Any use of drivers in a vertical config including those Deuval speakers will lose about 3dB or maybe more due to the sound being circulated around the front and rear arcs, right?Baffle step info I've heard implies maybe 6db but that seems a bit much- especially in a smaller room. Any comments on this?
Still, I think this opens up the use of 10" pro midranges which can be as high 101db watt/meter. I think we should look into these carefully, as they might have the bandwidth, low distortion, and efficiency that is needed, without the penalty of beaming that we normally must contend with. I know JBL and Selenium make them, also ATC.
At this point I am envisioning a low box like a subwoofer with the back of the 10" sticking up out of the top, so that the listener
has an angle more like 45 degrees instead 90 degrees to the cone.
Still, I think this opens up the use of 10" pro midranges which can be as high 101db watt/meter. I think we should look into these carefully, as they might have the bandwidth, low distortion, and efficiency that is needed, without the penalty of beaming that we normally must contend with. I know JBL and Selenium make them, also ATC.
At this point I am envisioning a low box like a subwoofer with the back of the 10" sticking up out of the top, so that the listener
has an angle more like 45 degrees instead 90 degrees to the cone.
are you looking at the Walsh drivers from Ohm or the recent mirage speakers?
i think there was a speaker in elektor that did this too
on the other had dbx had a speaker called a soundfield that used multiple drivers and a very complex XO to replicates this.
other than that one lacuna is that a donw firing 12-15" woofer with a heavy cone will have a limited life in that the spider will sag. downfiring works for smaller 8" drivers or a few 10" ers whith light cones and heavy spiders.
I have damaged a pair of Audio Concpets DV12s this way. I asked ACI is down firing was possible with their drivers and Mr. Dzurko said his spiders are able to take the abuse. Over time I guess they are not.
Sag severly reduces bass response. I say over time meaning over a time span of 5-7 years. if you intend to keep your drivers less than that there sould not be a problem. also i have not seen the tougher machines of skanning et. al. and others that have 2 spiders.
I always wondered what it wouldbe like to use a Walsh driver and a ESS AMT on top of that.... 🙂 back to the 70s or was that the 80s alchohol dulls the memory.
i think there was a speaker in elektor that did this too
on the other had dbx had a speaker called a soundfield that used multiple drivers and a very complex XO to replicates this.
other than that one lacuna is that a donw firing 12-15" woofer with a heavy cone will have a limited life in that the spider will sag. downfiring works for smaller 8" drivers or a few 10" ers whith light cones and heavy spiders.
I have damaged a pair of Audio Concpets DV12s this way. I asked ACI is down firing was possible with their drivers and Mr. Dzurko said his spiders are able to take the abuse. Over time I guess they are not.
Sag severly reduces bass response. I say over time meaning over a time span of 5-7 years. if you intend to keep your drivers less than that there sould not be a problem. also i have not seen the tougher machines of skanning et. al. and others that have 2 spiders.
I always wondered what it wouldbe like to use a Walsh driver and a ESS AMT on top of that.... 🙂 back to the 70s or was that the 80s alchohol dulls the memory.
1. has anyone considered an ESL? you can get/build one that goes from 70-10k and be 90db across that range.
2. to add ot lynn's (S3) ideas....
maybe we need a tweeter that has better 360deg. dispersion a dome might be ideal. what magnat uses might work better.
this involves driver design.
use a up firing 150mm-170mm driver. the dustcap/phase plug is repalced with a metal tube that will hold a shperical tweeter
supplement this with push - push woofer set up. 2 x 10" or 2 x 12" should be enough.
2. to add ot lynn's (S3) ideas....
maybe we need a tweeter that has better 360deg. dispersion a dome might be ideal. what magnat uses might work better.
this involves driver design.
use a up firing 150mm-170mm driver. the dustcap/phase plug is repalced with a metal tube that will hold a shperical tweeter
supplement this with push - push woofer set up. 2 x 10" or 2 x 12" should be enough.
And Now the Why????
My interest in the design and concept of this speaker is because I have been blessed?(cursed) with the smallest possible listening room in my history. Up until I moved to Sydney, I always had a big, workable listening rooms where I had the liberty to move speakers about to get the best sound.
Well, If I put the speakers in my current room a meter from the back wall, they are in the centre of the room!!! Ok, but it is only about 10' X 10', and with the property prices here, this is what I am stuck with for a very long time. Thus the need for a good sounding speaker that will work in the less than ideal setting.
I have been using a several different speakers, and I found that omnidirectionals do not load up a room so badly. Now I do enjoy my music at live concert levels, so that is an issue in such a small space. Do not mention headphones, tried that, and while the detail is great, there is no depth to the sound.
Regular direct radiating speakers when shoved (gasp) tight against the wall, develop all kinds of back-waves, standing waves, most would be surfable if we were talking water. You can actually feel the compression level rise when you hit the volume.
With the omni-directionals, not only were they much more efficient, like, about 10 times or so, it takes about 40 watts to pull the same volume from my 3-ways, that I can get at 4 watts according to my power meters. But even better, they did not generate the nasty sounding mess, but gave a nice wide, soundstage, the mid-range cleared and I stopped getting the back bass wave from behind my head. Treble cleaned up, overall about a 1000% percent improvement. To check my theory, I managed to gain control of the family lounge room for a few weeks, which is over twice the size and lot more friendly acoustically, and found the same effect again when I compared the different speakers.
OK, I hear the question on your mind, why don't I do my listening the lounge room, well, that is where the family TV has taken up residence, and my relationship with television is general is quite rocky. So while the family watches the tube, I go to my room, shut the door and listen to my music. So I am in self-exile.
So these circumstances combined with my fascination with full-range drivers has brought about this endeavour.
Much of my research does seem to support my findings, that indirect-radiating speakers are much more room friendly.
The end???? I doubt it!!!
Lynn aka Surf, Sun & Sound
My interest in the design and concept of this speaker is because I have been blessed?(cursed) with the smallest possible listening room in my history. Up until I moved to Sydney, I always had a big, workable listening rooms where I had the liberty to move speakers about to get the best sound.
Well, If I put the speakers in my current room a meter from the back wall, they are in the centre of the room!!! Ok, but it is only about 10' X 10', and with the property prices here, this is what I am stuck with for a very long time. Thus the need for a good sounding speaker that will work in the less than ideal setting.
I have been using a several different speakers, and I found that omnidirectionals do not load up a room so badly. Now I do enjoy my music at live concert levels, so that is an issue in such a small space. Do not mention headphones, tried that, and while the detail is great, there is no depth to the sound.
Regular direct radiating speakers when shoved (gasp) tight against the wall, develop all kinds of back-waves, standing waves, most would be surfable if we were talking water. You can actually feel the compression level rise when you hit the volume.
With the omni-directionals, not only were they much more efficient, like, about 10 times or so, it takes about 40 watts to pull the same volume from my 3-ways, that I can get at 4 watts according to my power meters. But even better, they did not generate the nasty sounding mess, but gave a nice wide, soundstage, the mid-range cleared and I stopped getting the back bass wave from behind my head. Treble cleaned up, overall about a 1000% percent improvement. To check my theory, I managed to gain control of the family lounge room for a few weeks, which is over twice the size and lot more friendly acoustically, and found the same effect again when I compared the different speakers.
OK, I hear the question on your mind, why don't I do my listening the lounge room, well, that is where the family TV has taken up residence, and my relationship with television is general is quite rocky. So while the family watches the tube, I go to my room, shut the door and listen to my music. So I am in self-exile.
So these circumstances combined with my fascination with full-range drivers has brought about this endeavour.
Much of my research does seem to support my findings, that indirect-radiating speakers are much more room friendly.
The end???? I doubt it!!!
Lynn aka Surf, Sun & Sound
apassgear
This is result of major over-excursion on these drivers. So you are right they are not really workable.
Fertin's are out of my budget also, though I think that they are a great driver.
Again if you try to keep them flat below 150Hz, you start hitting the wall of over-excursion. I have looked at all of them.
Nice thought, back I will consider the price after I find a driver suitable.
Lynn
This is result of major over-excursion on these drivers. So you are right they are not really workable.
Fertin's are out of my budget also, though I think that they are a great driver.
Again if you try to keep them flat below 150Hz, you start hitting the wall of over-excursion. I have looked at all of them.
Nice thought, back I will consider the price after I find a driver suitable.
Lynn
kelticwizard
Well, I do not think I am that much of a genius to be a revolutionary. I firmly believe that there are many who have went this path before me, and I can only hope learn and add a little to the theme.
AS fire the dipersion plate under the down-firing woofer, I just like the fact that if can help neutralize the effect of the floorcovering o your choice on how the speaker responds to the room. I know, that carpet will always sound different from tile is different from hardwood, even with a plate, but it helps calm the floor signature.
Lynn
Well, I do not think I am that much of a genius to be a revolutionary. I firmly believe that there are many who have went this path before me, and I can only hope learn and add a little to the theme.
AS fire the dipersion plate under the down-firing woofer, I just like the fact that if can help neutralize the effect of the floorcovering o your choice on how the speaker responds to the room. I know, that carpet will always sound different from tile is different from hardwood, even with a plate, but it helps calm the floor signature.
Lynn
goudey
I could have not said it better myself.
I love the human voice, and being a singer for many years, I get insulted with the way most speakers handle the human voice. And if you read my first post, you will find that listening to a CD of Acapella music sent me careening down this path of no return.
Our line of thinking meshes precisely with the mind of the creator of the Hammer Dynamics Super 12. I can actually listen longer and more comfortably to a cheap full-range with IM distortion and all the nasties than I can to many expensive multi-way speakers with faulty crossovers.
I will check out the infinite box design, since this a new idea for me. Can you give me some more details.
Lynn
I could have not said it better myself.
I love the human voice, and being a singer for many years, I get insulted with the way most speakers handle the human voice. And if you read my first post, you will find that listening to a CD of Acapella music sent me careening down this path of no return.
Our line of thinking meshes precisely with the mind of the creator of the Hammer Dynamics Super 12. I can actually listen longer and more comfortably to a cheap full-range with IM distortion and all the nasties than I can to many expensive multi-way speakers with faulty crossovers.
I will check out the infinite box design, since this a new idea for me. Can you give me some more details.
Lynn
Variac
You are scaring me. I was comtemplating the identical procedure when I read your post. I also was looking for that link, because I know that I had seen this configuration before. Now I just have to find time to do it.
As for Pro 10" drivers, I have been looking at the Eminence Legend 102 as a likely candidate. The response curve is a bit lumpy, but with some handtweaking and doping, I believe that it could be smoothed out and would be able to range from about 75Hz to 6000HZ or so.
I believe that this wide range driver is only going to be feasible with a large diameter, since as the diameter gets smaller more excursion is required to maintain a flat response, which drives down the efficiency and also there are few drivers with long excursion that are any good above 3000Hz because of the design emphasis on the lower octaves.
So it appears that we may be able to have the best of both worlds with the configuration you described, high efficiency, flat response from 70 - 6000, all the while only requiring minimal cone excursion in a sealed box.
We will see.
Lynn
You are scaring me. I was comtemplating the identical procedure when I read your post. I also was looking for that link, because I know that I had seen this configuration before. Now I just have to find time to do it.
As for Pro 10" drivers, I have been looking at the Eminence Legend 102 as a likely candidate. The response curve is a bit lumpy, but with some handtweaking and doping, I believe that it could be smoothed out and would be able to range from about 75Hz to 6000HZ or so.
I believe that this wide range driver is only going to be feasible with a large diameter, since as the diameter gets smaller more excursion is required to maintain a flat response, which drives down the efficiency and also there are few drivers with long excursion that are any good above 3000Hz because of the design emphasis on the lower octaves.
So it appears that we may be able to have the best of both worlds with the configuration you described, high efficiency, flat response from 70 - 6000, all the while only requiring minimal cone excursion in a sealed box.
We will see.
Lynn
Navin
Yes, I have considered ESL's, but the off-axis response has eliminated them along with large diameter, 4" or larger, full-range drivers in the standard direct-radiation configuration.
There are multiple ways to mount the tweeter in this configuration, so keep the ideas coming through.
Lynn
Yes, I have considered ESL's, but the off-axis response has eliminated them along with large diameter, 4" or larger, full-range drivers in the standard direct-radiation configuration.
There are multiple ways to mount the tweeter in this configuration, so keep the ideas coming through.
Lynn
seems you got the smae problem i got.
i swear soon i might only have the bath to my self. in fact i listen to more music in my car than elsewhere.
i swear soon i might only have the bath to my self. in fact i listen to more music in my car than elsewhere.
regarding Infinite Box
Some Infinite Box info:
The January and February 2002 issues of the audioXpress magazine contain a two-part article on the Infinite Box concept, experiments, and design guidelines. The authors make no claim of originality (its an old idea) but they do apply modern era measurements to the test boxes and perform an interesting set of experiments.
The basic idea is to make a half-sealed box where the back is semi-open and acoustically treated with dense fiberglass panels. The design approach is to start with a classic sealed box design (normal box tuning) and then make the volume somewhat smaller while adding a "back end" section that contains the fiberglass panel and a rear back panel that has large holes (semi-open-back box). It results in rather non-ideal frequency response, but what is interesting to me are the listening comments such as "The surprise was that the midrange was unusually clean, more so than we have come to expect from a two-way system using the woofer up to 2.3khz".
The design of the box rear section might be reducing the standing waves in the midrange region in a psychoacoustically significant way (wild guess, but plausible).
Regarding your room acoustics and space situation, standing waves can be a problem, and a dipole approach is helpful here to tame the room resonances between 70-300hz (but with compromised bass response unless the design budget is ample).
Regarding omni-radiation, I have experienced the Walsh system years ago and was not impressed. I am impressed with the dispersion of the Neo3PDR tweeter I had mentioned previously (good dispersion, good sound, WONDERFUL on vocals). Its power handling usually does not merit use for high SPL, but it may work using the higher crossover frequencies we have been discussing.
Hope this helps.
Some Infinite Box info:
The January and February 2002 issues of the audioXpress magazine contain a two-part article on the Infinite Box concept, experiments, and design guidelines. The authors make no claim of originality (its an old idea) but they do apply modern era measurements to the test boxes and perform an interesting set of experiments.
The basic idea is to make a half-sealed box where the back is semi-open and acoustically treated with dense fiberglass panels. The design approach is to start with a classic sealed box design (normal box tuning) and then make the volume somewhat smaller while adding a "back end" section that contains the fiberglass panel and a rear back panel that has large holes (semi-open-back box). It results in rather non-ideal frequency response, but what is interesting to me are the listening comments such as "The surprise was that the midrange was unusually clean, more so than we have come to expect from a two-way system using the woofer up to 2.3khz".
The design of the box rear section might be reducing the standing waves in the midrange region in a psychoacoustically significant way (wild guess, but plausible).
Regarding your room acoustics and space situation, standing waves can be a problem, and a dipole approach is helpful here to tame the room resonances between 70-300hz (but with compromised bass response unless the design budget is ample).
Regarding omni-radiation, I have experienced the Walsh system years ago and was not impressed. I am impressed with the dispersion of the Neo3PDR tweeter I had mentioned previously (good dispersion, good sound, WONDERFUL on vocals). Its power handling usually does not merit use for high SPL, but it may work using the higher crossover frequencies we have been discussing.
Hope this helps.
Lynn,
I get the impression that you didn't notice my subsequent post with the link to those vertical speakers. The are horn loaded for the highs, and I'd prefer to avoid that although clearly horns can sound pretty good.
The Walsh drivers are nothing to emulate-my experience with the Walsh tweeter on Infinity speakers was negative. The Walsh idea is to use the cone breakup to produce high frequencies. We woldn't be doing this. The only similarity is that the driver is vertical. Various drivers have dual spiders so maybe can take the non-horizontal mounting. There are now LOTS of subs that do this.
Most importantly, the full range driver doesn't have to be entirely vertical - it could be at a 45 degree angle towards the ceiling, if that gives the right compromise of frequency response, dispersion, and efficiency. Tilting full range drivers is a standard trick, to adjust the rising rate of response, BUT I now realize that it widens the dispersion. You lose efficiency at the top end though, which might be good, because we are planning on a tweeter anyway. It would certainly be easier to have the driver magnet structure in the box at first. The rebuilding of the driver might be a second step, and a lot less necessary if the driver is pointed partially at the listener.
It appears to me that you will need a 10" to get the bass response you seek, and a whizzer cone too. On paper these are the only ones that meet your requirements I think. The Beta Eminence with whizzer looks ideal (similar to the Hammer driver)
but all reports are that it reallly isn't in the highest catagory.
Looks like those very expensive French drivers with the bronze baskets might need to be tried. I think they are called Phy, but they are about $1000 ea. (not Fertin)
For myself, I will probably live with my 15" bass drivers crossed at 170 hz with with a 8" Fostex tilted about 30 degrees away from me, and a super tweeter. (so far I've just bought the 15" drivers!)
I get the impression that you didn't notice my subsequent post with the link to those vertical speakers. The are horn loaded for the highs, and I'd prefer to avoid that although clearly horns can sound pretty good.
The Walsh drivers are nothing to emulate-my experience with the Walsh tweeter on Infinity speakers was negative. The Walsh idea is to use the cone breakup to produce high frequencies. We woldn't be doing this. The only similarity is that the driver is vertical. Various drivers have dual spiders so maybe can take the non-horizontal mounting. There are now LOTS of subs that do this.
Most importantly, the full range driver doesn't have to be entirely vertical - it could be at a 45 degree angle towards the ceiling, if that gives the right compromise of frequency response, dispersion, and efficiency. Tilting full range drivers is a standard trick, to adjust the rising rate of response, BUT I now realize that it widens the dispersion. You lose efficiency at the top end though, which might be good, because we are planning on a tweeter anyway. It would certainly be easier to have the driver magnet structure in the box at first. The rebuilding of the driver might be a second step, and a lot less necessary if the driver is pointed partially at the listener.
It appears to me that you will need a 10" to get the bass response you seek, and a whizzer cone too. On paper these are the only ones that meet your requirements I think. The Beta Eminence with whizzer looks ideal (similar to the Hammer driver)
but all reports are that it reallly isn't in the highest catagory.
Looks like those very expensive French drivers with the bronze baskets might need to be tried. I think they are called Phy, but they are about $1000 ea. (not Fertin)
For myself, I will probably live with my 15" bass drivers crossed at 170 hz with with a 8" Fostex tilted about 30 degrees away from me, and a super tweeter. (so far I've just bought the 15" drivers!)
Has anyone heard the Verabox 7 or the ATD17LB which is simillar looking but has a different response, these are Italian speaks, 5 inchers, they look promising.
Had someone mention these before?
Check espeakers.com
BTW, I feel the Hammer Dynamics could be a very good candidate, specialy after reading Dick Olsher's article.
Had someone mention these before?
Check espeakers.com
BTW, I feel the Hammer Dynamics could be a very good candidate, specialy after reading Dick Olsher's article.
Hello Frank, good to hear from you,
Everyone:
If you go to the supravox web site and use your 3rd grade french as I did, you will eventually find a driver
215RTF-B
This is about 9" in diameter, has a whizzer cone, and claimed response 50-18000 +/- 3 dB 98 dB
They have a signature model of this too
Also the regular RTF 215 goes 50- 8000 easily- maybe this
would work better with a 3-way. Of course to avoid too much excursion, it would be better to cut the bass off higher.
Also the incredible flatness of the response will actually hurt if we tilt them to get wider response-the high end will roll off. On other speakers I've seen the response curves on, the real roll off at 30 degrees starts at 3-4k.
So the search is over!!!! hahahahahahahaaha
On other threads I have heard that Supravox is a bit flaky and hard to communicate with.
Frank, do you know how to get in touch with them? Most important is whether there is a way to get their products and how much this model costs! I suspect that your french is impeccable 😉
Do you know anyone that has heard them?
MArk
For the real sickos, there is the model 215 2000 with a huge Alnico magnet. It looks like a field coil, but I don't understand enought to tell. Frank is it puire alnico or acombinsation?
Everyone:
If you go to the supravox web site and use your 3rd grade french as I did, you will eventually find a driver
215RTF-B
This is about 9" in diameter, has a whizzer cone, and claimed response 50-18000 +/- 3 dB 98 dB
They have a signature model of this too
Also the regular RTF 215 goes 50- 8000 easily- maybe this
would work better with a 3-way. Of course to avoid too much excursion, it would be better to cut the bass off higher.
Also the incredible flatness of the response will actually hurt if we tilt them to get wider response-the high end will roll off. On other speakers I've seen the response curves on, the real roll off at 30 degrees starts at 3-4k.
So the search is over!!!! hahahahahahahaaha
On other threads I have heard that Supravox is a bit flaky and hard to communicate with.
Frank, do you know how to get in touch with them? Most important is whether there is a way to get their products and how much this model costs! I suspect that your french is impeccable 😉
Do you know anyone that has heard them?
MArk
For the real sickos, there is the model 215 2000 with a huge Alnico magnet. It looks like a field coil, but I don't understand enought to tell. Frank is it puire alnico or acombinsation?
SUPRAVOX
Hi,
Hey Marc, good to hear from you too.
Well,I must say of all the full range speakers these and the Fertins are by far the better ones available here in Europe,there my be some Italo speakers with similar specs but havings seen my Alfa Romeos rust under my nose...
Anyway,I can try to find out a way to communicate with them and if any of you needs to send an e-mail in french just mail it to me and I'll do my utmost to translate it and send it back to you.
The ones I've heard were at either friends' places mounted in an Onken enclosure+TAD horns or at Supravoxs' stand durings hi-fi shows in Paris.
Let me know if I can help,😉
Hi,
Hey Marc, good to hear from you too.
Well,I must say of all the full range speakers these and the Fertins are by far the better ones available here in Europe,there my be some Italo speakers with similar specs but havings seen my Alfa Romeos rust under my nose...
Anyway,I can try to find out a way to communicate with them and if any of you needs to send an e-mail in french just mail it to me and I'll do my utmost to translate it and send it back to you.
The ones I've heard were at either friends' places mounted in an Onken enclosure+TAD horns or at Supravoxs' stand durings hi-fi shows in Paris.
Let me know if I can help,😉
Frank:
At the moment I am stretching my resources considering getting a pair of Fostex FE 208ES These are the Fostex's newest 208 model. They are USD 350 a pair. I don't think it is worth contacting Supravox if you think they are a lot more, but for the others it would be useful to know generally what the various model 215's cost in Euros. If there is still interest, we could inquire more deeply.
EDIT: I am an idiot- there is an english option on the Supravox site
At the moment I am stretching my resources considering getting a pair of Fostex FE 208ES These are the Fostex's newest 208 model. They are USD 350 a pair. I don't think it is worth contacting Supravox if you think they are a lot more, but for the others it would be useful to know generally what the various model 215's cost in Euros. If there is still interest, we could inquire more deeply.
EDIT: I am an idiot- there is an english option on the Supravox site