1. Your listening impression counts as much as everybody elses.
2. I usually value the comments of speaker builders with long-time experience higher than those of a fresh man. I have no idea yet where to classify you in that ranking. 😉
3. I wasn't citing from company literature but from a man I know a bit about.
4. I always like to have listening impressions accompanied by measured data. Such comparisons help me to understand the world of acoustics better. If there are no data (yet), this doesn't "disprove" the personal impressions of others - it just leaves my curiosity unsatisfied. 🙂
Rudolf
Hi Rudolf,
Sorry for the late reply, was a bit busy recently. Agree with your comments regarding freq response of the problem and fullrange drivers unit.
That is why I would like to see if slanting the baffle helps. For example, take AN10. If I were to slant 30degrees. ( I know, one hell of a slant), The on axis relative to speaker and off axis, freq response will be quite similar. If on axis with the speaker (as oppose to the driver) we ill be looking at 30 degree (relative to driver) and off axis, about 45 degrees (estimated, relative to driver), where you would be sitting in between the 2 speakers, the frequency response would be similar. This would be how I would like to solve the eq on axis and off axis problem you described earlier. It can be roughly be described as 93dB average +/- 3db from 100Hz to 12kHz or so.
If fully vertical, the response can roughly be described as 97dB +/-8dB from 100Hz to 12kHz. the 30 degree response is very different from on axis.
By slanting the speaker, the on-axis (relative to speaker, not driver) and sitting position (30 degrees off axis), the differences in on-axis and off axis angle will be significantly reduced and should result in a more homogenous response.
For the B200, I think the ideal tilt anglemight be closer to 20 degrees.
Any thoughts on that?
Oon
Maybe there is a culture barrier but you seem to be a bit condescending... measure away guy. I'll be busy listening to music.
I think a German review really liked the an10 off axis............
"Finally, we have to strongly angled towards the boxes, so that the main radiation direction is substantially crossed in front of the listening position (angle between the rear wall and the main beam direction 50 °). Here the sound balance even more balanced and the spatial imaging was more compact."
Google Translate
Maybe put it on the floor firing forward....................
Norman
"Finally, we have to strongly angled towards the boxes, so that the main radiation direction is substantially crossed in front of the listening position (angle between the rear wall and the main beam direction 50 °). Here the sound balance even more balanced and the spatial imaging was more compact."
Google Translate
Maybe put it on the floor firing forward....................
Norman
Bare with me. I just tried to put my answer into the shortest format possible. Is it the enumeration which makes it sound condescending? BTW: I couldn't find how to translate "measure away" into German 😱. I'm sure it is idiomatic, but what does it mean? 😕
Rudolf
Hi Norman,
Thanks for pointing that out to me. Didn't notice it at first, when Rudolf first sent me the link. Looks like listening off axis is the way to go....
I will probably slant mine closer to 20 degrees. Don't have any data on AN15, but I believe the beaming behaviour will be even more pronounced than the AN10 so a smaller slant will be in order...
Oon
Thanks for pointing that out to me. Didn't notice it at first, when Rudolf first sent me the link. Looks like listening off axis is the way to go....
I will probably slant mine closer to 20 degrees. Don't have any data on AN15, but I believe the beaming behaviour will be even more pronounced than the AN10 so a smaller slant will be in order...
Oon
Oon,
slanting the baffle (vertically and/or horizontally) is a valid approach of course to get a balanced response on the listening axis. But the 0° direction (now off the listening axis) will still radiate the maximal power. Just keep an eye on the wall part, where it points to. It is always better to have it radiate into a large plant than to a mirror like wall section. 🙂
Rudolf
slanting the baffle (vertically and/or horizontally) is a valid approach of course to get a balanced response on the listening axis. But the 0° direction (now off the listening axis) will still radiate the maximal power. Just keep an eye on the wall part, where it points to. It is always better to have it radiate into a large plant than to a mirror like wall section. 🙂
Rudolf
Good point. The speaker will probably point to the ceiling. So I will take your advice and install two christmas tree bolted to ceiling upside down. I will provide your contact to my wife, who I believe will undoubtedly contact you and make some references to your parentage and bodily parts. 😉
Will send you pictures when I get around to building it...
Oon
Will send you pictures when I get around to building it...
Oon
Measure away... I suppose like "i dont care, go ahead and make measurements".
And who are you calling an idiomatic? 😛
Its all good... I am just mad I couldnt get a German citizenship through my mother 😡
Dear Rudolf,
I have been thinking about this design for a while. I wanted to make this speaker "futureproof", so after some thoughts, I was wondering if a single 15" woofer is enough for bass. So I figured that I should add in another 15" woofer just to make sure there is enough bass. After all the Jamo 909 had 2 woofers... So if I plan some material with a lot of bass, I would not run out of steam.
I was then thinking if I should add in the same woofer, so there will be 2 woofers, it should be able to handle most material..
Thinking further, I was thinking what if I added the a subwoofer instead of a woofer, a 15" subwoofer at the bottom, a pro-woofer in the middle, the Audio Nirvana at the top, followed by a supertweeter above that.
This of course will create another problem of trying to blend the subwoofer with the woofer. The subwoofer is just purely for the large x-max, so it can handle the really low notes without running out of steam.
Possibly something like this.
Dayton Audio IB385-8 15" Infinite Baffle Subwoofer 295-455
What do you think will be the better option of the 2? 2 prowoofer or 1 pro woofer and 1 subwoofer?
Yes, I am a megalomaniac...😀
Oon
I have been thinking about this design for a while. I wanted to make this speaker "futureproof", so after some thoughts, I was wondering if a single 15" woofer is enough for bass. So I figured that I should add in another 15" woofer just to make sure there is enough bass. After all the Jamo 909 had 2 woofers... So if I plan some material with a lot of bass, I would not run out of steam.
I was then thinking if I should add in the same woofer, so there will be 2 woofers, it should be able to handle most material..
Thinking further, I was thinking what if I added the a subwoofer instead of a woofer, a 15" subwoofer at the bottom, a pro-woofer in the middle, the Audio Nirvana at the top, followed by a supertweeter above that.
This of course will create another problem of trying to blend the subwoofer with the woofer. The subwoofer is just purely for the large x-max, so it can handle the really low notes without running out of steam.
Possibly something like this.
Dayton Audio IB385-8 15" Infinite Baffle Subwoofer 295-455
What do you think will be the better option of the 2? 2 prowoofer or 1 pro woofer and 1 subwoofer?
Yes, I am a megalomaniac...😀
Oon
Hello oon...
"I have been thinking about this design for a while. I wanted to make this speaker "futureproof", so after some thoughts, I was wondering if a single 15" woofer is enough for bass. So I figured that I should add in another 15" woofer just to make sure there is enough bass. After all the Jamo 909 had 2 woofers... So if I plan some material with a lot of bass, I would not run out of steam."
In my opinion, go with a 15 incher' with enough X-max, then you don't need two of them. AE makes good ones, although expensive. An other alternative is Eminence kappaLite low (I ordered a pair but haven't tested them yet). The Dayton you suggest should work just fine (If you cross them low).
But.
Unless you have a very good, treated room with bass traps, I strongly suggest that you drive the woofers active, preferably with EQ. This way you have full control to minimize room-nodes.
good luck!
Jacozz
"I have been thinking about this design for a while. I wanted to make this speaker "futureproof", so after some thoughts, I was wondering if a single 15" woofer is enough for bass. So I figured that I should add in another 15" woofer just to make sure there is enough bass. After all the Jamo 909 had 2 woofers... So if I plan some material with a lot of bass, I would not run out of steam."
In my opinion, go with a 15 incher' with enough X-max, then you don't need two of them. AE makes good ones, although expensive. An other alternative is Eminence kappaLite low (I ordered a pair but haven't tested them yet). The Dayton you suggest should work just fine (If you cross them low).
But.
Unless you have a very good, treated room with bass traps, I strongly suggest that you drive the woofers active, preferably with EQ. This way you have full control to minimize room-nodes.
good luck!
Jacozz
Oon...
Another thought.
Regarding the Visaton B200. I would suggest that you look at some alternatives.
I bought the B200, and struggled with it for a long time. Although it is a great midrange driver, it's not, in my opinion a great full range driver. It's VERY peaky in the higher mids/lower treble and is totally absent in the last upper octave. After a 1000 hour's + Daves phase plugs + a couple of coating layers, it now works good as a "wide ranger" in my 3-way OB set up. But I cross them at about 1 kHz, but with a "acoustical" 6 db slope, and now they do just fine with the very much help from my Hivi Planar tweeters.
But as full rangers? Naah.
There are in my opinion much better alternatives out there.
If you're not sensitive for whizzer cones I would suggest the Tangband series; 1772, 1808 or 1916.
If you don't like the "whizzer sound", then Mark Audio could be an alternative.
Cheers!
Jacozz
Another thought.
Regarding the Visaton B200. I would suggest that you look at some alternatives.
I bought the B200, and struggled with it for a long time. Although it is a great midrange driver, it's not, in my opinion a great full range driver. It's VERY peaky in the higher mids/lower treble and is totally absent in the last upper octave. After a 1000 hour's + Daves phase plugs + a couple of coating layers, it now works good as a "wide ranger" in my 3-way OB set up. But I cross them at about 1 kHz, but with a "acoustical" 6 db slope, and now they do just fine with the very much help from my Hivi Planar tweeters.
But as full rangers? Naah.
There are in my opinion much better alternatives out there.
If you're not sensitive for whizzer cones I would suggest the Tangband series; 1772, 1808 or 1916.
If you don't like the "whizzer sound", then Mark Audio could be an alternative.
Cheers!
Jacozz
Thanks Jacozz,
I have looked up on the AE (acoustic elegance) they are really nice but at $300 a pop its a bit steep. The thing I have discovered is that most subwoofers cannot function as woofers, the cones are too heavy. For example the celestion 15" woofer I was looking at had a cone mass of 68gm, but the subwoofer from for the Daytona is a bit over 200gms, about 3 times the weight, that makes it sound slow, slow to start and slow to stop.
The AE has a cone mass of 90gms but excursion of over 12mm, making the fast and able to handle the volume. I suppose they must be using something quite exotic for their cone, which allows them to reduce the mass while maintaining the strength needed for the excursion. If they were only half the price..
The woofers will be active, it is impossible to match the efficiency of a woofer or subwoofer with a high efficiency driver...
As for the fullrange I will be using the Audio Nirvana 15" cast frame, not the Visaton, I was only using that to illustrate the slanting baffle... 🙂
Thanks for all the comments.
Oon
I have looked up on the AE (acoustic elegance) they are really nice but at $300 a pop its a bit steep. The thing I have discovered is that most subwoofers cannot function as woofers, the cones are too heavy. For example the celestion 15" woofer I was looking at had a cone mass of 68gm, but the subwoofer from for the Daytona is a bit over 200gms, about 3 times the weight, that makes it sound slow, slow to start and slow to stop.
The AE has a cone mass of 90gms but excursion of over 12mm, making the fast and able to handle the volume. I suppose they must be using something quite exotic for their cone, which allows them to reduce the mass while maintaining the strength needed for the excursion. If they were only half the price..
The woofers will be active, it is impossible to match the efficiency of a woofer or subwoofer with a high efficiency driver...
As for the fullrange I will be using the Audio Nirvana 15" cast frame, not the Visaton, I was only using that to illustrate the slanting baffle... 🙂
Thanks for all the comments.
Oon
- Status
- Not open for further replies.