Need Help Choosing a Mid

mortron

Member
2011-08-20 6:02 am
Town
I have a pair of BG Neo 3 PDR that need a home. I also have a pair of Infinity 1262w headed for sealed enclosures. I need something to play inbetween.

I listen to music, no HT, maybe the ODD movie through them, but rare - and at present I don't even have a TV!

Originally I wanted a large 3 way, but have decided on a monitor and subs. I have researched a fair deal of drivers, and am thinking a 5"-6" mid is the go to for good reason. Therefore I have come up with a handful of drivers I can employ but am not really sure what to do.

The drivers are:

SB Acoustics SB13PFC25-04 Can be had super cheap locally.
http://www.sbacoustics.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/5in-SB13PFC25-04-1.pdf

Peerless 830656 Cheap as chips, Zaph liked them.
http://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/264-1078-peerless-830656-specifications.pdf

Faital 5FE120 Pro driver, but has interesting specs and features.
http://www.faitalpro.com/products/files/5FE120/8/5FE120_datasheet_8.pdf

Peerless 830860 Troels uses this up to ~3khz, so it should work well with my Neo 3, which he also uses in another design down to ~3Khz. Sadly its not very efficient
http://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/specs/264-1080-peerless-830860-specifications.pdf

As you can see, I am a bit all over the map. I was considering an MT design with some of the pricier drivers, and MTM if I went with the cheaper ones, as this would gain me some efficiency. I know the 830565 like a sealed enclosure, and find the idea of sealed mids appealing, but believe the 830860 would sound much better than the MTM due to a better driver.

My goal is something with low distortion and good efficiency. I know there are nice drivers in the $80-100 range, but they are a bit out of reach for my budget, as I will eventually want to make a Passive XO. That said, I don't want to do injustice to the Neo 3 by using a terrible midrange just to save $20.

What would you all do given my situation?

I am at an impasse and not sure what avenue to go. Any tips would be appreciated. I know some of you are sick of my all over the place questions, hopefully they will gain more focus with a mid selected. Thanks in advance.
 

mortron

Member
2011-08-20 6:02 am
Town
I have no cabs yet... the subs I was planning on 1.5cf sealed. The monitor is just something I am kicking around if I can find a suitable driver.

I had kicked the idea around of Peerless 830869 8" HDS woofer paired with the Neo 3 as a 2 way crossed @ 2kHz LR4 actively, big and loud... but fear that combo may leave me wanting more in the mids. IDK.

Not many I can converse with on the topic. Most of my DIY friends have a dipole hard on, and that aint the itch I'm wanting to scratch LOL.
 
I have the Peerless 830860 and the 830869.

The 830860 should mate well with your Neo3. I doubt the Neo3 will sound good at 2K crossover. I suggest crossing it at 3K-3.5K

As for the 8" 830869, I don't recommend it with your Neo3. I tried it in a 2-way with a JBL 2425 compression driver, crossing at about 1K5 and I still couldn't get the woofer to sing. The 860869 bass was just too laid back for my liking. Not enough dynamics.
 
Your time is valuable. Consider putting all your work and money behind a great 3-way.

Remember, it has been proven satellite + sub separated woofers can be physically located if crossed over 80Hz(THX standard), and a 60Hz crossover is desirable for superior integration. A well executed 3-way box offers the best sound in the smallest physical volume with the lowest total cost.

The Neo3 PDR white paper favors a 2Khz second order electrical, and using the Neo3 natural fall-off to create an acoustic 4th order to the midrange. Putting a 4th order electrical on the midrange allows using up to 6" by attenuating the natural cone breakup. The SB Acoustics SB17NRXC35 would by my first choice. $58-USD at Madisound.

Personally, I would favor a dome tweeter polar pattern for a musical 3-way, and the Neo3 PDR in a dipole. Can you trade? ""all over the place questions"" get all over the place opinions :)
 
Popular all over the world.
DIY designs with 1.6kHz-1.8kHz crossover available(just ask):
========
Dome = SB29RDC-4 $52
6" midbass=SB17NRXC35-8 $58
-Ported:
0.6ft^3 = F3 =48Hz
0.7ft^3 = F3 =45Hz
0.8ft^3 = F3 =42Hz
1.0ft^3 = F3 =38Hz
43“ tall MLTL~35Hz
=========
-Sealed 0.5cuft F3=70Hz
-use with your 12" ported woofer for 3-way.
 

Attachments

  • Popular 1.jpg
    Popular 1.jpg
    90.5 KB · Views: 114
  • Popular Alignments.jpg
    Popular Alignments.jpg
    63.1 KB · Views: 109
There's no necessity to buy mid-woofers in the $100 price range. That alone will not give you the sound. The crossover is the key. It helps tremendously if you have a good ear too.

eriksquires suggested the 830991. That's a very good driver to match your Neo3. There's an offer now at Madisound for $29 each. Normal price is $47. I'm seriously considering purchasing a pair myself.
 
Popular all over the world.
DIY designs with 1.6kHz-1.8kHz crossover available(just ask):
========
Dome = SB29RDC-4 $52
6" midbass=SB17NRXC35-8 $58
-Ported:
0.6ft^3 = F3 =48Hz
0.7ft^3 = F3 =45Hz
0.8ft^3 = F3 =42Hz
1.0ft^3 = F3 =38Hz
43“ tall MLTL~35Hz
=========
-Sealed 0.5cuft F3=70Hz
-use with your 12" ported woofer for 3-way.

The design on Troels' site you reference uses the SB26, no? What does changing the tweeter do to the design? Based on my discussions with him, one cannot simply mix and match design components like that, even if XO points are similar between projects.
 
What does changing the tweeter do to the design?

Both are excellent tweeters. Each is used in several SB Acoustics designs.
Designs with ~ 1.6kHz - 1.7kHz crossovers sometime favor the lower frequency extension and lower distortion of the SB29RDC-4.
Designs with ~ 1.8kHz-2kHz crossovers sometime favor the lower cost and tigher polar pattern from the smaller diameter SB26STC-4.

Cabinet design and baffle layout can also affect selection decisions.
MTM designs often favor the higher efficiency of the SB29RDC-4.
 

Attachments

  • Baffle Size Xover.jpg
    Baffle Size Xover.jpg
    145.2 KB · Views: 96