If that happens, you will have to pass it off as an "aesthetic design choice" or a "feature".
The basket is more shallow on the 7MS. The cone is more rounded on the 7MS, it's not just a straight conical shape like the P7, definitely more curvature. The dustcap is a tad longer, maybe by 1 mm on the 7MS and much closer to the top of the driver and obviously no dimple on the 7MS. Also, the actual 7MS color is a brighter shade of 'gold'. The light reflecting off of it really shows the shape of the cone nicely.
The 7MS is about .5LB heavier due to an extra magnet. Originally I had thought it was a longer magnet, but when I was taking these pics I noticed the rear cover wasn't properly aligned so I tried to mess with it and was surprised it came right off. Putting it back on and properly aligning it was no problem. It probably got shifted during shipping. No big deal. So here are some pics!
The 7MS is about .5LB heavier due to an extra magnet. Originally I had thought it was a longer magnet, but when I was taking these pics I noticed the rear cover wasn't properly aligned so I tried to mess with it and was surprised it came right off. Putting it back on and properly aligning it was no problem. It probably got shifted during shipping. No big deal. So here are some pics!
Attachments
Last edited:
I'll start a new thread comparing the P7 and MS7 complete with simple REW measurements using a UMIK cal'd mic in identical enclosures and stuffing along with my opinions on how they sound. Currently they're being used in my 12per side arrays to break them in at low volumes, so I can't really say how they sound except to say they blend well with the other P7's. I intend to remove the other 11 enlcosures per side and then can put theMS7's anywhere vertically on the 7ft stands. I can do this this upcoming weekend.
Here is my current setup using P7's...
Some of the more critical tests I'd like to do on the P7 and 7MS are the off-axis tests using white noise. This is especially true because I know for a fact the off-axis of the P7 is very impressive, so the 7MS should be even better. Why the data sheet does not spec off-axis response, for any Markaudio driver, is beyond me. Another test I must do is to compare the 7MS with and without the additional magnet supplied. Expect many pics in the new thread!
Some of the more critical tests I'd like to do on the P7 and 7MS are the off-axis tests using white noise. This is especially true because I know for a fact the off-axis of the P7 is very impressive, so the 7MS should be even better. Why the data sheet does not spec off-axis response, for any Markaudio driver, is beyond me. Another test I must do is to compare the 7MS with and without the additional magnet supplied. Expect many pics in the new thread!
Hi all,
I’m planning to make a pair of surround speakers to go with my front L/R A11MS, the obvious choice, is another pair of 11MS, however, I’d like to spend a little less cash if possible & don’t want to feel like I’m abusing them when cranking up an action movie.
Do you guys think the Pluvia 11 would work well?
It works in a sealed enclosure of 5litres, which is ideal & the blurb says they can take a bit of abuse.
I’m planning to make a pair of surround speakers to go with my front L/R A11MS, the obvious choice, is another pair of 11MS, however, I’d like to spend a little less cash if possible & don’t want to feel like I’m abusing them when cranking up an action movie.
Do you guys think the Pluvia 11 would work well?
It works in a sealed enclosure of 5litres, which is ideal & the blurb says they can take a bit of abuse.
Thanks Stefan, yeah, good dispersion is desirable, I’m currently using BMR drivers for my surrounds, they do work well but I’m going to switch them for use as Atmos channels & go with all Mark Audio base layer channels.
The problem I have with the A7ms is they need a bigger cabinet & are lower sensitivity.
Do you think the Pluvia11 would be too narrow in dispersion & I ought to do it properly by going with another pair of A11MS?
What sort of power response does a surround speaker need?
The 7ms drivers will still work in a small sealed box, but you will loose bass extension?
Ive written down they can work well in 8L sealed in my collection of plans for the 7ms
What would happen if you put them in a sealed well stuffed 4-5L cabinet?
The 7ms drivers will still work in a small sealed box, but you will loose bass extension?
Ive written down they can work well in 8L sealed in my collection of plans for the 7ms
What would happen if you put them in a sealed well stuffed 4-5L cabinet?
I’ll be crossing them over around 120hz so bass extension isn’t a big consideration.
I’ll have a measure up & check out how big an 8L cabinet works out, the 7 would save a good few £’s over the 11’s, especially as I’m also planning to add surround back’s at some point too.
Assuming current 7MS driver spec. and 0.5ohms series R for wire, connections &c., then 5 litres with lagged walls (in general it's a good idea avoid the heavy stuffing route with acoustically small sealed boxes -you'll likely mass-load the suspension & cone, altering its resonant behaviour from that designed) then you'll have a system Q of about 0.8 give or take, an F3 of ~95Hz and an F6 roughly 20Hz lower. 8 litres depending on the lagging will probably be about Butterworth -this one would be OK stuffed, providing you don't go overboard & keep it from immediate proximity with the driver), F3 ~90Hz, F6 about 70Hz.
Last edited:
Thank you Scott, that is really useful.
When you say Butterworth, is that system Q approx 0.7 ?
Gun to your head
Which driver would you choose for rear surrounds in my situation ?Check out the plans on Madisound for the pluvia 7's, we use the 11l sealed one for the Alpair 7.3 and it works really well. It says the dims and literage.
Markaudio Alpair-7 Gold Cone 4" Full Range
Markaudio Alpair-7 Gold Cone 4" Full Range