Nah , can't hold a candle to a vintage radio cones. I had a Proac monitor based on ATC drivers . It was easily embarrassed by Altec bicone driver in an open baffle.
Audio Technology can sound seductive but it won't bite when needed -a nature of the beast. JBL Le8 is world class , some Lowthers and similar ilk. The problem is always in matching the quality to other channels in the speaker. In the semi traditional coffin boxes old Spendor owns the midrange.
Best midrange - easy. Get one of the top 3" midrange domes.
For me that's Bliesma cause it's way easier to build with as the ATC and available. The new ScanSpeak ... but very expensive and huge front plate. The original ATCs are hard to get and also can't get so close to the tweeter but are more robust at low frequencies as the Bliesmas.
You won't go back after building with these.
(MD60N-6 could be a cheaper first step in the dome midrange land. But you will get infected with the midrange dome bug and start planing on a build with a 3" ;-) )
For me that's Bliesma cause it's way easier to build with as the ATC and available. The new ScanSpeak ... but very expensive and huge front plate. The original ATCs are hard to get and also can't get so close to the tweeter but are more robust at low frequencies as the Bliesmas.
You won't go back after building with these.
(MD60N-6 could be a cheaper first step in the dome midrange land. But you will get infected with the midrange dome bug and start planing on a build with a 3" ;-) )
When i design speakers, i go for least coloured, that means with flat fr response across its used band, whatever midrange means to you, well behaved of axis response, that is smooth narrowing without breakups and resonances. Small distortion, clean waterfall.
Ideal midrange is abou 4" to 5". Anything bigger will be midbass which needs to be crossed much lower to tweeter due to beaming, which requires robust tweeter with low fs.
I find it much easier to achieve type of sound i want by the deliberate use of preamp or amp with certain amout of distortion. Whatever euphoric is, its individual for each person. I simply like lush smooth yet clean.
When i had korg nutube pre, i could dial in any type of sound. This was in form of more or less distortion, with positive or negative 2nd harmonic.
While EEees here hate distortion, the word itself already marked negatively, i would call it harmonic enrichment. If the pre with 0.02% distortion sounds way better to me than pre with 0.0002%, i am ok with it.
Ideal midrange is abou 4" to 5". Anything bigger will be midbass which needs to be crossed much lower to tweeter due to beaming, which requires robust tweeter with low fs.
I find it much easier to achieve type of sound i want by the deliberate use of preamp or amp with certain amout of distortion. Whatever euphoric is, its individual for each person. I simply like lush smooth yet clean.
When i had korg nutube pre, i could dial in any type of sound. This was in form of more or less distortion, with positive or negative 2nd harmonic.
While EEees here hate distortion, the word itself already marked negatively, i would call it harmonic enrichment. If the pre with 0.02% distortion sounds way better to me than pre with 0.0002%, i am ok with it.
A derivation of ATC: Volt.
Excellent sound if not quite as clear as planar/ribbon/ES/plasma, but a bit more “body” or ”3d” “pop” in the mid.s. (..notably when the piano is playing lower notes there is a loss of clarity with the design below, perhaps owing to the t-line very slightly modulating the woofer’s diaphragm.)
Last edited:
12" starts beaming at ~700Hz. Good luck finding tweeter to cross that low.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Beaming.htm
Yeah, euphoric is a listener’s reaction and not something characterizing a driver.
Euphonic is the correct word: “pleasing to the ear”, or the driver is “pleasing to the ear”. ..you can also append that the pleasing character might not be the most neutral or accurate result from the recording, but may be a more realistic result (to many listeners) of the performance that was recorded.
Euphonic is the correct word: “pleasing to the ear”, or the driver is “pleasing to the ear”. ..you can also append that the pleasing character might not be the most neutral or accurate result from the recording, but may be a more realistic result (to many listeners) of the performance that was recorded.
But of course , no question about it . What else it should please ? A wall, microphone or redneck Riviera of house guest and friends? That's the salt and essence and about only justification for DIY. You can pick up a plethora of neutral and accurate competently designed speakers on the curb or for a lunch money and nobody will miss them. Somehow we all know it but pretend otherwise and marry ugly, cantankerous women and brave ahead meh
There isn’t one.
Nor would you find agreement with loading and resulting dispersion.
The spectacular result (at lower Spl) that I’ve heard was the CLS2 from MartinLogan; it’s just that it’s such a broad range that generates problems on both ends of the passband. Excursion/Spl limited on the low-end and integration/combing issues on the high-end.
It’s why I spec’ed 2 drivers: the Fostex 8” FE and the 3” silk Bliesma in combination and with a particular loading for the Fostex.
Last edited:
Midrange is classically defined as 500hz to 4khz. For home/ casual listening, a driver no larger than 5” is the prescription.
For commercial reproduction, a 2” or larger compression driver covers the passband.
Somewhere in between?…..the Selenium 250x 1” phenolic driver and a suitable waveguide to load the driver and deliver out to 80 degrees or so……sharpen your pencils
For commercial reproduction, a 2” or larger compression driver covers the passband.
Somewhere in between?…..the Selenium 250x 1” phenolic driver and a suitable waveguide to load the driver and deliver out to 80 degrees or so……sharpen your pencils