So I am going to attempt a cheap knockoff of this well known speaker. Drivers are different, horn is different, well everything is, but the title is catchy. Using 15pr400 and Faital hf140 paired to Pyle ph916. If things go well, I may switch to the new HF146. Started with DSP and will be playing with passive with a friends help. So far so good. Decent start with 24dB crossovers in the 750Hz region. Shelving filter on the horn and LT to accommodate bafflestep/diffraction issues for the woofer. Modeled a TL, but ended up stuffing the port as blass is plentiful and it another the woofers response a bit. Bass is plentiful and right. Box is around 3ft^2. Could be more exact, but being sealed, it's less important.
Attachments
Last edited:
Should be a very nice sounding speaker.
You might want to consider the 18 sound xt1496. Someone here tried the faital horn, pyle, and found the xt1496 to be the best with their hf144.
You might want to consider the 18 sound xt1496. Someone here tried the faital horn, pyle, and found the xt1496 to be the best with their hf144.
I will admit a horrible truth. I did not get it simply because it looks horrible. There, I said it🙂 they have to meet a certain level of WAF approval and the size already puts them in a territory similar to quicksand. Had considered the SEOS 15 and 18, but they only come in 1" and even this 1.4" can sound strained crossed too low.
That is tempting. Does it have to be ordered? I have been waiting a while to start this and the thought of another multi month wait is not the most appealing idea.
Whant you passive xo? 😱 Why?
With DSP it will be M2 not K2 🙂
Everyone says that m2 is better than k2.
That is direct mail. I would order through DiySoundgroup. I have fellow member PKI, my resident speaker specialist, helping with passive design. He helps me make my crazy speaker ideas possible. He has a passive XO at about 950. I am going to try to use biquad input on DSP to give it a try before ordering passive components. In simulation it looks very good. Kinda screaming for a supertweeter, but i think the HF146 might help in this regard. That is probably the route i would take first, as i would like to avoid a super if possible and the HF146 looks much better up high. Also Faital's polymer diaphragms are getting positive comments
Attachments
I don't see any crazy in this project 🙂. (Listening 18sound 15nd730 in closed box+nd1424bt in seos24; IB subs will be later)
What do you think about delay for woofer using passive xo?
I'm avoiding supertweeter for about 5 years. (May be I'm wrong))
What about jbl d2430k driver? They may be found on ebay used..
And some negative also. Like any 🙂.
You expirience whith 1.4 Faitals is interesting.
Delay with delay in passive XO is tricky business and we are trying to design/optimize for average listening distance.
The D2 is an excellent driver. It would mean a custom horn, as it is classic JBL 1.5".
I will take this a step at a time(I am prone to jumping around and not finishing things). If i think there is greater opportunity in other drivers, I will most definitely explore the options.
The D2 is an excellent driver. It would mean a custom horn, as it is classic JBL 1.5".
I will take this a step at a time(I am prone to jumping around and not finishing things). If i think there is greater opportunity in other drivers, I will most definitely explore the options.
I like speakers like that one a lot ! And the published FR diagram looks also very promising.
Within a few weeks I will have time to try the Faital HF146 on the mentioned "ugly" Eighteensound waveguides. So far I didn't actualliy listen to them - I was just running the drivers in for a few days up in the attic by running them from a kitchen radio with a series cap.
I am still undecided whether I will use the JBL 2226s that were just laying around for years now or wheter I will get some more modern PA woofers like the Faital that you use. Although its Xmax seems to be on the low side compared to my JBLs.
OTOH the Faitals allow a slightly lower Tuning. But there are even more modern PA Drivers around with an fs below 40 Hz and a Q around 0.3 (like the Eighteensound 15nlw9500, B&C 15nbx100, B&C 15sw115 etc) nowadays. But most manufactueres don't publish actual distortion measurements unlike JBL does. They always talk about low distortion but don't publish distortion graphs.
The other solution would be to go for a TAD from the very beginning but that would not be very "ECONO" anymore.
Regards
Charles
Within a few weeks I will have time to try the Faital HF146 on the mentioned "ugly" Eighteensound waveguides. So far I didn't actualliy listen to them - I was just running the drivers in for a few days up in the attic by running them from a kitchen radio with a series cap.
I am still undecided whether I will use the JBL 2226s that were just laying around for years now or wheter I will get some more modern PA woofers like the Faital that you use. Although its Xmax seems to be on the low side compared to my JBLs.
OTOH the Faitals allow a slightly lower Tuning. But there are even more modern PA Drivers around with an fs below 40 Hz and a Q around 0.3 (like the Eighteensound 15nlw9500, B&C 15nbx100, B&C 15sw115 etc) nowadays. But most manufactueres don't publish actual distortion measurements unlike JBL does. They always talk about low distortion but don't publish distortion graphs.
The other solution would be to go for a TAD from the very beginning but that would not be very "ECONO" anymore.
Regards
Charles
Lynn Olsen in the "Beyond the Ariel" thread did not like the JBL 2226 at all. He conveyed that he was suprised how poorly they sounded in comparison to the Altec's that he is using.
In a design like this, the components are very important, as you are stretching both to their limits. PKI and I are dealing with this now. The woofer has a little breakup that is making things difiicult, but then again, its a 15" driver. I have no doubt that "better" drivers could yield easier work, but often you spend the most money chasing the last 15-20% of performance, and at this point, decisions get very personal.
We must also consider the fact that modern woofers are made to take tremoundous power. As a result, you have huge motors, with heavy gauge wire, made to push big, heavy cones. I picked the 15pr400 because it is bult more like an old altec. It is not capable of super high power(only when compared to other pro drivers), but is efficient when combined with a large box. It has a reasonably light cone and relatively low inductance, which should keep distortion down and improve response in upper range. It accomplishes these things fairly well and it will simply be a matter of whether or not we can find a good compromise with the crossover. I made this choice in the hopes that it is better able to relay low level detail when compared to a 1000W 200gr cone woofer. I believe this is the general theory Lynn is forwarding in his thread.
I do not worry about the 15" and bass. We are actually using these sealed and the in room response is solid. Not boomy at all, but tight. It does not have earth shattering bass this way, but at the lower registers, the room and positioning dominate response, not the driver. I don't like bloated bass and would rather give a little up than deal with all the problems. Sealed, with our current 4th order crossover, it has a very nice slow rolloff down low. The cone barely moves during play and I have found that it is more than adequate for LF reproduction in comparison to most speakers and subs I have heard, while still remaining somewhat musical and not like a HT setup.
I am looking at other drivers, but i feel like we need to establish a baseline first.
Please pass on what you think about the HF146. Some love polymer and others do not. What a shock🙂
In a design like this, the components are very important, as you are stretching both to their limits. PKI and I are dealing with this now. The woofer has a little breakup that is making things difiicult, but then again, its a 15" driver. I have no doubt that "better" drivers could yield easier work, but often you spend the most money chasing the last 15-20% of performance, and at this point, decisions get very personal.
We must also consider the fact that modern woofers are made to take tremoundous power. As a result, you have huge motors, with heavy gauge wire, made to push big, heavy cones. I picked the 15pr400 because it is bult more like an old altec. It is not capable of super high power(only when compared to other pro drivers), but is efficient when combined with a large box. It has a reasonably light cone and relatively low inductance, which should keep distortion down and improve response in upper range. It accomplishes these things fairly well and it will simply be a matter of whether or not we can find a good compromise with the crossover. I made this choice in the hopes that it is better able to relay low level detail when compared to a 1000W 200gr cone woofer. I believe this is the general theory Lynn is forwarding in his thread.
I do not worry about the 15" and bass. We are actually using these sealed and the in room response is solid. Not boomy at all, but tight. It does not have earth shattering bass this way, but at the lower registers, the room and positioning dominate response, not the driver. I don't like bloated bass and would rather give a little up than deal with all the problems. Sealed, with our current 4th order crossover, it has a very nice slow rolloff down low. The cone barely moves during play and I have found that it is more than adequate for LF reproduction in comparison to most speakers and subs I have heard, while still remaining somewhat musical and not like a HT setup.
I am looking at other drivers, but i feel like we need to establish a baseline first.
Please pass on what you think about the HF146. Some love polymer and others do not. What a shock🙂
Last edited:
BMS don't publish distortion graphs at 1 W.
But they publish 100W graphs.
And 1000W for some models but this is offtop 😀
Last edited:
I already knew that BMS does that (I own some 12" BMS neo woofers). IIRC they do even show THD with even higher driving power for some of their drivers. They are one of the very few manufacturers publishing distortion measurements of their drivers.
The JBL 2226 measurements for instance were done with 60 watts of power BTW.
Regards
Charles
The JBL 2226 measurements for instance were done with 60 watts of power BTW.
Regards
Charles
I already knew that BMS does that (I own some 12" BMS neo woofers). IIRC they do even show THD with even higher driving power for some of their drivers. They are one of the very few manufacturers publishing distortion measurements of their drivers.
The JBL 2226 measurements for instance were done with 60 watts of power BTW.
Regards
Charles
The JBL 2226 measurements for instance were done with 60 watts of power BTW.
Regards
Charles
- Status
- Not open for further replies.