better. One big aha moment was for me to realise how critical the transition and crossover at about 150hz is. I never thought that taking away the crossover in that region would provide so much improvement. Of course its possible to time align and spatially align the speakers, aka putting the midbass close enough to the bass, that will provide good integration, but in my case that was not possible, since i was using the big midbass horn. So the distance from the lower midrange horn to the bass was necessarly big. One reason i like my actual configuration so much is the fact that the 12p80nd covers a wide frequency range, from 50hz to 1600hz flat. Combining it to the fact, that the 12p80nd has tremendous transients, that are not behind horns, and the naturalness and ease, beside having a wide dispersion range as it normal for cone drivers, and maching nicely with the 12p80nd, makes it a outstanding combination. I would definitively NOT cross in the 100hz region, but let it cover as wide as possible. I am sure anyone that will try out what i am saying, will confirm my experience. For the time being, i still believe its hard to top the 12p80nd / TPL150 combination. When i see people at this forum spending a lot of money and putting togeter 5 way horn systems, i can only smile.
so your 90 liters sealed cabinet was a good match & 50 hz F3 being a good targett... Not a XO seen oftenly, especially with this very low Qts (though certainly a need to match the transcient of the AMT).
Thanks Angelo for this input.
4 ways or more are for sure more difficult to setup, while I'm not sure you can go lower with an OB config ! E.g the 12P80nd/v2 should be Something in its OB range (around 250 hz to 800/900 hz) without big EQ because its transcient... For me OB/cardioid or sealed ... Nothing else, especially horns : too complex ! Not sure the expansion (progressiv then hyperbolic ?) of a Seos and the cheapest material version are so good ! Is there a sense to developp an horn without the CD which feet in it ?
With the low XO in a sealed (I'm with you against the vented bass but maybe an Onken W finely tunned) cabinet you choose, would you see a better 12" in the new Beyma's range (the 12P80nd v2 having a lower inductance, so maybe even difficulty to go low in the bass ... in theory I mean.) ?
Thanks Angelo for this input.
4 ways or more are for sure more difficult to setup, while I'm not sure you can go lower with an OB config ! E.g the 12P80nd/v2 should be Something in its OB range (around 250 hz to 800/900 hz) without big EQ because its transcient... For me OB/cardioid or sealed ... Nothing else, especially horns : too complex ! Not sure the expansion (progressiv then hyperbolic ?) of a Seos and the cheapest material version are so good ! Is there a sense to developp an horn without the CD which feet in it ?
With the low XO in a sealed (I'm with you against the vented bass but maybe an Onken W finely tunned) cabinet you choose, would you see a better 12" in the new Beyma's range (the 12P80nd v2 having a lower inductance, so maybe even difficulty to go low in the bass ... in theory I mean
.) ?
so your 90 liters sealed cabinet was a good match & 50 hz F3 being a good targett... Not a XO seen oftenly, especially with this very low Qts (though certainly a need to match the transcient of the AMT).
Thanks Angelo for this input.
4 ways or more are for sure more difficult to setup, while I'm not sure you can go lower with an OB config ! E.g the 12P80nd/v2 should be Something in its OB range (around 250 hz to 800/900 hz) without big EQ because its transcient... For me OB/cardioid or sealed ... Nothing else, especially horns : too complex ! Not sure the expansion (progressiv then hyperbolic ?) of a Seos and the cheapest material version are so good ! Is there a sense to developp an horn without the CD which feet in it ?
With the low XO in a sealed (I'm with you against the vented bass but maybe an Onken W finely tunned) cabinet you choose, would you see a better 12" in the new Beyma's range (the 12P80nd v2 having a lower inductance, so maybe even difficulty to go low in the bass ... in theory I mean
Eldam
sometimes the theory is one thing, and the praxis is another. I can say the 12p80nd goes flat down to 50hz because i measured it. I posted the frequencey plots at this forum some time back. I have never tried ob. My 90l cabinet has a port on the back, but i damped it.
or old bass-reflex Audax cabinet with bonded-logic in the port Hi Angelo and fellows,
Any new réflexions or testimonials around on how you mid-bassed the tpl150(H) ?
Angelo, if starting from scratch again, will you keep the 12p80nd and putt in a smaller sealed enclosure to cross it higher (around 100 hz) ?
On the paper I like this 3 scenarios :
- the 12" from Beyma (why not in OB with an other driver between 800 hz and the TPL150.... 5" neodynium from PRV Audio e.g. (Angelo, any feed back about this bRazilian driver?)
- a 10" from PHL, maybe two in MTM for a better matching of the sensivity of the tpl150
- same as above with 2X FR from Tangbang ! (assymetric MTM XO ?)
It seems better to have a XO bellow 120 hz max, so the choices of bass cabinets and driver could be very different according the scenario choosed above !
a 15" crossed at 200/300 hz for lighter 8" or 10" drivers above is not the same thing than a 12" starting from 80 or 100 hz ! (I like the idea than a driver is cover at minima the same aera of the human voice and bass localisation in the room (<120 hz?) !
Is there really no problem to cross as high the 12p80nd at 1600 hz while
crossing it as low below 80 hz (regarding the cone breakups for such a wide range and the beaming in the highs above let says 1300/1400 hz ?).
WHat are the best alternativ about mid-bass ? : Audax PR18m0 ? I have the feeling no pro drivers but the audax/PHL had a true concensus ?! As the Beyma JBL replica : too shiny because the aluminium central dust cone !
thanks a lot if you made new experiments about those drivers combo around a 3 ways solution (even OB or sealed
regards,
Eldam
Hello Eldam.
I don't have real world experience to share as I'm very much in the same situation you are. Been doing a fair amount of research, though.
My plan is a 4-way active system: subs below 80Hz, TPL-150H atop, and so far my best options seems a pair of Beyma 10G40 per side in a sealed enclosure up to 350 or 400 Hz. Big question is which midrange.
From a directivity standpoint I'm thinking a 6.5" driver and cross it over at 2.5kHz. A great option seems to be B&W FST, but for my case the 94dB/W sensitivity seems a bit low. I'd like to use a 45 or 2A3 based SET amp for the midrange...
PHL certainly looks good too. Some drivers have significant wiggles in their impedance, though, so better off avoiding those. Sensitivity is a better match for me.
Then PHL 8" are a good option too.
B&C 8PE21 also looks good to me.
I'm having a tough time deciding on this. Keep us posted on your developments and/or thinking.
It is too bad Beyma doesn't make a good 8" version of the 12P80Nd. I like everything I read about it, but have a hard time with the directivity of a 12" driver playing in the neighbourhood of 1600Hz, and also the TPL playing that low.
Cheers
why dont you you use the Beyma 10G40 in a MTM configuration like the Hornet EVO, and a sub below ? Less complex is better.
If i had to start from scratch, i would probably do something like this:
Äntligen hemma
I visitied a friend of mine in Hong Kong, where we compared Tannoy Westminster to his DIY speakers, using ESS Heil amt driver, and above 14khz, a second air motion transformer based tweeter. Mid low was driven by the same mid woofer as used in the magico mini, first version. His DIY sounded much better than Westminster, as can be even observed on the video, with bad sound quality. Sound was much more detailled, more clarity, transparece, and surprisingly good lower midrange, and bass with good transients.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY1WK0rl-Hw
Last edited:
While I would prefer to match beaming points to Xo and what not I like a big midrange. So for me its hard to just go with an 8" and move on. I liked my PHL 3451 mid under the TPL. That being said I probably wouldnt mind having a PHL6.5" or 8" from Jantzen under the TPL. Then just have a large midbass driver roll off gently into the midrange.
Things I cant try right now but thats what I would do. I think a MTM would do quite nice also but I for some reason am not a fan unless done with a low XO.
Just my experience.
Things I cant try right now but thats what I would do. I think a MTM would do quite nice also but I for some reason am not a fan unless done with a low XO.
Just my experience.
Hello Angelo.
I've been induced to stay away from MTM with a large tweeter as the TPL in between because of lobbing concerns and the necessary center-to-center distance. What's your take and/or experience with this?
I'm not familiar with the Hornet Evo you mention, and didn't get hits with Google.
BTW, while I have decided on the 10G40 based on calculations, I have not yet purchased them.
I remember the thread here discussing that build. I think it was a Beyma 10MI100 for the midarnge? What is it you like so much about that build?
What's the frequency range you are operating the 3451? Do you have measurements of it?
here a link to the hornet evo:
Hornet EVO
I don't know the 10MI100, but subjectively speaking, it looks attractive to me.
If i had to recommend something solely upon my experience, it would be the 12p80nd/tpl150 combo, and a sub below 50hz. In my case the double Altec 416a in Onken W style bass reflex cab does a terrific job, with very extended low bass output. I believe all Beyma woofers are great. Have a pair of 15LX60, and they are excellent. Very tight, fast low bass. The 15p80nd is rather a mid/bass, so below 50hz, other woofers might be at least as good, or eventually even better.
I look for a 10 or 8" (LineSource input about the polar map of the tpl 150 and the size of the woofer is more than interessant !
What I like in Angelo's design on the paper is the Beyma 12P80nd and its transcient to not mismatch with the fastness of the AMT ! When I look at the Le of the same driver in V2 (0.7 mH), the electrical damping, I find any 10 or 8 who could glue really with the tpl !
10g40 is more 90 dB on the low range ! Qe is high... not so good imho !
I believe the tpl needs at least a diy horn/waveguide for the vertical difusion, better than 30° ! Also larger for a 10" or a 12" if this last match in an home environment !
What I like in Angelo's design on the paper is the Beyma 12P80nd and its transcient to not mismatch with the fastness of the AMT ! When I look at the Le of the same driver in V2 (0.7 mH), the electrical damping, I find any 10 or 8 who could glue really with the tpl !
10g40 is more 90 dB on the low range ! Qe is high... not so good imho !
I believe the tpl needs at least a diy horn/waveguide for the vertical difusion, better than 30° ! Also larger for a 10" or a 12" if this last match in an home environment !