chrisb. I decided to go full DIY and build everything. I think I know what you mean now by suggesting that I use a larger driver. A few moments ago, I did a quick listening test on three different size 2-way bookshelf speakers: 4", 5", and 6". They're all Canadian-made, probably not high end, early-2000's speakers (Acoustech Labs 4" and 5", Ambiance II D-box 6"). I listened to the Star Wars theme song as a test. The 6" was by far the best. The sound just felt "fuller". Would this "fuller" sound also be felt by using a larger full range driver (say, 5" or 6"), as opposed to a smaller one (say 3" to 4")?
As much as the combination of common sense and 20yrs of DIY speaker building can deliver to the question, yeah a larger competent FR driver should be able to deliver a “fuller” sound, but I’ll add a few caveats, some of which will be repetitions of my earlier comments.
1) You’ve got a fairly small room, and probably a limited prime seating area, so the narrower high frequency dispersion that is often the penalty of larger drivers may be easily be overcome with toe-in;
2) OTOH, by employing a powered subwoofer and using the bass management software integral to all modern surround receivers, you can easily set the crossover point at which low frequencies are summed to mono and directed to the LFE output. This can allow the use of smaller FR drivers for the L&R, or at least the pair that you’ll be using to provide phantom center.
3) Smaller FR drivers tend to have more extended HF response and wider “sweet spot”. If using a discrete center channel, that might not be as much of a concern, but this is a bit of an unusual application, and from what I can infer, the multitude of smaller drivers in the vertically curved array are probably employed for their wider dispersion?
Geeze, if I was still actively building and had a room that could accommodate wall mounts, I might have fun playing with something like this.
Time now for some other voices, I think. I’ll be watching this thread with interest.
1) You’ve got a fairly small room, and probably a limited prime seating area, so the narrower high frequency dispersion that is often the penalty of larger drivers may be easily be overcome with toe-in;
2) OTOH, by employing a powered subwoofer and using the bass management software integral to all modern surround receivers, you can easily set the crossover point at which low frequencies are summed to mono and directed to the LFE output. This can allow the use of smaller FR drivers for the L&R, or at least the pair that you’ll be using to provide phantom center.
3) Smaller FR drivers tend to have more extended HF response and wider “sweet spot”. If using a discrete center channel, that might not be as much of a concern, but this is a bit of an unusual application, and from what I can infer, the multitude of smaller drivers in the vertically curved array are probably employed for their wider dispersion?
Geeze, if I was still actively building and had a room that could accommodate wall mounts, I might have fun playing with something like this.
Time now for some other voices, I think. I’ll be watching this thread with interest.
For the two center channel full range drivers, from what I understand, I'd need two 16 ohm drivers wired in parallel. So this kind of limits my choices. I found:
Dayton Audio PA130 (5" driver), FaitalPRO 4FE35 (4"), Peerless TC9FD (3.5") or Peerless 830987 (3"). I can't seem to find anything else with half decent ratings.
Given that the center channel is primarily for dialogue, the PA130 for now is my first choice. Seems pretty flat between 90ish hz and 5khz. Not sure if the center gets used for anything above 5khz...
Any advice/thoughts on that?
Dayton Audio PA130 (5" driver), FaitalPRO 4FE35 (4"), Peerless TC9FD (3.5") or Peerless 830987 (3"). I can't seem to find anything else with half decent ratings.
Given that the center channel is primarily for dialogue, the PA130 for now is my first choice. Seems pretty flat between 90ish hz and 5khz. Not sure if the center gets used for anything above 5khz...
Any advice/thoughts on that?
The PA130 have a bump at 1.5kHz, which might accentuate a "nasal" sound.
Also, the center channel is much more than "just dialogue".
There is a lot of information that is passed in the center channel, so it is important to match with the front L/R channels.
Reading from previous posts... seems you listened to the smallest enclosures available for either drivers.
For a commercial product, it makes sense.
For DIY, you are opened to possibilities far beyond the constraints of a commercial product.
In the three drivers mentioned, the one with the best chance of being a great system IMHO is the 4FE25 (although the 830987 is quite good too).
It will all depend on the application.
In a smallish room, they can reach down to 80Hz, where a sub (or two) can take over.
Also, the center channel is much more than "just dialogue".
There is a lot of information that is passed in the center channel, so it is important to match with the front L/R channels.
Reading from previous posts... seems you listened to the smallest enclosures available for either drivers.
For a commercial product, it makes sense.
For DIY, you are opened to possibilities far beyond the constraints of a commercial product.
In the three drivers mentioned, the one with the best chance of being a great system IMHO is the 4FE25 (although the 830987 is quite good too).
It will all depend on the application.
In a smallish room, they can reach down to 80Hz, where a sub (or two) can take over.
Last edited:
Or 2 4Ω wired in series.
The PA310 does not govery low, whether you need that for centre i don’t know. It is inexpensive.
dave
Those enclosures will need to have isolated chambers, which may not necessarily be of equal physical volume - or strictly orthogonal- so I think quarterwave action will be less likely to be a big factor.
As Dave notes, there’s probably no reason - other than trickier connections to amp terminals - that 4ohm or higher couldn’t be used for those center channel drivers. And as you’re in a small room and using a sub, the wall mount enclosures wouldn’t need to dig much deeper than say 80 - 100Hz.
The “PA” - public address / stage monitor application for which the particular model cited is targeted is something to keep in mind - I doubt they’re commonly employed with a listening distance of between 8 - 10ft., and as Perceval suggests, you’d likely hear coloration exactly where you wouldn’t want it.
There does appear to be a rather limited selection of affordable 16ohm FR drivers that’d be suitable for the application. I’d take a look at the RS100 - comes in both 4 & 8ohm versions, and can get you to around 60Hz in a fairly small vented enclosure.
As Dave notes, there’s probably no reason - other than trickier connections to amp terminals - that 4ohm or higher couldn’t be used for those center channel drivers. And as you’re in a small room and using a sub, the wall mount enclosures wouldn’t need to dig much deeper than say 80 - 100Hz.
The “PA” - public address / stage monitor application for which the particular model cited is targeted is something to keep in mind - I doubt they’re commonly employed with a listening distance of between 8 - 10ft., and as Perceval suggests, you’d likely hear coloration exactly where you wouldn’t want it.
There does appear to be a rather limited selection of affordable 16ohm FR drivers that’d be suitable for the application. I’d take a look at the RS100 - comes in both 4 & 8ohm versions, and can get you to around 60Hz in a fairly small vented enclosure.
Last edited:
I tried searching the forums about parallel vs series wiring, advantages and disadvantages. I thought the general conclusion was that parallel will increase sensitivity, whereas in series it'll decrease. Would there be a noticeable sound quality difference between the two? I'm thinking my AVR will compensate for the sensitivity differences.
Also, in my case, wiring in series (2 x 4ohm) would have the added benefit of more driver options. I don't mind spending more to get a proven better product.
Also, in my case, wiring in series (2 x 4ohm) would have the added benefit of more driver options. I don't mind spending more to get a proven better product.
Sensitivity yes, effiricency no.
But typically a 16Ω driver will be less sensitive than then 4Ω to start with (if they have the same efficincy it is the case). If that ideal holds 2 16Ω in parallel would have the same sensitivity as to 4Ω in series.
dave
Note: Chris is right, i neglected to keep in mind you are stuffing more than 1 channel into the box.
But typically a 16Ω driver will be less sensitive than then 4Ω to start with (if they have the same efficincy it is the case). If that ideal holds 2 16Ω in parallel would have the same sensitivity as to 4Ω in series.
dave
Note: Chris is right, i neglected to keep in mind you are stuffing more than 1 channel into the box.
PGM - I’m gathering that by now you’ve had a chance to play with the auto calibration speaker set up utility on your Marantz. As mentioned, I’ve had a fair bit of experience with a range of makes and models of HT receivers myself - including my current Onkyo that allows for digital crossover and active bi-amping within the receiver. So far all have been Audyssey, which I find incredibly handy and easy to use; hell some will even pause you with an on screen error message if a particular speaker channel is wired out of phase - I’ve had than happen. I can’t imagine that any difference in sensitivity between channels wouldn’t easily be managed during the initial calibration passes, and all allow drilling down to fine tune if needed.
Yes. I use Audyssey to calibrate my speakers. I'm happy with the results.
Two 3" full range drivers wired in series and placed one on top of the other. Question: Is there an easy way to make this a 1.5-way system, with a low pass filter for the second driver at about 300hz? In other words, driver #2 will only help with the bass. I went through a few forums, and also saw some of planet10's posts, but I still don't know the answer. I have very limited technical knowledge in these matters so what I'm trying to find out is: what do I have to buy and how do I wire it?
Two 3" full range drivers wired in series and placed one on top of the other. Question: Is there an easy way to make this a 1.5-way system, with a low pass filter for the second driver at about 300hz? In other words, driver #2 will only help with the bass. I went through a few forums, and also saw some of planet10's posts, but I still don't know the answer. I have very limited technical knowledge in these matters so what I'm trying to find out is: what do I have to buy and how do I wire it?
I have this feeling that we are stuck in a loop here...
Where this idea of using 2 drivers has become a mantra of some sort.
Why, since we are looking at enclosures that would suit a 1/4 wave design, are we trying to pack in dual drivers in a compromised setting?
One driver per channel, in a 1/4 wave MLTL design, would simplify the whole thing, and probably sound best.
Where this idea of using 2 drivers has become a mantra of some sort.
Why, since we are looking at enclosures that would suit a 1/4 wave design, are we trying to pack in dual drivers in a compromised setting?
One driver per channel, in a 1/4 wave MLTL design, would simplify the whole thing, and probably sound best.
perceval. I'm simply exploring some options. I have very little technical knowledge. For instance, I had to google "1/4 wave MLTL design" to understand what you're saying. My idea of 2 drivers came from the fact that I listened to some of the drivers from the "A Subjective Blind Comparison... etc." topics and generally noticed that the 3" to 3.5" drivers kind of lacked in the bass department, but had the best vocal and instrumental accuracy. I thought adding a second driver to assist with the bass might be a good idea. Or maybe it's not a good idea...
Here is how you can wire 2 drivers. http://www.planet10-hifi.com/downloads/Dual-Driver-Wiring.pdf
Series connection allows for 14 excursion at LF, but does not provide any BSC. Which, if you wall mount them, is sufficient in its own to deal with baffle step.
One thing i wanted to make clearer in the doc is that the possibilty exists that a higher output impedance amp (like a typical SET) can be used to get a smaller amount of BSC with series connection.
dave
Series connection allows for 14 excursion at LF, but does not provide any BSC. Which, if you wall mount them, is sufficient in its own to deal with baffle step.
One thing i wanted to make clearer in the doc is that the possibilty exists that a higher output impedance amp (like a typical SET) can be used to get a smaller amount of BSC with series connection.
dave
In the test? Or for real.
The whole premise of the test is significantly flawed and i would say that no real evaluation of the drivers can be made. Fun, but not all that useful.
Smaller drivers typically have less bass extension and often cannot move as much air. A larger driver will give more bass but at the sacrifice of the critical mid/top and dispersion (these all generalizations)
But as Toole suggests, particularily for HT, everything below 80 Hz is best handled by the subwoofers.
dave
PGM, re your post #34, another question and a few possibly redundant observations / suggestions:
- What room/system did you "listened to some of the drivers from the "A Subjective Blind Comparison... etc."? Those conditions might well not be relevant to the application you're positing here.
- As Dave reminds us above, and I think particularly applies to small room / relatively close listening area, as most of the heavy lifting in a surround HT system can be done by separately powered sub(s), and 3 -4" FR drivers can handily acquit themselves of the remaining duty in the front row (and peripheral surrounds, for that matter).
- If you look closely again at the Artisan enclosure photos, each enclosure includes 2 pairs of mid-bass drivers and side mounted tweeter in an MTM configuration, bracketing a curved array of 16 smaller FR drivers, for a total of 42 drivers (my earlier count was off). While I'm sure that quite acceptable results could be obtained with a single FR per side for the phantom centre channel, there could be some merit to a pair of drivers for each the L & R respectively. If so, one could have a LP filter for 1.5way function. All 6 drivers needn't be identical, but the 2 forming the L & R channels probably should.
- The question of how to connect the multiples of drivers per channel would depend on the impedance you choose; i.e. as selection of 16ohm models is limited, and the receiver's ability to sustain operation with multiple channels at 4ohm load is questionable, I'd tend towards series, even with 8 ohm drivers.
Now's as good a time as any to ask if you're open to consider other makes and models of drivers. It wouldn't take much searching of my posts to discover my own favorites, none of which have yet been mentioned.
- What room/system did you "listened to some of the drivers from the "A Subjective Blind Comparison... etc."? Those conditions might well not be relevant to the application you're positing here.
- As Dave reminds us above, and I think particularly applies to small room / relatively close listening area, as most of the heavy lifting in a surround HT system can be done by separately powered sub(s), and 3 -4" FR drivers can handily acquit themselves of the remaining duty in the front row (and peripheral surrounds, for that matter).
- If you look closely again at the Artisan enclosure photos, each enclosure includes 2 pairs of mid-bass drivers and side mounted tweeter in an MTM configuration, bracketing a curved array of 16 smaller FR drivers, for a total of 42 drivers (my earlier count was off). While I'm sure that quite acceptable results could be obtained with a single FR per side for the phantom centre channel, there could be some merit to a pair of drivers for each the L & R respectively. If so, one could have a LP filter for 1.5way function. All 6 drivers needn't be identical, but the 2 forming the L & R channels probably should.
- The question of how to connect the multiples of drivers per channel would depend on the impedance you choose; i.e. as selection of 16ohm models is limited, and the receiver's ability to sustain operation with multiple channels at 4ohm load is questionable, I'd tend towards series, even with 8 ohm drivers.
Now's as good a time as any to ask if you're open to consider other makes and models of drivers. It wouldn't take much searching of my posts to discover my own favorites, none of which have yet been mentioned.
I did the listening yesterday in the room where I'll be installing the system (living room/loft). I thought it was an interesting exercise because I was able to notice some differences between the drivers and was able to form an opinion. I believe my subwoofer is crossed at 100hz, maybe 120. The original Artison looked something like this:
Artison Portrait High-performance speakers for flat-panel TVs at Crutchfield
I think they were 4.5" drivers, with tweeter of course.
I'm open to other makes and models for drivers. The ones I mentioned are there because they can be ordered quite easily through Digikey, Parts Express, etc. These companies tend to come up first when doing a google search on FR drivers.
What are your top 2 FR drivers?
Artison Portrait High-performance speakers for flat-panel TVs at Crutchfield
I think they were 4.5" drivers, with tweeter of course.
I'm open to other makes and models for drivers. The ones I mentioned are there because they can be ordered quite easily through Digikey, Parts Express, etc. These companies tend to come up first when doing a google search on FR drivers.
What are your top 2 FR drivers?
I suspect that Artison is neither a MTM nor a 1.5 design.
Looking at the angled tweeters, I think that the tweeters angled towards the middle are for the centre channel, and the ones angled outside for the L/R channels, each sharing a woofer.
Judging by the size, it won't be a bass monster either.... The woofers look pretty much like 3-3.5".
Looking at the angled tweeters, I think that the tweeters angled towards the middle are for the centre channel, and the ones angled outside for the L/R channels, each sharing a woofer.
Judging by the size, it won't be a bass monster either.... The woofers look pretty much like 3-3.5".
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.