The WAN154.00 is right in there to I see. I can't figure out why the WAN153.00 is so cheap? LaVoce WAN153.00 15" Neodymium Woofer 8 Ohm
Someone made a comment tha they wouldn't use a woofer with a mms over 80 for mids, any merit to this?
It's a relatively new Company, originated from Hertz car audio.
The drivers are produced in China, which largely determines the price.
The drivers are produced in China, which largely determines the price.
Not really, here's an old Altec/GPA 15" with a usable 2 kHz, HR calculated Mmd = 85.97 gr, so Mms will be higher: http://greatplainsaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/3154.pdf
There's been others in the past, but can't remember brand/models and don't have any of my old specs 'library' loaded. Regardless, this old 'rule of thumb' was disproved in the woofer 'speed' doc I posted earlier.
They're not as common nowadays simply because amps have such low output impedance that a high upper mass corner and super wide BW horn loading isn't required to offset a high output impedance.
If coupling to a matching impedance OTOH, then I'd set the bar down around 50 gr for a 15" to get driver basic 'snap' out to ~5 kHz.
GM
There's been others in the past, but can't remember brand/models and don't have any of my old specs 'library' loaded. Regardless, this old 'rule of thumb' was disproved in the woofer 'speed' doc I posted earlier.
They're not as common nowadays simply because amps have such low output impedance that a high upper mass corner and super wide BW horn loading isn't required to offset a high output impedance.
If coupling to a matching impedance OTOH, then I'd set the bar down around 50 gr for a 15" to get driver basic 'snap' out to ~5 kHz.
GM
WEll this guy looking pretty tempting right now
LaVoce WAN154.02
Tuning the port to 35hz in a 2.75 cuft box matches the excursion of the 15m. About 100 dollars cheaper as well.
LaVoce WAN154.02
Tuning the port to 35hz in a 2.75 cuft box matches the excursion of the 15m. About 100 dollars cheaper as well.
I made that comment on 80gr Mms as a rule of thumb.
Marco Gea correctly stated you cannot consider a driver solely based on mms without taking other parameters into consideration.
It is true that many highly regarded midwoofers are often low Mms.
The Faital 15PR400, the Eminence Deltalite 2515, some Celestions and the TD15M as well.
Often these woofers are also used as instrument loudspeakers, if a clean (undistorted) sound is desired.
This has been the case for classic woofers like the EV 15L, JBL e145 etc.
One almost forgotten gem is the Fane Studio 15L, of which I own a pair.
This is quite a special driver, does >130dB, is very linear, has low distortion, ultra high sensitivity, wide bandwidth etc.
Last but not least: the Altec/GPA 816A also belongs to this category.
I found many of today's drivers lacking the subtle midrange qualities of the drivers above, luckily there are still many similar drivers available that I didn't mention. You cannot just substitute the impact on sonic performance of a heavier cone/suspension with motor force, amp power etc. It's not just that simple, even though this stuff in itself isn't exactly simple, technically speaking.
I have read many discussions/threads about this topic and some research (there's not much published), but up to now I haven't been converted.
The tech savy among us tend to focus on the T&S related aspects > motor strength, magnetic/voice coil structure, force/acceleration factor, in relation to cone/suspension etc.
But often people seem to ignore the many other tiny things at play here. Such as the shape, material composition of the cone, the surround, the spider, the coatings used etc. These and many many other things contribute to the driver's performance or more subjectively: sonic signature.
Earlier I mentioned the WE/Altec drivers; the 755, the 728B etc. Why are these drivers so immensely sought after?
One specific aspect is the cone, which was made from a special wood fiber pulp. The cones were often composed of several layers of different materials with a varying thickness towards the center cap/surround. Producing these cones was very expensive, but in those days the quality of specialty products was hardly cost-driven.
That's why the 594A is such an icon, it's still a benchmark, even 80 years after it's creation.
Today, it's cheaper to produce a small car than it is to reproduce a 594A.
Marco Gea correctly stated you cannot consider a driver solely based on mms without taking other parameters into consideration.
It is true that many highly regarded midwoofers are often low Mms.
The Faital 15PR400, the Eminence Deltalite 2515, some Celestions and the TD15M as well.
Often these woofers are also used as instrument loudspeakers, if a clean (undistorted) sound is desired.
This has been the case for classic woofers like the EV 15L, JBL e145 etc.
One almost forgotten gem is the Fane Studio 15L, of which I own a pair.
This is quite a special driver, does >130dB, is very linear, has low distortion, ultra high sensitivity, wide bandwidth etc.
Last but not least: the Altec/GPA 816A also belongs to this category.
I found many of today's drivers lacking the subtle midrange qualities of the drivers above, luckily there are still many similar drivers available that I didn't mention. You cannot just substitute the impact on sonic performance of a heavier cone/suspension with motor force, amp power etc. It's not just that simple, even though this stuff in itself isn't exactly simple, technically speaking.
I have read many discussions/threads about this topic and some research (there's not much published), but up to now I haven't been converted.
The tech savy among us tend to focus on the T&S related aspects > motor strength, magnetic/voice coil structure, force/acceleration factor, in relation to cone/suspension etc.
But often people seem to ignore the many other tiny things at play here. Such as the shape, material composition of the cone, the surround, the spider, the coatings used etc. These and many many other things contribute to the driver's performance or more subjectively: sonic signature.
Earlier I mentioned the WE/Altec drivers; the 755, the 728B etc. Why are these drivers so immensely sought after?
One specific aspect is the cone, which was made from a special wood fiber pulp. The cones were often composed of several layers of different materials with a varying thickness towards the center cap/surround. Producing these cones was very expensive, but in those days the quality of specialty products was hardly cost-driven.
That's why the 594A is such an icon, it's still a benchmark, even 80 years after it's creation.
Today, it's cheaper to produce a small car than it is to reproduce a 594A.
Attachments
Last edited:
One more thing, which may also concern camplo.
I have to admit, that these subtle differences are not always that obvious.
It is dependent on the type of music and definitely also on SPL.
If you are mainly into classical, acoustic or other types of music with traditional instruments and vocals, it might be of greater importance to you than if you mostly listen to modern pop, electronic, hardrock or similar types of music.
To some I may come across as an stereotype audiophool, but I am sure there are also members who recognize what I am saying.
I am not a proponent of light cones per se. Remember those WE cones weren't exactly lightweight either.
It's more about technological trends and the effects. Progression is not always synonymous with "better"
A final remark: the 80gr rule of thumb applies when you want to run a 12 of 15" up high, say >500Hz.
Some may argue, I prefer a well controlled roll-off (TAD, JBL, some B&Cs etc.) about an octave above my XO, instead of a more spikey breakup higher up.
I prefer the best of both > i.e. 15PR400.
I have to admit, that these subtle differences are not always that obvious.
It is dependent on the type of music and definitely also on SPL.
If you are mainly into classical, acoustic or other types of music with traditional instruments and vocals, it might be of greater importance to you than if you mostly listen to modern pop, electronic, hardrock or similar types of music.
To some I may come across as an stereotype audiophool, but I am sure there are also members who recognize what I am saying.
I am not a proponent of light cones per se. Remember those WE cones weren't exactly lightweight either.
It's more about technological trends and the effects. Progression is not always synonymous with "better"
A final remark: the 80gr rule of thumb applies when you want to run a 12 of 15" up high, say >500Hz.
Some may argue, I prefer a well controlled roll-off (TAD, JBL, some B&Cs etc.) about an octave above my XO, instead of a more spikey breakup higher up.
I prefer the best of both > i.e. 15PR400.
Last edited:
Edit:
2 posts ago I erroneously referred to the Altec 816A, which is a cabinet. Obviously, I meant the Altec/GPA 414/416A woofers.
2 posts ago I erroneously referred to the Altec 816A, which is a cabinet. Obviously, I meant the Altec/GPA 414/416A woofers.
I assume you refer to the midbass horn that I showed measurements of. It doesn't have a slot. But it has a phase plug. The phase plug isn't really important though.
With most drivers it will be flat without EQ up to 550-700 Hz. But with a custom driver with low mass it can be extended considerably higher. However, I don't really see any point in that as the horn is meant to be crossed at 600 Hz or lower.
Look at two JBL classic's: The 4430 features a 2235H as woofer/midrange, whose Mms is 150 g. It's big brother 4435 features two 2234H's with a Mms of 105 g (basically 2235H's without the 35g mass rings). Both crossed over at 1 kHz. They really weren't bad speakers in the 1980ies, and they even aren't today. So I can't follow this argument either.
Best regards!
Last edited:
Hello,
I have 2-way Altec based speakers: 416C (165lit BR) + 288k + 400hz LeCleach.
They sound quite nice.
Here is FR of L+R speaker at listener position window (avg. ca. 20 measurements). Mike sensitivity was uncalibrated hence odd readings.
I have 2-way Altec based speakers: 416C (165lit BR) + 288k + 400hz LeCleach.
They sound quite nice.
Here is FR of L+R speaker at listener position window (avg. ca. 20 measurements). Mike sensitivity was uncalibrated hence odd readings.
Attachments
Higher Mms implies bigger heavier coil and optimization towards excursion, implies more inductance and back EMF, as well as stiffer suspensions to support. So while the Mms itself doesn't define things, the trend will be that heavier woofers are designed with an eye towards output and bass, rather than being optimized for midrange.
Kind of like wearing size 44 pants- you may not be overweight, but it's much more likely that than you're a giant person at a healthy weight.
You could take most motors on the market and improve low level linearity by lightening the assembly at the cost of xmax and power handling- simply convert the voice coil to a much smaller underhung coil. The market has dictated that the output capability is a much more important factor, since in all but the most esoteric markets (we qualify here), size and cost of system for a given output is THE core limiting factor.
Kind of like wearing size 44 pants- you may not be overweight, but it's much more likely that than you're a giant person at a healthy weight.
You could take most motors on the market and improve low level linearity by lightening the assembly at the cost of xmax and power handling- simply convert the voice coil to a much smaller underhung coil. The market has dictated that the output capability is a much more important factor, since in all but the most esoteric markets (we qualify here), size and cost of system for a given output is THE core limiting factor.
This is what it basically comes to, the market dictating technology.
The mass con- and prosumer market also demands light, thin laptops, which are awfully compromised with regards to performance and quality.
That bigger person, while healthy, in general may not be the best athlete or ballet dancer.
The mass con- and prosumer market also demands light, thin laptops, which are awfully compromised with regards to performance and quality.
That bigger person, while healthy, in general may not be the best athlete or ballet dancer.
Last edited:
On a large woofer the coil mass is small in regard to the cone mass, the Mms must be high, no?
... And for a OB configuration there is no air damping on the back of the cone, the Mms must compensate it.
The 15FH500 is the slightly more "muscular" brother of the 15PR400.
A very nice driver as well.
I'm afraid it's a bit more complicated.
It's not only about the mechanical and electrical parameters. In order to deal with the much higher temperatures involved, these drivers demand special materials and cooling solutions to withstand the heat.
My favorite is the 15FH500 16Ohm. This one is very good, with lighter cones. This one need more volume. 250l vented enclosure 🙂
https://faitalpro.com/en/products/LF_Loudspeakers/product_details/datasheet.php?id=151060101
KR Barossi