Apparently these are in QC and will be available (to the store I called at least) within the week. So if you really want this one then it shouldn't be too difficult to get hold of soon...
Vikash said:
Never used it, sorry. It's probably worth the money though, as it looks well built,( 1.18 Kilo, shurely shome mishtake!). I would be tempted to cross it over quite high, it looks a little messy around 2K, and you might as well make as much use of the AP100s as possible.
Hi again guys!
I'm happy to report being a user of the TW034X0, I put it (randomly) into my 1st DIY speakers, which my brother uses now. I paid £25 each, just bought them as they were the most expensive Maplin sold, heh. 🙄
Compared to my Seas NoFerro 900, the tweeter sounds sweet and lively, and far less harsh. More coloured though I feel. But basically, it's a nice unit, and I think it was designed for x-ing over low, hence it's 1.25" dome size.
The tweeter really is massive and heavy, it's much more substantial than these plastic Audax mid/basses. The magnet is unbelievable for a tweeter.
I will be buying some of these!
I'm happy to report being a user of the TW034X0, I put it (randomly) into my 1st DIY speakers, which my brother uses now. I paid £25 each, just bought them as they were the most expensive Maplin sold, heh. 🙄
Compared to my Seas NoFerro 900, the tweeter sounds sweet and lively, and far less harsh. More coloured though I feel. But basically, it's a nice unit, and I think it was designed for x-ing over low, hence it's 1.25" dome size.
The tweeter really is massive and heavy, it's much more substantial than these plastic Audax mid/basses. The magnet is unbelievable for a tweeter.
I will be buying some of these!
SimontY said:
Any good tweeter is more substantial then the Ap100's 😀
I always love listening to inferior speakers with the XLS, when I switch back to the W15cy/ss07 combo i realise how much better the excel/revel actually is 🙂
Dont worry the audax' are still great value!
Just want to note that the TW034X0 is not magnetically shielded as far as I can tell - a shame if you want this tweet to go with the AP100Z0 for computer speakers.
edit: oh mama. A closer look at the FR shows it's relatively bumpy to other Audax tweeters mentioned. And it has a footprint of 132mm. The AP100Z0 is a mere 117mm in diameter.
At the reduced price I don't see that I have any alternative. 😀 I'm just hunting the net looking for opinions/implementations of it now. Oh O - here we go again...
edit: oh mama. A closer look at the FR shows it's relatively bumpy to other Audax tweeters mentioned. And it has a footprint of 132mm. The AP100Z0 is a mere 117mm in diameter.
other sources to maplin.........
It looks like we will have to wait on the F1's then. or maybe not?
I wounder how long it would take for a few 😉 drivers to be sent from parts express or similar and what the uplift in postage would be if "we"ordered more than a pair, a sort of group buy maybe. They seem to have some decent Vifa tweeters for less in dollars than we are looking at paying in £'s for Audax "landrover required frequency response inclines" 😱
perhaps some one who is awake when we are asleep can help with getting them over?
m
It looks like we will have to wait on the F1's then. or maybe not?
I wounder how long it would take for a few 😉 drivers to be sent from parts express or similar and what the uplift in postage would be if "we"ordered more than a pair, a sort of group buy maybe. They seem to have some decent Vifa tweeters for less in dollars than we are looking at paying in £'s for Audax "landrover required frequency response inclines" 😱
perhaps some one who is awake when we are asleep can help with getting them over?
m
Quickly tested my drivers last night, the averaged results are below:
Re: 5.6
Fs: 82.5
Qms: 2.34
Qes: 0.82
Qts: 0.61
Vas: 2.45
Looks like a little more running in is needed to match Vikash's results, but the're getting there. 🙂
Re: 5.6
Fs: 82.5
Qms: 2.34
Qes: 0.82
Qts: 0.61
Vas: 2.45
Looks like a little more running in is needed to match Vikash's results, but the're getting there. 🙂
I measured the drivers in batches, and drivers A+B were pushed to around xmax up to the 50 hour mark. If you just look at just these measurements at 50 hours, they're about the same as yours. 😎
Just for info, xmax is 2.7mm and I reckon mechanical excursion is around double that - which is what I pushed the second batch of drivers to (C+D+E+F).
Cheers PM, looks like we're in the same park.
Just for info, xmax is 2.7mm and I reckon mechanical excursion is around double that - which is what I pushed the second batch of drivers to (C+D+E+F).
Cheers PM, looks like we're in the same park.
Vikash said:...looks like we're in the same park.
Always nice to have independant confirmation isn't it, especially as I believe you use Speaker Workshop and I use Rod Elliot's manual method.
Well the Vas seems to be well down (and Fs up) on the 4.7L 65Hz specs.
Doesn't give much real choice in sealed or reflex loading.
I wonder if a TQWT or MLTWQT could extract some extra bass
SPL capability, though this is not my area of expertise at all.
🙂 sreten.
(used Q=0.6,Fs=80Hz,Vas=2.8L)
Doesn't give much real choice in sealed or reflex loading.
I wonder if a TQWT or MLTWQT could extract some extra bass
SPL capability, though this is not my area of expertise at all.
🙂 sreten.
(used Q=0.6,Fs=80Hz,Vas=2.8L)
Attachments
For the bass I was thinking the options were quite open. Shows how much I know. 
Well I was thinking a ported enclosure of ~28l perhaps. Or even 15l (factoring room gain of some sort) which I much prefer the size of.
The mid enclosure size doesn't appear critical so maybe ~5l, or larger to bring down the Qtc. And then a happy tweeter on top.
Well I was thinking a ported enclosure of ~28l perhaps. Or even 15l (factoring room gain of some sort) which I much prefer the size of.
The mid enclosure size doesn't appear critical so maybe ~5l, or larger to bring down the Qtc. And then a happy tweeter on top.
Attachments
Vikash said:For the bass I was thinking the options were quite open. Shows how much I know.
Well I was thinking a ported enclosure of ~28l perhaps. Or even 15l (factoring room gain of some sort) which I much prefer the size of.
The mid enclosure size doesn't appear critical so maybe ~5l, or larger to bring down the Qtc. And then a happy tweeter on top.
Well if you'll accept 6dB loss down to the port frequency there
are more options, but you don't get much more bass than 3dB
loss, and you lose a lot of bass efficiency, just my opinion but
the 6dB drop is too rapid for room gain to come to the rescue.
Regarding the mid as Vas is ~ 2.5L anything much bigger than
this is not really helping IMO, Qtc shouldn't really be a major
factor given you'll be crossing over higher than this, distortion
wise I'd say around 3.5L is appropriate.
🙂 sreten.
Attachments
Bricolo said:37Hz with a 10cm driver?
Why not? I'm sure they'll reach mechanical limits before melting, as proved by these good people running them in at mechanical limits at 15Hz etc 🙂
Steve
Vikash said:
Ive ordered a pair of them, and the website says I should get them "within 28 days". Couldnt you just order some?
stee-b said:
Damn! I wanted to get those instead of the TM025F1s but didnt want to pay £25 each. Now ill have to order a pair of these too. 😀 Another £30 gone...
Just point out to you all the 34mm audax tweeter is as old as
the hills (almost) and dates back to the days of the ubiquitous
1" Audax soft dome in nearly every decent speaker.
There were two versions, this does appear to be the high efficiency.
🙂 sreten.
the hills (almost) and dates back to the days of the ubiquitous
1" Audax soft dome in nearly every decent speaker.
There were two versions, this does appear to be the high efficiency.
🙂 sreten.
Audax 34mm tweeter
A word of warning here, World Audio Design used this in the last Audax kit they did (KLS13?) and the x-o had to be pretty complex to tame the uneven tweeter response, 3rd order with notch I think - may still be on the site even though they don't do the kit any more. 15 quid is pretty irresistible on material grounds though...
Ian
Sorry, KLS12, and it looks like 3rd order with notch and Zobel!
A word of warning here, World Audio Design used this in the last Audax kit they did (KLS13?) and the x-o had to be pretty complex to tame the uneven tweeter response, 3rd order with notch I think - may still be on the site even though they don't do the kit any more. 15 quid is pretty irresistible on material grounds though...
Ian
Sorry, KLS12, and it looks like 3rd order with notch and Zobel!
Well, I'm going to order a pair of TM025F1 from Maplin's website and see what happens. It will be interesting to compare them with the titanium version when I get mine off bigparsnip. Because I'm using active crossover I will just be able to swap them as I please, no mods 🙂
In a couple of weeks time I will also be measuring the T/S parameters of my AP100Z0 drive units. I will post the results here for the others to check. The method I use is the one Rod Elliott's is based on. So we should have results with 3 different methods. Now that's what I call verification 🙂
In a couple of weeks time I will also be measuring the T/S parameters of my AP100Z0 drive units. I will post the results here for the others to check. The method I use is the one Rod Elliott's is based on. So we should have results with 3 different methods. Now that's what I call verification 🙂
ahh i see. The one Rodd bases his method on. Sorry I didn't read it properly - Status
- Not open for further replies.