ive been searching fot the "ultimate" system to build, without spending a packet, and the closest i can find to this impossible target, is picking up a few fostex fx 200's and hoping they will go with my current fane 18" sub.
i think ill have to use a tweeter with the fx200's
they start to drop off at like 16-17k, and i can hear up about 18k using signal generator
i dont wanna use crossovers at all - dont like the idea of components altering the sound, and i like the way speakers sound without them.
is there maybe some sort of piezo/supertweeter i can use to solve my problem, without using a crossover?
maybe a better driver combo i could use without using crossovers?
bass is not an issue, 18" pumps from about 90 hz and below 40 hz, pumps even more.
i think ill have to use a tweeter with the fx200's
they start to drop off at like 16-17k, and i can hear up about 18k using signal generator
i dont wanna use crossovers at all - dont like the idea of components altering the sound, and i like the way speakers sound without them.
is there maybe some sort of piezo/supertweeter i can use to solve my problem, without using a crossover?
maybe a better driver combo i could use without using crossovers?
bass is not an issue, 18" pumps from about 90 hz and below 40 hz, pumps even more.
Piezo tweeters inherently do not need a crossover, but I cannot say much about their sound quality. A dome supertweeter still needs one, though. Regarding a driver combo without XO, how about a woofer and a midtweeter, like one of the Tangband 2-inchers? You'll need a woofer that naturally does not extend into the midrange, but there will still be considerable overlap in the FR of the drivers.
Piezos don't need an XO, but they will play too low and sound way too harsh, so not an option without an XO IMO. You could design/build a very narrow BW super tweeter horn, it wouldn't need an XO.
The Jordan is the only one I've auditioned that is so 'hot'/extended on the top end you actually need to listen to it off axis if you have good HF hearing. Mine's rolled off enough that on axis sounds fine.
OK, but the critical midbass could be since a typical high SQ FR driver doesn't have enough excursion to cover this BW with sufficient dynamic range. Again, you could design/build a horn, but then the sub may not be able to keep up......
I prefer the Jordan's SQ to the few Fostex I've auditioned, but I haven't heard the most popular ones (FE206E, FE168ES), so Caveat Emptor. For me, the Jordan's lack of sensitivity is its major shortcoming, though all the folks I know that have them are quite happy with their dynamic range. The TBs are great bang/buck, but overall not even remotely in the same league IMO.
GM
Here a few ideas a little different to what you are thinking.
What about an active crossover? This gets around a lot of the problems with passive crossovers and are easier to design. Get a nice low power class A amp for a tweeter crossed fairly high. This lets you choose a tweeter with nice detail that doesn't like to be crossed low. Perhaps a ribbon tweeter. It's out of the critical range. The critical range would be covered by your fullrange driver. If you can't get the fullranger to go down to a point the sub is happy with you might have to use a few of them. I'd say if you have just one driver then you want to try to cross at 200 Hz to keep some dynamic range.
What about an active crossover? This gets around a lot of the problems with passive crossovers and are easier to design. Get a nice low power class A amp for a tweeter crossed fairly high. This lets you choose a tweeter with nice detail that doesn't like to be crossed low. Perhaps a ribbon tweeter. It's out of the critical range. The critical range would be covered by your fullrange driver. If you can't get the fullranger to go down to a point the sub is happy with you might have to use a few of them. I'd say if you have just one driver then you want to try to cross at 200 Hz to keep some dynamic range.
i was thinkin of gettin some nice speakers, which could run off valve amps, when i finally get around to getting some.
but now youve got me thinkin..... a nice dac without outputs to control two valve amps per channel, one for top end, one for mid range....active x-overs - no passive crap!!!
ill probably end up getting the fx200's and using a couple of db's of eq at the top end if necc.
but now youve got me thinkin..... a nice dac without outputs to control two valve amps per channel, one for top end, one for mid range....active x-overs - no passive crap!!!
ill probably end up getting the fx200's and using a couple of db's of eq at the top end if necc.
While I do think it's a good idea to avoid crossovers in the critical range ~ 200Hz - 5kHz, I think it is a serious compromise for a single driver to cover more than that range. If you 1) go active and 2) push the crossover point up higher then in two ways you are minimising the crossover impact as much as possible, which I'd consider a better compromise than using eq to try to push a driver higher than it wants. Another advantage of going active is that you don't waste amplifier power which is sucked up by the passive components. So you make the most of what you have.
Let's say you cross at 200 Hz to your woofer and 5kHz to your supertweeter. Assuming drivers have the same efficiency, you need 40% power to the woofer, 50% to the mid and 10% to the tweeter. You can get the same output as a 100 watt amp and a passive crossover by using 20w+25w+5w amps with an active crossover. Now since you will have different sensitivities you would need to adjust the gain and you may will need more power to deal with less effieicnt speakers.
Now suppose you did want to biamp and cover 250Hz and up with a full ranger. One good driver is the 3" paper Tangband 871. Use an array of 8 of them on top of your Fane woofer and the efficiency goes up to 96 db (1W 1m). The power handling also increases to over 100 watts. Cross at 250 Hz with a 4th order LR slope and you will get loads of power handling. As the efficiency of the speakers now has a close match you need about 60% of total amplifier power for the fullrange drivers. Use 30 watts for the fullranger and 20 watts for the woofer and you get equivalent of 100 watts with a passive system.
Given the efficiency of such speakers, just about any amp that you happen to like will probably have enough power.
I like this idea a bit better:
find a fullrange driver with more bass extension, get it down to 80 Hz and use a 20W class A amp (better for bass than valve amps) for the woofer, valve amps for your fullrangers, and cross high to some ribbons with another valve amp - you might do a small array of ribbons and some mid-sized fullrangers. Use enough drivers to match the efficiency of your woofer, then with a pair of low power valve amps and a solid state for the bass you find a nice diy path to audio bliss
The idea behind all this is to get a synergy between the parts - the best kind of team work where each part does what it does best. Many who like valve amps don't like their bass performance. Biamping gets around that, and the best sounding solid state amp is class A, which normally isn't practical, but in this case it could work quite well. You can also build a very good DIY class A amp.
Anyway, some more food for thought ...
Let's say you cross at 200 Hz to your woofer and 5kHz to your supertweeter. Assuming drivers have the same efficiency, you need 40% power to the woofer, 50% to the mid and 10% to the tweeter. You can get the same output as a 100 watt amp and a passive crossover by using 20w+25w+5w amps with an active crossover. Now since you will have different sensitivities you would need to adjust the gain and you may will need more power to deal with less effieicnt speakers.
Now suppose you did want to biamp and cover 250Hz and up with a full ranger. One good driver is the 3" paper Tangband 871. Use an array of 8 of them on top of your Fane woofer and the efficiency goes up to 96 db (1W 1m). The power handling also increases to over 100 watts. Cross at 250 Hz with a 4th order LR slope and you will get loads of power handling. As the efficiency of the speakers now has a close match you need about 60% of total amplifier power for the fullrange drivers. Use 30 watts for the fullranger and 20 watts for the woofer and you get equivalent of 100 watts with a passive system.
Given the efficiency of such speakers, just about any amp that you happen to like will probably have enough power.
I like this idea a bit better:
find a fullrange driver with more bass extension, get it down to 80 Hz and use a 20W class A amp (better for bass than valve amps) for the woofer, valve amps for your fullrangers, and cross high to some ribbons with another valve amp - you might do a small array of ribbons and some mid-sized fullrangers. Use enough drivers to match the efficiency of your woofer, then with a pair of low power valve amps and a solid state for the bass you find a nice diy path to audio bliss
The idea behind all this is to get a synergy between the parts - the best kind of team work where each part does what it does best. Many who like valve amps don't like their bass performance. Biamping gets around that, and the best sounding solid state amp is class A, which normally isn't practical, but in this case it could work quite well. You can also build a very good DIY class A amp.
Anyway, some more food for thought ...
sounds good, i like the idea of an array of widebands to match the 18
my subby amp is a diy jaycar amp, with 3 mm thick tracks on the pcb, thick and short power supply wires, and 68 000 uf in caps -3 x 8000 per supply rail and 10 x 1000 between fuse and transistor per rail, and a ~4 kg heatsink - which pretty much stays cool at a measured 200 watt rms output.
my subby amp is a diy jaycar amp, with 3 mm thick tracks on the pcb, thick and short power supply wires, and 68 000 uf in caps -3 x 8000 per supply rail and 10 x 1000 between fuse and transistor per rail, and a ~4 kg heatsink - which pretty much stays cool at a measured 200 watt rms output.
i used to use a diy 5 channel amp, and was gonna get a dac, but i got the yamaha rx 440 for now, ill go crazy with a dac and valves later. the rx 440 only has a tiny bit more power than my old diy, but cant do bass better than my diy. im trying hard to resist opening it, fitting a decent heatsink, more caps, etc....
to MV Agusta
What a FAB old classic Scoot this isany way, enough about ur nik
you can hear 18K and it goes to 16K? thats the difference of ONE note on a musical scale! you wont even know u arent getting to 18Kwhen you play music thats 1 missing note out of 80 LOL. certainly not enough to risk bringing in a tweeter with its different sound. u will hear more change from the different type speaker than the missing 2K IMHO. try it without a tweet first. ill bet you cant hear a quality improvement! a difference yes, esp if the tweet is too hot . remember the tweet will overlap to a large degree and will change the tone and most importantly, the point source effect. not worth it IMHO
What a FAB old classic Scoot this is
any way, enough about ur nik you can hear 18K and it goes to 16K? thats the difference of ONE note on a musical scale! you wont even know u arent getting to 18Kwhen you play music
thats 1 missing note out of 80 LOL. certainly not enough to risk bringing in a tweeter with its different sound. u will hear more change from the different type speaker than the missing 2K IMHO. try it without a tweet first. ill bet you cant hear a quality improvement! a difference yes, esp if the tweet is too hot . remember the tweet will overlap to a large degree and will change the tone and most importantly, the point source effect. not worth it IMHOadendum
i have been useing the Jordan JX92S and championing it for almost 6 years now and i too roll it off on top and listen @ 15deg off axis! there certainly is NO lack of trebble out to 20K to my ears the only thing that beats it is the supravox sig bicone at $330 or so ea! Before i spent an equal amount on the fostex F200A i would get the Sig and put it in an OB!
i have been useing the Jordan JX92S and championing it for almost 6 years now and i too roll it off on top and listen @ 15deg off axis! there certainly is NO lack of trebble out to 20K
to my ears the only thing that beats it is the supravox sig bicone at $330 or so ea! Before i spent an equal amount on the fostex F200A i would get the Sig and put it in an OB!adendum to the adendum lol
put another way, i could disable the single top note on a piano and have your fave pianist play it all day and id defy u to tell me what i did if u didnt know. Steve shell might be able to as hes a piano tuner and they have developed ears like a bat, but IMHO no one else could
put another way, i could disable the single top note on a piano and have your fave pianist play it all day and id defy u to tell me what i did if u didnt know. Steve shell might be able to as hes a piano tuner and they have developed ears like a bat, but IMHO no one else could
your bass is a 18"....if you want to keep things simple i see 2 options.
1. get 2 amps (Design and watts will depend on the drivers).
2. Use PLLXO at about 50-60Hz so the 18" works below that.
option 1.
JX92 in MLTL as per GM idea. I like this idea a lot. if you are doing this you will need atleast 50W for the JX92. The Aksa or Pass SS amps are your best bet. 50W = 17dbW +86db (sens of JX92) =103db/1m midrnage SPL.
option 2.
Fostex FF85 mated to a paper cone 6/8" woofer like say the SEAS CA21REX (am not sure about coated paper cones like the C18, CB17 or CA15) using a 1st order passive at say 300Hz. A 20W tube amp like a EL84PPP. you sens should be around 89db+20W (13dbW) = 102db/1m midrnage SPL.
either way you spend about 130$. JX 92 is $130. FF85 = $35, SEAS CA21 is $60, good XO components would be $30-40 about as much as you would on the FX200 and you dont worry about that last 2kHz.
1. get 2 amps (Design and watts will depend on the drivers).
2. Use PLLXO at about 50-60Hz so the 18" works below that.
option 1.
JX92 in MLTL as per GM idea. I like this idea a lot. if you are doing this you will need atleast 50W for the JX92. The Aksa or Pass SS amps are your best bet. 50W = 17dbW +86db (sens of JX92) =103db/1m midrnage SPL.
option 2.
Fostex FF85 mated to a paper cone 6/8" woofer like say the SEAS CA21REX (am not sure about coated paper cones like the C18, CB17 or CA15) using a 1st order passive at say 300Hz. A 20W tube amp like a EL84PPP. you sens should be around 89db+20W (13dbW) = 102db/1m midrnage SPL.
either way you spend about 130$. JX 92 is $130. FF85 = $35, SEAS CA21 is $60, good XO components would be $30-40 about as much as you would on the FX200 and you dont worry about that last 2kHz.
Well... here's the thing Thor, there nothing that anyone can hear as "notes", certainly not piano pitches, between 16 and 18k. The piano range ends at about 4200. In fact, here is very little musical information above 10k, even overtones, and in the 16 - 18k you really hear only "air", some sort of sense of spaciousness and liveness. Even percectly healthy hearing is rolled of extemely in that range, and many people, even younger folks hear little above 15k. Almost all people will hear the top note of a piano disabled either if you're talking about a note being missing from a piece or high freq rolled or cut off at that point. But you're absolutely right that in the 16-18k range most people can't hear doodly, and the 2k area is near the most sensitve area of human hearing where incredibly tiny differences in volume and frequency are perceivable by eveyone with average hearing. That's why crossovers don't belong in the frequency range they are most commonly applied, 2 - 3k. Anyone with decent ears will hear the acoustic garbage this causes, even with "quality" crossovers, and it's why good fullrange speakers are so very good. The 2.5k crossover thing is a dinosaur, a bad habit, from the early days of speaker design that people can't seem to get over. Piano tuners (I tune pianos myself), BTW use the interference patterns of pitches out of tune, know as "beats", to tune the first sequence of 12 fifths flat (setting the temperament), something on the order of three beats in 5 seconds, so that the circle of fifths yields all fifths equally out of tune, with octaves tuned pure (equal temperament). Those "beats" can be heard by people with considerable high frequency hearing loss, so piano tuners aren't necessarily the sharpest ears, though they can be. Strings can be really funny too - a bent one can give you an in-tune fundamental and very wonky overtones.
nonamekid said:
ok this leads the the question whether a speaker with response to 20K (like many tdome tweeters) will sound more realistic than say one that is -6db down at 18k.
There are transducers that can produce 20,30and even 40k. What use is this or is this just marketing hype?
now lets look at 2 systems at 2 extremes.
1. a 6-8" fullrange say from visaton, lowther, fostex etc or even a 2 way using a wide range driver like a manger. such a system has little or no XO and the response drops of quickly above 15k or so.
2. a multi way system using say a large woofer (10-18"), coupled to a midbass or midrange or both (4.5-8") and a tweeter (.75", 1" ribbon). Let assume the the midrnage/midbass unit is capable of 100-5k and is crossed over as such. thereby putting most of the "critical" range within the operating capabilities of one driver. such systems can produce sounds as high as 40k and a significant ammount of off axis energy as well.
which of these 2 systems are capable of sound that is more realistic? Are companies like ScanSpeak, PHL, etc. barking up the wrong tree?
Maybe a system that is a "little of both" using say a wide range driver like a JX53, FF85, JX92, FE103/107 supported by a bass unit upto say 300-500Hz might be the "best" option.
PS. Please note that the above statements contain a lot of generic statements. Some would argue what is "best"? others would argue what is "realistic"? So take these generalisims with a large table sppon of salt.
The object of almost of all us on this forum and others like it is to reproduce music as realistically as posssible no mattwe what our opinion of what is realistic is.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.