Just wondering how these two mid range drivers compare to one another?
One is used in the LX521 speaker the other in the Nao Note II RS.
Both these drivers appear to be utilized in the same way, as mid range in a dipole configuration operating over the range 1-7kHz.
Price wise though they aren't similar as the Scanspeak is $100 and the Seas is $57.
Could these drivers be easily substituted with a full range driver like a Fostex FE103en or similar?
One is used in the LX521 speaker the other in the Nao Note II RS.
Both these drivers appear to be utilized in the same way, as mid range in a dipole configuration operating over the range 1-7kHz.
Price wise though they aren't similar as the Scanspeak is $100 and the Seas is $57.
Could these drivers be easily substituted with a full range driver like a Fostex FE103en or similar?
Last edited:
The Scanspeak just bc I listen to it daily and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, very, very nice midrange! 🙂
It also has 5dB higher sensitivity than the Seas and a more linear response between 1 and 2 kHz.
Measures nicely too in third party measurements, very low distortion!
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/reviews/10f8424g00-KlangTon2012-2.pdf
It also has 5dB higher sensitivity than the Seas and a more linear response between 1 and 2 kHz.
Measures nicely too in third party measurements, very low distortion!
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/reviews/10f8424g00-KlangTon2012-2.pdf
There's plenty of measurement of both (e.g. Zaph, MarkK). Clearly the SS is the winner.
I have heard it (not the Seas) on NaO note and they are very nice indeed.
I have heard it (not the Seas) on NaO note and they are very nice indeed.
The SS looks extremely good to 15khz off axis, I'm very surprised these aren't commonly used as wide band tweeters. I'm taking that route with my next speaker project, as I cant see a down side?
I may have to invest in a pair then as they are readily available in the UK for around £62 each where as the Seas are only available in the LX521 bundle. I worked out that to import the MU10 from Madisound, it would cost £5 more per speaker.
I see my self very close to building the Nao Note II RS!😀
I managed to get another pair of the Peerless XLS drivers for a steal as well!
I suppose it is a question for JohnK but would his build plans be suitable for sending to a CNC shop to make up the pannels?
I see my self very close to building the Nao Note II RS!😀
I managed to get another pair of the Peerless XLS drivers for a steal as well!
I suppose it is a question for JohnK but would his build plans be suitable for sending to a CNC shop to make up the pannels?
I am also tempted to build the Note II (nearly have a clone already). Struggled to find a UK source for the tweeters but found them for £50 eventually - special order only.
Is this first hand experience wuth the SS? All the data suggests otherwise. Then there's the fullrange crowd, but they usually use drivers with poor measurements.
Because they don't actually work like that. That darn thing called physics again. But they are legitimate 5K midranges, which are few and far between. Go ahead and try it, but leave room to add a tweeter later as you will want it.
Im confused. They dont actually do what the measurements show they do? Multiple sources have shown the same high frequency performance on and off axis.
You're saying that the 10F/4424G00 has the same off-axis performance that a 1" or a 3/4" tweeter does?
Looking at the Blue (on), Green (15 degrees), and Red (30 degrees), it compares fairly well to 1" dome tweeters.
Here's a Seas 27 TAFNCG for a quick example
Yes, I've worked with the 10F, the 8ohm version though.
The difference between the two drivers above will be very audible.
The difference between the two drivers above will be very audible.
SEOS 12, DE250 (7.5 degree increments). Outside of the outstanding CD response, nothing special or extended about the high frequency extension. Arguably worse then the SS...
I'll definitely test the SS out before I plan a mega build around it, but I'm still not seeing where its performance is poor.
It isn't a poor performer, in fact it is excellent. The dispersion is only slightly more directive than a typical 1" tweeter, and most of that is beyond +/- 30 degrees.
I remember JohnK questioning his own original Note's design making use of the Neo 3 PDR.
Now as far as sound quality.. I believe that Planet 10 didn't quite think that they sounded as good as some of the smaller Fostex drivers, but I'm even less sure on the conditions that formulated that opinion (..if indeed there was one).
That's what I was thinking. My intended use would be crossing 500-1khz to some kind of serious woofer setup. Outside of a huge waveguide, this looks like one of the only drivers well suited to the application.
Pretty much a "FAST" design.
You should probably base the woofer's crossover in conjunction with baffle step loss. A more narrow baffle, higher effective crossover freq. (..and vice-versus).
If you need a bit more "air" because of increased dispersion beyond +/-30 degrees you could always add-in a rear facing tweeter with a very high freq. high-pass filter.
You might want to "ping" Dave/Planet10 on this and get his thoughts on this driver and other similar drivers as well.
Where these 4" drivers will fail as a "tweeter" are distortion and stored energy. Just like any other full range of similar size.
I forget my history but can't stored energy simply be EQed out since it is linear distortion?Where these 4" drivers will fail as a "tweeter" are distortion and stored energy. Just like any other full range of similar size.
Also, with the two charts Jay provided we can see that the SS is 7 dB less intense than the 1" tweet at 10 kHz. With the following waveguide at least everything can be EQed flat with matching off-axis.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.