I just got this funny thought the Visaton M10 might be a copy/clone of the famous vintage SABA green cone
the surround on these type of drivers is often the cone itself, pleated and coated
hard core fullrange fanatics believe pleated paper surround is the best of all
How about tvm arp150
TVM Acoustics, Valašské Meziøíèí - Midranges
actually, I have been looking at that one a few times
and thought it looked interesting ... but unknown quality
do you know it ?
is it good ?
I do not know tinitus.actually, I have been looking at that one a few times
and thought it looked interesting ... but unknown quality
do you know it ?
is it good ?
They are not expense my concern is they are typical classic loudspeaker design. No short ring to reduce distorsion. Very limited xmax.
But they still can be used in a line array so all the points I named above will not play a large roll.
The 12" woofers had my interest for a long time to make a closed cabinet they look cool to.
Now you can buy a 10" alucone scanspeak for same money with all the new design upgrades, so tvm do not have any sale points for me. Oke one to make a real new classic style speaker a 70-80 ties speaker for a nice price.
This one maybe do well, it has low fs, but when closed with plastic pipe as small as possible it wil go higher, maybe around 350 a 400 hz. I go buy one and measure when I have closed it. It has high force factor thus efficienty.
FRS 8 M - 8 Ohm
FRS 8 M - 8 Ohm
I've got a FRS 5-8Ohm here, the surround looks like cloth. Unless its some kind of foam with a fine imprint of fiber weave in it?
Seems to work similarly to the $2 buyout 2incher from Parts Express.
FRS 5 - 8 Ohm
Seems to work similarly to the $2 buyout 2incher from Parts Express.
FRS 5 - 8 Ohm
I have a question, and I could figure it out with Hornresp, but maybe someone knows off the top of their head.
In a Unity or Synergy horn, the midranges are in front of the tweeter. One of the reasons that the design works is that the coupling chamber in front of the midranges creates a delay at the Fb of the coupling chamber.
Well, it occurred to me today:
Wouldn't that delay be dependent on the Q of the resonance?
I'm not 100% sure if this is the case. But if it IS, then it means that the location of the ports would have to be closer to the throat if the Q of the resonance is low.
I imagine that the net effect is relatively small, perhaps only a fraction of an inch.
But I've noticed that the Pyles sound a bit 'slower' than the Miscos, and maybe that's why. Perhaps the higher Q of the Pyle is screwing up the phase.
(I've never been able to measure phase well, so that's part of my problem. It's something that I need to learn how to do, but I'm not even 100% sure if Arta can record phase accurately. I understand Danley uses TEF?)
In a Unity or Synergy horn, the midranges are in front of the tweeter. One of the reasons that the design works is that the coupling chamber in front of the midranges creates a delay at the Fb of the coupling chamber.
Well, it occurred to me today:
Wouldn't that delay be dependent on the Q of the resonance?
I'm not 100% sure if this is the case. But if it IS, then it means that the location of the ports would have to be closer to the throat if the Q of the resonance is low.
I imagine that the net effect is relatively small, perhaps only a fraction of an inch.
But I've noticed that the Pyles sound a bit 'slower' than the Miscos, and maybe that's why. Perhaps the higher Q of the Pyle is screwing up the phase.
(I've never been able to measure phase well, so that's part of my problem. It's something that I need to learn how to do, but I'm not even 100% sure if Arta can record phase accurately. I understand Danley uses TEF?)
Hi Patrick
Is that Pyle not a speaker with weak motor? a horn needs a strong motor and a very stiff and strong conus who is light, this is not easy for speaker makers.
A slow sounding speaker has prperly a weak small magnet and a high qts, a very small speaker with a big magnet and thus drive can sound quite faster. The fase
when not properly corrected make a speaker slow and thin sounding.
It is just a thought.
kees
Last edited:
cheap drivers often have too big pole gap
easier to produce and assemble
but also means you can have poorly alligned voice coil
and still no risk of voice coil rubbing
on these drivers you are likely to notice the combination of a quite big magnet and high Qts
leads to poor control, low dynamics, and distortion
This you can see on the QTS, if it is higher then expected for such big magnet then the gap is wide.
als you see on fostex, these have a qts of 0,27 means good control, low distortion and nice for horns.
But fostex is more expensive, low qts drivers sometimes needs frequency correction for the peaks, the more
newer fostex are better these days and need no correction sometimes..
als you see on fostex, these have a qts of 0,27 means good control, low distortion and nice for horns.
But fostex is more expensive, low qts drivers sometimes needs frequency correction for the peaks, the more
newer fostex are better these days and need no correction sometimes..
Last edited:
You guys need to quit focusing so much on Qts and Qes. Once you seal the rear of any driver, the Q will go up anyway. Tom Danley uses the figure of (Bl^2)/Re as a figure of motor strength merit. A good expample that is apples to apples would be comparing the Eminence Alpha-6A and the LA6-CBMR.
Alpha-6A | Eminence Speaker
LA6-CBMR | Eminence Speaker
The Qts for the Alpha-6A is 0.54
The Qts for the LA6-CBMR is 0.89
However, the LA-CBMR has more than twice the motor strength of the Alpha-6A. In addition, anyone that has heard or used these two drivers will tell you the LA-CBMR is a beast and the Alpha-6A is more of a kitten. Lastly, if you model it and it works, who really cares what is written on the spec sheet?
Alpha-6A | Eminence Speaker
LA6-CBMR | Eminence Speaker
The Qts for the Alpha-6A is 0.54
The Qts for the LA6-CBMR is 0.89
However, the LA-CBMR has more than twice the motor strength of the Alpha-6A. In addition, anyone that has heard or used these two drivers will tell you the LA-CBMR is a beast and the Alpha-6A is more of a kitten. Lastly, if you model it and it works, who really cares what is written on the spec sheet?
In my situation, I had a couple drivers which were very similar. Basically the same Fb, same size. But the qts on one was much higher. I believe this is because of the foam surround and treated cone of the Pyle.
Here's the specs:
Pyle PDMR5:
Re: 6.736 ohms
Fs: 465 Hz
Qts: 2.43
Qes: 3.277
Qms: 9.395
Le: 0.8465 mH
Misco JC5RTF-B
Resonant Frequency (fo) 491 Hz
D.C. Resistance (Re) 6.7 ohms
Mechanical Q (Qms) 7.6
Electrical Q (Qes) 2.41
Total Q (Qts) 1.83
Compliance Equivalent Volume (Vas) 0.2 ltr
BL Product (BL) 5.4 T-M
Maximum Linear Excursion (Xmax) 0.9 mm
Surface Area of Cone (Sd) 64.0 cm2
It's interesting that the Misco actually uses a magnet that's 2/3rds the size.
I think this is also one of the reason that those cheap cone tweeters perform so well. They're a ridiculously crude design, but they're very horn friendly.