Actually no looking at the parameters once again i must say that i was probably wrong 😶. Hificompass gives rough idea.
I too consider the RS225-8 a special driver, unmatched by any other 8in woofer from any brand, at any price. You won’t find another driver with as smooth and flat and wide of a bandwidth. I have bought SB23NRX hoping it would be “more premium” than RS225 but it doesn’t measure as flat. The SB23NBAC is not as flat of a response and the first major breakup is at 4kHz vs the RS225’s 7kHz. For me, the wide bandwidth is needed for a 1st order transient perfect crossover at 900Hz. When paired with a SS 10F/8424 or Visaton B80 as a midtweeter in a TL cabinet, the sound is unbelievable. World class, one of the best sounding speakers I have heard.
Here is the SB23NBAC data:
Here is RS225-8’s frequency response:
The RS225-8 has a much smaller 57 liter Vas making for a more compact cabinet.
Here is the SB23NBAC data:
Here is RS225-8’s frequency response:
The RS225-8 has a much smaller 57 liter Vas making for a more compact cabinet.
Sorry, didn't get a notification (next time please quote, the new system works great with that)
I don't like bigger woofers perse (don't even understand why people even say that?).
In fact, I don't really care about big or small, all depends what you exactly want to do with your system.
But my approach is and will always be from a practical point of view.
In that practical equation; budget (price), size (volume) as well as objective science also come into play.
I enjoy thinking, making and talking about any kind of speaker system, big or small, expensive or cheap.
I'll thread it all equally.
The biggest issue I have with Purifi's literature (yes I have read it), is that very little of it is supported by quantified numbers and objective practical research. Second to that, they literally do things that have been already known for many years.
Just open your (hopefully known) books from Eargle, Borwick, Mellow and Beranek.
Besides, they have been pretty disrespectful (not my words) in Voice Coil magazine, kind of saying that a lot of well done research basically is useless and not important. Also, keep in mind they are a business trying to sell speakers.
(apparently that doesn't seem to bother anyone?)
Klippel is still a business as well obviously, but the only thing they wanna sell, is a good measuring system that can objectively measure all kinds of parameters. Meaning they don't care what performs better or worse.
Does that mean they are the untouchable holy grail?
No of course not, no one is and no one will ever be.
But on the list of trustworthy and objective information, which btw is REALLY hard in the field of audio and acoustics, it's a little higher on the list for me, since they don't have any direct benefits.
And yes, there is still plenty of critique on their way of determining things.
(I have plenty myself)
Why am I not impressed?
I would be impressed if they managed to do this for a FAIR price.
So let's say around 75-150 bucks for a woofer (consumer price).
Reason is that most of the mechanical techniques they use don't make a woofer that much more expensive.
Paying more than 200 bucks for a 6,5 inch is just totally insane.
Absolutely not in line anymore with the technology, production and work that is involved.
Saying that from a mechanical acoustic point of view, NOT from a mechanical finish/looks point of view.
(fyi, a nicely made and beautiful ring, basket or looks won't give you better performance, but will make your speaker 20-80% more expensive!)
Anyway, back to the rest of the story.
In the end it all depends on context, but many 8 or 10 inch subwoofers will perform similar as something like.
Even with two cheaper 6,5 inches you will get very close.
Do you call that big?
I don't know, but for most people I know, 8-15 liters is very manageable and can be made with a very high WAF.
Instead of mounting a (6,5 inch) woofer on the front, you just mount it on the side.
Same volume, same footprint.
Also, I have seen quite a few people having all the space in the world anyway?
If you follow and understand the literature and the underlying physics, any full-range 2-way system is by definition already a compromise. The performance will be miles better with a 2-way system playing from 100Hz and up + subwoofers on so many levels.
The reason for this in a 2-way, is that a trying to do fullrange with one woofer (low-end and mid), WILL already be a compromise in the mechanical department.
Since most of the performance is determined by the non-linear behavior in either/or the compliance, BL or Le(x).
By using a system only above around 100Hz, one only has to focus one linearity of the inductance.
(or a very well saturated magnet system, but those are rare to find).
Which is a total piece of cake these days. Plenty of affordable 6 and 5 inch woofers having extremely good and linear performance from 100-150Hz and up.
The low end is done with a mutli-sub system, since that's the only practical way to tackle does extremely harmful standing waves and nodes. Besides mechanical passive acoustic systems, which aren't practical for most people or the whole being small argument will go out the window anyway.
When this system is even positioned in a symmetrical setup, that crossover frequency can go even up to 200-250Hz.
Since we need a good multi-sub system for the lower end anyway, why would one even bother going full-range if we are speaking about "best" non-compromised audio quality?
The same goes for a 3-way system.
Although in that case you do spread out the performance much better, it still doesn't tackle one of the most harmful things on the list, those nasty standing waves and nodes.
Also keep in mind that for frequencies under 100Hz, the distortion can be much higher.
The sensitivity of the human ears is a lot less plus there is a lot of masking going on.
So anything up to 10% distortion won't be much of an issue. So looking at the 20% mark isn't that strange either for absolute max performance.
So do I think it's completely BS?
Actually, no I don't. Not at all even!!
If you have all the money and you can afford it, go for it!
They are very well made speakers, performing extremely well.
Under the assumption that you know how to use them and make a good performing crossover (which I know you're completely capable of), you will get good performance.
But it won't fix many issues like standing waves and acoustics, or bad crossovers, poor mechanical or acoustical design etc.
It's not a magic recipe.
And for most other people who don't have all the money laying around, all I am trying to say, you can spend your money far more wisely!!
That's not me being an *ss towards these kind of speaker brands, that's me trying to explain with the very best intentions to get y'all the best for your hard earned bucks.
I am only a little confused why we talk about these things, since I thought it was about MISCO speakers?
See my message above.
But what I would like to add.
It's not about being hypocritical.
It's all about being realistic.
You can't beat physics.
See it a bit like an extremely well performing 5W amplifier.
All great, but it can only get you so far.
So even if we assume that you will have an extremely well performing 3 inch subwoofer, you will always just lose on the SPL department.
When you look at it from a realistic point of view, the performance goes down extremely fast with smaller speakers.
While the price most of the time stays pretty much the same.
So yeah, it all depends what you expect from something.
Sometimes it seems that a lot of people expect wonders?
Also don't forget that a bit of creativity will get you very far.
Thanks for your thoughts.
everything is a compromise though.
so brandon wants 8” woofers for a slim 3 way. Fair enough.
What’s a good one?
Maybe the upcoming Misco.
What else is comparable!
I want a slim 3 way too; and I’m going to use using dual 12” woofers.
13 3/4” wide cabinets and 100L might be far too big for some.
And maybe twin 12” woofers might be a waste of money; when you can get a 15” or 18 or even a 21” for less than the price of two 12”.
And why even bother with a speaker with a big woofers when one could have a handful of subs woofers scattered throughout the room?
But what about people who don’t want multiple subs scattered across the room (multiple amps, Multiple cables, or with a single listener it’s unnecessary as EQ at the LP is all that’s needed)
At some point one has to draw the line and say, yeah, that’s an outstanding woofer or tweeter or midrange, its its size class.
Like the RS225-8; but this ain’t Brandon’s first rodeo. Maybe he just wants to see if anything else has come along in the last decade…
I know the T34B is an outstanding tweeter, regardless of cost.
Do I think I need it? Do I think it’s good value?
Do I want to pay for it or own one?
We’ll that’s an entirely different matter…
PS.
I meant hypercritical- as in too critical.
It’s easy to be too critical of a 6.5” midwoofer, or a 3” subwoofer.
But they are amazing for what they are.
30 years ago one simple couldn’t get what we can get now in just under 1L litre.
(60 to 15KHz; 80dB)
everything is a compromise though.
so brandon wants 8” woofers for a slim 3 way. Fair enough.
What’s a good one?
Maybe the upcoming Misco.
What else is comparable!
I want a slim 3 way too; and I’m going to use using dual 12” woofers.
13 3/4” wide cabinets and 100L might be far too big for some.
And maybe twin 12” woofers might be a waste of money; when you can get a 15” or 18 or even a 21” for less than the price of two 12”.
And why even bother with a speaker with a big woofers when one could have a handful of subs woofers scattered throughout the room?
But what about people who don’t want multiple subs scattered across the room (multiple amps, Multiple cables, or with a single listener it’s unnecessary as EQ at the LP is all that’s needed)
At some point one has to draw the line and say, yeah, that’s an outstanding woofer or tweeter or midrange, its its size class.
Like the RS225-8; but this ain’t Brandon’s first rodeo. Maybe he just wants to see if anything else has come along in the last decade…
I know the T34B is an outstanding tweeter, regardless of cost.
Do I think I need it? Do I think it’s good value?
Do I want to pay for it or own one?
We’ll that’s an entirely different matter…
PS.
I meant hypercritical- as in too critical.
It’s easy to be too critical of a 6.5” midwoofer, or a 3” subwoofer.
But they are amazing for what they are.
30 years ago one simple couldn’t get what we can get now in just under 1L litre.
(60 to 15KHz; 80dB)
Last edited:
Even with one listening position an EQ is definitely not only what's needed.
A multi-sub system does a lot more, not only getting rid of the peaks but also getting rid of those dips. Which can't be EQ'd. See Floyd Toole's book as well many experiences from many others.
There's a great free program out there that summarizes this very well (the name slips my mind atm, but will get back to it soon)
I mostly read what people don't want.
There isn't anything wrong with it, but just keep in mind that it just never will be great let alone "perfect ".
A better performing subwoofer (or woofer) is not gonna fix those issues (like I mentioned). If a race car performs bad because of its tires you need to fix the tires.
I just really don't understand why anno 2022 there is still so much focus on distortion?
While there seems to be little focus on things that really matter.
Also things like a proper directivity.
You only have to have a quick look at Erin's (Klippel NFS) measurements to figure out that many companies just don't understand it at all.
About good performing 8 inch woofers?
Wavecor has some pretty nice ones, Dayton as well, SB Acoustics.
If you're in EU, STX has some very interesting and affordable DVC subs.
If you can fit a 12-15 liter cabinet the choices are even bigger for a 10 inch.
I don't follow the downside of multiple amps? For a given budget.
Some can even be build in, you still will be cheaper in the end.
The only criticism I do follow, is the total lack of well performing plate amps for a fair price.
Apparently the PA guys can do it, so there is no reason.
With a tiny bit of work and creativity wires can be completely camouflaged.
This will be of interest to you:
It’s Todd Welti/Harman. Who did the research on multi-subs. Independent of Earl Geddes.
the multi sub approach is to smooth out peaks and nulls AROUND the room. And is of particular advantage for multi-listeners eg. Home theatre. But in a solo situation multi subs is a moot point. This seems to be missing on most discussions of multi subs.
I agree with Earl on the whole “THD is useless” idea. Because all those old distortion studies only look into THD a which is a blunt tool, Or only look at H2/H3 which weighs heavily on THD.
but distortion is far more complex than THD.
in transducers and complete speakers we’re talking 1% or 10% or 20% THD. Why are we using those limits? Because in studies it what’s listener find as objectionable distortion “I hear bad distortion”
But I’m not interested in “hearing distortion” I’m interest in hi-fi in terms of closest to the signal as possible. So all those 3rd orders and higher orders eg. 5th, 7th etc matter.
Why does Earl use a minimum of 10” midwoofer for his speakers. Perhaps when a 6.5” or 3” in a most compact form factor might suffice?
Erin Hardison is the first (as far as I can know) to publish compression testing in a systematic way. Have a look at the JBL M2 and March Audio Sointuva and compare the compression/distortion measurements to something like the Edifier MR4
Higher SPL Is the other side of the coin of lower distortion.
This is getting OT. And my last post on this thread.
I’d like to try to Misco 6.5” and upcoming 8” midwoofers for myself. It’s a shame there’s no distributor down under, so I’ll still looking.
It’s Todd Welti/Harman. Who did the research on multi-subs. Independent of Earl Geddes.
the multi sub approach is to smooth out peaks and nulls AROUND the room. And is of particular advantage for multi-listeners eg. Home theatre. But in a solo situation multi subs is a moot point. This seems to be missing on most discussions of multi subs.
I agree with Earl on the whole “THD is useless” idea. Because all those old distortion studies only look into THD a which is a blunt tool, Or only look at H2/H3 which weighs heavily on THD.
but distortion is far more complex than THD.
in transducers and complete speakers we’re talking 1% or 10% or 20% THD. Why are we using those limits? Because in studies it what’s listener find as objectionable distortion “I hear bad distortion”
But I’m not interested in “hearing distortion” I’m interest in hi-fi in terms of closest to the signal as possible. So all those 3rd orders and higher orders eg. 5th, 7th etc matter.
Why does Earl use a minimum of 10” midwoofer for his speakers. Perhaps when a 6.5” or 3” in a most compact form factor might suffice?
Erin Hardison is the first (as far as I can know) to publish compression testing in a systematic way. Have a look at the JBL M2 and March Audio Sointuva and compare the compression/distortion measurements to something like the Edifier MR4
Higher SPL Is the other side of the coin of lower distortion.
This is getting OT. And my last post on this thread.
I’d like to try to Misco 6.5” and upcoming 8” midwoofers for myself. It’s a shame there’s no distributor down under, so I’ll still looking.
Last edited:
Why some people use a bigger speaker as a mid?
The main reason, it will mostly give you a much higher directivity. Which can be beneficial in a room with a lot of reflections.
Btw 30 years ago, engineers would probably be capable of developing similar speakers. The problem back then was mainly the power from the amplifier.
So for engineers back in the day it simply wouldn't make sense in the context.
Power is not only in abundance these days but also super cheap.
The main reason, it will mostly give you a much higher directivity. Which can be beneficial in a room with a lot of reflections.
Btw 30 years ago, engineers would probably be capable of developing similar speakers. The problem back then was mainly the power from the amplifier.
So for engineers back in the day it simply wouldn't make sense in the context.
Power is not only in abundance these days but also super cheap.
So in the newest VoiceCoil magazine the E180HE-44 was finally tested.
Usually this article will be free to read online roughly a month later.
Doesn't look as promising as we hoped 🙁
In the BL(x) and Kms(X) graphs the driver seems to suffer from quite some (dynamic) offset as well.
Tested at 94dB as they do by default.
So compared with the same 10% criteria, the MISCO BWX-6502 performs significantly better while having roughly the same xmax (at the same 10% criteria that is). See MISCO review here;
https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-the-bwx-6502-midbass-from-misco-s-bold-north-audio-line
MISCO only gives the minimum xmax, so I don't know if the 6502 is capable of providing more excursion and/or what the 20% numbers will look like.
For people living in the US both woofers are basically the same price.
So my advice would be to go for the MISCO instead.
I would definitely not recommend the 180HE for any midrange usage.
3.5% K3 distortion is not something to be proud of.
It's unfortunate, relatively speaking the 150HE looks better, but unfortunately that data could not be extrapolated.
Usually this article will be free to read online roughly a month later.
Doesn't look as promising as we hoped 🙁
In the BL(x) and Kms(X) graphs the driver seems to suffer from quite some (dynamic) offset as well.
Tested at 94dB as they do by default.
Practically you will have around 9.7mm at 10% criteria.
So compared with the same 10% criteria, the MISCO BWX-6502 performs significantly better while having roughly the same xmax (at the same 10% criteria that is). See MISCO review here;
https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-the-bwx-6502-midbass-from-misco-s-bold-north-audio-line
MISCO only gives the minimum xmax, so I don't know if the 6502 is capable of providing more excursion and/or what the 20% numbers will look like.
For people living in the US both woofers are basically the same price.
So my advice would be to go for the MISCO instead.
I would definitely not recommend the 180HE for any midrange usage.
3.5% K3 distortion is not something to be proud of.
It's unfortunate, relatively speaking the 150HE looks better, but unfortunately that data could not be extrapolated.
Attachments
Last edited:
Me neither, almost makes you wonder if there is something wrong with the sample?
The offset was also quite bad to be very honest.
It's a little annoying that they don't show higher harmonics at VC, because it will give a lot more information about what's causing it. The impedance plot looks pretty fine (not shown here, you have to read the full article)
The 150HE wasn't that bad either; (considering its size)
https://audioxpress.com/article/tes...e-subwoofer-from-the-dayton-audio-epique-line
I think they make good little woofers, but as a midwoofers there are probably better available options.
The PE datasheet had hinted that the H3 was higher than the H2, although you really have to be familiar with Omnimic's colour scheme and a be pixel starer or trainspotter to figure that out.
But this was confirmed by our friends over that HT Guide over a month ago:
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php?44788-A-New-Design-Study-in-progress&p=641013#post641013
These new Epique drivers haven't eclipsed what Scan-Speak produced almost 15 years ago- Illuminator introduction was in 2008.
To Xrk971:
I too like the RS225. But it is better than the Scan Revelator 8" ?
The PE datasheet had hinted that the H3 was higher than the H2, although you really have to be familiar with Omnimic's colour scheme and a be pixel starer or trainspotter to figure that out.
But this was confirmed by our friends over that HT Guide over a month ago:
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php?44788-A-New-Design-Study-in-progress&p=641013#post641013
These new Epique drivers haven't eclipsed what Scan-Speak produced almost 15 years ago- Illuminator introduction was in 2008.
To Xrk971:
I too like the RS225. But it is better than the Scan Revelator 8" ?
That's very disappointing performance on the HE180...
I've always wondered how the Reckhorn D165 performs. Another 6.5" designed for bass but very inexpensive.
I've always wondered how the Reckhorn D165 performs. Another 6.5" designed for bass but very inexpensive.
The performance under 100hz is really good. But I can't even use these on my 3-way design.
I'll probably use the MISCO, but I'm hoping for their 8" to be available in time. They said June, but with the current "situation" we'll see.
I'll probably use the MISCO, but I'm hoping for their 8" to be available in time. They said June, but with the current "situation" we'll see.
I would love to see some Klippel measurements of the (new) Reckhorn D165i.
(They recently upgraded)
Well I wouldn't say really good for the E180HE. The numbers of the 5 inch are much more impressive.
There are dozens of 8 inch woofers around the same price that perform very well. In fact the majority of those perform way better than these two Daytons.
So unless the dimensions of the cabinet are extremely critical I don't see many reasons to advise these.
Most 8 inch subs fit in 8-12 liter closed no problem.
What's so special about the 8 inch MISCO? 🙂
There are A LOT of 8 inch subwoofers that perform very very well, especially within the $100-200 category.
But curious, MISCO makes quite some nice products.
There is a bit to win distortion wise, it's quite tricky to get an 8 inch right < 45Hz.
An area were 10 inchers can do those frequencies with ease again.
A bit more than the BWF 8001 I hope, that one is a little simple?
My first post:
"Looking for a woofer to anchor a 3-way and I stumbled across these: 6501 and 6502. Voice Coil magazine also tested them. I would only use the 6.5" for a center channel, but they have an 8" coming, I was given a very tentative date of June '22. XBL2 motors are known for their very low harmonic distortion in the bass, and these are a good example. But after reading a lot of the Purifi info, I took a closer look at some of the Klippel results like BL flatness and especially symmetry, and Le(x) tilt. These appear to be solving some of the same issues that Purifi identified, like FFM distortion. Now I'm not comparing the two, the usage case different, and Purifi obviously went much further in nailing down the behavior of the driver. But it does seem these are performing very well in the ways that audibly matter vs most other manufacturers. Thoughts?"
I'm analyzing this from the perspective explained here: https://purifi-audio.com/2019/12/12/imd/ https://purifi-audio.com/2019/12/07/amfm/ https://purifi-audio.com/2019/05/02/distortion-the-sound-that-dare-not-speak-its-name/
I'd like to test some drivers with this method and hear the results myself. The audio files are pretty compelling.
"Looking for a woofer to anchor a 3-way and I stumbled across these: 6501 and 6502. Voice Coil magazine also tested them. I would only use the 6.5" for a center channel, but they have an 8" coming, I was given a very tentative date of June '22. XBL2 motors are known for their very low harmonic distortion in the bass, and these are a good example. But after reading a lot of the Purifi info, I took a closer look at some of the Klippel results like BL flatness and especially symmetry, and Le(x) tilt. These appear to be solving some of the same issues that Purifi identified, like FFM distortion. Now I'm not comparing the two, the usage case different, and Purifi obviously went much further in nailing down the behavior of the driver. But it does seem these are performing very well in the ways that audibly matter vs most other manufacturers. Thoughts?"
I'm analyzing this from the perspective explained here: https://purifi-audio.com/2019/12/12/imd/ https://purifi-audio.com/2019/12/07/amfm/ https://purifi-audio.com/2019/05/02/distortion-the-sound-that-dare-not-speak-its-name/
I'd like to test some drivers with this method and hear the results myself. The audio files are pretty compelling.
Oh you mean like a similar unit like the 6502? The one with the phase plug doesn't seem to be as good, which doesn't make much sense?
Thoughts?
That Purify makes nice but very expensive drivers and do things that aren't new?
Also using claims that haven't objectively been verified (which isn't important in their own opinion, so much so for science....)
It all depends, are you gonna use them full-range up till 2kHz or so or below 200Hz?
Le(x) tilt is very debatable for just sub and frequencies below 200Hz, since the inductance doesn't have any significance anymore below the impedance dip.
In general according to literature distortion can be quite high below 100Hz.
Hence the reason why 20% norm is being used for subwoofers with these Klippel tests.
For this reason 2nd order harmonics are actually not bad at all.
Unless it has to be crazy compact, my advice is always getting a separate woofer for 100/150Hz til mid (2kHz) and another woofer for below 100/150Hz.
For proper low frequencies one needs to have a multi-sub system anyway.
Which can't be done with just a 2-way system. So using a purifi full-range is a (huge) compromise in my book.
Also, one can still use two other 6.5 inch woofers probably in the same volume (like Dutch&Dutch does with their two subs on the back)
If you have the room for 8 inch (or even bigger). Go for that option.
But like I said before, there are plenty of 8 inch woofers that can do the same performance with ease.
If you have the money for it, sure go for it. They are measurable one of the best and very well made speakers, no question about that.
They also have a 8 inch variant coming up soon.
If it's audible is a different question.
Thoughts?
That Purify makes nice but very expensive drivers and do things that aren't new?
Also using claims that haven't objectively been verified (which isn't important in their own opinion, so much so for science....)
It all depends, are you gonna use them full-range up till 2kHz or so or below 200Hz?
Le(x) tilt is very debatable for just sub and frequencies below 200Hz, since the inductance doesn't have any significance anymore below the impedance dip.
In general according to literature distortion can be quite high below 100Hz.
Hence the reason why 20% norm is being used for subwoofers with these Klippel tests.
For this reason 2nd order harmonics are actually not bad at all.
Unless it has to be crazy compact, my advice is always getting a separate woofer for 100/150Hz til mid (2kHz) and another woofer for below 100/150Hz.
For proper low frequencies one needs to have a multi-sub system anyway.
Which can't be done with just a 2-way system. So using a purifi full-range is a (huge) compromise in my book.
Also, one can still use two other 6.5 inch woofers probably in the same volume (like Dutch&Dutch does with their two subs on the back)
If you have the room for 8 inch (or even bigger). Go for that option.
But like I said before, there are plenty of 8 inch woofers that can do the same performance with ease.
If you have the money for it, sure go for it. They are measurable one of the best and very well made speakers, no question about that.
They also have a 8 inch variant coming up soon.
If it's audible is a different question.