And there is I suspect an example of good clarity even at low volumes mostly because of the metal cone as I suspect that sexy soft surround is a high loss material. This to get good cone behavior into upper frequency's
Last edited:
I don't mean to keep harping on the NE series of drivers as they sound good at higher volume, but that is not the topic of this thread and I have direct experience with them.
The NE225W-08 has pretty wide usable bandwidth but you need to give it some pretty good power before it comes alive. Also the bandwidth of the NE265 and 15TBX100 are pretty close, one might even say the NE265 extends higher in frequency. Also the NE seems to have good BL to mass ratio (they are both 8 ohm nominal devices).
They both play differently at low volume. Of course I might have a flawed implementation or a couple of bum drivers but........wideband frequency response does not guarentee playing well at low volume. At least on these devices.
The NE225W-08 has pretty wide usable bandwidth but you need to give it some pretty good power before it comes alive. Also the bandwidth of the NE265 and 15TBX100 are pretty close, one might even say the NE265 extends higher in frequency. Also the NE seems to have good BL to mass ratio (they are both 8 ohm nominal devices).
They both play differently at low volume. Of course I might have a flawed implementation or a couple of bum drivers but........wideband frequency response does not guarentee playing well at low volume. At least on these devices.
Last edited:
A very simple hysteresis test for someone with a dial gauge would be to sit a driver on it's back with the dial gauge on the cone/voicecoil junction. Zero the dial gauge. Energise the driver with 1V DC in a positive direction then remove. Take a measurement. Energise the driver with 1V DC in a negative direction then remove. Take a second measurement. A comparison of these two measurements will give a direct indication of hysteresis and any static friction present. My guess would be that these readings will be the same. I'd do this test myself if I had ready access to a dial gauge.
By using gravity? Ah, ok, have read post again, think I see what you mean. Re measuring the hysteresis, wouldn't the cone settle to it's resting position over time, and wouldn't that be part of the issue?
Last edited:
QUOTE=mikealanlee;5261121]I don't mean to keep harping on the NE series of drivers as they sound good at higher volume, but that is not the topic of this thread and I have direct experience with them.
The NE225W-08 has pretty wide usable bandwidth but you need to give it some pretty good power before it comes alive. Also the bandwidth of the NE265 and 15TBX100 are pretty close, one might even say the NE265 extends higher in frequency. Also the NE seems to have good BL to mass ratio (they are both 8 ohm nominal devices).
They both play differently at low volume. Of course I might have a flawed implementation or a couple of bum drivers but........wideband frequency response does not guarentee playing well at low volume. At least on these devices.[/QUOTE]
Hi,
Had a quick look at the NE225W-08. The first thing I noticed, is that it is a subwoofer. I don't think I have heard a subwoofer that sounds good yet at low volume.
When I mentioned full range, I meant going to 20KHz or more. If the mechanical system can deal with a 20KHz vibration, it should able to deal with a low level low frequency vibration efficiently, provided the speaker can respond to it. Another indicator would be high efficiency for its size (efficiency is also dependent on cone diameter)
I can speculate on a few matters. If you compared it with a standard 8 inch woofer. Most woofers have a Mms of about 20 grams (Scanspeak, SB acoustics, SEAS), the NE225W has a Mms 37 grams, almost twice that of a normal woofer. Since a standard 8 inch generally don't already sound good at low volume , I would think it would not be any better. I would go for the SEAS FA22RCZ (12 grams), Dayton Audio PS220 (8 grams) and Tangband W1808 (9.5 grams)
However, do take note, because of the very light cone, they are built with ultra low compliance spring as well. So, for the box to not impact the FR, the generally require some very big boxes.. Much bigger than your standard 8" box.
Alternatively there are some other smaller full rangers out there with decent excurion such as Markaudio, Jordan etc.
As for the million dollar question why the 15TBX100 sounds good. I have no idea....
Oon
The NE225W-08 has pretty wide usable bandwidth but you need to give it some pretty good power before it comes alive. Also the bandwidth of the NE265 and 15TBX100 are pretty close, one might even say the NE265 extends higher in frequency. Also the NE seems to have good BL to mass ratio (they are both 8 ohm nominal devices).
They both play differently at low volume. Of course I might have a flawed implementation or a couple of bum drivers but........wideband frequency response does not guarentee playing well at low volume. At least on these devices.[/QUOTE]
Hi,
Had a quick look at the NE225W-08. The first thing I noticed, is that it is a subwoofer. I don't think I have heard a subwoofer that sounds good yet at low volume.
When I mentioned full range, I meant going to 20KHz or more. If the mechanical system can deal with a 20KHz vibration, it should able to deal with a low level low frequency vibration efficiently, provided the speaker can respond to it. Another indicator would be high efficiency for its size (efficiency is also dependent on cone diameter)
I can speculate on a few matters. If you compared it with a standard 8 inch woofer. Most woofers have a Mms of about 20 grams (Scanspeak, SB acoustics, SEAS), the NE225W has a Mms 37 grams, almost twice that of a normal woofer. Since a standard 8 inch generally don't already sound good at low volume , I would think it would not be any better. I would go for the SEAS FA22RCZ (12 grams), Dayton Audio PS220 (8 grams) and Tangband W1808 (9.5 grams)
However, do take note, because of the very light cone, they are built with ultra low compliance spring as well. So, for the box to not impact the FR, the generally require some very big boxes.. Much bigger than your standard 8" box.
Alternatively there are some other smaller full rangers out there with decent excurion such as Markaudio, Jordan etc.
As for the million dollar question why the 15TBX100 sounds good. I have no idea....
Oon
Last edited:
And yet, the NE225W-08's mechanical damping is much LOWER, at (Fs/Qms) = 32/8.84 = 3.62, than that of the Dayton Audio PS220, for which (Fs/Qms) = 46.4/5.73 = 8.1.
This would indicate that the Thympany's subwoofer may actually be better at revealing low-level detail in the bass range than the 'jack of all trades' Dayton full-ranger.
Again, you seem to be fixated on moving mass on its own, but in reality that spec is just part of the story.
What really matters is the relation between moving mass and electromagnetic driving force (which determines electrical damping), AND the relation between moving mass and mechanical resistance (which determines mechanical damping).
A simile might help you (and others) understand this better.
In cars, what determines acceleration potential is the power-to-mass ratio, NOT the car's mass per se.
Also, the tyres' ability to provide enough 'grip' depends, in first approximation at least, on the ratio of the inherent 'grippy-ness' of the tyres themselves to the mass of the car.
I agree that motor BL has a role to play in the acceleration of the cone. However with a heavier cone comes more momentum. More momentum means heavier damping means more resistance etc. If you were to look at damping, might as well look directly at Re. Except that is rarely published. It is also a known fact that TS parameters changes with input power. I don't know of anyone who publishes frequency response at 0.1W, 0.01W etc.
Engine power only determines acceleration, but mass determines agility.
That is my justification to look at frequency response. High frequency signals are actually low level vibration. As frequency picks up, amplitude goes down. So if a speaker is able to play 20KHz at 1 W. It should not have any problem at 100Hz at 10mW. Amplitude is probably about the same. It is much more difficult to make a diaphragm move at 20KHz than it does at bass notes. If it accomplish that, chances are it has a diaphragm that moves easily.
So that is my justification for going for full range drivers. If you need to guess, yes I do full range drivers too, so I am perfectly aware how they sound like as well as their disadvantages.. No, they don't do loud bass well...
Oon
"So if a speaker is able to play 20KHz at 1 W. It should not have any problem at 100Hz at 10mW:"
Not sure about that one. Materials that are elastic at low freq can act hard as a rock at high freq.
"Engine power only determines acceleration, but mass determines agility."
Seems to me regardless of mass that agility will depend on the powers "grip" on that mass
Theory says higher mass just needs more power to control, BUT i suspect in a practical working out of this ,depending on what were trying to do,the higher mass system will be harder to "get right" due to all the practical limitations of materials and technology.
Not sure about that one. Materials that are elastic at low freq can act hard as a rock at high freq.
"Engine power only determines acceleration, but mass determines agility."
Seems to me regardless of mass that agility will depend on the powers "grip" on that mass
Theory says higher mass just needs more power to control, BUT i suspect in a practical working out of this ,depending on what were trying to do,the higher mass system will be harder to "get right" due to all the practical limitations of materials and technology.
Last edited:
I have a friend who has a KEF Uni Q floor stander. One day he heard my Fostex Fe103. Impressed with the sound, so I built a small speaker based on a Fostex Fe83. His response after owning it for a while was it was night and day at low level listening compared to the Uni Q floor stander.
There was talk earlier on high efficiency speakers, and I can relate to that. I am also a supporter of high efficiency speakers. The thing about high efficiency speakers is they share a lot of common design traits with full rangers. In fact many full rangers are high efficiency speakers. Most 8" full rangers have sensitivity of about 95db/watt.
One of my favorite commercial speakers is the Audio Note. They tout high efficiency as their main focus. So I was looking around for woofers that are really high efficiency. You find them in the Pro woofers section. Most are about 95 db sensitivity. However they Have a rather high Fs, typically 70 Hz for 8". In the end I figured out I already have them. I could use my 8"full rangers as they could fit the bill. They generally have very low Fs as well. However there are only a few with a decent Xmax of only 3mm. Example I cited above posts. Fostex for example only about 1mm. Only problem is, they have huge Vas. They have low mass, and for it to have low Fs, you need a low spring constant. So you would need a huge box.
Open Baffle 15" pro woofer is another way to go for low frequency. If you can afford the space. You just need to have an amp where you can boost the low end.
Oon
They can't provide much bass without significant linear distortion (in the bass).
-it's a "holistic" problem. 😉
Cherry-pick the driver and you can get low distortion with a high-pass filter to reduce spl at lower freq.s: thereby reducing excursion, thereby reducing non-linear distortion.
-in other words: use it as a lower midrange/midbass driver (depending on the driver).
😡. That makes it hard when looking at datasheets........probably why there are outliers when testing drivers.
..as far as a "magic bullet" for drivers with respect to resistance:
Klippel testing with Kms(x) plots. It shows resistance with displacement.
Ex. Look at figure 23 of the Dayton Audio PM220-8:
http://www.daytonaudio.com/media/resources/PM220-8 Voice Coil Review - September 2013.pdf
-Resistance is a nominal .7, which is good. (..read from the 0 line vertically on figure 23.)
To bad the driver has such high 2nd order non-linear distortion below 100 Hz. But I can think of a way to cancel that out. 😉
Yup. They are no match to a decent real woofer like one from SB acoustics or Scanspeak in frequency response and loudness.
The reason I mentioned these few drivers is because they are branded as a full range and they respond to 20KHz. They tend to be used as that. However if you choose to use them as a two way as a mid bass they provide an interesting combination as well. Especially if you choose to cross it a bit higher 5KHz. If you can reduce cone movement by using it in an mltl (quite a few examples out there) it should produce some interesting projects.
Oon
This one looks like its a candidate for a midbass driver that is NOT efficient but does low listening level very well:
Test Bench - Dayton Audio ES140Ti-8 5.5” Midwoofer
Force isn't good.. but it's not bad either at about 8 Bl.
Resistance however is phenomenal at about .2. 😱
-and it's very good throughout its linear range of motion. 🙂
..hopefully the newer version is as good or better:
Dayton Audio ES140TiA-8 5-1/2" Esoteric Series Woofer 8 Ohm
Test Bench - Dayton Audio ES140Ti-8 5.5” Midwoofer
Force isn't good.. but it's not bad either at about 8 Bl.
Resistance however is phenomenal at about .2. 😱
-and it's very good throughout its linear range of motion. 🙂
..hopefully the newer version is as good or better:
Dayton Audio ES140TiA-8 5-1/2" Esoteric Series Woofer 8 Ohm
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.