Hi,
Ive just bought a pair of Peerless 831 - 531 drive units from ebay these are 10 " .I cant find any info out on them.Does anyone know this drive unit ? Im thinking of making an isobarrik sub woofer.
Cheers
Anthony
Ive just bought a pair of Peerless 831 - 531 drive units from ebay these are 10 " .I cant find any info out on them.Does anyone know this drive unit ? Im thinking of making an isobarrik sub woofer.
Cheers
Anthony
Hello electroant2 (that is your ebay id right?); perhaps sending a message to the person whom you bought the drivers from may lead to datasheets. I have tried looking to no avail for you, even via the d-s-t website.
If however the seller doesn't have the data-sheets your next bet is to e-mail danish sound technology - peerless and ask them politely for datasheets. It may just be that these drivers are no longer on production/sale (and havent been for a long while).
Looking through the d-s-t website I found similar drivers, 831510, 831709. Since this is a 10" driver the other's are over 245mm even though they begin with 831. If you look in the engineering page you will see that 83xxxx are "woofers". If your's is the first (831510) then it will be a mid-bass driver, otherwise it's a subbass.
I hope this helps a little bit, and I'm sorry I couldn't find the datasheets for you. Good luck!
If however the seller doesn't have the data-sheets your next bet is to e-mail danish sound technology - peerless and ask them politely for datasheets. It may just be that these drivers are no longer on production/sale (and havent been for a long while).
Looking through the d-s-t website I found similar drivers, 831510, 831709. Since this is a 10" driver the other's are over 245mm even though they begin with 831. If you look in the engineering page you will see that 83xxxx are "woofers". If your's is the first (831510) then it will be a mid-bass driver, otherwise it's a subbass.
I hope this helps a little bit, and I'm sorry I couldn't find the datasheets for you. Good luck!
Hi there,
Thanks for you help i emailed the guy i bought these from and he sent me the TS parameters.
here are the parameters. ohms nom=8 Re=6.1 Le=1.5mh Fs=26.4hz Qms=2.35 Qes=0.52 Qts=0.43 Mms=30.07 Sd=310.0cm2 Vas=160.61litres Bl=7.7 Voice coil diameter =33mm sensitivity 2.83v at 1m =90dB.
Would these units make a good subwoofer ? Ive already got Kef Referance 105.3s with kube but id like to have a sub to handle the lower bass for movies etc im thinking bandpass or and isobarrik design using both of the units.
Cheers
Anthony
Thanks for you help i emailed the guy i bought these from and he sent me the TS parameters.
here are the parameters. ohms nom=8 Re=6.1 Le=1.5mh Fs=26.4hz Qms=2.35 Qes=0.52 Qts=0.43 Mms=30.07 Sd=310.0cm2 Vas=160.61litres Bl=7.7 Voice coil diameter =33mm sensitivity 2.83v at 1m =90dB.
Would these units make a good subwoofer ? Ive already got Kef Referance 105.3s with kube but id like to have a sub to handle the lower bass for movies etc im thinking bandpass or and isobarrik design using both of the units.
Cheers
Anthony
I wouldn't use this driver in isobarik configuration, as it has a max spl of 87dB. If you use both drivers in a sealed enclosure you will be at 93dB but that won't be near enough for a HT setup.
The frequency response in the lower octaves is quite bad also, -9dB down at 25Hz. These drivers appear to be more useful in a 2-way to n-way system configuration and not a subwoofer.
Hope this helps, Vlad.
4.12.2004
The frequency response in the lower octaves is quite bad also, -9dB down at 25Hz. These drivers appear to be more useful in a 2-way to n-way system configuration and not a subwoofer.
Hope this helps, Vlad.
4.12.2004
Would they make a good subwoofer? It depends what you mean by "good".
I glanced at the Peerless page, plus remembered Peerless models from years past. The 33 mm voice coil was usally 17mm long, Peerless air gaps were 6 or 8 mm long, so to boil it down, linear excursion was about 5.5 mm.
Believe it or not, that was considered pretty long linear travel up until 1990 or so. Now, the heavyweights have travel twice as long and longer.
Still, 5.5 or 6mm is not bad, just not great. And at 90 dB at one watt, the sensitivity is higher than most of those long stroke subs, anyway. So you give a little, you get a little.
They'll go down to 26 Hz in a vented configuration equal to the speaker's Vas. Unfortunately, the speaker's Vas is 160 liters-over five cubic feet. If I'm going to devote 5 cubic feet to a subwoofer, I would certainly use other units than these, although if I had a five cubic foot cabinet hanging around, and the space in my listening area to fit it in, these will acquit themselves pretty well.
In a sealed box, the story improves considerably.
Below are the curves for 3 sealed boxes. These are shown without room gain, which is certain to be present and improve the bass output.
Red is 4 cu ft, Qtc = 0.7
Bue is 2 cu ft, Qtc = 0.9
Green is 1.5 cu ft, Qtc = 1.05
Although these days people are drifting toward Qtc = 0.5, the fact is that ever since the closed box was fully understood, engineers have aimed toward a Qtc that is between 0.7 and 1.0 cu ft. That was considered the high fidelity range,and most commercial loudspeakers are between those numbers.
Qtc = 1.05 can for all intents and purposes be considered Qtc = 1.0.
As you can see, the red line, (2 cu ft) and the green line (1.5 cu ft) give pretty good sub performance. As far as box size goes, I can only point this out: rmemeber the old AR's and Advents that most people had during the seventies? Well, those were 2 cu ft, and most people did not consider them obtrusive. So a box of 2 cu ft and below should fit into most people's listening space without too much trouble.
Of course, since the box is sealed and there is no supplementation from a port, the 5.5 mm linear travel might cut down on super high SPL in the very low ranges, but many might not notice that. And remember-there is considerable extra travel above the linear limit, but with increasing distortion. Your ability to hear distortion goes down in the bass range, however.
I would check to see the sensitivity of your KEF. If the sensitivity is within 2 dB or so, I would recommend picking these up if the price isn't so high. Then I would stick them in a 2 cu ft or 1.5 cu ft box. Unless you are looking for super high SPLs real low, I think they will make a nice subwoofer.
The smallest box will only be 6 dB down from midpoint at 30 dB,and remember, that will be without counting room gain.
I glanced at the Peerless page, plus remembered Peerless models from years past. The 33 mm voice coil was usally 17mm long, Peerless air gaps were 6 or 8 mm long, so to boil it down, linear excursion was about 5.5 mm.
Believe it or not, that was considered pretty long linear travel up until 1990 or so. Now, the heavyweights have travel twice as long and longer.
Still, 5.5 or 6mm is not bad, just not great. And at 90 dB at one watt, the sensitivity is higher than most of those long stroke subs, anyway. So you give a little, you get a little.
They'll go down to 26 Hz in a vented configuration equal to the speaker's Vas. Unfortunately, the speaker's Vas is 160 liters-over five cubic feet. If I'm going to devote 5 cubic feet to a subwoofer, I would certainly use other units than these, although if I had a five cubic foot cabinet hanging around, and the space in my listening area to fit it in, these will acquit themselves pretty well.
In a sealed box, the story improves considerably.
Below are the curves for 3 sealed boxes. These are shown without room gain, which is certain to be present and improve the bass output.
Red is 4 cu ft, Qtc = 0.7
Bue is 2 cu ft, Qtc = 0.9
Green is 1.5 cu ft, Qtc = 1.05
Although these days people are drifting toward Qtc = 0.5, the fact is that ever since the closed box was fully understood, engineers have aimed toward a Qtc that is between 0.7 and 1.0 cu ft. That was considered the high fidelity range,and most commercial loudspeakers are between those numbers.
Qtc = 1.05 can for all intents and purposes be considered Qtc = 1.0.
As you can see, the red line, (2 cu ft) and the green line (1.5 cu ft) give pretty good sub performance. As far as box size goes, I can only point this out: rmemeber the old AR's and Advents that most people had during the seventies? Well, those were 2 cu ft, and most people did not consider them obtrusive. So a box of 2 cu ft and below should fit into most people's listening space without too much trouble.
Of course, since the box is sealed and there is no supplementation from a port, the 5.5 mm linear travel might cut down on super high SPL in the very low ranges, but many might not notice that. And remember-there is considerable extra travel above the linear limit, but with increasing distortion. Your ability to hear distortion goes down in the bass range, however.
I would check to see the sensitivity of your KEF. If the sensitivity is within 2 dB or so, I would recommend picking these up if the price isn't so high. Then I would stick them in a 2 cu ft or 1.5 cu ft box. Unless you are looking for super high SPLs real low, I think they will make a nice subwoofer.
The smallest box will only be 6 dB down from midpoint at 30 dB,and remember, that will be without counting room gain.
Attachments
They seem to perform pretty much like a peerless 850146 in a sealed box, again these dont have sub bass, but what they do have is very nice. The peerless 10" now have about 9mm xmax. I saw these on ebay and they look like 727's which have 9mm too.
OK I just fired up LspCAD and had a look at what drivers it comes with, it seems like the parameters you have there are for the 832531. The 831531 doesnt seem to exist. Email peerless.
Either way, the specs could just be very similar anyway, all peerless 10" seem to have similar specs anyway. Id bet if you plonked it in a 60litre sealed box it would work well.
Either way according to the LspCAD data file these have 4mm xmax which is not quite as good as I thought they could be.
However you do get an f3 of about 45hz and an f12 of 24hz, with room gain this will improve. You will get about 100dB out of it before you hit xmax at 50hz. This not a bad figure for a 10" in a sealed box wit 4mm xmax.
OK I just fired up LspCAD and had a look at what drivers it comes with, it seems like the parameters you have there are for the 832531. The 831531 doesnt seem to exist. Email peerless.
Either way, the specs could just be very similar anyway, all peerless 10" seem to have similar specs anyway. Id bet if you plonked it in a 60litre sealed box it would work well.
Either way according to the LspCAD data file these have 4mm xmax which is not quite as good as I thought they could be.
However you do get an f3 of about 45hz and an f12 of 24hz, with room gain this will improve. You will get about 100dB out of it before you hit xmax at 50hz. This not a bad figure for a 10" in a sealed box wit 4mm xmax.
Bandpass?
Well, here is a 4 th order bandpass, (sealed on one side, ported on the other).Also, a sealed woofer. both are 2 cu ft, total.
The orange is the 4 th order bandpass. Back chamber is 1 cu ft, sealed. Front chamber is 1 cu ft, ported to 69 Hz.
The blue is 2 cu ft, sealed. Qtc = .9
As you can see, the output of the bandpass is higher, although down around 30 Hz the two tend to meet. However, the group delay-normally allied with distortion, will tell another story.
Here is the frequency response fo rthe bandpass and sealed:
Well, here is a 4 th order bandpass, (sealed on one side, ported on the other).Also, a sealed woofer. both are 2 cu ft, total.
The orange is the 4 th order bandpass. Back chamber is 1 cu ft, sealed. Front chamber is 1 cu ft, ported to 69 Hz.
The blue is 2 cu ft, sealed. Qtc = .9
As you can see, the output of the bandpass is higher, although down around 30 Hz the two tend to meet. However, the group delay-normally allied with distortion, will tell another story.
Here is the frequency response fo rthe bandpass and sealed:
Attachments
And here is the group delay for the two bandpass and sealed, again orange for bandpass and blue for 2 cu ft sealed. the bandpass is considerably higher throughout the range, getting quite high in places.
Group delay is associated with transient response and distortion. The lower the better.
However, if you are going to use this for Home Theater or movies, the group delay might not matter much. The sub will only be there for sound effects, after all, unless you are watching something where the music is important.
Low group delay is important for music.
Both boxes will have the same internal volume, 2 cu ft. for each.
Group delay is associated with transient response and distortion. The lower the better.
However, if you are going to use this for Home Theater or movies, the group delay might not matter much. The sub will only be there for sound effects, after all, unless you are watching something where the music is important.
Low group delay is important for music.
Both boxes will have the same internal volume, 2 cu ft. for each.
Attachments
Just curious what he paid for them. I think Wilmslow was selling them, (832531, which these certainly appear to be) new for £42.
Anyway, here is a link to a page that has full info on the 832531:
http://www.mass.com.au/peerless 832531/Peerless-832531.pdf
Anyway, here is a link to a page that has full info on the 832531:
http://www.mass.com.au/peerless 832531/Peerless-832531.pdf
Hi there,
Thanks for everyones input i was just interested in what these units were capable of.For now im quite happy with the bass my Kefs give out.The Peerless XLS range look good for subwoofer use think i might go for a design around these units.which enclosure best suits this drive unit ?
As for the peerless speakers ive bought...Any takers ?
Cheers
Anthony
Thanks for everyones input i was just interested in what these units were capable of.For now im quite happy with the bass my Kefs give out.The Peerless XLS range look good for subwoofer use think i might go for a design around these units.which enclosure best suits this drive unit ?
As for the peerless speakers ive bought...Any takers ?
Cheers
Anthony
I've tried sealed and vented, and soon I'm going to invest in the passive style. I suggest you get a passive driver and use the specs on the peerless engineering webpage.
The passive alignment will only cost a little bit more and you get the benefits of a vented enclosure without any of the disadvantages (such as port noise/distortion).
The passive alignment will only cost a little bit more and you get the benefits of a vented enclosure without any of the disadvantages (such as port noise/distortion).
Hi there
I am taking my first steps in speaker design, prompted by a recent unhappy upgrade of my music system. After replacing a 30 yr old amplifier (Mitsubishi) with Yamaha av receiver RXV 673, i was disappointed with quality of sound. Dealer I bought it from said my 30 yr old 3 way speakers may be part of the problem....yet they sound wonderful with the old amp. I previously have put in a new Peerless tweeter and a 2in port to improve sound and am about to replace mid range woofer. The main woofer is 10in but total box volume is only 46 litres. What I don't understand is why formulas on various websites all indicate that box volume should be 3- 4 times what they are and yet sound is so good?!
Reason for asking is that I have found some 10" Peerless woofers that will fit and they are 832531. I could replace old woofers with them, or could put in 8 " woofers in an attempt to get a better match match between drivers and cabinet volume.
Or I could do nothing and sell the Yamaha...
Advice of Diyaudio members much appreciated.
Cheers
I am taking my first steps in speaker design, prompted by a recent unhappy upgrade of my music system. After replacing a 30 yr old amplifier (Mitsubishi) with Yamaha av receiver RXV 673, i was disappointed with quality of sound. Dealer I bought it from said my 30 yr old 3 way speakers may be part of the problem....yet they sound wonderful with the old amp. I previously have put in a new Peerless tweeter and a 2in port to improve sound and am about to replace mid range woofer. The main woofer is 10in but total box volume is only 46 litres. What I don't understand is why formulas on various websites all indicate that box volume should be 3- 4 times what they are and yet sound is so good?!
Reason for asking is that I have found some 10" Peerless woofers that will fit and they are 832531. I could replace old woofers with them, or could put in 8 " woofers in an attempt to get a better match match between drivers and cabinet volume.
Or I could do nothing and sell the Yamaha...
Advice of Diyaudio members much appreciated.
Cheers
Peerless 832531
Hi there
I recently upgraded my 30 yr old Mitsubishi amp with a Yamaha RXV673 av receiver to put all av units through common amplifier and was very disappointed with sound quality. Dealer claimed my 30 yr Old 3 way speakers may be part of problem?!
I added a Peerless tweeter and a 2" port a few years ago and was pleased with results.
I am about to replace mid woofer with 4" Peerless.
The main woofer is 10" and I have found some Peerless 10in 832531 which will replace them exactly in terms of dimensions.
Having looked at various websites with formulas for calculating cabinet volumes, and what I don't understand is why my speakers sound so good to me when they are only 46 litres in vol and yet formulas all indicate boxes should be 3-4 times this size?
If I put in some 8" woofers, this would better match of cabinet volume to driver size?
Or am I just waiting my time and should sell the Yamaha!
Advice of members appreciated.
Apologies for double post. I am a novice at this, so please go easy on me in yr replies!
Cheers
.
Hi there
I recently upgraded my 30 yr old Mitsubishi amp with a Yamaha RXV673 av receiver to put all av units through common amplifier and was very disappointed with sound quality. Dealer claimed my 30 yr Old 3 way speakers may be part of problem?!
I added a Peerless tweeter and a 2" port a few years ago and was pleased with results.
I am about to replace mid woofer with 4" Peerless.
The main woofer is 10" and I have found some Peerless 10in 832531 which will replace them exactly in terms of dimensions.
Having looked at various websites with formulas for calculating cabinet volumes, and what I don't understand is why my speakers sound so good to me when they are only 46 litres in vol and yet formulas all indicate boxes should be 3-4 times this size?
If I put in some 8" woofers, this would better match of cabinet volume to driver size?
Or am I just waiting my time and should sell the Yamaha!
Advice of members appreciated.
Apologies for double post. I am a novice at this, so please go easy on me in yr replies!
Cheers
.
Last edited:
Right. Each woofer has an associated set of numbers, which describe its low frequency behaviour. These are called Thiele-Small parameters, after the Australian guys that sat down and figured out what they are and what they mean.
Saying an 8" driver is better suited to that cabinet than a 10" driver is like saying that red cars are faster than blue cars. Without any specifics on either of the cars/drivers, nobody can say which one will be better.
Download WinISD Pro, read the Help file on how to add new drivers. Find the T/S parameters of some drivers in the right price bracket (FWIW, if it doesn't come with T/S parameters, don't bother - performance will be unpredictable at best. All you could say for sure is that it'd make sound). Add the drivers to WinISD, play around with vented/closed boxes of various sizes and tunings. See what works. Generally, for Qts <0.5, ported is best - the low Qts indicates the driver needs some help from the cabinet to get good low-end extension. For Qts< ~0.25, big horns are usually needed. For Q>0.5, sealed. Ported cabinets are still an option, but will tend to be very large and tuned very low. You'd get a lot of low-end extension, but it'll be a huge cabinet. Sealed cabinets will tend to be smaller, and with the higher Qts, the re-inforcement from ports isn't always needed, so you can get by with the smaller box.
HTH
Chris
Saying an 8" driver is better suited to that cabinet than a 10" driver is like saying that red cars are faster than blue cars. Without any specifics on either of the cars/drivers, nobody can say which one will be better.
Download WinISD Pro, read the Help file on how to add new drivers. Find the T/S parameters of some drivers in the right price bracket (FWIW, if it doesn't come with T/S parameters, don't bother - performance will be unpredictable at best. All you could say for sure is that it'd make sound). Add the drivers to WinISD, play around with vented/closed boxes of various sizes and tunings. See what works. Generally, for Qts <0.5, ported is best - the low Qts indicates the driver needs some help from the cabinet to get good low-end extension. For Qts< ~0.25, big horns are usually needed. For Q>0.5, sealed. Ported cabinets are still an option, but will tend to be very large and tuned very low. You'd get a lot of low-end extension, but it'll be a huge cabinet. Sealed cabinets will tend to be smaller, and with the higher Qts, the re-inforcement from ports isn't always needed, so you can get by with the smaller box.
HTH
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.