I did some calculations - if the radiating area matches the area of perforations, then the LM10n could have an Sd of around 150cm2. That's equivalent to a circular driver with a radiating diameter of 5.4 inches. Radian give 1.2mm as the "displacement limit." Entering that into the online piston excursion calculator, with a 220Hz lower limit, suggests a maximum SPL of 103.7dB. Even if that's 6dB down from the passband level, that's an excursion limited maximum of just under 110 dB. And that assumes the 1.2mm excursion limit given is an RMS value, rather than a peak value (which is unlikely), and it ignores the fact that planars don't displace air uniformly as excursion increases (a point that's made nicely in the Consonus Tide technical paper). It also assumes a driver in a sealed box.
So I doubt that a single LM10n on that baffle, crossed at 220 Hz, could manage 114 dB.
So I doubt that a single LM10n on that baffle, crossed at 220 Hz, could manage 114 dB.
Here is Tide individual responses, from their brochure that is very informative. Still polar measurements are missing...
XOs 90/250/2200 LR4 acoustic
And my AINOgradients (indoor) - 10" sub, 12"cone low mid, 8" planar high mid and 3# planar tweeter
XOs 180/800/3500 LR2 acoustic
XOs 90/250/2200 LR4 acoustic
And my AINOgradients (indoor) - 10" sub, 12"cone low mid, 8" planar high mid and 3# planar tweeter
XOs 180/800/3500 LR2 acoustic
Last edited:
Damn, you should have filed for a PATENT on the AINOgradient design, @Juhazi
Well, for one, he didn't suspend the drivers on springs.
They are on a damped stiff, non-resonant, baffle with damping at the edges of the drivers, front and back. Ref: CONSONUS Tide design story and technology, https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/...f293c08e1_ConsonusTideDesignAndTechnology.pdfAlso, the cone drivers are anchored similarly to what Linkwitz proposed here: https://www.linkwitzlab.com/frontiers_2.htm
I've seen similar systems in the 'post yer pictures' and open baffle threads.
Any votes for SEAS Excel M15CH-002 5" Nextel Cone Midrange?
Eton 4-212/C8/25 HEX Symphony II 4" Bass-Midrange?
Eton 4-212/C8/25 HEX Symphony II 4" Bass-Midrange?
Thanks for the Excel input. Did a quick review of the info on HiFi Compass for this driver and doesn't seem to surpass the PTT6.5M08.
I'm now down to either this Purifi or the Radian LM10n as top current performers of cones and plannars, both suitable for my application.
Unfortunately I haven't heard a plannar midrange and I'm extrapolating/hoping that since I like AMT tweeters I would like plannar midrange...I realize this is a weakness in my rationale, though. I see comments about plannar midrange around "details" and "nuance" without being analytical. Would anybody be willing to venture how a plannar midrange and a cone such as PTT sound different? I know it has a lot to do with implementation but hopefully you understand what I'm after. Assuming the plannar is used outside the lower range where distortion rises.
Yeap, the Tide pdf talks about constrained layer for the baffle in the open section and talks about a heavy 1.5" thick panel, but I suspect is has more to do with minimizing vibrations from the 9.5" midbass cone than inherent vibrations from the midrange.Well, for one, he didn't suspend the drivers on springs.
Also, the cone drivers are anchored similarly to what Linkwitz proposed here: https://www.linkwitzlab.com/frontiers_2.htm
I've seen similar systems in the 'post yer pictures' and open baffle threads.
At this point, you should consider purchasing one of each and deciding for yourself. They're both excellent candidates, but no one can tell you how each may or may not suit your own preferences.
@studiotech
Fair and reasonable comment. Sourcing either will be complex and expensive, so I'll buy a pair of one of them and try it out.
This weekend I will test xo the midbass SLOB at 600Hz and see how that sounds. This could be a way to mitigate rising distortion on the LM10n, per @CharlieLaub .
BTW, what's the RAAL tweeter you use with the plannar midranges? I saw one trapezoidal OB speaker you showed that had it, and your avatar here also looks like another speaker with plannar mid and RAAL tweeter.
Fair and reasonable comment. Sourcing either will be complex and expensive, so I'll buy a pair of one of them and try it out.
This weekend I will test xo the midbass SLOB at 600Hz and see how that sounds. This could be a way to mitigate rising distortion on the LM10n, per @CharlieLaub .
BTW, what's the RAAL tweeter you use with the plannar midranges? I saw one trapezoidal OB speaker you showed that had it, and your avatar here also looks like another speaker with plannar mid and RAAL tweeter.
The large open baffles are dual BG NEO 10 plus Raal 140-15. The studio monitors are BG NEO8-S with Raal 70-20. I cross the dual NEO 10 at 300-3k. The NEO 8-S at 350-3k. Using a custom faceplate on the monitor to hold the NEO and Raal as close as possible.
Attachments
Purple? That's groovy, baby! I bet they sound fantastic. Is there a build thread on them?
Joseph Crowe has created various waveguides & full-on horns for planar drivers, including the BG/GRS magnetic planars. Others, including @xrk971 have come up with very shallow semi-waveguides for the same. All these for more consistent directivity. It's also an obvious way to improve low frequency reach.
For OB, I've considered using shallow WGs on both sides of the Neo8 (and similar).
3D printing makes such WG experiments possible & inexpensive.
The OP might consider this.
For OB, I've considered using shallow WGs on both sides of the Neo8 (and similar).
3D printing makes such WG experiments possible & inexpensive.
The OP might consider this.
Just bits and pieces here and there. Not a full build thread. So far we've got blue pairs, black, this purple and a natural to blue fade out in studios.
Attachments
If you can get to 3 to 5khz with your mid or full range driver the tweeter can easily take the top. A 4 inch should play well from 2 or 300hz to 6khz. This allows a range for crossover. A tuned sub box fills out the bottom.
Thank you!!
In the large open baffles it's the Raal 140-15D dipole, correct? These must be amazing tweeters. How do you find their horizontal and vertical dispersions?
Not the dipole Raal. Horizontal is fine. Vertical is bad without the foam pads. Alright below 10k with the foam pads. But for clear, effortless high frequencies without glare or artificial sounding brightness, they are the way to go.
@studiotech
Thanks. I'm curious why you chose the 140-15 non-dipole when you were doing OB? Maybe you had them already, or maybe something I can learn from.
Thanks. I'm curious why you chose the 140-15 non-dipole when you were doing OB? Maybe you had them already, or maybe something I can learn from.
It was not available at the time, as I recall. And I wasn't really going for full dipole. Even the neo10 were not usually run fully open back. I always used some amount of rear absorption to have a blend from monopole HF, to cardioid upper mids blending into dipole woofer.
Those are dead sexy!
I'm very much interested in monitors like those. I want to downsize my 7.2 system to a very good three-way or WAW. I plan on getting rid of my subwoofers and going with a real woofer that goes to 35-40hz. Any info you can provide would be great. I've looked at Troels bookshelf design and it looks great for what I want to do, Your system seems to take the small three-way up a notch or two. The woofer seems to be the most challenging thing for me to find. I have a tendency to derail threads, so any links would be better than a conversation, thanks!