The mentioned active Genelec and performance it brings, is the worthy proposed goal.
Hello Fluid,
the spec of the data librairy of Vituixcad are not good, I rised the Vas to the new datasheet and remade a model for that driver. Of course it is indeed about the Q & loss. Here my sim. F3 is 50 hz with a 12 dB low pass at 200 Hz with Q 0.7. QA is setuped at 80 . Volume is 75 L netto. So 80L surely after the 2 L of the driver plus the rest : bracing, filter. Add the mid enclosure, volume is climbing... I stopped there after the sim.
F6 : 47 Hz. . The Xmax at 40 hz is 97 dB peak... But look at the average spl level at 2.83V ! It is more than 97 dB. We all know from real design : OSMC, T Gravsen, Humble home hifi (who tune quite low, I don't want to look at the group delay here) the efficienty is more between 91 to 93 dB according the load and designer measurements. Xmax peak is surely lower in real.... Definitly a midwoof. Or excelent PA midrange. Of course maybe good enough at average spl... But I find a little sad to have a so huge cabinet for that results.
the spec of the data librairy of Vituixcad are not good, I rised the Vas to the new datasheet and remade a model for that driver. Of course it is indeed about the Q & loss. Here my sim. F3 is 50 hz with a 12 dB low pass at 200 Hz with Q 0.7. QA is setuped at 80 . Volume is 75 L netto. So 80L surely after the 2 L of the driver plus the rest : bracing, filter. Add the mid enclosure, volume is climbing... I stopped there after the sim.
F6 : 47 Hz. . The Xmax at 40 hz is 97 dB peak... But look at the average spl level at 2.83V ! It is more than 97 dB. We all know from real design : OSMC, T Gravsen, Humble home hifi (who tune quite low, I don't want to look at the group delay here) the efficienty is more between 91 to 93 dB according the load and designer measurements. Xmax peak is surely lower in real.... Definitly a midwoof. Or excelent PA midrange. Of course maybe good enough at average spl... But I find a little sad to have a so huge cabinet for that results.
Last edited:
10 FE and 12FE have not good low end if the low end target is F3 < 45 hz. (vented)
Maybe if sealed F3 < 50 Hz is good enough?
Maybe if sealed F3 < 50 Hz is good enough?
Last edited:
Maybe, I don't see your change making much difference, you said 58Hz before which did not make sense.
You can tweak numbers in these sort of sims all day long and change the values completely. It does not tell you much unless you know by actual experience why you are aimimg for a specific response. I see a lot of people trying to force a flat line to the lowest frequency as if that is some kind of improvement because it goes lower for longer. Unless the speaker is going to be quite far away from boundaries this will result in boomy or bloated bass and dissappointent.
T/S parameters change considerably with temperature, take a look at the measurement debacle at ASR of the little Neumann speaker for an example.
My advice is to try the driver you already have in a box with a few different vent configurations in a room, then you will know what works for you. Then plug the ports to seal it and use EQ to change the rolloff behaviour and listen to the difference.
You might like something that rolls off higher and goes lower or not but at least you will know instead of guessing.
58 Hz was the F3 of the OSMC iirc or something close. It can sim like that according the vent slope and Q one choose. In my book if I tune like I prefer, i.e. few hz after the real driver Fs which is not 42 Hz anyway (more 47 Hz in real). And in reality Q is often < than 7, no ? More towards the 3 ?
Fluid, I don't guess, I have listened enough loudspeaker to know a little what I like and prefer in the lows... But indeed the EQ thing can be usefull for someone who has no experience of loudspeakerS in his listening room. Good idea.
I always return to sealed. I have still to try open frame designs though... but off topic.
Fluid, I don't guess, I have listened enough loudspeaker to know a little what I like and prefer in the lows... But indeed the EQ thing can be usefull for someone who has no experience of loudspeakerS in his listening room. Good idea.
I always return to sealed. I have still to try open frame designs though... but off topic.
Last edited:
I'm still unclear whether this preference is derived from experience and testing or internet opinions. If it is preference from testing, great you know what you like, if not then....
If you ask me if I build one loudspeaker or more a year, no. If you ask me if I have already build, yes. If you ask if I heard many and know what the spec were, yes.
I don't like vented Max flat... I come back to sealed always... With Onken double driver, I need to go back 10 meter or bass is bad.... So I should only listen music through my laptop on internet maybe, lol !
Anyway I unsubscribed, my inputs seem not good enough... I wisch a good luck to that team and budget if one must construct different average volume box and play with the length of the port to see what is pleased after choosing a driver then a volume box. Certainly good for reach boys that spend > 1 000 euros driver just for measure drivers... imo off topic in this thread but I can be wrong. Maybe one should show, at least 5 designs with multiple pictures, whatever it is not a success to be believed there ?! Do we need this vulgarity to show and picture our toys here ???? I rarely do, I hate that !
I don't like vented Max flat... I come back to sealed always... With Onken double driver, I need to go back 10 meter or bass is bad.... So I should only listen music through my laptop on internet maybe, lol !
Anyway I unsubscribed, my inputs seem not good enough... I wisch a good luck to that team and budget if one must construct different average volume box and play with the length of the port to see what is pleased after choosing a driver then a volume box. Certainly good for reach boys that spend > 1 000 euros driver just for measure drivers... imo off topic in this thread but I can be wrong. Maybe one should show, at least 5 designs with multiple pictures, whatever it is not a success to be believed there ?! Do we need this vulgarity to show and picture our toys here ???? I rarely do, I hate that !
Last edited:
Yes it is, I find your last input unpleasant cause suspicious and on the judgement side. But I also didn't plane to construct it. I have one on rail stopped for some reasons not related to audio and lack of time, where the hearth of the system is a midwoof NE-149W (or two, I have them) to go back to paper like sound (my actual is mid FR + tweeter, both metal, and sealed bandpass bass in the lows. So in fine a WMT 2 cabinets or probably a 3.5 with WMMT to have a little more efficienty and not all eated by the baffle step cause the mid which needs to be crossed over around 300 hz maybe less if two...
I am not in urge and often ask advices to the ones whom own a lot of drivers as I can not affoard many just to try, and I also don't want by conviction.
So in my design which is low speed , I don'tknowyet for the bass driver, but it will not be the 12PR320 I keep for open mid one day. It should be a 12 or two 10 in my 40 square meter living room but not too huge, I favor passive, cause I make my Dac or tune good other designs. I have always several tweeter, I hesitated with a Be. I planned a Seas TAF/G 22, from internet review for that one, before having heard it. Voilà !
Now that's sure I have not the know how of guy like you, or of course a guy like profiguy and even less for sure than AllenB or guys of the Pro Audio...
Of course it is still okay with me, no problems Fluid. And if you re read my inputs, there are no slouch drivers advised by me there on the data side !
Edit : the SLS 12" is what I'd choose on budget, not a 12FE330. Sealed. Sims and datas are enligthing enough...
I am not in urge and often ask advices to the ones whom own a lot of drivers as I can not affoard many just to try, and I also don't want by conviction.
So in my design which is low speed , I don'tknowyet for the bass driver, but it will not be the 12PR320 I keep for open mid one day. It should be a 12 or two 10 in my 40 square meter living room but not too huge, I favor passive, cause I make my Dac or tune good other designs. I have always several tweeter, I hesitated with a Be. I planned a Seas TAF/G 22, from internet review for that one, before having heard it. Voilà !
Now that's sure I have not the know how of guy like you, or of course a guy like profiguy and even less for sure than AllenB or guys of the Pro Audio...
Of course it is still okay with me, no problems Fluid. And if you re read my inputs, there are no slouch drivers advised by me there on the data side !
Edit : the SLS 12" is what I'd choose on budget, not a 12FE330. Sealed. Sims and datas are enligthing enough...
Last edited:
Where did you get that price from? They are £150 each in the UK and €180 on the continent.
I didn't intend it to be taken that way is all I can say. When it comes to opinion or preference your input is as valuable as anyone else's.
The best audio education I have had, has came from trying things. Almost everything I have bought or built based on internet opinion has been dissappointing in some way, but valuable learning. It is very hard for anyone to know that if what I like will be what they like. If you are not in a position to buy or try, that is a hard obstacle to overcome and some luck is needed, or access to some EQ.
By putting them into my cart at TLHP, the I quoted price is excluding VAT or tax as that varies by location. The price shown changes after you log in with an account. TLHP sells a lot of drivers and their prices are often lower than some other dealers particularly if you buy in quantity.
I could be wrong, but feel there is interest for -in essence- bas-middrivers suited for 2-way systems. Define SPLmax at the low end and focus on drivers that can do that.
I think it may be time to start working on a detailed spec to assess possible components against and eventually to assess the performance of various designs against. This has been mentioned before and Ugg10 has made a start and sent me a document. I don't think sending me documents is how a group project like this ought to work. Information should be posted here or if in a more detailed form in a docx file to the google project folder with a note here to let people know. Anyway.
Broadly we want a pair of speakers that will generate low distortion at standard listening levels at 3-4 m without sub support. So what does that mean in detail?
Standard levels are 80-85 dB average, good quality recordings tend to use 20 dB peak-to-average, 4m away is 12 dB quieter than 1m away so that gives us a spec of 112-117 dB clean SPL at 1m.
Now 117 dB at 20 Hz and 20 kHz would be expensive and is also not a reasonable target for music. So what should our target look like? At frequencies below, say, a kickdrum instruments tend to be more sustained and less percussive and so don't need a 20 dB peak/average overhead. At high frequencies music tends to have a much lower SPL than at lower frequencies. There is also a case to exclude the lowest audible octave or part of it because for many genres of music it contains no useful content. In addition boundary reinforcement at low frequencies tends to reinforce SPL significantly so how should this be reflected in the low frequency SPL requirement? So at what frequencies should we start reducing the SPL requirements and with what slopes? I think this needs to be involve a survey of typical music content. Anyone have some useful links? The boundary reinforcement can likely be defined satisfactorily with a simulation study. Might volunteer for that in a week or two.
The target sound radiation pattern will largely determine how the speaker sounds relative to other good speakers (i.e. ones with minimal audilble nonlinear distortion at standard levels). What should it be quantitatively? A wide baffle is going to tend towards to a narrower beamwidth and this likely needs embracing. But what should the beamwidth be? Constant directivity has some desirable properties w.r.t. to reflections but listening tests suggest a narrowing of beamwidth with rising frequency is preferable in domestic settings. So what do we want it to be?
The Genelec 1237A and Neumann kH 420 specs are in a form fairly close to what we are after and also help define what are reasonable targets. I have started a detailed spec here but it needs more work on what specs to include as relevant and how to compare plots. Ideally we want to include plots in a shareable format so that we can compare them. What formats can measurement and simulations packages currently import and export?
Broadly we want a pair of speakers that will generate low distortion at standard listening levels at 3-4 m without sub support. So what does that mean in detail?
Standard levels are 80-85 dB average, good quality recordings tend to use 20 dB peak-to-average, 4m away is 12 dB quieter than 1m away so that gives us a spec of 112-117 dB clean SPL at 1m.
Now 117 dB at 20 Hz and 20 kHz would be expensive and is also not a reasonable target for music. So what should our target look like? At frequencies below, say, a kickdrum instruments tend to be more sustained and less percussive and so don't need a 20 dB peak/average overhead. At high frequencies music tends to have a much lower SPL than at lower frequencies. There is also a case to exclude the lowest audible octave or part of it because for many genres of music it contains no useful content. In addition boundary reinforcement at low frequencies tends to reinforce SPL significantly so how should this be reflected in the low frequency SPL requirement? So at what frequencies should we start reducing the SPL requirements and with what slopes? I think this needs to be involve a survey of typical music content. Anyone have some useful links? The boundary reinforcement can likely be defined satisfactorily with a simulation study. Might volunteer for that in a week or two.
The target sound radiation pattern will largely determine how the speaker sounds relative to other good speakers (i.e. ones with minimal audilble nonlinear distortion at standard levels). What should it be quantitatively? A wide baffle is going to tend towards to a narrower beamwidth and this likely needs embracing. But what should the beamwidth be? Constant directivity has some desirable properties w.r.t. to reflections but listening tests suggest a narrowing of beamwidth with rising frequency is preferable in domestic settings. So what do we want it to be?
The Genelec 1237A and Neumann kH 420 specs are in a form fairly close to what we are after and also help define what are reasonable targets. I have started a detailed spec here but it needs more work on what specs to include as relevant and how to compare plots. Ideally we want to include plots in a shareable format so that we can compare them. What formats can measurement and simulations packages currently import and export?
The Detailed Spec file is visible to me in the folder, it is visible from the link in the previous post but is not visible via the folder link in the OP. Anyone with more familarity with google tools than me (likely pretty much everyone) know why not and what can be done to fix it?
PS My mistake. It was located above the MonkeyMonitor directory but displayed alongside the other files.
PS My mistake. It was located above the MonkeyMonitor directory but displayed alongside the other files.
Edit: Where did you get the Fs for 12pr320 to fall at 47Hz ?
@mbrennwa measured his 12pr320 extensively and came to the conclusion that FaitalPro datasheet was spot on.
Not exactly if you read it well, they never fall on 42 Hz, always between 45 & 47 hz with the fellow from USA and his calculating tools. The numbers of Mbrewna didn't work in the box calculation tool which is know to be quite good. The only way for the numbers to match was to sim with a bigger Fs for the datas being exacts. Note it is not an exception to Faital, Many Scan Speak have often more Fs, many brands...
The sensivity is not exact too but if you accept there is 6 dB of baffle step loss at 100 hz. So not 97 dB where it maters for a bass or woofer, it is more in the midrange.
No one has measured it with legit T&S with half of the cone weigth mass to have proper T&S.
Anyway, maybe a measured impedance will tell more with few OSMC now the drivers are broken in, we can easily abstract the f3 from the impedance curve. But I think it is off topic, as the 12PR320 is not exactly planned here. And mostly I don't care of the 12PR320 as bass driver. Bad choice for bass, that's all. Good choice for mid high sensivity cut off as the Volt. End of the story for I.
The sensivity is not exact too but if you accept there is 6 dB of baffle step loss at 100 hz. So not 97 dB where it maters for a bass or woofer, it is more in the midrange.
No one has measured it with legit T&S with half of the cone weigth mass to have proper T&S.
Anyway, maybe a measured impedance will tell more with few OSMC now the drivers are broken in, we can easily abstract the f3 from the impedance curve. But I think it is off topic, as the 12PR320 is not exactly planned here. And mostly I don't care of the 12PR320 as bass driver. Bad choice for bass, that's all. Good choice for mid high sensivity cut off as the Volt. End of the story for I.
Last edited:
I don't know what you're talking about. The Faital datasheet is spot on and consistent with my measurements:
Fs at 42 hz?, Prove it ! How much do you add to the cone, in what temperature environment you did it 😉 All is written in the thread I don't invent.
Well 3 to 5 hz, not a war to beginn about, but for a bass driver it beginns to be important... There is no doubt nowadays for hifi and not triode SET lovers, the 12RS430 is a far better choice.
Send one at HifiCompass....
As audio education, the best I had was to listen all my life a lot of constructor loudspeakers mostly. Diy is also valid of course. I have also listen to some, one from Hiraga as well, so I know what a diy can do as well, as mines (not very good cause the trade offs) .If you can affoard building twice or mora a year and buy several thousand of USD of drivers, no one should stop you; I simply can't, also because the time and the saw table not being where I live most of the time. We should do a rule, shut up if you don't have builded at least 5 loudspeakers and at least 2 the last year.... And begun 40 years ago in the house you get at 30 yo ! Wonderfull. We are going to make laugh or cry Greta Thundberg !
I quite the thread I have said. It is in the hands of the best specialists now 🙂 ! Don't forget to choose a management tool for ruling the several project management soft, lol ! Good luck, I will folllowing it in silence as I said.
Well 3 to 5 hz, not a war to beginn about, but for a bass driver it beginns to be important... There is no doubt nowadays for hifi and not triode SET lovers, the 12RS430 is a far better choice.
Send one at HifiCompass....
As audio education, the best I had was to listen all my life a lot of constructor loudspeakers mostly. Diy is also valid of course. I have also listen to some, one from Hiraga as well, so I know what a diy can do as well, as mines (not very good cause the trade offs) .If you can affoard building twice or mora a year and buy several thousand of USD of drivers, no one should stop you; I simply can't, also because the time and the saw table not being where I live most of the time. We should do a rule, shut up if you don't have builded at least 5 loudspeakers and at least 2 the last year.... And begun 40 years ago in the house you get at 30 yo ! Wonderfull. We are going to make laugh or cry Greta Thundberg !
I quite the thread I have said. It is in the hands of the best specialists now 🙂 ! Don't forget to choose a management tool for ruling the several project management soft, lol ! Good luck, I will folllowing it in silence as I said.
Last edited:
As always, this decision will be the result of some compromise. Your way of looking at the low-frequency content of music is one way of approaching this.
Another way will be to decide on the limits for low-frequency extension, box volume, and power requirement (i.e., efficiency). The plot in the attachment of post #376 demonstrates this nicely. For example, if you target a box volume of 80 L (2.83 ft³) and a -3 dB cutoff at 40 Hz, the efficiency can't be more than about 0.7%, or approx. 90 dB-SPL @ 1m, 1 W. Getting up to 117 dB-SPL @ 1 m will require a lot of power.
What's your take on efficiency or "amplifier friendliness"?
Efficiency and power handling of the drivers matters to get clean output. Amplifier friendliness may be an issue for those designing passive crossovers but for active crossovers 'blameless' amplifier modules of a few hundred Watts tend to be close to commodities. A 91 dB(ish) woofer would need 250W for 115 dB. So 250-500W for woofer and perhaps half that for midrange and tweeter.