With your 87db, 8" woofers there should be no need fore PA drivers
You could try the attractive Monacor SPH-176 ... its quite cheap and it might do the trick
http://www.monacor.com/int/en/produktseite_suche.php?artid=4084&spr=EN&typ=full
You could try the attractive Monacor SPH-176 ... its quite cheap and it might do the trick
http://www.monacor.com/int/en/produktseite_suche.php?artid=4084&spr=EN&typ=full
Attachments
Best Mid on the Zaph Audio site is the Vifa XG18 for my money.
Much better than any Revelator in measured THD.
Its slightly better than the RS52 and can go lower.
Much better than any Revelator in measured THD.
Its slightly better than the RS52 and can go lower.
tinitus said:
Your right, he should use pro bass drivers with the pro mids if he wants to get out of this rut he's in
Interesting. So I went to Zaph's site and compared the XG18 to the 18W8531G00. The Vifa XG18 has much lower 2nd HD, around 10dB in a wide bandwidth, but slightly higher 3rd HD, around 4-5dB in a wide bandwidth. The CSD shows the 18W8531G00 being cleaner above 1k.
So I guess the revelator still sounds better than the XG18. But the XG18 would be much better in terms of quality to price ratio.
Regards,
Bill
HiFiNutNut said:
That the Revelator sounds subjectively better would be my guess as well. At $208 a piece I'm not likely to find out soon.
It makes me wonder if an MTM with the XG18 would be better than a single 18W8531G00. You'd still have $80 more per channel in your pocket.
Then there's the unity horn arrangement... only a few here have spoken of. 4 mid drivers pushing sound through about 8 pencil size holes.
If you look at this new design from Troels you will see that he crosses the 12M at 1khz/3khz ... if you cross it too low power compression may become an issue
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/ektagrande.htm
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/ektagrande.htm
Old news from Nelson Pass about him using Audax PR170M0.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6363&highlight=
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6363&highlight=
Daveis said:
HiFiNutNut said:
In Zaph's 7" test group, there are three drivers that can be said to be the best midrange performer: ScanSpeak Revelator, Usher 8945P, and Vifa XG18.
But as Zaph noted in the following link, the limitation of XG18 is its level dependency---even in midrange. At a moderate listening level, it's really one of the best, but as the volume goes up, it loses clarity.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1312423#post1312423
Jay_WJ said:
Unfortunately, there is a peak on the Usher 8945, you need to use a notch filter, a little problematic if you are not an experienced desisigner. Scanspeak does not experience this problem but far more expensive. Some people who has experience with both Usher and scanspeak said that scanspeak is far superior. If price is a factor than Usher is a good substitute.
BTW I have Usher woofer, and also GR M130 mid ($25 each) which is far cheaper and very good drivers for their price. I would recommend them.
If price is not a factor then go for scanspeak, probably you get what you pay for. Scanspeaks are used for box design only. I am not sure of open baffle design. Their eficiency is only moderate, about 88dB.
ttan98 said:
I've designed my Usher 2-way crossover (visit my website if interested) and after voicing what I hear is the best midrange I've heard during my 20 yr audio hobby. I strongly suspect that people who preferred the SS to the Usher either listened to the 8945P with a crossover that was not so well designed, or were psychologically biased due to what they paid for the SS. 😀
In addition to Zaph's HD sweep, Mark K's more thorough test also shows that the 8945P is on par with (actually better in a few testing conditions) the SS Revelator: http://www.markk.claub.net/Testing/woofer8/Usher_new_7_tests.htm
ttan98 said:
Scan' s are not used for box designs only. SL, JohnK, me and several others have used Scan's in dipoles with success.
/Peter
Curmudgeon; The flexunit 4" looks promising but I will have to look in to it.
Tinitus; I do not understand?? I do not want to replaced anything but the 12m
And I do not want to cross higher than around 350hz because I want one speaker to cover the all important vocal range.
The 12m does this job very good! But played too loud; distortion.
So the 12m CAN play as loud as I want but with a bit to much distortion. If I can find a replacement with higher SPL/power it will be less likely that it breaks up...
Tinitus; I do not understand?? I do not want to replaced anything but the 12m
And I do not want to cross higher than around 350hz because I want one speaker to cover the all important vocal range.
The 12m does this job very good! But played too loud; distortion.
So the 12m CAN play as loud as I want but with a bit to much distortion. If I can find a replacement with higher SPL/power it will be less likely that it breaks up...
I've heard some small MTM 5.5" Seas Excel's playing fairly loud and still sounding clean.
But now that you mention an emphasis on SPL... there's only one place to go -- horns.
Maybe someone can comment on the relative merits of Audax, BMS, JBL, TAD, Behma, etc.
That Nelson was playing with Audax makes me think its worth looking into.
But now that you mention an emphasis on SPL... there's only one place to go -- horns.
Maybe someone can comment on the relative merits of Audax, BMS, JBL, TAD, Behma, etc.
That Nelson was playing with Audax makes me think its worth looking into.
Our review of mids when we undertook the Great Project was limited to those drivers of very good reputation that looked as if they could handle the full vocal spectrum with relatively low order (multislope) filters.
This was about 7 years ago, so info is a bit out of date; but we looked at the first Revelator mid, Focal, Eton,et al but not the high breakup metal cones. Later we also looked at the Accutons, and finally settled on the Skaaning 15 cm C-Quenze. Simply cleaner, without audible fault.
Quite recently we became dissatisfied with the idea of using a very good series metallized polyprop for the mid HP, and experimented with removing it entirely, as we did not wish to pay for 100 uF 😱 of Duelund or Mundorf or Relcap exotica. In a smallish enclosed enclosure, we now cross over at ~90 Hz, and continue to crossover to the ScanSpeak 2905/99000 at ~3800 Hz. Despite our concern, we simply do not hear strain at listenable levels. (30 X 20 X 10 feet, open to other rooms.) Removing the mid cap gave us a more natural sound; a little grain we had not realized was there was now gone, clarity and warmth both increased.
Any system upgrades are readily heard; so clearly the drivers are not yet the limiting factor. You can't reasonably be more demanding of a mid, and I don't know of any other that would perform as well under the circumstances. You do, however, pay for the capability.
P.S. I should mention that we also made considerable effort to reduce internal reflections and diffraction. Failure to do so will mean that the driver's full potential will not be realized.
This was about 7 years ago, so info is a bit out of date; but we looked at the first Revelator mid, Focal, Eton,et al but not the high breakup metal cones. Later we also looked at the Accutons, and finally settled on the Skaaning 15 cm C-Quenze. Simply cleaner, without audible fault.
Quite recently we became dissatisfied with the idea of using a very good series metallized polyprop for the mid HP, and experimented with removing it entirely, as we did not wish to pay for 100 uF 😱 of Duelund or Mundorf or Relcap exotica. In a smallish enclosed enclosure, we now cross over at ~90 Hz, and continue to crossover to the ScanSpeak 2905/99000 at ~3800 Hz. Despite our concern, we simply do not hear strain at listenable levels. (30 X 20 X 10 feet, open to other rooms.) Removing the mid cap gave us a more natural sound; a little grain we had not realized was there was now gone, clarity and warmth both increased.
Any system upgrades are readily heard; so clearly the drivers are not yet the limiting factor. You can't reasonably be more demanding of a mid, and I don't know of any other that would perform as well under the circumstances. You do, however, pay for the capability.
P.S. I should mention that we also made considerable effort to reduce internal reflections and diffraction. Failure to do so will mean that the driver's full potential will not be realized.
aaronboumans said:
You can't have everything, speaker design is a compromise. Make a choice:
1. You go for a larger midrange driver, that will handle the SPL better. But, it will need a lower crossover point to the tweeter to avoid beaming.
2. You keep the 12m and cross to the woofer a bit higher. 500Hz should do the trick.
I would pick #2. If you do your crossover right you won't hear it at 500Hz. Crossovers that low are very easy to implement as the large wavelength almost guarantees the drivers output will combine in phase.
...maybe 3. Use two 12m in series for an 8Ohm load?
Maybe it is worth mentioning I have a pair of perfect condition ScanSpeak 12m midranges to sell if anyone is interested!
who said I can't have it all????????
Oh yes I shall have it all!!!!!!!!!!
If I would stop trying I should stop DIYing.
If there is no solution than I can alway build a few extra Aleph's buy an extra pair of 12m's.
But serious
option 3? Anyone some experience with series drivers?
Oh yes I shall have it all!!!!!!!!!!
If I would stop trying I should stop DIYing.
If there is no solution than I can alway build a few extra Aleph's buy an extra pair of 12m's.
But serious
option 3? Anyone some experience with series drivers?aaronboumans, it was not me that suggested to change anything ... on the contrary, Like Tenson I suggested to keep that nice 12M with a higher xo point ... low end energy is a hard load fore this small driver and will most likely push it into premature power compression, and if your woofers are up to the job with higher xo point you will experience much more power on heavy classical music
As an option I suggested the cheap Monacor SPH-176, which is supposed to be very good
A small "low" sensitive PA mid driver(93db) could be an option ... it will have better power rating, but you would still need a higher xo point, because sensitivity has to come from somewhere ... mostly the cost is higher Fs ... but you may risk a bit harsh sound on classical music, which can be handled in a passive crossover, but not with a standard active filter, or you will need some kind of equalizer ... I have no experience with a hybrid of active filter and passive components
Also remember that there is a limit to how loud you can play in room of a certain size, before it all turns into distortion
As an option I suggested the cheap Monacor SPH-176, which is supposed to be very good
A small "low" sensitive PA mid driver(93db) could be an option ... it will have better power rating, but you would still need a higher xo point, because sensitivity has to come from somewhere ... mostly the cost is higher Fs ... but you may risk a bit harsh sound on classical music, which can be handled in a passive crossover, but not with a standard active filter, or you will need some kind of equalizer ... I have no experience with a hybrid of active filter and passive components
Also remember that there is a limit to how loud you can play in room of a certain size, before it all turns into distortion
aaronboumans said:who said I can't have it all????????
Oh yes I shall have it all!!!!!!!!!!
If I would stop trying I should stop DIYing.
If there is no solution than I can alway build a few extra Aleph's buy an extra pair of 12m's.
But serious
I'm running series 4ohm mids in a pair of speakers at the moment. It works just fine, but you will probably want to do some jiggery-pokery with the crossover to stop the second mid driver working at high frequencies or you may get beaming. Unless you fancy a mid-tweeter-mid arrangement?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.