LOL Noah, that was just to illustrate that good ol' polyprope is still competitive with the very best. Driver is inappropriate for budget, 
but also pretty much demands excellent crossover components, not to mention the rest of the system.
But in the mood of general chatter, #2 of 4 systems is moving along, with a Scanspeak 25W-?? woofer and 99000 Rev tweeter. Very very nice combination.
but also pretty much demands excellent crossover components, not to mention the rest of the system. But in the mood of general chatter, #2 of 4 systems is moving along, with a Scanspeak 25W-?? woofer and 99000 Rev tweeter. Very very nice combination.
im currently building a system around a pair of seas mca-15 RCY 15cm midranges, and they sound really good, very smooth sound- ive been listening to them full range and they are very listenable, with no harsh cone breakup particularly noticable and good HF extension. Relatively cheap too. Id like to hear how they compare to the vifa p13 for midrange use.
graph etc here: http://www.seas.no/seas_line/midrange/h1262.pdf
graph etc here: http://www.seas.no/seas_line/midrange/h1262.pdf
hello
as you can see on this graph the XG18 is having no breakup node, and a very smooth response. i think it could be a very good choice, provided it is having a very good midrange distortion
also about the monacor unit, i agree that their curves are smoothed a little bit much, but if you look at theses measured specs of the SPH-165KEP: SPH165-KEP K&T you see the little membrane breakup node at 4.8khz , and
the smoothness of the curve before.
I assume the SPH-102KEP is having the same kind of breakup node except that you see on its FR curve that it is at around 10khz, soot really a big problem in crossover design. The SPH-135KEP is almost better behaved. I believe any of theses three driver could be good challenger, especially according to their prices
as you can see on this graph the XG18 is having no breakup node, and a very smooth response. i think it could be a very good choice, provided it is having a very good midrange distortion
also about the monacor unit, i agree that their curves are smoothed a little bit much, but if you look at theses measured specs of the SPH-165KEP: SPH165-KEP K&T you see the little membrane breakup node at 4.8khz , and
the smoothness of the curve before.
I assume the SPH-102KEP is having the same kind of breakup node except that you see on its FR curve that it is at around 10khz, soot really a big problem in crossover design. The SPH-135KEP is almost better behaved. I believe any of theses three driver could be good challenger, especially according to their prices
Nemophyle said:hello
as you can see on this graph the XG18 is having no breakup node, and a very smooth response. i think it could be a very good choice, provided it is having a very good midrange distortion
also about the monacor unit, i agree that their curves are smoothed a little bit much, but if you look at theses measured specs of the SPH-165KEP: SPH165-KEP K&T you see the little membrane breakup node at 4.8khz , and
the smoothness of the curve before.
I assume the SPH-102KEP is having the same kind of breakup node except that you see on its FR curve that it is at around 10khz, soot really a big problem in crossover design. The SPH-135KEP is almost better behaved. I believe any of theses three driver could be good challenger, especially according to their prices
I hope you have permission from John Kurke to link directly to his site. At the very least you should include the source of the picture in your post.
Dan
Some comments on the decay graphs etc.
If you look at the graph from the xg18 you'll definately see the breakups in the decay graph (no doubt about that)they are damped but they are there. Just compare them to those from the 165kep from monacor and see how fast (in milliseconds) the decay is (even at the breakup node at 4.8 Khz). It's faster then that of the xg18.
It seems that some just don't "analyze" what these graphs really say. Sorry that I'm picky on this, but it again feels like monacor is being kicked at. Okay they really have some bad stuff, but there are some superb units in there.
And that the decay indicates that the 165kep isn't a beginners unit is just ...... The small breakup at 4.8 khz is so well damped that it should be no problem to use this diver up to 3khz with a 12db network.
I've seen other measurements (in the K&T magazine) from several well respected scanspeak, seas and vifa units that aren't up to the level of the 165kep! I'm talking about the same measure methods here, so they can be compared.
I hope I can soon post some measurements of the 102kep.
Oh, one other real great midrange unit from monacor is the MSH116. A plain papercone with no breakups and a superb response up to 8Khz. I used it in a big Studio Monitor with great results.
If you look at the graph from the xg18 you'll definately see the breakups in the decay graph (no doubt about that)they are damped but they are there. Just compare them to those from the 165kep from monacor and see how fast (in milliseconds) the decay is (even at the breakup node at 4.8 Khz). It's faster then that of the xg18.
It seems that some just don't "analyze" what these graphs really say. Sorry that I'm picky on this, but it again feels like monacor is being kicked at. Okay they really have some bad stuff, but there are some superb units in there.
And that the decay indicates that the 165kep isn't a beginners unit is just ...... The small breakup at 4.8 khz is so well damped that it should be no problem to use this diver up to 3khz with a 12db network.
I've seen other measurements (in the K&T magazine) from several well respected scanspeak, seas and vifa units that aren't up to the level of the 165kep! I'm talking about the same measure methods here, so they can be compared.
I hope I can soon post some measurements of the 102kep.
Oh, one other real great midrange unit from monacor is the MSH116. A plain papercone with no breakups and a superb response up to 8Khz. I used it in a big Studio Monitor with great results.
I didn't mean my comment to be as strong as it was taken to be. It's certainly true that the 165 is better than most; and quite a bit better than many in the intensity of its breakup. It's just that there are (a few) drivers with very well damped breakup, which would be a better choice for a beginner developing his own crossover without test equipment or simulation software.
With assistance from someone with equipment and experience, or if building from a kit, those concerns would be reduced, or nonexistent.
I recently heard a system that used a metal driver with a very fierce breakup peak that had no hint of harshness; the company is noted for its crossover development expertise, and justly so. So skill can certainly make these drivers very usable; but not by a first-timer.
I'd be really interested in your test of the Monacor 102, and the MSH 116 sounds ideal for the original poster.
With assistance from someone with equipment and experience, or if building from a kit, those concerns would be reduced, or nonexistent.
I recently heard a system that used a metal driver with a very fierce breakup peak that had no hint of harshness; the company is noted for its crossover development expertise, and justly so. So skill can certainly make these drivers very usable; but not by a first-timer.
I'd be really interested in your test of the Monacor 102, and the MSH 116 sounds ideal for the original poster.
I totally agree with curmudgeon in here, even if the 165KEP is very good, the fact that the breakup is localized on a precise point that is a bit low in frequency for the use intended make it a driver that may not be "easy" for a beginner without experience in crossover design.
And although i love this unit, i may point to the fact that, having used it with a 12db / 3khz, i found the breakup audible even if it wasn't a big problem, it did colorate the sound, probably trough the effect it had on lower order harmonics.
BUT that was why i pointed to the other KEP unit that do have same kind of breakup but much higher in frequency. I'm pretty sure that you could use the 102 and 135 with a 12db at 3khz, without any problems, even for a beginner.
of course that is just a choice among many others that mey be very good in this frequency range.
Even if the XG18 looks very good, i'm not sure i would use it with a with crossover at 3khz,i would probably cross lower, but that is only a design choice.
and i am very sorry about the direct link, i wanted to do a classic link and fooled myself. i hope Zaph will not be angry about that , if a moderator hangs around here it would be good to transform it in a link to the driver comparison page.
and bombardon it would be great if you could do theses measurements, any baffle size is ok as long as you precise it
And although i love this unit, i may point to the fact that, having used it with a 12db / 3khz, i found the breakup audible even if it wasn't a big problem, it did colorate the sound, probably trough the effect it had on lower order harmonics.
BUT that was why i pointed to the other KEP unit that do have same kind of breakup but much higher in frequency. I'm pretty sure that you could use the 102 and 135 with a 12db at 3khz, without any problems, even for a beginner.
of course that is just a choice among many others that mey be very good in this frequency range.
Even if the XG18 looks very good, i'm not sure i would use it with a with crossover at 3khz,i would probably cross lower, but that is only a design choice.
and i am very sorry about the direct link, i wanted to do a classic link and fooled myself. i hope Zaph will not be angry about that , if a moderator hangs around here it would be good to transform it in a link to the driver comparison page.
and bombardon it would be great if you could do theses measurements, any baffle size is ok as long as you precise it
I second the MSH-116, it is a fantastic driver and is really well behaved. It has a slight nudge at 4kHz which is very, very well damped and the next annomally only turns up at 12kHz but is again super-damped. It is really nice to work with but has to be crossed at or above 300Hz for best results (depending on SPL requirements)
230 € at
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/index_en.htm?/hifi/scan_sp_en.htm
but I think 200€ is target price ,please help me to search best price for seas,scanspeak in the web......
seas scanspeak is so expensive,but you archive the problem for 10-15 year!! HIMO
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/index_en.htm?/hifi/scan_sp_en.htm
but I think 200€ is target price ,please help me to search best price for seas,scanspeak in the web......
seas scanspeak is so expensive,but you archive the problem for 10-15 year!! HIMO
Beppe61, what is your associated equipment? I know budget is ~ 800 Euros for the speaker pair. Does that budget figure have to include cabinets, or will you be building your own?
The problem for a beginning builder is that drivers like the 12M 4631 require excellent associated equipment, crossover parts, and cables. The 13M 8636 at half the price is still a very good driver, if no longer the last word in transparency; and some of the famed old Seas mids would also work. Apparently some drivers not distributed here in the USA would be good choices as well.
This thread is a companion to:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72023
Also, a visit to http://www.zaphaudio.com/ might be very helpful.
The problem for a beginning builder is that drivers like the 12M 4631 require excellent associated equipment, crossover parts, and cables. The 13M 8636 at half the price is still a very good driver, if no longer the last word in transparency; and some of the famed old Seas mids would also work. Apparently some drivers not distributed here in the USA would be good choices as well.
This thread is a companion to:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72023
Also, a visit to http://www.zaphaudio.com/ might be very helpful.
Accouton C²90-T6 mid-range unit is best based on the data, and also the smoothest FR to 2kHz. It is good to 5kHz though. I've never heard it but others have measured it and it beats the Vifa and the PHL.
You will prolly want to remove the grills though. In my experience grills have always made an audible difference, always negative.
You will prolly want to remove the grills though. In my experience grills have always made an audible difference, always negative.
I use an Audax cast frame 6.5 inch carbon fiber mid/bass driver for between about 100hz to 2500hz. With 12 db slopes.
The sound is extremely natural and open.
I assume you are wanting to cover most all of the fundamentals with one midrange driver. I don't know why but midrange drivers in the 6 - 7 inch range tend to sound more natural in the lower midrange (assuming all other things are equal) which is generally more important for most listeners.
Cones of this size generally tend to break up around 2000 - 3000 Hz.
However some listeners are more sensitive to upper midrange anomolies. If your listening preferences seem to be of the latter type moving the upper crossover up a little may be called for but I think the highest note on the piano has a fundmental at about 4000 - 5000 Hz unless my memory fails me. And only a few 3-4 inch midrange drivers can do this.
Going to a 4 inch you only get about 500Hz more before breakup with most drivers except in a few very extended range drivers.
My feeling is that it is better to lower the lower crossover point to around 80 - 100 Hz and let the upper slide down a little.
There are more important fundamentals in normal music in the 150 Hz region which is right in the lower vocal range. IF you tend to be more picky about lower midrange and vocal region sound I think it is a better compromise to move both crossover regions down a little.
The sound is extremely natural and open.
I assume you are wanting to cover most all of the fundamentals with one midrange driver. I don't know why but midrange drivers in the 6 - 7 inch range tend to sound more natural in the lower midrange (assuming all other things are equal) which is generally more important for most listeners.
Cones of this size generally tend to break up around 2000 - 3000 Hz.
However some listeners are more sensitive to upper midrange anomolies. If your listening preferences seem to be of the latter type moving the upper crossover up a little may be called for but I think the highest note on the piano has a fundmental at about 4000 - 5000 Hz unless my memory fails me. And only a few 3-4 inch midrange drivers can do this.
Going to a 4 inch you only get about 500Hz more before breakup with most drivers except in a few very extended range drivers.
My feeling is that it is better to lower the lower crossover point to around 80 - 100 Hz and let the upper slide down a little.
There are more important fundamentals in normal music in the 150 Hz region which is right in the lower vocal range. IF you tend to be more picky about lower midrange and vocal region sound I think it is a better compromise to move both crossover regions down a little.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.