Dear All,
I have recently purchased as set of FR125's (initially to use these sealed with a BSC circuit and perhaps a notch filter as well).
Intrigued by the various offerings I have given this some more thought. I guess the primary reason to choose a full-range driver is it's coherency and simplicity of any filter network. Fewer components can only mean less components to affect the sound in a negative way.
Having read pretty much all the posts on the FR125 it seems that there's not a real consensus on driver loading. Bass Reflex seems to be the least popular, followed by horn/TL. Sealed and aperiodic seem to be most popular since horn/TL might emphasize CSS's impressive base response a tad too much. However there does not seem to be a "definitive" type of loading. I understand this also depends on the room..
Now personally I have a soft spot for sealed but I am drawn to the various horn designs. I might match it with a subwoofer in the future so I guess sealed is the way forward.
In order to work the benefits of full-range drivers I thing it is appropriate to use a second driver to solve the baffle step issues. Of course I could use a few passive components but If I follow this route I might as well build a 2-way speaker.
I'd like to do some more work on this type but before I move on I'd like to get a few things straight:
1) What's better for a bipole > a wider baffle or a narrow one. Somehow it seems that the width in this type isn't that important at all since the driver at the back in a push-push configuration sees the same width. Am I right or wrong here? Is it depth that is crucial?
2) To low pass or not to low pass on the rear driver..... Isn't it unnatural to run the rear driver with an inductor / low pass? What I am trying to say is that if the rear driver is rolled off early then surely there must be an unbalance below the baffle step region and the region between the baffle step and the roll off? The two drivers are partially summed aren't they - but the higher frequencies aren't hence the imbalance - right?
3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of having the two push-push drivers sharing the same physical volume. Are there advantages to be had by giving them both their own volume?
4) Is there a consensus on the ideal enclosure volume for the FR125 in a sealed config?
Many questions but hopefully interesting enough to pursue.
As a last point, one of the things that really keeps me occupied is what about using another two FR drivers (so 4 drivers in total per enclosure) but run these passively like a passive radiator. They'd need to be wired together to create a short with a rotary switch and a few resistors. This way if memory serves me right you can alter the qts of the drivers. Sonus Faber did this in the past with a KEF B139 at the back of an Extrema monitor loudspeaker. It even included a small heatsink to conduct the heat produced by the resistors. I know this effectively is a bass reflex enclosure but the possiblity to tailor the "passives" behaviour might prove interesting - both aesthetically and hopefully sonically as well.
Many thanks for thinking with me!
Bukem
I have recently purchased as set of FR125's (initially to use these sealed with a BSC circuit and perhaps a notch filter as well).
Intrigued by the various offerings I have given this some more thought. I guess the primary reason to choose a full-range driver is it's coherency and simplicity of any filter network. Fewer components can only mean less components to affect the sound in a negative way.
Having read pretty much all the posts on the FR125 it seems that there's not a real consensus on driver loading. Bass Reflex seems to be the least popular, followed by horn/TL. Sealed and aperiodic seem to be most popular since horn/TL might emphasize CSS's impressive base response a tad too much. However there does not seem to be a "definitive" type of loading. I understand this also depends on the room..
Now personally I have a soft spot for sealed but I am drawn to the various horn designs. I might match it with a subwoofer in the future so I guess sealed is the way forward.
In order to work the benefits of full-range drivers I thing it is appropriate to use a second driver to solve the baffle step issues. Of course I could use a few passive components but If I follow this route I might as well build a 2-way speaker.
I'd like to do some more work on this type but before I move on I'd like to get a few things straight:
1) What's better for a bipole > a wider baffle or a narrow one. Somehow it seems that the width in this type isn't that important at all since the driver at the back in a push-push configuration sees the same width. Am I right or wrong here? Is it depth that is crucial?
2) To low pass or not to low pass on the rear driver..... Isn't it unnatural to run the rear driver with an inductor / low pass? What I am trying to say is that if the rear driver is rolled off early then surely there must be an unbalance below the baffle step region and the region between the baffle step and the roll off? The two drivers are partially summed aren't they - but the higher frequencies aren't hence the imbalance - right?
3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of having the two push-push drivers sharing the same physical volume. Are there advantages to be had by giving them both their own volume?
4) Is there a consensus on the ideal enclosure volume for the FR125 in a sealed config?
Many questions but hopefully interesting enough to pursue.
As a last point, one of the things that really keeps me occupied is what about using another two FR drivers (so 4 drivers in total per enclosure) but run these passively like a passive radiator. They'd need to be wired together to create a short with a rotary switch and a few resistors. This way if memory serves me right you can alter the qts of the drivers. Sonus Faber did this in the past with a KEF B139 at the back of an Extrema monitor loudspeaker. It even included a small heatsink to conduct the heat produced by the resistors. I know this effectively is a bass reflex enclosure but the possiblity to tailor the "passives" behaviour might prove interesting - both aesthetically and hopefully sonically as well.
Many thanks for thinking with me!
Bukem
) I suppose you lose the push - push mechanical argument but on the other hand you reduce the distance between the two drivers.
