I'm looking for a midrange that would be essentially a step up from the scan speaks 18W 8545 series. The thing sounds sweet, I know, but is definately going to be the limiting factor in my system power wise unless I can find a suitable replacement. I'm, of course, willing to pay more.
thanks
Myren
thanks
Myren
How much power do you plan to be driving your speakers with? There are systems that incorporate these speakers that can handle 1000 watts. Your tweeter and crossover components are just as important a factor as your midrange driver. But dont be fooled by power handling specs; each driver does not use the same amount of power in a passive configuration.
I'm looking for at bear minimum 250 watts RMS across the system. 350 to 400 range would be very nice, and something I'm ultimately going to shoot for. My woofer should be rated to 250 and tweeter to 225.
I know its a per crossover thing, and it really is stupid to even ask, but is there any way to make a horribly insanely crude generalized power distribution statement. I honest to god have NO CLUE what to expect in this department.
My previous inquiries to power distribution all returned the same response: "look at max power handling for each driver, find lowest, have a nice day". I'd be exceedingly glad to know this isnt the truth.
Thanks
Myren
I know its a per crossover thing, and it really is stupid to even ask, but is there any way to make a horribly insanely crude generalized power distribution statement. I honest to god have NO CLUE what to expect in this department.
My previous inquiries to power distribution all returned the same response: "look at max power handling for each driver, find lowest, have a nice day". I'd be exceedingly glad to know this isnt the truth.
Thanks
Myren
Rest assured Myren this isnt the truth .....
Many 100W speakers have 25W tweeters in them however is that tweeter you refer to rated at 225W or is that 225W system power when using the correct crossover? I suspect the latter.......
The whole thing is really a bit of a contentious subject because the power distribution will vary wildly between different styles of music etc. Also the crossovers you use will have a massive effect on this.
There are many ways of determining the power rating of the speaker system all with there own downfalls ... the most common amongst seems to be the pink noise distribution chart. You can find this in the Yamaha Sound Reinforcement Handbook and on the net if you look hard enough.
Rest assured though that depending on the type of music this nominal rating may almost be thown out the window by its inaccuracy.... ie.. you will have to derate the speakers for certain music.
Many 100W speakers have 25W tweeters in them however is that tweeter you refer to rated at 225W or is that 225W system power when using the correct crossover? I suspect the latter.......
The whole thing is really a bit of a contentious subject because the power distribution will vary wildly between different styles of music etc. Also the crossovers you use will have a massive effect on this.
There are many ways of determining the power rating of the speaker system all with there own downfalls ... the most common amongst seems to be the pink noise distribution chart. You can find this in the Yamaha Sound Reinforcement Handbook and on the net if you look hard enough.
Rest assured though that depending on the type of music this nominal rating may almost be thown out the window by its inaccuracy.... ie.. you will have to derate the speakers for certain music.
Perhaps you are going in the wrong direction..
You want high quality mids that handle insane amounts of power? Well, this might be tough. I assume your only reason is for higher SPL, well you would be much better off IMO getting much higher sensetivity midranges and tweeters rather than higher powered ones. The same net results will be in effect. Focal offers a few Audiom midranges (example: 7" Audiom 7 NV2 with 95db/2.8v/1m)that have very high SPL capability and also offer superb quality. However, the Audiom midranges have limited xmax so they are not suitable for midbass. I am not aware of many high sensitivy or high power level midranges except for those used in pro applications. Also note that a Focal driver sounds very different from a Scan Speak. A Scan Speak sounds a bit 'warmer', but the Focals do produce superior upper midrange detail.
It seems you must be using a discrete amplfier and an active crossover to each driver range from the way you are talking. Is this correct?
Perhaps specifying the required passband that the drivers must perform within will help out.
You were not specific in your purpose for these midranges. If this is for automotive use you may want to consider using multiple midrange drivers.
-Chris
You want high quality mids that handle insane amounts of power? Well, this might be tough. I assume your only reason is for higher SPL, well you would be much better off IMO getting much higher sensetivity midranges and tweeters rather than higher powered ones. The same net results will be in effect. Focal offers a few Audiom midranges (example: 7" Audiom 7 NV2 with 95db/2.8v/1m)that have very high SPL capability and also offer superb quality. However, the Audiom midranges have limited xmax so they are not suitable for midbass. I am not aware of many high sensitivy or high power level midranges except for those used in pro applications. Also note that a Focal driver sounds very different from a Scan Speak. A Scan Speak sounds a bit 'warmer', but the Focals do produce superior upper midrange detail.
It seems you must be using a discrete amplfier and an active crossover to each driver range from the way you are talking. Is this correct?
Perhaps specifying the required passband that the drivers must perform within will help out.
You were not specific in your purpose for these midranges. If this is for automotive use you may want to consider using multiple midrange drivers.
-Chris
this is me breathing a great sigh of relief. whew. power handling that doesnt suck: good.
Scan speak <a href="http://www.scan-speak.dk/scs_prod/tweeters/d2905_970000d.htm">D970000's</a>. 225 watts power handling, with 89.5 dB sensitivity. Looks pretty freaking sexy to my amatuer eyes. one of the few components I'm actually fairly happy with and may keep.
i know i should probably be maimed shot and had my head inspected for doing things in this order, but, um, i'm actually kind of going to figure out what exact amplification i'm going to be using after the fact. it just so happens that my speakers are the current limiting reagent in my musical perfection formulae, and while my amp needs upgrading too, my speakers are my #1 priority. I'll probably end up with an Odyssey Audio Stratos for starts, and turn it into a surround amp when I can afford better. If anyone has better ideas, please note.
I'd like to stick with passive crossovers, since I'm already more than redlining my budget just by building a single set of speakers, breath nothing of the eventual corresponding new amp i'll inevitably and invariably have to buy. Active, would, of course, be preferable, but it doesnt look like I could afford it.
I havent really celitified (sp?) any of my component choices. Everythings too codependent. If I build the sub with it, I can keep my woofers reasonable with a nice low Qt on the mains and not that great bass extension. Which will in turn allow me to choose woofers that only need to edge into the lower range. Even assuming I build the sub, I'm still left wondering what passbands I want my woofers and mid-ranges to cover. I'm a perfectionist. It'll take me a while to finally decide, but I imagine I'll be happy if I ever can decide.
Definately not automotive purposes. Music listening for home. Pretty wide range of music, minus rap country popular and probably a hundred million reigonal musics I just dont know about. Very little jazz. Primary listening tastes are classic rock, older alternative, classical, some electronica.
Still considering multiple midrange drivers. I take it having non matching midranges is either impossible or close to, and I should definately stick to identical drivers. It would be nice to have a low-mid and a high-mid (or is that mid-high and mid-low?) to complement each others weaknesses, but I havent gotten a single reply to any post I've ever made that mentioned that.
Myren
Scan speak <a href="http://www.scan-speak.dk/scs_prod/tweeters/d2905_970000d.htm">D970000's</a>. 225 watts power handling, with 89.5 dB sensitivity. Looks pretty freaking sexy to my amatuer eyes. one of the few components I'm actually fairly happy with and may keep.
i know i should probably be maimed shot and had my head inspected for doing things in this order, but, um, i'm actually kind of going to figure out what exact amplification i'm going to be using after the fact. it just so happens that my speakers are the current limiting reagent in my musical perfection formulae, and while my amp needs upgrading too, my speakers are my #1 priority. I'll probably end up with an Odyssey Audio Stratos for starts, and turn it into a surround amp when I can afford better. If anyone has better ideas, please note.
I'd like to stick with passive crossovers, since I'm already more than redlining my budget just by building a single set of speakers, breath nothing of the eventual corresponding new amp i'll inevitably and invariably have to buy. Active, would, of course, be preferable, but it doesnt look like I could afford it.
I havent really celitified (sp?) any of my component choices. Everythings too codependent. If I build the sub with it, I can keep my woofers reasonable with a nice low Qt on the mains and not that great bass extension. Which will in turn allow me to choose woofers that only need to edge into the lower range. Even assuming I build the sub, I'm still left wondering what passbands I want my woofers and mid-ranges to cover. I'm a perfectionist. It'll take me a while to finally decide, but I imagine I'll be happy if I ever can decide.
Definately not automotive purposes. Music listening for home. Pretty wide range of music, minus rap country popular and probably a hundred million reigonal musics I just dont know about. Very little jazz. Primary listening tastes are classic rock, older alternative, classical, some electronica.
Still considering multiple midrange drivers. I take it having non matching midranges is either impossible or close to, and I should definately stick to identical drivers. It would be nice to have a low-mid and a high-mid (or is that mid-high and mid-low?) to complement each others weaknesses, but I havent gotten a single reply to any post I've ever made that mentioned that.
Myren
Personally, if you want higher SPL, and if you have some fast-paced electronica music to listen to, I would go with multiple midrange drivers. The most common speaker lineup for this would be the MTM, or mid-tweeter-mid.
And although I'd suggest sticking with the same drivers for the mids, you dont necessarily have to, but its going to require more complex crossover circuits, and I'm not too fond of that in a passive system. If you decided to go with a four way system (tweeter, midrange, midbass, bass), then you could use either a dome midrange (not my favorite,) or one of several 5 1/4 inch - 7 inch midrange drivers, from a number of manufacturers: Dynaudio, Scanspeak, Focal (Kevlar drivers are great in this situation), and then bring in an additional 6 1/2 - 8 inch driver to extend into the lower midbass. IMO however, going with a 3 or 4 way system might not be a bad idea, because it may be optimal if you ever decide to go the active route. But the choice is up to you. Good luck.
And although I'd suggest sticking with the same drivers for the mids, you dont necessarily have to, but its going to require more complex crossover circuits, and I'm not too fond of that in a passive system. If you decided to go with a four way system (tweeter, midrange, midbass, bass), then you could use either a dome midrange (not my favorite,) or one of several 5 1/4 inch - 7 inch midrange drivers, from a number of manufacturers: Dynaudio, Scanspeak, Focal (Kevlar drivers are great in this situation), and then bring in an additional 6 1/2 - 8 inch driver to extend into the lower midbass. IMO however, going with a 3 or 4 way system might not be a bad idea, because it may be optimal if you ever decide to go the active route. But the choice is up to you. Good luck.
If I went the active route with a four way system, would I need four seperate channels of amplification for each speaker in my system? It'll be many many a year before I could ever afford an upgrade like that.
I'm thinking the overcomplexity of the crossover in the 4 way will probably kill that plan. As much as I like the other aspects of the idea, I think that pretty much kills it.
Thanks again
Myren
I'm thinking the overcomplexity of the crossover in the 4 way will probably kill that plan. As much as I like the other aspects of the idea, I think that pretty much kills it.
Thanks again
Myren
Correct.
"I'm thinking the overcomplexity of the crossover in the 4 way will probably kill that plan"
Correct. It is unlikely you will design a 4 way passive crossover that would take advantage of the potential of the drivers. Of course, if you have CLIO and about 3 months to spend on the crossover design alone.....
. IMO go with a 3 way passive(this will still be 'fun') max, or use active crossovers and go 3 way and split the sub to it's own and mid highs to a 2 way passive xover on their own. This would only require 2 stereo amplifiers and an active xover easily fabricated from several simple schematics from off of the web.
Don't think that you have to have a dedicated upper midrange and midbass drivers. While this is often the case if you want very high resoultion midrange, several companies make drivers that can produce upper midrange over 4Khz with no more than a 3dB deviation on 30 degree axis relative to on axis response. Several Focal mids, Accuton, and I think SEAS makes an Excel midrange that fits this bill too. The only catch with these units is that you will have to deal with cone resonance which results in a ringing sound which can be dealt with usually a notch filter, steep electrical crossover slope, or even some mechanical means of damping on the cone. This ringing is a result of the very hard materials used to make the cones, which have inherently low damping characteristics.
I have no idea of your budget on this project, but it might be worth considering the Raven R2 tweeters or NewForm Research ribbon drivers if your budget is high. However, I have not used anything other than ribbon tweeters for quite a while so I might be a bit biased in this aspect. But...one benefit to using the NewForm tweeters is that they can be crossed as low as 1khz, and provide near perfect mid and high range and allow the use of any midbass driver you wish as well as allowing a simple crossover network to be used.
Anyways....good luck and happy building!
-Chris
"I'm thinking the overcomplexity of the crossover in the 4 way will probably kill that plan"
Correct. It is unlikely you will design a 4 way passive crossover that would take advantage of the potential of the drivers. Of course, if you have CLIO and about 3 months to spend on the crossover design alone.....
. IMO go with a 3 way passive(this will still be 'fun') max, or use active crossovers and go 3 way and split the sub to it's own and mid highs to a 2 way passive xover on their own. This would only require 2 stereo amplifiers and an active xover easily fabricated from several simple schematics from off of the web.Don't think that you have to have a dedicated upper midrange and midbass drivers. While this is often the case if you want very high resoultion midrange, several companies make drivers that can produce upper midrange over 4Khz with no more than a 3dB deviation on 30 degree axis relative to on axis response. Several Focal mids, Accuton, and I think SEAS makes an Excel midrange that fits this bill too. The only catch with these units is that you will have to deal with cone resonance which results in a ringing sound which can be dealt with usually a notch filter, steep electrical crossover slope, or even some mechanical means of damping on the cone. This ringing is a result of the very hard materials used to make the cones, which have inherently low damping characteristics.
I have no idea of your budget on this project, but it might be worth considering the Raven R2 tweeters or NewForm Research ribbon drivers if your budget is high. However, I have not used anything other than ribbon tweeters for quite a while so I might be a bit biased in this aspect. But...one benefit to using the NewForm tweeters is that they can be crossed as low as 1khz, and provide near perfect mid and high range and allow the use of any midbass driver you wish as well as allowing a simple crossover network to be used.
Anyways....good luck and happy building!
-Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.