This one?
Dual 10" Scanspeak 25W/8565, B&C ME90 Horn + SB Audience 65CDN-T.
The ScanSpeak has been a favorite (sub)woofer of Romy the Cat for many years.
Imo it's a typical hi-fi subwoofer driver with a lot of damping and too low BL/Mms for my taste > just look at the cone.
Some people believe Le is more important, but I don't buy into that.
That said, 2 of those (Zmin 3 Ohm) are around 94 dB, f3 @ 43 Hz in 100l sealed and should suffice when crossed @ 800 Hz max.
Dual 10" Scanspeak 25W/8565, B&C ME90 Horn + SB Audience 65CDN-T.
The ScanSpeak has been a favorite (sub)woofer of Romy the Cat for many years.
Imo it's a typical hi-fi subwoofer driver with a lot of damping and too low BL/Mms for my taste > just look at the cone.
Some people believe Le is more important, but I don't buy into that.
That said, 2 of those (Zmin 3 Ohm) are around 94 dB, f3 @ 43 Hz in 100l sealed and should suffice when crossed @ 800 Hz max.
Last edited:
Alternative drivers for a similar MTM: 16 Ohm with twice the BL and only 50% of the Mms (combined Zmin: 5.3 Ohm).
Cost: 2 pieces for a single 25W/8565.
Same cab size, only ported:
Excursion of dual 25W/8565 in 100l sealed:
100l BR:
Cost: 2 pieces for a single 25W/8565.
Same cab size, only ported:
Excursion of dual 25W/8565 in 100l sealed:
100l BR:
Last edited:
Since I'm personally moving away from class-D (+ DSP and ΔΣ DACs), a Zmin ≥ 5 Ohm is preferred.
Last edited:
Correct!
Troy also explicitly states that he is aiming for a more audiophile/hi-fi signature by using hi-fi woofers.
It's a matter of preference. Personally, I'm not a fan of the combination compression driver + hi-fi woofers, unless the woofers in question have been specifically designed for such systems.
Blumenhofer is an example.
Last edited:
Quote:
"These drivers have been carefully selected by Joseph Crowe based on their specific parameters and sound quality. The goal with this system is to provide world class sound quality that is more "audiophile" than "pro sound". Joseph Crowe decided to move away from the typical Pro sound woofer and instead chose a driver from Scanspeak which features the renowned Symetrical Drive One motor technology for an extremely flat BL(x) curve which translates into much lower distortion at normal listening levels."
If 'audiophile' is synonymous with the 'signature' of 80-90% of the systems at hi-fi shows... then no, thanks.
The (imho) best sounding systems, that I have listened to in recent years, were nearly all equipped with 'pro-like' woofers, or 'vintage' hi-fi drivers.
I prefer 'signature', as 'sound quality' is too generic/subjective in this context.
Unless you believe that a fraction more/less distortion determines 'sound quality' (I don't).
"These drivers have been carefully selected by Joseph Crowe based on their specific parameters and sound quality. The goal with this system is to provide world class sound quality that is more "audiophile" than "pro sound". Joseph Crowe decided to move away from the typical Pro sound woofer and instead chose a driver from Scanspeak which features the renowned Symetrical Drive One motor technology for an extremely flat BL(x) curve which translates into much lower distortion at normal listening levels."
If 'audiophile' is synonymous with the 'signature' of 80-90% of the systems at hi-fi shows... then no, thanks.
The (imho) best sounding systems, that I have listened to in recent years, were nearly all equipped with 'pro-like' woofers, or 'vintage' hi-fi drivers.
I prefer 'signature', as 'sound quality' is too generic/subjective in this context.
Unless you believe that a fraction more/less distortion determines 'sound quality' (I don't).
Last edited:
I see these terms are in quotes.. If this was a matter of voicing then we'd EQ rather than swap drivers, wouldn't we 😉
I'm not sure I'm looking for a sound that has a 'signature', but I do know one thing.. like Earl, I find these subjective terms quizzical.
Imo the most important factors of 'voicing' are the drivers themselves.
I do not share Geddes' view on this.
But perhaps this is also a matter of hearing/feeling/training.
Audio 'experience' is strictly subjective.
Those who disagree should take an example from Bruno Putzeys > Audio R&D according to lab/mind/machine/science(scientism?) principles.
The outcome?
Certainly acceptable, but not what I classify as 'real' and 'natural'.
Although the 12€ midrange (80% of the bandwidth) in the Kii speakers helps enormously.
I do not share Geddes' view on this.
But perhaps this is also a matter of hearing/feeling/training.
Audio 'experience' is strictly subjective.
Those who disagree should take an example from Bruno Putzeys > Audio R&D according to lab/mind/machine/science(scientism?) principles.
The outcome?
Certainly acceptable, but not what I classify as 'real' and 'natural'.
Although the 12€ midrange (80% of the bandwidth) in the Kii speakers helps enormously.
Last edited:
As I see it, allowing a driver to play into a problematic breakup region results in a 'broken' system. As for not attending to resonances. Apart from these, two drivers equalised to the same response and used within their limits are likely to sound more similar than different.
Agree, but the proverbial devil (in the details) always comes into play.
To stick with Earl Geddes' philosophy and a topic that has been touched upon several times in the past; he prefers (sub)woofers for his 2-way systems, including the 15TBX100.
A quote:
"Actually the first Summa iteration of Geddes used the B&C 15TBX100 - crossed at approx. 900Hz, if I’m not incorrect - the same driver I’m using in my pair of tapped horn subs."
Nice and flat response and yes, you could 'glue' a comp. driver + waveguide to this woofer and make it sound 'acceptable' or even 'likeable'.
But I know (based on the parameters and the experiences/measurements of others) that this woofer falls short in the mid range > 500 Hz.
It tends to sound nasal/muddy/muffled instead of open and clear (~ agile and fleet-footed).
Duke LeJeune (Audiokinesis) has collaborated with Earl in the past, but he 'consciously' chooses mid-woofers for his studio project.
"Yes, but in combination with 21" subs".
Indeed, but Earl also uses separate subs, however, with the same woofers as the 'mains' (2-way).
Just an example to illustrate differences in views/philosophy, although my preference is clear.
To stick with Earl Geddes' philosophy and a topic that has been touched upon several times in the past; he prefers (sub)woofers for his 2-way systems, including the 15TBX100.
A quote:
"Actually the first Summa iteration of Geddes used the B&C 15TBX100 - crossed at approx. 900Hz, if I’m not incorrect - the same driver I’m using in my pair of tapped horn subs."
Nice and flat response and yes, you could 'glue' a comp. driver + waveguide to this woofer and make it sound 'acceptable' or even 'likeable'.
But I know (based on the parameters and the experiences/measurements of others) that this woofer falls short in the mid range > 500 Hz.
It tends to sound nasal/muddy/muffled instead of open and clear (~ agile and fleet-footed).
Duke LeJeune (Audiokinesis) has collaborated with Earl in the past, but he 'consciously' chooses mid-woofers for his studio project.
"Yes, but in combination with 21" subs".
Indeed, but Earl also uses separate subs, however, with the same woofers as the 'mains' (2-way).
Just an example to illustrate differences in views/philosophy, although my preference is clear.
Last edited:
Ro808, if I managed to get a pro woofer and a hifi woofer to both work well, I'd expect little difference between them. A distinct sound would essentially indicate one has a problem.
It depends on the mind/senses I guess.
I can 'see' why some people like pp cones, but personally I can't listen to the (often subtle) 'cuppy' sound of plastic anymore.
At the last show we walked towards a room and before entering I said, "Do you hear that? Probably plastic". It was.
In another room, a new 60k Goldmund system using Audio Technology pp cones was introduced, with much fanfare.
Within 30 seconds we left.
Last edited:
I rather think we owner-designers would find a little more consistency than that.. don't you 😉
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/dual-woofers-flanked-horizontally-design-study-on-distortion
"Final Conclusion
The smaller dual woofer arrangement (flanked horizontally) is an interesting alternative to the larger single woofer solution. "
Seems like a marketing campaign disguised as "research" before a new model release.
"Final Conclusion
The smaller dual woofer arrangement (flanked horizontally) is an interesting alternative to the larger single woofer solution. "
Seems like a marketing campaign disguised as "research" before a new model release.