Magnetar said:
And maybe so did Western Electric and Vitaphone. Ever hear a Western Electric 15A horn? Or a Vitaphone 11? Pretty impressive stuff. 🙂
I'd love to see photos of your 300Hz Tractrix round horns. They must be BIG.
K15's fun with coaxial and the way "its supposed to be done" plus "the reference" for comparing other K-coupler - -how did you locate Transylvania Tubes? - - I look every day and can't find them listed :^) - hope you like The Tube - they go well with other K. K's x15 ~1966 tube as I have it had a diameter transition to 1.875" ID pipe with a concentric 30 degree sliced 1"ID piece and a parabolic slot and it sounds pretty good - - -to use acoax with Rosie Klam I'd think you have to lay your head on the floor to catch some of the mid-highs (?)
SunRa said:
The Radian 8" is nice but not efficient enough for me. I am used to 100 db or higher sensitivity systems.
el`Ol said:
I have been running them all over the map. I like them best crossed over 300 to 400 cycles. No baffle step filter is necessary. these have very linear response 55- 600 cycles.
panomaniac said:
I have heard WE and RCA theater horns as well as many of my own horns systems - of which some were better in many ways. Here is my 180 cycle tractrix loaded with TAD 4001 crossed in at 300 cycles.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Phase 2 - Update
I have settled finally on what I find to have the best compromise in the midrange (I define midrange 200-2K) for an open baffle system. Compromises come in many ways, one of which I let fall in the original design here. The twin 8's were not sensitive enough so I used 2. Doing this caused several problems mainly interference problems between the drivers. Using a pair was only 96 db sensitive - ! Way too low for realistic dynamics. The carbon fiber cones also sounded too 'fast' and 'electrostatic' to me, meaning they did not have the TONE I am used to with other loudspeakers I have built. Too bleached out - too 'high end' not enough startling WOW realism
I imagine the average high end audio boutique person would love this system - too me it sounded like a good pair of Stax or Quad electrostats with better dynamics and imaging rather than live musicians in my room. To sound like an electrostat is NOT my goal. LIVE and pure is! This is why I build my own loudspeaker systems because commercial systems are mostly garbage in realism.
I have found the midrange (actually the entire system full range )needs to have at least 103 db sensitivity to sound realistic (as in live and pure) without strain - when the music gets calm the system gets calm and must retain full microscopic dynamics. Compression drivers do this BEST - BUT they all have their own TONE problems related to the diaphragm material, phase plug, horn and other non linear distortion - LOUD is easy - compression drivers do that - so do cones - That is not what a high efficiency system is about it is just a throw in. I have ruled out compression driver midrange.
I have found the solution that is up and running. To me it has very little compromise! The system is boxless with 104 db sensitivity, no horn loaded bass, and has the best tone I've been able to obtain in listening room.
Detail will follow shortly.
I have settled finally on what I find to have the best compromise in the midrange (I define midrange 200-2K) for an open baffle system. Compromises come in many ways, one of which I let fall in the original design here. The twin 8's were not sensitive enough so I used 2. Doing this caused several problems mainly interference problems between the drivers. Using a pair was only 96 db sensitive - ! Way too low for realistic dynamics. The carbon fiber cones also sounded too 'fast' and 'electrostatic' to me, meaning they did not have the TONE I am used to with other loudspeakers I have built. Too bleached out - too 'high end' not enough startling WOW realism
I imagine the average high end audio boutique person would love this system - too me it sounded like a good pair of Stax or Quad electrostats with better dynamics and imaging rather than live musicians in my room. To sound like an electrostat is NOT my goal. LIVE and pure is! This is why I build my own loudspeaker systems because commercial systems are mostly garbage in realism.
I have found the midrange (actually the entire system full range )needs to have at least 103 db sensitivity to sound realistic (as in live and pure) without strain - when the music gets calm the system gets calm and must retain full microscopic dynamics. Compression drivers do this BEST - BUT they all have their own TONE problems related to the diaphragm material, phase plug, horn and other non linear distortion - LOUD is easy - compression drivers do that - so do cones - That is not what a high efficiency system is about it is just a throw in. I have ruled out compression driver midrange.
I have found the solution that is up and running. To me it has very little compromise! The system is boxless with 104 db sensitivity, no horn loaded bass, and has the best tone I've been able to obtain in listening room.
Detail will follow shortly.
Re: Phase 2 - Update
A lot of that coloration that defines a diaphragm's particular sound is its upper freq. response as it couples to the diaphragm itself (similar to a poor horn). Though it would be worthless to do so, IF you were to lowpass the carbon 8" drivers around 800 Hz or less with a steep filter then most of that coloration would disappear. (..though the cut-off should probably be a litter lower in freq. still for that horizontal limited dispersion array.)
Of course the same is partially true for horns as well - change the material of the surface of the horn and part of that horn coloration changes.
The same is also true of diffraction effects and the external shape and construction of the baffle and "box" (if any).
Another significant characteristic of a driver's tonal coloration (beyond deviations in more normal linearity and non-linearity), is "rooted" in the driver's suspension at extremely low excursion potentials. That "free" "uncompressed" sound that the best driver's exhibit is to a large degree dependent on just how "free" the driver is allowed to move at those extremely small excursions. Sometimes its not even a matter of how much the suspension allows the driver to move, but rather how weak the diaphragm is so that it can move regardless of the suspension (..again a reason why low mass drivers for a given sd often sound more "live" at unseen excursion levels vs. other drivers). Note that this is a big reason why most compression drivers can lack "tone". Despite the immense force they can have (vs. their comparatively small mms), their diaphragms are often very rigid simply because of shape and material (in an effort to achieve a higher usable freq. response) ..and similarly their suspensions are often very non-compliant. Occasionally NOS phenolic based compression drivers can have much greater "tone" than their newer counterparts.
Note that you'll rarely ever see anyone talk about either aspect mentioned above (though occasionally the second issue is hinted at with respect to ribbons). ..perhaps its in the "blackest art" of loudspeaker design.
😉
Magnetar said:
A lot of that coloration that defines a diaphragm's particular sound is its upper freq. response as it couples to the diaphragm itself (similar to a poor horn). Though it would be worthless to do so, IF you were to lowpass the carbon 8" drivers around 800 Hz or less with a steep filter then most of that coloration would disappear. (..though the cut-off should probably be a litter lower in freq. still for that horizontal limited dispersion array.)
Of course the same is partially true for horns as well - change the material of the surface of the horn and part of that horn coloration changes.
The same is also true of diffraction effects and the external shape and construction of the baffle and "box" (if any).
Another significant characteristic of a driver's tonal coloration (beyond deviations in more normal linearity and non-linearity), is "rooted" in the driver's suspension at extremely low excursion potentials. That "free" "uncompressed" sound that the best driver's exhibit is to a large degree dependent on just how "free" the driver is allowed to move at those extremely small excursions. Sometimes its not even a matter of how much the suspension allows the driver to move, but rather how weak the diaphragm is so that it can move regardless of the suspension (..again a reason why low mass drivers for a given sd often sound more "live" at unseen excursion levels vs. other drivers). Note that this is a big reason why most compression drivers can lack "tone". Despite the immense force they can have (vs. their comparatively small mms), their diaphragms are often very rigid simply because of shape and material (in an effort to achieve a higher usable freq. response) ..and similarly their suspensions are often very non-compliant. Occasionally NOS phenolic based compression drivers can have much greater "tone" than their newer counterparts.
Note that you'll rarely ever see anyone talk about either aspect mentioned above (though occasionally the second issue is hinted at with respect to ribbons). ..perhaps its in the "blackest art" of loudspeaker design.
😉Great Plains Audio still have phenolic midranges:
http://www.greatplainsaudio.com/downloads/390series.pdf
So do Selenum (for a lower price).
I don`t know the FR graph of your 10"ers, but these have same specs and could be crossed at 600Hz without problems.
http://www.teleprodottistore.it/shop/ciare/cw250.pdf
http://www.greatplainsaudio.com/downloads/390series.pdf
So do Selenum (for a lower price).
I don`t know the FR graph of your 10"ers, but these have same specs and could be crossed at 600Hz without problems.
http://www.teleprodottistore.it/shop/ciare/cw250.pdf
Re: Re: Phase 2 - Update
RE 8" = Yes. when crossed that low they were better. Still lacked realistic dynamics due to low (under magic 103 db) efficiency
I like the Emilar compression drivers with the mylar surround for that very reason - still the dome is aluminum - metallic sound - TAD - very rigid extended sound but will reveal it's true FAKE sound after a while
RE: Horn surface, well thats debatable in my experience. I believe the horn should be dead or inert and made with with low coloration material - wood, heavy plastics, no metal or 'ringing' material. Mahogany or maple Wood seems best sounding in the mids- these OB are made of maple plywood because I feel it has the most pleasant tone.
The new midrange has very low mass at around 5 grams. And it has the 'free' sound when loaded properly. Loaded properly it has VERY low excursion and distortion because it is not a direct radiator paddling the air. direct radiator excursion goes way up (like 4 times per octave as you go down) where this mid system remains linear and 'free' - BIG differences in realism
Ribbons -- they paddle air and are metal! They sound compressed and metallic! No ribbons for me. been there- big mistake to use ribbons if you want realistic 'free' sound - People should listen to what I say here, they are fine for little 2 watt amps and compromised 'paddling' midrange but not a smart choice for low compromise realistic sounding loudspeakers
ScottG said:
A lot of that coloration that defines a diaphragm's particular sound is its upper freq. response as it couples to the diaphragm itself (similar to a poor horn). Though it would be worthless to do so, IF you were to lowpass the carbon 8" drivers around 800 Hz or less with a steep filter then most of that coloration would disappear. (..though the cut-off should probably be a litter lower in freq. still for that horizontal limited dispersion array.)
Of course the same is partially true for horns as well - change the material of the surface of the horn and part of that horn coloration changes.
The same is also true of diffraction effects and the external shape and construction of the baffle and "box" (if any).
Another significant characteristic of a driver's tonal coloration (beyond deviations in more normal linearity and non-linearity), is "rooted" in the driver's suspension at extremely low excursion potentials. That "free" "uncompressed" sound that the best driver's exhibit is to a large degree dependent on just how "free" the driver is allowed to move at those extremely small excursions. Sometimes its not even a matter of how much the suspension allows the driver to move, but rather how weak the diaphragm is so that it can move regardless of the suspension (..again a reason why low mass drivers for a given sd often sound more "live" at unseen excursion levels vs. other drivers). Note that this is a big reason why most compression drivers can lack "tone". Despite the immense force they can have (vs. their comparatively small mms), their diaphragms are often very rigid simply because of shape and material (in an effort to achieve a higher usable freq. response) ..and similarly their suspensions are often very non-compliant. Occasionally NOS phenolic based compression drivers can have much greater "tone" than their newer counterparts.
Note that you'll rarely ever see anyone talk about either aspect mentioned above (though occasionally the second issue is hinted at with respect to ribbons). ..perhaps its in the "blackest art" of loudspeaker design.
RE 8" = Yes. when crossed that low they were better. Still lacked realistic dynamics due to low (under magic 103 db) efficiency
I like the Emilar compression drivers with the mylar surround for that very reason - still the dome is aluminum - metallic sound - TAD - very rigid extended sound but will reveal it's true FAKE sound after a while
RE: Horn surface, well thats debatable in my experience. I believe the horn should be dead or inert and made with with low coloration material - wood, heavy plastics, no metal or 'ringing' material. Mahogany or maple Wood seems best sounding in the mids- these OB are made of maple plywood because I feel it has the most pleasant tone.
The new midrange has very low mass at around 5 grams. And it has the 'free' sound when loaded properly. Loaded properly it has VERY low excursion and distortion because it is not a direct radiator paddling the air. direct radiator excursion goes way up (like 4 times per octave as you go down) where this mid system remains linear and 'free' - BIG differences in realism
Ribbons -- they paddle air and are metal! They sound compressed and metallic! No ribbons for me. been there- big mistake to use ribbons if you want realistic 'free' sound - People should listen to what I say here, they are fine for little 2 watt amps and compromised 'paddling' midrange but not a smart choice for low compromise realistic sounding loudspeakers
el`Ol said:
Phenolic sounds good. I like JBL 2482 and Eminence APT series. The altecs are terribly non linear and sound poor. Altec 290 and 292
The 8's are too low of sensitivity - the bass is 104, treble 108 - Using power sucking 96 db twin 8's was the major bottleneck here
I am crossing the 10's at 300 and it's good, 400 is also good, maybe 350 is the right place. I don't want the mid horn to unload
So, what's the secret? 4xPR170M0 per side? 😀 A lower low-pass, at say 900-1.2khz would maybe reduce the interferences related to using this kind of arangement? I think the dynamics would be stuning 😀
OK Magnetar, you're giving us some fun hints here. Umm - 5 grams mass, 103 dB efficient, and no compression driver. That still leaves horn loading, but with a small low-mass midrange driver, or possibly an array that are not horn loaded.
I agree with your comments about 103 dB efficiency and the sound of phenolic - one of the little secrets of PWK that made the Klipsch sound a lot better than they had any right to.
I agree with your comments about 103 dB efficiency and the sound of phenolic - one of the little secrets of PWK that made the Klipsch sound a lot better than they had any right to.
SunRa said:
Hello
I agree that would be stunning in dynamics and if crossed over that low their wouldn't be too much of a problem with combing. I only have three working PR170MO's - so I never tried it. I was trying to get away from multiple mid drivers here plus I wanted to use a cone up to 2.5-3 K to elimate problems I find find in most compression drivers in that range (1k-3K hump, metallic sound, bleached tone)
Lynn Olson said:
You are exact on horn loaded little cone! Two choices I found from current production manufactures. B&C and 18 Sound. I choose the B&C because of the built in phase plug, the fact I am using their little DE10 compression driver for treble and I could buy it from an Ohio retailer- Folks in Ohio need all the help they can get! I'm still tweaking the spacing and horn throat but out of the box loaded in 300 Hz horns they sound quite a bit better in the midrange and go lower than my favorite large format compression driver. Low coloration,pure tone and dynamic. Back loading is open back, no rear compression chamber. They load well and are measuring linear 300- 3k (little peaking at 300) in the horns - around 105 db/watt
B&C Midrange
Working on these
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Hello Magnetar,
It looks great. How do you compare the horn with the PR170M0, as these are known for being very musical? And by chance do you have a picture from a different angle? I'd like to have an idea about the lenght of the horn...
Again, great project. I like the way you are trying all sorts configurations. Your observations are a real value!
It looks great. How do you compare the horn with the PR170M0, as these are known for being very musical? And by chance do you have a picture from a different angle? I'd like to have an idea about the lenght of the horn...
Again, great project. I like the way you are trying all sorts configurations. Your observations are a real value!
hey Magnetar - woudl that B&C play well on rectangular flat-plate Edgarhorn type?
did you get the Transylvania tubes? - -if you don't like them keep me in mind.
did you get the Transylvania tubes? - -if you don't like them keep me in mind.
freddi said:
Hey Fred, they aren't here yet, send me you address i'll send them to you after I try them out. I know you'll enjoy them as much as anyone! if I like them I'll just copy them - you probably will appreciate the collect ability / nostalgia more them me......
I'm pretty sure it would be great in an Edgarhorn, rectangular or not, may not be as good in the upper range though - if you like the LE5 you'll like these, but these are better in the low mid and handle more power
SunRa said:
Thanks, the audax is not so good in a horn it's way better suited for a regular direct baffle. In the horn they are peaky in the bottom, recessed misd and not enough motor to drive the top end.
I will shoot them again when I have them together all the way
Re: Phase 2 - Update
Hey,
does that mean, this driver with 103 db would be a good choice?
http://www.monacor.com/int/en/produktseite_stageline.php?artid=5780&spr=EN&typ=u
Regards,
Stephan
Magnetar said:
Hey,
does that mean, this driver with 103 db would be a good choice?
http://www.monacor.com/int/en/produktseite_stageline.php?artid=5780&spr=EN&typ=u
Regards,
Stephan
Magnetar said:
Nice looking specs for the 6PEV13 - hmm, I'd be tempted to add a mild notch filter around 4.5 kHz, based on the impedance ripple and acoustic peak at that frequency, possibly following a simple 1st-order lowpass filter starting at 3 kHz. Any thoughts on that?
As for the 18Sound candidate, are you speaking of a horn-loaded 6ND410? Nice looking specs there too, with a Theile/Small efficiency of 98 dB, BL of 11.6 T*M, and a Mms of 8.2 grams. Hmm, the 6PEV13 has a BL of 8.2 T*M and a Mms of 6 grams.
They are kind of similar - I guess the differences would come down to the integral phase plug and the endless Neo vs ceramic magnet-sound question. Your choice of a 3 kHz transition to a real tweeter sidesteps the beaming issues of taking the mid-horn too high, and takes full advantage of the horn's greatly improved loading for the all-important "power-band" below 1 khz.
Hmm - I like what you're doing here. The large effective source size of the mid-horn will match very well to the large source size of the dipole array, good idea. I imagine the effortlessness and "snap" of the dynamics is in a completely different league than one or two direct-radiators, no matter how efficient they are.
Hi
The Beyma 605nd
http://www.beyma.de/fileadmin/seiten/download/pdf/Beyma_professional/605nd.pdf
is very close to the specs of the B&C 6PEV13.
Slightly higher Fs and neodym magnet.
I have seen detailed measurements (CSD and harmonics ) of the B&C 6PEV13 and the Beyma 6MI90 - the predecessor of the Beyma 605nd once measured by a magazine.
They both look good the Beyma 6MI90 is a little bit more focused to a single resonance whereas the B&C 6PEV13 spreads the cone break up resonance slightly.
At higher SPL's the Beyma keeps K3 / K5 harmonics ~3-6 dB lower.
Greetings
Michael
The Beyma 605nd
http://www.beyma.de/fileadmin/seiten/download/pdf/Beyma_professional/605nd.pdf
is very close to the specs of the B&C 6PEV13.
Slightly higher Fs and neodym magnet.
I have seen detailed measurements (CSD and harmonics ) of the B&C 6PEV13 and the Beyma 6MI90 - the predecessor of the Beyma 605nd once measured by a magazine.
They both look good the Beyma 6MI90 is a little bit more focused to a single resonance whereas the B&C 6PEV13 spreads the cone break up resonance slightly.
At higher SPL's the Beyma keeps K3 / K5 harmonics ~3-6 dB lower.
Greetings
Michael
- Status
- Not open for further replies.