No, no. Only one Alpha 6 per speaker and maybe I will change to SB ACOUSTICS SB26STAC-C000-4
Regarding Alpha 8, yes that speaker sound very nice. I have an old design for a friend with that speaker and sound very natural.
Regarding Alpha 8, yes that speaker sound very nice. I have an old design for a friend with that speaker and sound very natural.
So if you use a passive filter, is it not better to use two drivers of the same impedance ? And maybe a lower XO : 2000 or 2500 Hz ?
just two cents, I'm not designer.... maybe I'm wrong !
just two cents, I'm not designer.... maybe I'm wrong !
Not mandatory but it may be harder to do calculations, but in this way you can gain 3db for the 4Ω speaker.
Last edited:
ah ok, I believe I understand the choice now. So if the amp is good no problem,(after all just a tweeter), nore for the phase Windows ! Am I correct ?
What do you want to say? I'm afraid I could not understand....
Can You explain a little, please. I'm not soo expert in speakers, like others....
So do I... I'm not the good guy for that here ! I believed all the drivers should have a same impedance for the phase and for the amp in a passive mono amplification. That's all. I don't know what can give a same amp : amount of current for a 8 ohms and in a same time for a 4 ohms driver ! there is a filter in between but I assume the load is seen as a same thing by the amp unit ??? I don't know, it's above my head.
Well I suppose as far the spl at 1 watt at 1 meter for the both driver it's ok ?! And also it's easier for the amp just to see a unit at 4 ohm which need more curent when it's just a light tweeter ?
Specialists will say the good thing to do. That's why I drove you towards an already made design : not more expensive and already proof of concept.
Well I suppose as far the spl at 1 watt at 1 meter for the both driver it's ok ?! And also it's easier for the amp just to see a unit at 4 ohm which need more curent when it's just a light tweeter ?
Specialists will say the good thing to do. That's why I drove you towards an already made design : not more expensive and already proof of concept.
Last edited:
Yes, I understood your point but I do not know if is completely correct.
Imagine that: the signal that reaches the speakers are very affected by the filters and even so the speakers impedance is variable with the frequencies.
And many commercial speakers has different impedance speakers inside so is not a very big problem that.
Same time is more alluring to do your self the design and not to copy somebody else.
Imagine that: the signal that reaches the speakers are very affected by the filters and even so the speakers impedance is variable with the frequencies.
And many commercial speakers has different impedance speakers inside so is not a very big problem that.
Same time is more alluring to do your self the design and not to copy somebody else.
This is not a bad thing. The response narrows with the woofer at higher frequencies. If you design a crossover based on a single frontal measurement to get the pressure right then there will be less sound into the room at those frequencies, ie a power hole at the crossover. A dome tweeter has wide radiation at its low end.
I have a problem....
I ordered SB26STAC-C000-4 and I receive instead SB29RDC-C000-4.
Should I send back or this tweeter perform the same or even better camparing with my first chose?
How it will work toghether with Alpha 6A?
I ordered SB26STAC-C000-4 and I receive instead SB29RDC-C000-4.
Should I send back or this tweeter perform the same or even better camparing with my first chose?
How it will work toghether with Alpha 6A?
It could be that not enough folks here are familiar with the entire SB line to pass judgement on other than just the published specs, and /or experience with standard soft fabric domes and concentric ring domes by other makers.
Either might well work for your intended application, but of course the XO circuit might need to be revisited.
Either might well work for your intended application, but of course the XO circuit might need to be revisited.
It depends on what you are trying to do with the tweeters. If you already have a XO designed, then you should send them back, because the 29RDC will not sound the same using the XO designed for another tweeter.
If you haven't designed a XO yet, I would keep the RDC's, they have a lower Fs, which means you can cross at a lower frequency and avoid possible beaming from the woofer.
I also personally like the sound of ring radiator tweeters, they sound different, but very open and crisp to my ears, a little smoother off-axis too. YMMV
I think either would work with the Alph 6A, but again, easier XO with the RDC because you could cross lower and it's 1.5db more sensitive.
If you haven't designed a XO yet, I would keep the RDC's, they have a lower Fs, which means you can cross at a lower frequency and avoid possible beaming from the woofer.
I also personally like the sound of ring radiator tweeters, they sound different, but very open and crisp to my ears, a little smoother off-axis too. YMMV
I think either would work with the Alph 6A, but again, easier XO with the RDC because you could cross lower and it's 1.5db more sensitive.
Thank you guys.
In fact the situation is even more complicated because in the package was one dome and one ring radiator.
My first idea was to continue with the ring radiator but the dome has more powerful motor and a more than double Xmax...because of this I ask...
And I want to be capable to support very powerful passage because sometime I can use a large room for auditions and I like it loud.
In fact the situation is even more complicated because in the package was one dome and one ring radiator.
My first idea was to continue with the ring radiator but the dome has more powerful motor and a more than double Xmax...because of this I ask...
And I want to be capable to support very powerful passage because sometime I can use a large room for auditions and I like it loud.
Last edited:
Well you definitely have a problem if it is one of each! 😉 The extra X-Max of the dome would seem to be desirable when it comes to crossing low, though the rated power handling for the ring is 5 times higher.. odd.
Tony.
Tony.
Can you explain?
On datasheet the dome has 120W and the ring has only 100W.
It is only because the ring has a bigger coil?
Can you detail a little?
I do not understood. You mean that the Ring are more sensible and in the same time a bigger coil?
But the Ring theoretically perform worst (higher beaming and starting lower) at high frequency because of bigger membrane....
Using a compression tweeter as an example, it sounds clean at all levels. There is something 'right' about this, some call it 'dynamics' or whatever, it might be distortion related but anyway it feels like headroom isn't limited. It is partially related to efficiency and coil mass. Just though I'd mention it. Maybe search for 'thermal modulation'.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/258487-why-crossover-1-4khz-range-11.html#post4016436
Just a sample link, not the one I was looking for.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/258487-why-crossover-1-4khz-range-11.html#post4016436
Just a sample link, not the one I was looking for.
Last edited:
Allen, what is the link to my question?
You try to convince me to chose the ring and to cut as low as possible?
You try to convince me to chose the ring and to cut as low as possible?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.