Greetings,
This is my first post here on the site, but I have read many postings by members, which have been really informative and pleasure.
I would like to start a speaker project loosely based on the design of the Devore Orangutan, in looks mostly. I have a CTS woofer from a defunct Rectilinear Highboy which sounds smooth. I would like to combine this with a 4 - 5" full range in a ported enclosure.
Does anyone have any recommendations for a good full range with great highs?
Also, is this design even good? I have a pair of Revel M20's that are lightning fast and revealing; so I am looking at this speaker project to contrast those with a smooth full sound (almost vintage like).
Thanks ahead of time for any help.
This is my first post here on the site, but I have read many postings by members, which have been really informative and pleasure.
I would like to start a speaker project loosely based on the design of the Devore Orangutan, in looks mostly. I have a CTS woofer from a defunct Rectilinear Highboy which sounds smooth. I would like to combine this with a 4 - 5" full range in a ported enclosure.
Does anyone have any recommendations for a good full range with great highs?
Also, is this design even good? I have a pair of Revel M20's that are lightning fast and revealing; so I am looking at this speaker project to contrast those with a smooth full sound (almost vintage like).
Thanks ahead of time for any help.
It depends what you mean by 'great highs' since for some people this could mean an HF emphasis, for others a rolled off top end, and for others the infinite number of possibilities in between.
No idea regarding how good the design is. It's fairly high efficiency, possibly using modified Seas drivers. Their website doesn't give much detail, since it doesn't even say what the LF loading scheme is, which is a fairly basic detail (sealed box, vented box etc.), nor does it mention the XO topology etc. But FWIW, you should be able to create something vaguely similar in looks.
No idea regarding how good the design is. It's fairly high efficiency, possibly using modified Seas drivers. Their website doesn't give much detail, since it doesn't even say what the LF loading scheme is, which is a fairly basic detail (sealed box, vented box etc.), nor does it mention the XO topology etc. But FWIW, you should be able to create something vaguely similar in looks.
I agree with Scott; you need to provide your definition of "great highs". Some may think any full range driver sounds great when they are high. 😉
Regarding your desire for a "smoother, vintage" sound, my gut says MarkAudio CHP-70, but this is not a driver that fits the majority's definition of "great highs" so I have reservations about recommending it.
Regarding your desire for a "smoother, vintage" sound, my gut says MarkAudio CHP-70, but this is not a driver that fits the majority's definition of "great highs" so I have reservations about recommending it.
In my experience, a full range driver with great highs will not have great lows unless the SPL is very low and you eq the bottom back into shape. Like a desktop system. There are some full range drivers that can do fairly good in all categories though.
The choices for a two-way with a woofer could be many, but a few to consider would be Mark Audio A6p, A7.3, Fostex FF85WK, FF105WK.
jeff
I'm thinking the A6P myself, the very good metals mentioned might be incongruent with the tonality of the old CTS
+1 assuming there isn't a grotesque efficiency mismatch between it and the woofer, in which case an active XO and Eq would have to be employed.
Vifa TC9FD or the Scanspeak 10F ($$). These are near perfect for your application and will probably have the smoothest highs of all full range drivers.
How big is your woofer?
How big is your woofer?
These are all really helpful points and laser accurate.
To answer my ambiguity on "great highs", I guess I read a number of post where full range
drivers have trouble after 10k and many people add tweeters. I a shooting for a smooth sound if that helps anything; I don't need ribbon like high extension.
I cannot find any specs on the efficiency of the CTS woofer but I would assume that it is middle ground because at the time the speaker was released (1968) there were not any mega power wattage amps made ( I could be wrong ) It is 12" woofer (alhtough it measures a little less than that; more like 11" and some change)
To be more specific, I was hoping to incorporate a FR driver with this woofer and cross it over at 250hz or so. I know the crossover point is ok because the Rectilinear crossed the woofer with philips FR at 300hz.
Mark Audio and Tang Band were options I was looking at, and I leaning towards the Mark Audio.
My idea was to get those drivers into a wide baffle-dual ported enclosure with 3/4" walls and a 1 1/2" thick front baffle. The FR driver would be sealed and the woofer would use the rest of the enclosure.
Does this help? Thanks for all the responses.
To answer my ambiguity on "great highs", I guess I read a number of post where full range
drivers have trouble after 10k and many people add tweeters. I a shooting for a smooth sound if that helps anything; I don't need ribbon like high extension.
I cannot find any specs on the efficiency of the CTS woofer but I would assume that it is middle ground because at the time the speaker was released (1968) there were not any mega power wattage amps made ( I could be wrong ) It is 12" woofer (alhtough it measures a little less than that; more like 11" and some change)
To be more specific, I was hoping to incorporate a FR driver with this woofer and cross it over at 250hz or so. I know the crossover point is ok because the Rectilinear crossed the woofer with philips FR at 300hz.
Mark Audio and Tang Band were options I was looking at, and I leaning towards the Mark Audio.
My idea was to get those drivers into a wide baffle-dual ported enclosure with 3/4" walls and a 1 1/2" thick front baffle. The FR driver would be sealed and the woofer would use the rest of the enclosure.
Does this help? Thanks for all the responses.
Lots of people use the technique you're proposing. It's often labelled FAST (full range assissted or full range and subwoofer technology). I'd suggest a minidsp and a pair of cheap tang band W3-881SI. They're only $9.99 and you'll be able to mess about a little to see how this goes. They have very good high end, but not the best of the best. Measure very smooth. I would try these to get a handle on things and then upgrade. The cut out hole for them is very small so you can alway enlarge it for a larger full range. Even most 3" full rangers would be slightly bigger.
If you want to go straight to it I'd personally be interested in the Fostex FF85. I've used the FE83 and it wasn't great, but the FF85 is supposed to be very good. I'd go with the minidsp or something active. Unless you have a lot of big inductors laying around.
If you want to go straight to it I'd personally be interested in the Fostex FF85. I've used the FE83 and it wasn't great, but the FF85 is supposed to be very good. I'd go with the minidsp or something active. Unless you have a lot of big inductors laying around.
If you go for a front baffle that thick, just keep in mind that most of the 3" or so FR candidates for mid/tweeter are fairly shallow ( for example the Alpair6 is 52mm / 2 1/16" overall) and that you'd need to seriously chamfer the back side of the through hole to avoid choking the FR.
Also note that it's highly recommended to rebate these drivers flush to the front of baffle, but even with that, almost the entire back side of cone of the A6P would be enclosed in a 38mm / 1 1/2" thick baffle, and I'm sure you'd hear it.
I'd be more inclined to go for thinner material for the full length of driver baffle, and laminate a second layer on the inside of the woofer section only - but then, I'm from the lighter / thinner and well braced school, so YMMV..
Crossing over as low as you propose with drivers such as any of Mark's that I've used, you might want to consider a resistively vented sub enclosure.
I've only built one sealed enclosure for a MA driver (rear surrounds for HT), and as far as I know haven't heard any others at get togethers.
Yes, the FF85WK is good, spectacularly so in fact, but I wonder if the CTS woofers wouldn't be similar to the old RSC, and other OEM drivers of the suspected vintage ( say circa mid - late 60's?) - in that the two might not integrate as smoothly as would something with a slightly more classic ,"darker" upper mid to top end.
No, that driver makes for something good all around all on its own.
I'm not sure I understand where Chris is coming from. Almost anything can blend at 250hz. I've started a few threads about FAST design if you search my threads started by tuxedocivic you'll see what I've done. I've done a few with bigger woofers like yours as well and I find down that low there's no blend issues.
I'm not sure I understand where Chris is coming from. Almost anything can blend at 250hz. I've started a few threads about FAST design if you search my threads started by tuxedocivic you'll see what I've done. I've done a few with bigger woofers like yours as well and I find down that low there's no blend issues.
I bought a pair of Alpair A12P.
It has remarkably detailed and extended highs, without being aggressive. The resulting soundscape was truly spatial.
You do not need a tweeter with it.
It is a true fullranger when used in a relatively large cabinet (I listened to the Superpensil cabinet).
I am myself investigating how to pair it with a woofer (preferably passive but I realise it will have to be active to keep things practical), relieving it from the lowest frequencies, and keeping with a reasonably sized cabinet. Check the Markaudio forum here for discussions and ideas in this vein.
It has remarkably detailed and extended highs, without being aggressive. The resulting soundscape was truly spatial.
You do not need a tweeter with it.
It is a true fullranger when used in a relatively large cabinet (I listened to the Superpensil cabinet).
I am myself investigating how to pair it with a woofer (preferably passive but I realise it will have to be active to keep things practical), relieving it from the lowest frequencies, and keeping with a reasonably sized cabinet. Check the Markaudio forum here for discussions and ideas in this vein.
Similar to the OP's idea of combining a 12" woofer with a small fullrange is this recent project "Terra Luna" by the german magazine Klang & Ton. Both units are Visaton, the graphics at least are quite interesting.
However it crosses at 900hz, which may be relatively low for a 2 way box, but it's high compared to what you are looking for:
Description: TerraLuna
However it crosses at 900hz, which may be relatively low for a 2 way box, but it's high compared to what you are looking for:
Description: TerraLuna
That would have been the thing that OP EnoXX was looking for.
Look like orangutan.
I wanted to quote what Tuxedocivic started
really simple kind of approach that requires...
And I started one year ago, when I saw that nice 2" were available, which
happens everytime for a real DIYer, you know...nothing stable.
I happened to have also some broken cones around so I managed to rescue them and 1+1= mid-tweeter with waveguide.
🙄
Look like orangutan.
I wanted to quote what Tuxedocivic started
I also use that tecnique, which is rather joyful for what it does for the
really simple kind of approach that requires...
And I started one year ago, when I saw that nice 2" were available, which
happens everytime for a real DIYer, you know...nothing stable.
I happened to have also some broken cones around so I managed to rescue them and 1+1= mid-tweeter with waveguide.
🙄
Similar to the OP's idea of combining a 12" woofer with a small fullrange is this recent project "Terra Luna" by the german magazine Klang & Ton. Both units are Visaton, the graphics at least are quite interesting.
However it crosses at 900hz, which may be relatively low for a 2 way box, but it's high compared to what you are looking for:
Description: TerraLuna
That is pretty much what I am talking. My CT woofer won't be able to crossover that high so that is why I was thinking in the 3-4-5" range of FR's. Is the mark audio chp's overkill in the warmth department because of the roll offs after 7k? Is there a reason that passive wont work? Should bi-amp instead with a low pass and high pass?
There are many reasons passive is a bad idea when crossing that low. I've posted some detailed information on why in other threads, but the biggest reason is the impedance peaks in that range cause very audible issues. In my experience, if using text book cross overs, they often end up over and octave higher than predicted when actually measured. The cross over values are huge and expensive. And much more.
For non drug induced 'great highs', the greatest I have heard is the Jordan JX6, but They don't do the great lows. Imaging and resolution is superb. I understand Ted is to be revising this next. I achieve the highs I want in my designs by mating the Eikona with a high dispersion tweeter - the latter has a fist order roll-in. The tweeter is relatively low power and really used for a fill-in, while the Jordan does the all important imaging and coherence. The beauty of a full-range design is that the demands made on a mating tweeter are alot less, meaning great highs are more easily achievable.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.