What is this opinion based on? Can you link to any reputable research that supports this view?
At the end you can buy the most expensive driver and it will sound horrible with a not suitable crossover or case. I guess for drivers above $100 you will not note the difference between $300 or $500. And for speaker construction and development you need not only software tools, also much experience and trial'n'error. So I would buy diy bundles which are well designed by known people in the diy speaker scene.
Listening to music is also a question of taste and preferences. Only datasheets, expensive raw materials or extraordinary look are no signs for a good sounding speaker... ;-)
Listening to music is also a question of taste and preferences. Only datasheets, expensive raw materials or extraordinary look are no signs for a good sounding speaker... ;-)
Leadcoma, its based on simple physics.
For each wavelength, there is ideal cone size.
Tweeters are small, for small wavelength. Woofers are big for large wavelength.
Like in pipe organ, big pipes for low frequencies, tiny pipes for high frequencies.
Physics my friend.
Link to reputable research?
For each wavelength, there is ideal cone size.
Tweeters are small, for small wavelength. Woofers are big for large wavelength.
Like in pipe organ, big pipes for low frequencies, tiny pipes for high frequencies.
Physics my friend.
Link to reputable research?
Let's consider, for example, a midrange frequency range of 300Hz to 2KHz. An 8" driver and a 1" driver can both emit that frequency range.
You're saying the ideal size is 4-5". What specifically makes this size range ideal for the example wavelength range given drivers smaller and larger can emit those frequencies?
Ha, emit yes, but it will have serious breakups long before 2kHz crossover point.
Breakups are nasty resonances which produce distorting cone movement after the audio signal is long gone. Easy to see on waterfall plot.
Even 15" fullrange can emit 10kHz, but it is not hifi.
8" mibbass and dome tweeter are done all the time, midbass has to be selected very carefully, and dome even more, it must be very robust to handle that low crossover.
Study cone breakups.
Even 10" can be used as midrange, but its far from ideal. And that was the question.
Breakups are nasty resonances which produce distorting cone movement after the audio signal is long gone. Easy to see on waterfall plot.
Even 15" fullrange can emit 10kHz, but it is not hifi.
8" mibbass and dome tweeter are done all the time, midbass has to be selected very carefully, and dome even more, it must be very robust to handle that low crossover.
Study cone breakups.
Even 10" can be used as midrange, but its far from ideal. And that was the question.
For example, and there are many, here's a 6.5" driver with breakup which appears to start well above 2KHz. Does this not meet your midrange breakup criteria and if so, why is a 4-5" driver a better midrange choice?
If the goal is no breakup within the midrange spectrum, why isn't a driver smaller than 4" a better choice for a mid? All other parameters being equal, doesn't physics dictate the smaller driver will breakup at a higher frequency optimally outside of the midrange frequency spectrum?
I appreciate your replies and I am not trolling. I genuinely want to understand your perspective.
Your 8" midbass with 1" dome crossed at 2kHz will not be ideal, because of few issues. First, it will not have enough bass. Not like proper 15" woofer. It will place crossover in the most sensitive area, 2-3kHz. Our ears are most sensitive in this region. Putting crossover right there is asking for trouble. Not that it can not be done, but besides flat on axis, you have to achieve smooth of axis, and phase. Not so easy.
Selecting 4-5" midrange will allow for higher crossover range, outside most sensitive area, and will put less demand on dome tweeter. Less distortion. If you cross high enough, even planar or ribbon tweeter can be used.
Offcourse, you need to use woofer, or two...so you end up with the most common speaker these days, lean 3way tower.
You keep asking the same questions over and over again.
If you use smaller midrange than 4", than obviously you can not cross it very low on the other side. You have to consider its excursion in low midbass, Physics dictates that. There are plenty 2-3" domes, but you have to cross on low side around 900Hz, no longer full midrange.
If you select proper 4-5" midrange, you can cover all midrange from 300Hz to 3kHz or higher easily. Or lower.
Selecting 4-5" midrange will allow for higher crossover range, outside most sensitive area, and will put less demand on dome tweeter. Less distortion. If you cross high enough, even planar or ribbon tweeter can be used.
Offcourse, you need to use woofer, or two...so you end up with the most common speaker these days, lean 3way tower.
You keep asking the same questions over and over again.
If you use smaller midrange than 4", than obviously you can not cross it very low on the other side. You have to consider its excursion in low midbass, Physics dictates that. There are plenty 2-3" domes, but you have to cross on low side around 900Hz, no longer full midrange.
If you select proper 4-5" midrange, you can cover all midrange from 300Hz to 3kHz or higher easily. Or lower.
Last edited:
To add to what adason has said: another reason why 4-5" driver is ideal size is that the radiation pattern is fairly constant from 300 to 2k... with an 8 or 10" mid, the radiation pattern changes significantly in the highest octave, from 1k to 2k...
High efficiency, high SPL speaker systems often use very large mid drivers, 8, 10, 12, even 15" mid drivers. The designers do this not because it is ideal. They do it because high efficiency and high SPL are so important in their application that they are willing to sacrifice other areas of performance.
j.
High efficiency, high SPL speaker systems often use very large mid drivers, 8, 10, 12, even 15" mid drivers. The designers do this not because it is ideal. They do it because high efficiency and high SPL are so important in their application that they are willing to sacrifice other areas of performance.
j.
As already written, I'm very happy with the MW13TX 5" midrange/woofer. It has a very smooth off-axis too, which makes it an even more smooth blend with the tweeter. Some don't like the word smooth... but if you want to have a midrange/tweeter combo, where you don't notice the cross-over... smooth on and off-axis is what you want.
Further.... I believe that the more narrow speakers, with less of a baffle, is also the speakers I tend to hear less - more focus on the sound, less on the speakers. So a smaller midrange that blend beautifully with the tweeter, and 2-3 mid-woofers, so that it be kept narrow - then the speaker kinda disappears to me - which is a good thing IMO.
And when you want to play loud.... then remember that you need tons of bottom/low end to play loud with the feeling of the so-called power... which smaller speakers never will have, if you want the air to "breath" for the lack of better term. I have 4 x 1000W to pull 2 x 12" and 2 x 15" subwoofers, that smoothly blends in with 2 x 6,5" Purifi drivers - big overlap and first order filter on the Purifi, so that I end up with around +/-2dB almost all the way from 20Hz to around 17-18kHz where the Seas DXT might fall of a bit - directivity and so on.... but who cares... can't hear a "beep" up there
When you hear a door close in your house. It feels like a lot of air is being moved at once. It gives that very realistic feeling of something true and physical is going on. It is simply impossible for anything small - no matter how far it moves( X-max) - to create that sensation. I believe this is what you need in the low end. But with midranges... you are creating an illusion of something that should not be heard by itself - only create a kind of a sound field - where the speaker is the messenger, but not the focus. That is where the difference really kicks in for me, when it comes to the difference needed in size, for a given driver at a given frequency range.
Further.... I believe that the more narrow speakers, with less of a baffle, is also the speakers I tend to hear less - more focus on the sound, less on the speakers. So a smaller midrange that blend beautifully with the tweeter, and 2-3 mid-woofers, so that it be kept narrow - then the speaker kinda disappears to me - which is a good thing IMO.
And when you want to play loud.... then remember that you need tons of bottom/low end to play loud with the feeling of the so-called power... which smaller speakers never will have, if you want the air to "breath" for the lack of better term. I have 4 x 1000W to pull 2 x 12" and 2 x 15" subwoofers, that smoothly blends in with 2 x 6,5" Purifi drivers - big overlap and first order filter on the Purifi, so that I end up with around +/-2dB almost all the way from 20Hz to around 17-18kHz where the Seas DXT might fall of a bit - directivity and so on.... but who cares... can't hear a "beep" up there
When you hear a door close in your house. It feels like a lot of air is being moved at once. It gives that very realistic feeling of something true and physical is going on. It is simply impossible for anything small - no matter how far it moves( X-max) - to create that sensation. I believe this is what you need in the low end. But with midranges... you are creating an illusion of something that should not be heard by itself - only create a kind of a sound field - where the speaker is the messenger, but not the focus. That is where the difference really kicks in for me, when it comes to the difference needed in size, for a given driver at a given frequency range.
I kept asking the same question because I was looking for logical and scientifically supported reasons why you believe the ideal size midrange is 4-5".
Acoustics unfortunately debunks most of the reasons in your replies. We can't all be loudspeaker engineers and that's okay.
Therefore "fairly constant" meaning the smaller driver exhibits less high frequency rolloff, if my understand of your reply is correct.
Let's consider the entire frontal hemispherical radiation pattern of a flush mount 1" tweeter and a 5" driver at 2KHz. Marketing frequency response curves usually don't extend past 60deg so let's use that easily accessible data. The tweeter typically acts as a point source at 2KHz, 60deg. In other words, the output at 60deg is equal to the output at 0deg. A 5" driver is typically up to couple dB down at 60deg. The radiation pattern doesn't quite match and is not ideal unless the tweeter is waveguide/horn loaded.
Cries out for current drive, doesn't it? That will take care of thermal compression as well as inductance modulation. Downside is that the resonance gets exaggerated because Qes is switched off. One needs to choose an enclosure that does not raise fb too much so it remains far outside of the passband. Or parallel a lossy resonant circuit.
* makes sense if the tweeter is horn/waveguide loaded such that its radiation pattern matches the midrange over a frequency spectrum centered on the crossover frequency across a width defined by the crossover transfer function.
With all modern well known theories, measurements and findings - I can't for the love of anything understand why you would not build a speaker with a midrange/tweeter match, where you get exactly what you just wrote.
I think I do understand why.
Not everyone is aware of those proven theories, measurements and findings. We all have different levels of knowledge and drive to educate ourselves.
No different than with any hobby or subject
Even major high end brands like Magico (seems they just caught up though) or Wilson don‘t follow these modern insights. It’s a shame that not every audio shop has a pair of decent Genelecs at hand for comparison. But a lot here do grasp it. We even dig into the science of floor bumps and front wall interference. Or the advantages of multi sub low end reproduction. Heck, cardioid and dipole design perfection can be found on forums like these, I think.