MW16P vs SB17

cs

Member
2005-06-04 7:37 pm
.
Is there any advantage to the Satori MW16P midwoofers compared to the cheaper SB17 range? I'm considering both for an MLTL project, in conjunction with some SB29RDC tweeters I already have.

The Satori has very low distortion, although the SB17NAC also looks good in that respect. However, the midband in the Satori looks a bit lumpy.
 
I use both the MW16P-8 (bookshelf with SB29RDAC) and the SB17NAC35-8 (floorstander with SB26ADC) and they are great drivers. I do listen more to the NAC as it's more engaging but that is probably due to the speaker and crossover design. The MW16 is more smoother in it's presentation which could be the lower distortion or the crossover.

Can't go wrong with either.
 
Last edited:

ILikeFoodz

Member
2014-06-22 12:33 pm
I used the SB15NAC30-4 in a 2 way with the sb26stac and it is excellent, so I would expect great performance out of the sb17 as well.

I haven't heard the Satori, but everyone seems to say they're exceptional drivers, and they supposedly have a more advanced motor design than the SB series, which is a lot of where the lower distortion and higher price will come from. Also, I wouldn't worry too much about the dip just above 1khz on it, usually small sharp dips like that aren't very audible (it's the spikes you need to worry about)!

As for which I would choose... I think it really comes down to what your goals for the build are. If you don't mind spending a bit more and are going more for a no compromise build, then I'd go with the Satori due to the lower distortion, more benign breakup, and the stellar reputation they've got. If you don't really want to spend that much, then the SB17 will not disappoint you either. What a wonderful problem to have, picking between two excellent drivers like this!
 
For the woofer in a 2-way MLTL, the stiff aluminum cone and high Qts=0.42 make the SB17NAC35-8 a good choice. An MLTL cannot produce the perfect-phase, low-delay transient resonse of a 3-way with a sealed midrange and woofer. So, it can be hard to justify the extra cost of the MW16P-x for a MLTL.
----
I would use the MW16P-4 in a sealed Qtc=0.6 midrange as part of a 3-way speaker.

I built a 0.75cuft rear-ported 2-way cabinet with the larger MW19P-4 midbass and SB29SDC-4 dome tweeter for my desktop. I am very pleased with the natural sound and rear ported bass around 45Hz, BUT... when I added fiberglass to the rear panel and sealed the port (Qtc~ 0.57 -F3=60Hz ) the test and musical transients became CLEAN-CLEAN-CLEAN
 

YSDR

Member
2013-11-24 8:13 pm
I am very pleased with the natural sound and rear ported bass around 45Hz, BUT... when I added fiberglass to the rear panel and sealed the port (Qtc~ 0.57 -F3=60Hz ) the test and musical transients became CLEAN-CLEAN-CLEAN

I don't want to open up a classic can of worms and it's slightly off-topic, but you may have a better match to the room gain with the sealed box alignment and that's the reason for cleaner bass. If we look further, your vent tuning is on the high side for that woofer, yes you may have an extended flat low end response this way, but the problem is the room/boundary gain, which is always needs to consider in a normal sized living room and with flat tuning you have much more chance to get bumpy, mushy, on-note bass because of the room-speaker interaction and not because of the speaker only.

Btw, if you have weaker low-end response (sealed), the sound always becomes subjectively "faster", because of less low-bass.
But if you have the same in-room low-end response with the bass-reflex and with sealed then I didn't say a word.
 
For the woofer in a 2-way MLTL, the stiff aluminum cone and high Qts=0.42 make the SB17NAC35-8 a good choice. An MLTL cannot produce the perfect-phase, low-delay transient resonse of a 3-way with a sealed midrange and woofer. So, it can be hard to justify the extra cost of the MW16P-x for a MLTL.

I would use the MW16P-4 in a sealed Qtc=0.6 midrange as part of a 3-way speaker.

Well, you might find it hard to justify using a Satori as a midbass in a vented enclosure of a given type (MLTL, Small-type Helmholtz etc.) but plenty of people use them like that with great success. Given that that is what they are primarily designed for, it's not surprising. ;) I've designed a number: it's a superb midbass of its type, and one of my 'go-to' drivers in this size bracket. A 3-way using the 6in Satori as a midrange is a fundamentally different type of loudspeaker to a 2-way using it as a midbass, to the point where about all you can say in comparative terms is that they are different.
 
Why is the magnet too strong? Assuming about 1/2ohm series R for wire, connections, series inductor &c. then about 19 litres with an Fb of 35Hz or so gives a nice, usable, well-damped response with an F6 of about 32Hz. That's not exactly shabby for a 6in midbass. OK, if you want to use it sealed, F6 is up in the mid 40s with a Butterworth alignment, but again, not exactly bad for a 6in midbass. Granted, the 17MFC can get lower if you give it a bigger box, but whether that's necessarily an advantage is more a question of individual requirements.
 
Last edited:

celef

Member
2012-11-26 7:40 pm
Why is the magnet too strong? Assuming about 1/2ohm series R for wire, connections, series inductor &c. then about 19 litres with an Fb of 35Hz or so gives a nice, usable, well-damped response with an F6 of about 32Hz. That's not exactly shabby for a 6in midbass. OK, if you want to use it sealed, F6 is up in the mid 40s with a Butterworth alignment, but again, not exactly bad for a 6in midbass. Granted, the 17MFC can get lower if you give it a bigger box, but whether that's necessarily an advantage is more a question of individual requirements.

you said it well, and i like the bass to be a bit under damped, but not always, some periods i just plug the ports and enjoying a tighter response