Seeing that this thread has quite a wide range of topics spread from the original, I thought I would ask about crossovers.
I was planning on getting the WF02C as the 18db/oct version is £30, but then I saw the N74AW and thought, why is it £4? I wonder if this is meant for car audio?
Any advise? Would it be cheaper to make my own crossover?
[edit]: Woot! 5 Pages.
I was planning on getting the WF02C as the 18db/oct version is £30, but then I saw the N74AW and thought, why is it £4? I wonder if this is meant for car audio?
Any advise? Would it be cheaper to make my own crossover?
[edit]: Woot! 5 Pages.
WF02C on the website brings up a 6dB/oct crossover at £6.99. 😕 Also, from the pic on the website it looks to me like a 12dB/oct one.
For the N74AW, I can't see how it can retain the same quoted crossover frequency for both 4 and 8 ohms.
I wouldn't recommend either of these units as the AP100Z0 is 6 ohms anyway, and your tweeter is probably 8 ohms, maybe 4 ohms. This will mean that the crossover frequencies will be completely stuffed.
I'm going active because it's better, but also because getting hold of the inductors for a passive crossover would be a pain, and a chip amp would cost about the same anyway.
For the N74AW, I can't see how it can retain the same quoted crossover frequency for both 4 and 8 ohms.
I wouldn't recommend either of these units as the AP100Z0 is 6 ohms anyway, and your tweeter is probably 8 ohms, maybe 4 ohms. This will mean that the crossover frequencies will be completely stuffed.
I'm going active because it's better, but also because getting hold of the inductors for a passive crossover would be a pain, and a chip amp would cost about the same anyway.
What tweeters have you ordered Matt?
If it's the Audax TM025 range, they have a pretty even roll off, so you may be able to just use a basic PLLXO feeding a chip amp for each way, just crank the gain up a little to compensate for the losses.
If it's the Audax TM025 range, they have a pretty even roll off, so you may be able to just use a basic PLLXO feeding a chip amp for each way, just crank the gain up a little to compensate for the losses.
richie00boy said:
Yes active is better, getting inductors is no pain, wilmslow audio offer a very good range of air core and ferrite core inductors. The service is generally very efficient. Can all be ordered over the web.
Active I cant imagine would end up being any cheaper then passive. As this is not going to crossover bass drivers at low frequencies the inductors are going to be of lowish values so will not cost that much. Power supplies and heatsinks are expensive.
0 Hours run-in:
30 hours run-in. 2 hours rest.
I'll give it another 20-30 hours.
David, the mass changes the resonance to around 72Hz which is around 20% i think.
Code:
Fs Re Vas Qms Qes Qts Le L1 R1
Driver A 93.8 5.7 2.03 3.04 0.94 0.72 0.16 0.29 13.7
Driver B 93.5 5.7 2.12 2.84 0.94 0.71 0.16 0.29 14.2
Average 93.7 5.7 2.07 2.94 0.94 0.71 0.16 0.29 14.0
Audax 64.0 5.7 4.72 2.16 0.63 0.49 0.4530 hours run-in. 2 hours rest.
Code:
Fs Re Vas Qms Qes Qts Le L1 R1
Driver A 83.5 5.7 2.55 2.95 0.85 0.66 0.16 0.29 14.0
Driver B 82.5 5.7 2.72 2.76 0.84 0.64 0.16 0.29 13.9
Average 83.0 5.7 2.63 2.85 0.84 0.65 0.16 0.29 13.9
Audax 64.0 5.7 4.72 2.16 0.63 0.49 0.45I'll give it another 20-30 hours.
David, the mass changes the resonance to around 72Hz which is around 20% i think.
richie00boy said:
OK, prebuilt ones are a no-go then. Ill start looking at the design of my own then...
pinkmouse said:
Yes, the TM025F1.
These speakers are going to be used with my computer, so high quality is not a priority. I have a small stereo amp that I am going to use, so I am going to use passive filters rather than bi-amping.
One Matt to another😀
Im going to be doing a design revolving around the AP100ZO and the TM025F1 anyway so if you get stuck with the crossover I can offer help if required.
I will not actually build any F1 designs these will all be simulations as the proper speakers will have MDT30's. However dont let this worry you LSPcad has always been accurate with its predictions and final results.
Matt😀
Im going to be doing a design revolving around the AP100ZO and the TM025F1 anyway so if you get stuck with the crossover I can offer help if required.
I will not actually build any F1 designs these will all be simulations as the proper speakers will have MDT30's. However dont let this worry you LSPcad has always been accurate with its predictions and final results.
Matt😀
On another note you may be surprised at how good these driver actually sound. If you have a sub you not going to be left wanting. I have, as you know, done a simple open baffle with these replacing the scan speak D2905/97 tweet and W15CY seas excel mid/bass. The audax/morel certainly do not disgrace themselves whatsoever in comparison. You should/will end up with a very good sounding pair of speakers using the F1 and the ZO.
Audax certainly know how to make a "kick ***" cheap driver.
Audax certainly know how to make a "kick ***" cheap driver.
5th element said:
Are you putting the AP100Z0's in a sealed or ported enclosure? I think ported is the way to go, but thats just my opinion.
As a side note, has anyone tried, or thought of trying these in a dipole?
Tried them in a dipole?! thats what i am doing now! sounds great!
Other then that yes ported sealed whatever it doesnt really make all that much difference to the impedance where the xover to the tweeter is concerned. So my sealed box xover will be fine for a ported box aslong as the width of the front panel are roughly the same.
I agree that ported is the way to go, but I dont want a cabinet thats floorstanding and two of these will not work in a small ported standmount.
Other then that yes ported sealed whatever it doesnt really make all that much difference to the impedance where the xover to the tweeter is concerned. So my sealed box xover will be fine for a ported box aslong as the width of the front panel are roughly the same.
I agree that ported is the way to go, but I dont want a cabinet thats floorstanding and two of these will not work in a small ported standmount.
5th element said:
Right, looking again at the photo I see it is.
I must have subconsciously registered it, and thought it was a good idea without consciously realising.I’m going to make two ~27cm cubes, which gives me ~12L which is perfect for tuning to 45Hz.
Hi, I just thought I would ask the oppinions of people here about running two of these things in one cab. What would be the best way to arrange the wiring on the two drivers, series or parallel? With the series arangement, there will be a fair amount of power lost because of the high impedance load, and with the parallel, the load will be closer to 3 ohms for a large chunk of the spectrum. Either way, these things will probably be powered from a LM3875 chip amp, running on +/-25V rails, so in theory it should just about be ok with the 3 ohm minimum load (which would mean about 45W of possible output power) but would probably have problems going loud with the series arangement (only about 20W if you ignore the tweeter for now).
basicaly, I have a feeling that wiring these in parellel would be best for me (as I have some 4 ohm tweeters on the way too), but I am a little concerned about creating a speaker of such low impedance (I assume it would drop even lower if you take the tweeter into account, but I have ignored this for now) and would like the oppinions of you lot to see what may be the best thing to do here.
edit: one more thing, when I say I will be running these from an LM3875, I mean as an normal external amp, not active, so using one amp per driver isn't what I intend to do just yet (although, I may become tempted, if this doesn't look like it's going to work vey well).
basicaly, I have a feeling that wiring these in parellel would be best for me (as I have some 4 ohm tweeters on the way too), but I am a little concerned about creating a speaker of such low impedance (I assume it would drop even lower if you take the tweeter into account, but I have ignored this for now) and would like the oppinions of you lot to see what may be the best thing to do here.
edit: one more thing, when I say I will be running these from an LM3875, I mean as an normal external amp, not active, so using one amp per driver isn't what I intend to do just yet (although, I may become tempted, if this doesn't look like it's going to work vey well).
5th element said:
One.
Having never handled a tweeter before, are the TM025F1 sealed, or is the moving part in contact with the air inside the box. (Sorry about the bad wording, ive just done several practice exam papers as im revising for my GCSEs and I cant think straight)
Matttcattt said:
Not the best shape for results. Careful construction is required
to spread cabinet resonances, and careful placement of the
driver is required for a smooth difraction baffle step response.
Not saying don't do it, just some care is needed.
🙂 sreten.
bigparsnip said:
The tweeter resistance after padding down will not be an issue.
After some BSC correction mid range will be near 6/8 ohms.
So only bass will be nominally 4 ohm.
The current limiting of the chip appears to quite severe,
so ideally you'd either use two chips in parallel or a higher
voltage rail and drive the two units in series.
For one chip series seems to be the better choice, though
if your rails are fixed at 25V then parallel is the choice.
🙂 sreten.
Hi all,
One of my projects is putting together a small 2-way using the AP100Z0 and TM025F1. I got them at Parts Express a while ago when they had some Audax stuff on sale. Here's infinite baffle measurements. The tweeter also has a 30 deg off axis curve. These curves actually look pretty close to spec.
After a long breaking, these measured:
Qts: .6
Fs: 80hz
Vas: 2.4 l
Nice little drivers.
John
One of my projects is putting together a small 2-way using the AP100Z0 and TM025F1. I got them at Parts Express a while ago when they had some Audax stuff on sale. Here's infinite baffle measurements. The tweeter also has a 30 deg off axis curve. These curves actually look pretty close to spec.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
After a long breaking, these measured:
Qts: .6
Fs: 80hz
Vas: 2.4 l
Nice little drivers.
John
Hi John, thanks for that. Some good material on your site BTW. 😉
edit1: Out of interest, how much did you pay for them on sale over there?
edit2: And how long did you run them in for before you settled on those results?
edit1: Out of interest, how much did you pay for them on sale over there?
edit2: And how long did you run them in for before you settled on those results?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.