What I see is baffle step compensation [BSC] to make it ~tonally balanced in room, something that most all speakers need if not mounted in a wall or designed with either electronic or acoustical BSC built in.
[30-240]^0.5 = ~85 Hz mean, [60-120] = ~85 Hz mean, so proves the need for BSC EQ and that your hearing perception overall to at least 4 kHz is normal
, implying that its nameplate frequency response is pretty accurate too.GM
Then again, I could be wrong [am], so another whizzer to tweak to tame this 'beast': https://www.bluearan.co.uk/sales/fane/images/SOV12-250TC_a.jpg
GM
the double whizzer Fane 12 really goes high (dead on axis) - their 15 should get to 12K - played with 250 a little bit in Karlson12 and Karlsonator12. I had bonded Dacron over the K12's slit vents - clear mids, no low bass, Karlsonator had "bass" - might have been underdamped but didn't measure
Fane 12 and 15 should be nice OB, sealed, aperiodic - I wish Fane would offer a lower Q version
for vented boxes
http://i.imgur.com/AYuv6G9.jpg
Fane 12 and 15 should be nice OB, sealed, aperiodic - I wish Fane would offer a lower Q version
for vented boxes
http://i.imgur.com/AYuv6G9.jpg
Last edited:
the 12 Fane just might - so should 12lta where 12lta would have some punch ability without much excursion - I should mount either the Fame or 12lta in a K15 but got so much stuff built up of the decades that none of its usable - maybe a set of headphones I'll look and see if I have a crude adapter to put a 12 in an un-loaded K15. AN10 (fs ~48, qts ~0.41) sounded good in K15 - maybe better in the Karlsonator12. AN10 stamped frame has a rough treble - no power handling in a 2.5 cubic foot reflex. My WT3 plot of that combo showed 41Hz tuning but George Augspruger's "Ventwrk" says 2.5 CF tuned with a 3" ID duct 7 inches long, tunes to ~28Hz. - Wonder why the large discrepancy ???
I'll look and see if I have a crude adapter to put a 12 in an un-loaded K15. AN10 (fs ~48, qts ~0.41) sounded good in K15 - maybe better in the Karlsonator12. AN10 stamped frame has a rough treble - no power handling in a 2.5 cubic foot reflex. My WT3 plot of that combo showed 41Hz tuning but George Augspruger's "Ventwrk" says 2.5 CF tuned with a 3" ID duct 7 inches long, tunes to ~28Hz. - Wonder why the large discrepancy ???
Last edited:
Me too, although driving Q down would likely require more motor, driving up cost. I guess they think only the budget-minded would try a 12" (or 15") running full-range instead of using a more conventional 2-way PA speaker.
Chris
PS - I'm keeping an eye on the 15"s. Got some cabs lying around, and a pile of them would make an amazing drum monitor.
jbl d 123.
I'm new to this forum. I noticed some members like the 12" Eminence 12lta on an open baffle. I also own those speakers.I compared them to the old JBL D123 full range speakers. I my opinion, the efficiency& high end response are equal. But the JBL has a more open&airy and alive sound compared to the 12lta's.I use the JBL 077tweeter for the extreme high end.I recommend the JBL over the Eminence on a open baffle design-RUDY.
I'm new to this forum. I noticed some members like the 12" Eminence 12lta on an open baffle. I also own those speakers.I compared them to the old JBL D123 full range speakers. I my opinion, the efficiency& high end response are equal. But the JBL has a more open&airy and alive sound compared to the 12lta's.I use the JBL 077tweeter for the extreme high end.I recommend the JBL over the Eminence on a open baffle design-RUDY.
No clue, not familiar with any of measurement software typically used here. FWIW, HR shows excursion minima @ 28.5 Hz based on 2.5 ft^3 net and have to shrink it to ~1.2 ft^3 to raise it to 41 Hz, so a major difference.
GM
GM
If BL is the motor strength, and Sd x one way excursion @ 10% thd (this was Xmax, or you could use [Xmax-Xlim]^.5 if Xlim is known) = one way displacement volume, could you approximate a "punch" or "hit" effect value by multiplying BL and one-way displacement volume? (And be able to directly compare 2 or more drivers?)
Norman
Freddi
Xerxes
I didn't have a chance to compare the moving mass, that's rather surprising vs the CX...
If BL is the motor strength, and Sd x one way excursion @ 10% thd (this was Xmax, or you could use [Xmax-Xlim]^.5 if Xlim is known) = one way displacement volume, could you approximate a "punch" or "hit" effect value by multiplying BL and one-way displacement volume? (And be able to directly compare 2 or more drivers?)
Norman
Thanks Norman, agreed on moving air, but surprised on the 150 xover vs 750hz xover... substantially different drivers between the two making it an unfair fight?
Freddi
Which JBLs do you refer to? Not sure that I could drive two per side from the reciver... maybe two 4 ohms in series per side, but then, what, they get 80w/2 = 40w each rms? Not sure if it would be better to have, for instance, 80 drivers running at 1 watt apiece (in a series-parallel network I guess), or 1 driver running with 80 watts.
Xerxes
Thanks for the input sir, so you mean that the 12lta would be better in a different enclosure than the simple vented BR? Like an MLTL or Dave's EM-Ken, or something else?
Freddi
Why need a lower Q for vented? Wouldn't the cab just be larger? Seems that if it works OB or aperiodic, then it would work BR?
Hmm... I hadn't even looked at the 15" Fane.. uh oh
more here:
New 15" full range- FANE
datasheet:
https://www.fane-international.com/downloads/Fane-FC152F01TC-DS240717.pdf
GM
I just assumed it probably wasn't anywhere near that flat (the fisher graph)... Not a whole lot to the woofer motors as you can see. But playing around with test frequencies the other day/week, it seemed to fall off around 40-45 hz, so maybe the low end is fairly accurate?
Why need a lower Q for vented? Wouldn't the cab just be larger? Seems that if it works OB or aperiodic, then it would work BR?
Hmm... I hadn't even looked at the 15" Fane.. uh oh
more here:
New 15" full range- FANE
datasheet:
https://www.fane-international.com/downloads/Fane-FC152F01TC-DS240717.pdf
GM
It's about a 14" wide baffle, so that's something a little over 1500hz for BSC? First crossover is at 1600 hz woofer/mid. There's nothing complex for crossovers inside the cabs, a cap there, resistor here. No coils that I can see (or recall at least, last time they were apart), so not sure how else they'd be corrected. My hearing is questionable, after the aforementioned car-audio days..What I see is baffle step compensation [BSC] to make it ~tonally balanced in room, something that most all speakers need if not mounted in a wall or designed with either electronic or acoustical BSC built in.
[30-240]^0.5 = ~85 Hz mean, [60-120] = ~85 Hz mean, so proves the need for BSC EQ and that your hearing perception overall to at least 4 kHz is normal, implying that its nameplate frequency response is pretty accurate too.
Last edited:
GM - for instance, the Fane 12 has a larger BL than the Em 12lta... All other things equal, this makes it a more powerful driver, no? If the usable excursion was the same between them (and thus displacement volume, ~), wouldn't the Fane provide more "punch"? I'm still trying to understand the relationship with all these parameters.
For the purpose of speaker design, Qes is the effective motor strength, though some folks stick with the historical BL^2/Rdc for comparison purposes, which has been used to calculate Qes = [2*pi*Fs*Mms]/[BL^2/Rdc].
Assuming the driver's capable of following the signal in the BW that will produce it, then ignoring cab size, a relatively high Qt [weak motor] driver is more likely to 'kick like a mule' since its upper mass corner is lower and especially so if it's down around 100 Hz like the pioneers did in many cab alignments and especially their OBs, BLHs that were known for life-like [mid] bass using relatively weak motors driven by high output impedance amps to push system Q [sysQ] to as much as 1.4! Makes for short horns too [aka scoop bins].
Not HIFI in today's terms, but HIFI back then was more about dance hall 'toe tappin' entertainment. After all, the original movies only had a music soundtrack, so being able to create the various moods of the film with it was tantamount.
IOW, as power increased, amp impedance dropped, so driver Qts increased to compensate, which in turn lowered system efficiency, so more [Vd] was required, which in turn meant even more power required [dog chasing tail scenario] till now we have abysmally inefficient speakers needing multiple KWs to hit SPLs the pioneers did with 30 W, with the tradeoff of trucks full of relatively small speakers Vs a few truck size horns.
In short, one more time......there's no replacement......., reread mine and Norm's post re needing it for the harmonics higher up too, so compare swept volume [aka Vd] at all these key frequency ranges: [Sd*Xmax] to keep the 'playing field' level, then make sure the driver can actually handle the power required to reach Xmax or exceed it in the intended BW, which many can't down this low. If there's a simple routine to do all this at once, I'm either not aware of it or long since forgot it.
GM
More like ~3051/14 = ~218 Hz and probably why the 240 Hz slider isn't boosted as much.
GM
GM - Thank you, I need to think on this for a bit and do some more reading and re-reading...
Things certainly were better back in the pioneer days, as you say... (though I happen to like my solid state receiver). Would have been a blast to be involved back then in R&D building some of the big stuff...
Also, I suspect my tastes tend towards "toe tapping" rather than hi-fi anyway!
Ah - that would certainly explain the 240hz muddiness.. good to know.
Things certainly were better back in the pioneer days, as you say... (though I happen to like my solid state receiver). Would have been a blast to be involved back then in R&D building some of the big stuff...
Also, I suspect my tastes tend towards "toe tapping" rather than hi-fi anyway!
Ah - that would certainly explain the 240hz muddiness.. good to know.
Oh. Vd is what i was trying to calculate before with Sd and Xmax... ha! No one wanted to point that out eh?
For what its worth, todays playlist is more rock-ish:
Foo fighters
Incubus
Muse
Killers
Linkin Park
Sheryl Crow
Journey
Zac Brown Band
I never did find that Danley harley recording, if anyone has a link to it?
For what its worth, todays playlist is more rock-ish:
Foo fighters
Incubus
Muse
Killers
Linkin Park
Sheryl Crow
Journey
Zac Brown Band
I never did find that Danley harley recording, if anyone has a link to it?
Last edited:
They were in the archives, so didn't bother to store them, but now all the links are dead ; I wonder what prompted him to do that.........
GM
edit [read and heed warning!]: Tom Danley’s Mic Recordings | Danley Sound Labs, Inc.
; I wonder what prompted him to do that.........GM
edit [read and heed warning!]: Tom Danley’s Mic Recordings | Danley Sound Labs, Inc.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.