TangBang 3" is dead?
I noticed Zaph as replaced the WS-871 design, with a new one which is said to be multi-purpose - including neafield - but he mentions it lacks low end and NEEDS a subwoofer.
I've also read the same review for the old TangBang 3" design, which led me wondering if they should be paired with a sub - and stop being fullrange - ?
I'm mostly interested in making cheap *cough* nearfield *cough* monitors *cough* and wonder if nearfields are supposed to have a sub? I personally have never seen it.
I got optimistic when I found one of the new replacement design drivers - there are two, the design is intended for B3S, but there is a similar B3N - for aound 9£ which should qualify as both cheap and "do-able" as a DIY project for a broke student and potential upgrade from desktop computer speakers.
But I'm still wondering on the low end/Subwoofer issue. As anyone built the TangBang or the new model Zaph replaced it with, for nearfield purpose with/without subwoofer?
Any input welcome.
😀
I noticed Zaph as replaced the WS-871 design, with a new one which is said to be multi-purpose - including neafield - but he mentions it lacks low end and NEEDS a subwoofer.
I've also read the same review for the old TangBang 3" design, which led me wondering if they should be paired with a sub - and stop being fullrange - ?
I'm mostly interested in making cheap *cough* nearfield *cough* monitors *cough* and wonder if nearfields are supposed to have a sub? I personally have never seen it.
I got optimistic when I found one of the new replacement design drivers - there are two, the design is intended for B3S, but there is a similar B3N - for aound 9£ which should qualify as both cheap and "do-able" as a DIY project for a broke student and potential upgrade from desktop computer speakers.
But I'm still wondering on the low end/Subwoofer issue. As anyone built the TangBang or the new model Zaph replaced it with, for nearfield purpose with/without subwoofer?
Any input welcome.
😀
um, nope, the w3-871s is alive and well.
seems no one plays with them since zaph prefers the b3s :-(
TB Not such a great deal at $20 each now though.............
I'm doing a shootout over the next few weeks of dual drivers.
That may not help you but it'd be good to know.
like the minuet
http://www.dagogo.com/47LabGaincard-OmegaMinuet.html
dual tang band w3-871 vs. dual peerless vline tg9 vs. dual 4" bamboo vs. dual w4 1-52sd
Now all will be in a .35ft3 lightly stuffed sealed box...............
and remember w3-871s has 32cm2, peerless has 38cm2, and the other 2 have 57cm2. Peerless and bamboo each will need a notch filter.
Tang band w3-871s is phase plugged.
Peerless has fiberglass cone, copper cap, and dust cap.
4" bamboo has shorting ring, neo magnet, cast frame, underhung, and bamboo cone.
the 1052 has a poly cone with stiffeners (and prob break up standing waves), and neo magnet.
Some run baffle step.
That sepends how close to a wall and size of baffle.
I ran a w3-871s on a 2.5' wide open baffle... It'd break up on bass.
When run at same time as a 3 way, it added intelligibility and more coherent bass.
I'd say a sub never hurts, especially if it can clean up the mids.
Trouble is getting clean circuitry................
Fiddling around with active crossover, 24db/octave LR that 200hz was a good place to cross a full ranger. Best mids. Maybe you need a woofer instead of a sub. but good luck finding a transparent crossover.
I'd found a link on a german site where someone still heard the ringing of the b3s even with the filter in. I'd read it is easy to make a tweeter give cymbals a bunch of zing but upon long term listening they'd become irritating.
Remember these are tiny drivers......................
I say the tb is great given low volume levels restraints......................
Norman
seems no one plays with them since zaph prefers the b3s :-(
TB Not such a great deal at $20 each now though.............
I'm doing a shootout over the next few weeks of dual drivers.
That may not help you but it'd be good to know.
like the minuet
http://www.dagogo.com/47LabGaincard-OmegaMinuet.html
dual tang band w3-871 vs. dual peerless vline tg9 vs. dual 4" bamboo vs. dual w4 1-52sd
Now all will be in a .35ft3 lightly stuffed sealed box...............
and remember w3-871s has 32cm2, peerless has 38cm2, and the other 2 have 57cm2. Peerless and bamboo each will need a notch filter.
Tang band w3-871s is phase plugged.
Peerless has fiberglass cone, copper cap, and dust cap.
4" bamboo has shorting ring, neo magnet, cast frame, underhung, and bamboo cone.
the 1052 has a poly cone with stiffeners (and prob break up standing waves), and neo magnet.
Some run baffle step.
That sepends how close to a wall and size of baffle.
I ran a w3-871s on a 2.5' wide open baffle... It'd break up on bass.
When run at same time as a 3 way, it added intelligibility and more coherent bass.
I'd say a sub never hurts, especially if it can clean up the mids.
Trouble is getting clean circuitry................
Fiddling around with active crossover, 24db/octave LR that 200hz was a good place to cross a full ranger. Best mids. Maybe you need a woofer instead of a sub. but good luck finding a transparent crossover.
I'd found a link on a german site where someone still heard the ringing of the b3s even with the filter in. I'd read it is easy to make a tweeter give cymbals a bunch of zing but upon long term listening they'd become irritating.
Remember these are tiny drivers......................
I say the tb is great given low volume levels restraints......................
Norman
>>> dual tang band w3-871 vs. dual peerless vline tg9 vs. dual 4" bamboo vs. dual w4 1-52sd
I look forward to your opinion on these drivers. Enjoy the process.
I look forward to your opinion on these drivers. Enjoy the process.
thanks godzilla,
I still need to buy a pair of peerless tg9 and a pair of the w4-1052sd.
My bets are on peerless.
But any notch network while improving the ringing may remove a bit of magic or life normally found when adding even passive circuitry to a full range driver.
Detail will be the most important factor followed by clarity at low volumes.
Drivers will be run wide open with bass support (f-modded at 80hz ported v12f cerwin vega).
I'll try not to let cone area be a factor, especially with the drivers being run wide open.
I couldn't believe I'd read "These guys also give good weight on acoustic piano, and the timbre they project is very accurate… I mean the acoustic piano really sounds like it should" about a poly cone. Guess those stiffening ribs work. I see them as breaking up standing waves..........And these do bass compared qtc sealed boxes having f3 between 120 and 150hz of the other 3.
Seems omega only doing hemp cones.....
pretty, but not cheap.
Thickness of cone may also be a factor as I know the TB w3871s well in an open baffle, not 2 in a .35ft3 sealed box. Open baffle gave it squeeky clean mids...............
Norman
I still need to buy a pair of peerless tg9 and a pair of the w4-1052sd.
My bets are on peerless.
But any notch network while improving the ringing may remove a bit of magic or life normally found when adding even passive circuitry to a full range driver.
Detail will be the most important factor followed by clarity at low volumes.
Drivers will be run wide open with bass support (f-modded at 80hz ported v12f cerwin vega).
I'll try not to let cone area be a factor, especially with the drivers being run wide open.
I couldn't believe I'd read "These guys also give good weight on acoustic piano, and the timbre they project is very accurate… I mean the acoustic piano really sounds like it should" about a poly cone. Guess those stiffening ribs work. I see them as breaking up standing waves..........And these do bass compared qtc sealed boxes having f3 between 120 and 150hz of the other 3.
Seems omega only doing hemp cones.....
pretty, but not cheap.
Thickness of cone may also be a factor as I know the TB w3871s well in an open baffle, not 2 in a .35ft3 sealed box. Open baffle gave it squeeky clean mids...............
Norman
norman bates said:
That's pretty much 2/3 of the way to an FF85k which is a much better driver.
Not many 3" will get you under 100 Hz, and even then tend to be xMax limited. This works out fine for nearfield use, and a sub abd a high pass and they can get quite interesting (Chris just delivered the proto boxes for an FF85k/SDX7 20way we are working on 🙂)
dave
hiya dave,
whatzza FF86k ?
an ff85k ?
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/fostexdrivers/FF85K.pdf
I don't yet have much experience with different drivers.
yet anyway.
sounds neat.
there needs to be more full range plus bass speakers !!!!!!!!
there was a link on ff85k and FW208N (qts .2, fs 29hz)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=34710
or the 871s with woofer
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/index_en.htm?/hifi/ct211_en.htm
here is a dual ff85k rear horn, cool
http://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_comp/pdf/recom_enclose/85k_encl.pdf
and even saw where one crossed 1 ff85k at 24db/octave LR actively.
Norman
whatzza FF86k ?
an ff85k ?
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/fostexdrivers/FF85K.pdf
I don't yet have much experience with different drivers.
yet anyway.
sounds neat.
there needs to be more full range plus bass speakers !!!!!!!!
there was a link on ff85k and FW208N (qts .2, fs 29hz)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=34710
or the 871s with woofer
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/index_en.htm?/hifi/ct211_en.htm
here is a dual ff85k rear horn, cool
http://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_comp/pdf/recom_enclose/85k_encl.pdf
and even saw where one crossed 1 ff85k at 24db/octave LR actively.
Norman
norman bates said:
A consequence of my taking Grade 11 math instead of Grade 10 typing .... FF85k it is (actually FF85KeN -- in truth we just went ahead and modified the driver to start.
Inspired by Cal's Calhouns we have 2 pair of FF85KeN set aside to try in a set of Frugel-Horns -- one on the front & oneon the side
dave
doorman said:
Tysen (the FF85 + SDX7) will be playing for the diyFEST... the twin FF85 Frugel-Hor won't make it unless Chris decides to do a blast.
dave
I've tried the WS-871 in several designs and the always sounded "small" to me. Not bad, but just lacking impact and life. Ineffecient, too.
But maybe there is a good design out there for them....
But maybe there is a good design out there for them....
w00t
I've been trying to keep up, but you guys seem to be talking in a code I do not know.
So it's not necessary to use a sub for nearfields? Won't I miss the bass? I don't mean a bass enhancer, just to hear what's there, not color it.
Also, whats the difference in using two drivers per cabinet instead of one? From what I understand it simply cuts the power efficiency by half, given Ohm's Law.
I'm also looking for speakers that can reproduce a new aquired les paul like guitar with humbuckers, do you think that the B3S/B3N (or WS-871S) will work, also serving as nearfields? I don't suppose the below 100Hz would matter much on the guitar, unless it was a bass.
Still, is there any cheap subwoofer, to match the B3S/B3N or WS-871S?
I really don't have a budget for going into higher cost projects, so I'll settle with the best I can get in the low budget.
I could possibly look up how to do (cheap) passive - I like passive things, i.e.: no power usage 😉 - crossover, although my electric background is rusty and I don't know how all the law's I studied are used in audio, and there are probably people much better at it, already doing it out there.
I've been trying to keep up, but you guys seem to be talking in a code I do not know.
So it's not necessary to use a sub for nearfields? Won't I miss the bass? I don't mean a bass enhancer, just to hear what's there, not color it.
Also, whats the difference in using two drivers per cabinet instead of one? From what I understand it simply cuts the power efficiency by half, given Ohm's Law.
I'm also looking for speakers that can reproduce a new aquired les paul like guitar with humbuckers, do you think that the B3S/B3N (or WS-871S) will work, also serving as nearfields? I don't suppose the below 100Hz would matter much on the guitar, unless it was a bass.
Still, is there any cheap subwoofer, to match the B3S/B3N or WS-871S?
I really don't have a budget for going into higher cost projects, so I'll settle with the best I can get in the low budget.
I could possibly look up how to do (cheap) passive - I like passive things, i.e.: no power usage 😉 - crossover, although my electric background is rusty and I don't know how all the law's I studied are used in audio, and there are probably people much better at it, already doing it out there.
#1 they will sound small, forget midbass or bass, but sitting 3' away will help.
Role audio Sampan FTL, 3.5" tranny line (with port? can't remember)
http://www.affordableaudio.org/RoleSampanFTL.pdf
Review of selah audio mf7 6.5" coax
http://www.affordableaudio.org/aa2008-01.pdf
"compared to the stand-mounted monitors I previously reviewed, the single driver Role Audio Sampan FTL, the selah mf7s had a much bigger, room-filling sound if not quite as holographic. The Sampans seemed to envelope me in their sound with an almost headphone-like presentation, but the images were smaller and more distant."
so, yea, a 3.5" driver gives a small sound.
I think that's why people love their big tannoys.
Voice is launched from a large area compared to from a flashlight.
#2 yea I'd run a sub, It'll make the driver sound cleaner and give some heft.
#3 since you are sitting so close, run 1 driver.
If not enough loudness get a larger / more sensitive driver.
A recently reviewed 2 x 4" drivers (5" frames) per speaker, your head is in a vice at 12' away.
Passive ? that's another can of worms.
I'd use some sweet headphones.
Wallmart had some Koss ones saying e-bass on package (means you don't need loudness on). Sounded good, was $18 a couple of years ago.
It's hard to bet a pair of headphones.
Norman
Role audio Sampan FTL, 3.5" tranny line (with port? can't remember)
http://www.affordableaudio.org/RoleSampanFTL.pdf
Review of selah audio mf7 6.5" coax
http://www.affordableaudio.org/aa2008-01.pdf
"compared to the stand-mounted monitors I previously reviewed, the single driver Role Audio Sampan FTL, the selah mf7s had a much bigger, room-filling sound if not quite as holographic. The Sampans seemed to envelope me in their sound with an almost headphone-like presentation, but the images were smaller and more distant."
so, yea, a 3.5" driver gives a small sound.
I think that's why people love their big tannoys.
Voice is launched from a large area compared to from a flashlight.
#2 yea I'd run a sub, It'll make the driver sound cleaner and give some heft.
#3 since you are sitting so close, run 1 driver.
If not enough loudness get a larger / more sensitive driver.
A recently reviewed 2 x 4" drivers (5" frames) per speaker, your head is in a vice at 12' away.
Passive ? that's another can of worms.
I'd use some sweet headphones.
Wallmart had some Koss ones saying e-bass on package (means you don't need loudness on). Sounded good, was $18 a couple of years ago.
It's hard to bet a pair of headphones.
Norman
norman bates said:
That was my first reaction also with W3-871s boxes ; matchbox size speakers, and a shoebox size sound.
I have however got very fond of my pair of Cyburg Needles with the W3-871s installed diagonally in a small 10' by 10' room.
It seems that most imaginable design options for the 3" TB drivers have now been tried, many with very good results !!!
I would however be interesting to see some more projects with the slightly larger 4" drivers, such as the w3-1320. It might provide some of the finesse of the 3" with with a little more weight to the grand piano ?
SveinB
Hi,
The best full range (i.e. no sub) 3" driver is the NS3-193.
As described in Zaphs SW-MS part 1 and 2.
And as a fullrange in the Zaph Archives.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/archives-19.zip
Nearfields do not need a lot of bass but for accuracy they need
to go low, most mini's do not go low, hence the need for a sub.
They can be made with active EQ etc. to go low, but not IMO
with a 3" fullrange, a bigger longer throw bass/mid is needed.
🙂/sreten.
The best full range (i.e. no sub) 3" driver is the NS3-193.
As described in Zaphs SW-MS part 1 and 2.
And as a fullrange in the Zaph Archives.
http://www.zaphaudio.com/archives-19.zip
Nearfields do not need a lot of bass but for accuracy they need
to go low, most mini's do not go low, hence the need for a sub.
They can be made with active EQ etc. to go low, but not IMO
with a 3" fullrange, a bigger longer throw bass/mid is needed.
🙂/sreten.
sreten said:
When stretched the Aura will get you a half-octave more bottom than the FF85 but otherwise it isn't even close to the FF85. At it's best compromise between extended bottom and the bottom deterioraying the mid quality the Aura still only gets just below 100 Hz. The penalty it pays for extended nottom is even lower efficiency than you expect from a 3".
Still, it would be my 2nd choice for a 3" driver.
Note: the 5 1/2" Silver Flute seems a nice, inexpensive driver to add some bottom tp these. I have a pair i haven't utilized yet which i got on the basis of hearing Gregg-the-Geeks SF + the 2" Jordan J6T (now Alpair)
dave
Hi,
The FF85 with 0.5mm excursion is not full range, it is not
even a bass unit of any sort, more like a midrange/tweeter.
🙂/sreten.
The FF85 with 0.5mm excursion is not full range, it is not
even a bass unit of any sort, more like a midrange/tweeter.
🙂/sreten.
Er, perhaps I'm missing something here, but I don't recall anybody saying it was. Dave's remark is that the Aura goes lower than the Fostex unit, at the price of much lower sensitivity, and in his view, inferior mids / treble.
You will note that he's pairing it with an SDX7 in a current design, & mooting a pair of them for use in a corner-horn, where available excursion is doubled, & control over the driver is far tighter than in, say, a more regular BR cabinet.
You will note that he's pairing it with an SDX7 in a current design, & mooting a pair of them for use in a corner-horn, where available excursion is doubled, & control over the driver is far tighter than in, say, a more regular BR cabinet.
sreten said:
If you want to get picky none of the 3" drivers are full-range... if you want to get real picky there is no such thing as a FR driver... in the µFonken the FF85 does 100 Hz, Scott has an MBVR that sims to 70.
I've actually gotten quite satisfactiry levels with a set of µFonken in my 350 m^3 room... a real surprise given the sims.
In a sealed box the Aura does 100 Hz, in an approproate BR it will do ~65 Hz. The FF85 goes well beyond 20k, the Aura is strugglinh sufficienttly at the top that some want to use it with a tweeter.
And in terms of finese and fidelity there is no contest.
dave
From my understanding, range is merely a reference to a driver's optimal response.
And 3" FR clearly ends when we had a sub 😀
Still, I'm not worried about labels, rather with sonics.
So if need be, what should I pair the B3S/N's with (given I can't find the WS-871 in europe)? Zaph mentions the need but not the choice, so is there a proven cheap subwoofer design that fits in?🙄
And 3" FR clearly ends when we had a sub 😀
Still, I'm not worried about labels, rather with sonics.
So if need be, what should I pair the B3S/N's with (given I can't find the WS-871 in europe)? Zaph mentions the need but not the choice, so is there a proven cheap subwoofer design that fits in?🙄
- Status
- Not open for further replies.