I’ve used some Accuton drivers and they are in my ears the “best”. Currently using the C90 5-inch cell version in a 3-way. I have probably tried >20 different version of crossover and now settled on 12dB LR @3500Hz against a C30 tweeter with 18dB HP. C90 HP around 300Hz 12dB.
What surprises me a bit is the focus on FR and linearity in measured curves. I bought and tested the “golden boy” Purifi 6,5 which many seems to hold high. It‘s the least snappy midrange driver I’ve heard. Yes it measures well, but isn’t music more about the ability to reproduce square-wave than sinus?
Another interesting thing is the cone-breakup. With C90 it’s at 9kHz. With the high crossover point and without notch filter, the measured response is “awful” and would be slaughtered in every hifi magazine . One might assume that this is very obvious the the human ear (ok, I’m not 20 anymore). I have the notch filter installed and can easily switch it on and off. With the notchfilter active it’s very easy to hear the decay isn’t as good as without. I have asked friends and no one can detect the FR peak but the phase shift, that a notch filter adds, can be easily heard.
What surprises me a bit is the focus on FR and linearity in measured curves. I bought and tested the “golden boy” Purifi 6,5 which many seems to hold high. It‘s the least snappy midrange driver I’ve heard. Yes it measures well, but isn’t music more about the ability to reproduce square-wave than sinus?
Another interesting thing is the cone-breakup. With C90 it’s at 9kHz. With the high crossover point and without notch filter, the measured response is “awful” and would be slaughtered in every hifi magazine . One might assume that this is very obvious the the human ear (ok, I’m not 20 anymore). I have the notch filter installed and can easily switch it on and off. With the notchfilter active it’s very easy to hear the decay isn’t as good as without. I have asked friends and no one can detect the FR peak but the phase shift, that a notch filter adds, can be easily heard.
Interesting. Have you got any measurements of your design?
Actually the Purifi is not all that impressive from the FR or linearity point of view. Actually the opposite. It’s drop like a rock after 4Khz; many other 6.5” drivers have an extra octave or so. What impressive about the Purifi is the non-linear distortion.
i always liked the linearity of Accutonsmbut wasn’t impressed with odd-order harmonic distortion being higher than the even order (H5>H4; H3>H2) but it’s unclear how that’s perceived; at least to me. Perhaps in combination with the higher sensitivity there’s special effects or enhanced musicality...
Actually the Purifi is not all that impressive from the FR or linearity point of view. Actually the opposite. It’s drop like a rock after 4Khz; many other 6.5” drivers have an extra octave or so. What impressive about the Purifi is the non-linear distortion.
i always liked the linearity of Accutonsmbut wasn’t impressed with odd-order harmonic distortion being higher than the even order (H5>H4; H3>H2) but it’s unclear how that’s perceived; at least to me. Perhaps in combination with the higher sensitivity there’s special effects or enhanced musicality...
Lynn Olsen thinks so. (see his writings hereabouts)
Based on what he wrote some decades ago (and Ragnar's comments about the same time) the plots and other info in this thread suggest that's still the case. Lots of horrible break up and ringing on most of those I've looked at (no, I've not looked at them all)
Unfortunately they are now unobtainable.
I thought that was a good thing.
No breakups to deal with, not much overlap with tweeter, simpler crossover.
Currently soaking the surrounds of my P13-WH in glycerin. I have a bunch of spares gently stored away for nearly 10 years waiting for install in the boxes. With zero use stored in climate controlled room in boxes and cabinets (zero UV) the surrounds still managed to stiffen up. Fs over 200Hz.
Hoping to get some progress on a used test woofer for proof of concept. Thus far, overnight soak with low frequency excitation has not done much. I might have to get creative and try a method to add some heat to the process.
Here I thought I was smart to buy spares, but they outgas nonetheless. I don't know there are replacements available - I would be happy enough to find a speaker that at least meets the same mounting and holes.
Hoping to get some progress on a used test woofer for proof of concept. Thus far, overnight soak with low frequency excitation has not done much. I might have to get creative and try a method to add some heat to the process.
Here I thought I was smart to buy spares, but they outgas nonetheless. I don't know there are replacements available - I would be happy enough to find a speaker that at least meets the same mounting and holes.
Yes, the P13wh00-8 sound quite nice. I've got them in Ariel MK3's (modified) Since the P13wh is NLA, how about Adason's previous suggestion
https://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/264-1636--tymphany-tpy05w08o0088-spec-sheet.pdf
https://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/264-1636--tymphany-tpy05w08o0088-spec-sheet.pdf
Attachments
Last edited:
I thought it was a limited run, but again NLA.
One of the batches I jumped at.
Attachments
+1 for SB15NBAC30-4
But I would think it depends on a lot of factors
Especially if it is a normal Xover, I think simulations are super helpfull. I'm using the briliant and free VituixCAD2. Just trying out based on traces of req and imp response from data sheets. This will give a good indication on how much filtering (and cost + complexity) is needed to make a good crossover btw. mid and tweeter. Can be somewhat surprising. You of course have to the the real work when you have the chosen speakers installed in the right enclosure, to obtain the real measured responses.
Mids are very transparent
But I would think it depends on a lot of factors
- Cross over points, high and low
- Matching with which tweeter
- Active/DSP or "normal" Xover (a lot can be done by DSP)
Especially if it is a normal Xover, I think simulations are super helpfull. I'm using the briliant and free VituixCAD2. Just trying out based on traces of req and imp response from data sheets. This will give a good indication on how much filtering (and cost + complexity) is needed to make a good crossover btw. mid and tweeter. Can be somewhat surprising. You of course have to the the real work when you have the chosen speakers installed in the right enclosure, to obtain the real measured responses.
And literally nothing has changed sinds early nineties, packaging included, except for the Scanspeak brand. I think if one would like to order a few hundred, well, no problem sir…
I certainly understand. A large midrange driver sounds cleaner and more realistic to me than the smaller drivers. 6.5 to 8" works for me. I've even heard the old Eminence Beta12LT as a mid sound as big and clean as an electrostatic speaker - with the right crossover (not easy). But not everyone likes that sound. Many people prefer a 4" fullrange, tho I don't understand why.
That is one of the best, cleanest mid-range cones I've ever heard. Easy to cross, too. 200-6K it's a winner.
Why do you think this is Pano?
I believe it's the combination of higher sensitivity and lower distortion, which makes for higher dynamic range, which makes up for the reduced dispersion (or higher directivity)
Gentlemen,
Please keep in mind that there are many “listening in” to this conversation. I’m trying to understand this and learn from your experience. Please take a second and type out what you mean. What is PE, what is “them” and why not link the website?
Does that work?
I'm in a similar situation with the "spares" in my stash.
Do they loosen up over time or simply get harder and harder?