Looking for the best 5" or 6" high sensitivity driver for an open baffle project.
Hi
I need to cover 1k - 2,5k with some very good driver for an open baffle project.
I consider now 5" or 6" drivers with high sensitivity but I am open for some other suggestion.
Thank you!
Hi
I need to cover 1k - 2,5k with some very good driver for an open baffle project.
I consider now 5" or 6" drivers with high sensitivity but I am open for some other suggestion.
Thank you!
B&C Speakers 6MBX44 MBX Mid-Bass Woofer | audioXpress
18Sound 6ND610 is also has very high midrange sensitivity.
18Sound 6ND610 is also has very high midrange sensitivity.
I can find only 6nd410, 6nmb420 and 6nmb900 from 18Sound.
Which one is more suitable for this project?
SB Audience Nero 6" Mid-range Woofer 150 Watt -6MRN150D
It has a very high sensitivity of 99 db and a high resonance of 222 Hz.
It is also rather expensive too at $299 in Aussie dollars.
The crossover frequency would need to be around 500 - 600 Hz in an open baffle as the Xmax is only 3.43 mm.
There is a .PDF available.
NERO-6MRN150D Sb Audience Nero 6" Mid-Range Woofer 150W | Wagner Online Electronic Stores
C.M
It has a very high sensitivity of 99 db and a high resonance of 222 Hz.
It is also rather expensive too at $299 in Aussie dollars.
The crossover frequency would need to be around 500 - 600 Hz in an open baffle as the Xmax is only 3.43 mm.
There is a .PDF available.
NERO-6MRN150D Sb Audience Nero 6" Mid-Range Woofer 150W | Wagner Online Electronic Stores
C.M
interesting find, i just notice high end version is now put in ACR catalogues
the original version is sold around $180/pair here locally
6” ARRAY 5061 M FABULOUS BY ACR | ACR Speaker
Something different
BG neo8s
Otherwise
Supravox
PHL audio
And there is a cheap but decent P Audio 6 inch too
BG neo8s
Otherwise
Supravox
PHL audio
And there is a cheap but decent P Audio 6 inch too
Vertically.
Note in their graphs that they show an on-axis result with NO baffle that's dipole (..and it's still 95 db). More baffle should net a higher pressure without a rear enclosure.
Note that this is a more efficient version of the Neo 8 already mentioned.
At your proposed crossover low-pass (2.5 kHz), you can integrate just about any tweeter that will go that low with a vertical orientation and still get a *reasonably wide vertical window PLUS an excellent horizontal window (..and adjustable depending on how much baffle you want for the driver - if any).
*I'm guessing -4db at 20 degrees off-axis, so a very stable +/-15 degree (30 degree) window should be available out to 2.5 kHz. (..this is from looking at Neo 8 vertical results.)
You could probably do it horizontally if you moved the low-pass down to 1600 Hz.
Note in their graphs that they show an on-axis result with NO baffle that's dipole (..and it's still 95 db). More baffle should net a higher pressure without a rear enclosure.
Note that this is a more efficient version of the Neo 8 already mentioned.
At your proposed crossover low-pass (2.5 kHz), you can integrate just about any tweeter that will go that low with a vertical orientation and still get a *reasonably wide vertical window PLUS an excellent horizontal window (..and adjustable depending on how much baffle you want for the driver - if any).
*I'm guessing -4db at 20 degrees off-axis, so a very stable +/-15 degree (30 degree) window should be available out to 2.5 kHz. (..this is from looking at Neo 8 vertical results.)
You could probably do it horizontally if you moved the low-pass down to 1600 Hz.
Last edited:
I found a pair standard (?) version - open back.
It is the open back version or the closed one that you recommend?
Thank you!
..open-back
You can see the measured result in 2nd graph that is open-back and without any baffle (with horizontal off-axis included). ..the 3rd graph also shows it open-back and without any baffle (BLACK) vs. with an enclosure (back-cup) and a modest sized baffle (8" by 12") (BLUE). Most of the gain you'll see on that second BLUE line is the result of the baffle, not the enclosure. In other words, IF you use a baffle (but still open-back) you will likely get similar gain below 1.4 kHz. (..though also undesirable artifacts as well, as in the "dip" on-axis at about 2.2 kHz.) (..the 1st graph is the same as the BLUE in the 3rd, but with multiple horizontal off-axis responses; note how the dip at 2.2 kHz changes just 15 degrees off-axis.)
You can see the measured result in 2nd graph that is open-back and without any baffle (with horizontal off-axis included). ..the 3rd graph also shows it open-back and without any baffle (BLACK) vs. with an enclosure (back-cup) and a modest sized baffle (8" by 12") (BLUE). Most of the gain you'll see on that second BLUE line is the result of the baffle, not the enclosure. In other words, IF you use a baffle (but still open-back) you will likely get similar gain below 1.4 kHz. (..though also undesirable artifacts as well, as in the "dip" on-axis at about 2.2 kHz.) (..the 1st graph is the same as the BLUE in the 3rd, but with multiple horizontal off-axis responses; note how the dip at 2.2 kHz changes just 15 degrees off-axis.)
Last edited:
no-baffle decreases LINEAR distortion (at least higher in freq. - baffle dependent, axis dependent). no-baffle increases NON-LINEAR distortion (as a result of increased excursion). HOWEVER, IF you have a good enough high-pass filter (net result) for the planar around 1 kHz, then non-linear distortion shouldn't be a problem.
As for what a baffle is doing to the freq. response (linear distortion), model in the Edge (..check "open baffle"), and alter the baffle as you'd like. The result isn't going to be correct given the non-linearity of the driver itself, but you should be able to see interaction with the baffle over a range of baffle sizes (at least on and slightly off-axis w/ mic movement).
Home of the Edge