*1 ^^^
* 2 ^^^
I have. Well, at least, measured great but sounded mediocre.
*1 answer: Hmm, well, we must have different standards as to what sounds "great". I thought the Revel Salon Ultimas sounded very good; I haven't heard any speakers that I thought really sounded "great" (other than briefly, on some songs) in more than 20 years.
*2: I agree with Dan, with what he said, if not with his intention: the purpose of measurements is precisely "getting us very near that point".
*1 & 2: I could make many arguments to support my case but I will present only one, and then I think the issue is put in the coffin, nailed shut, and burried:
Harmon Audio Group's elaborate listening test setup and procedures.
Isn't that enough for me to rest my case?
Last edited:
We may also have a different standard of what measures great. Maybe? I wish you were still out here, I could show you the recording end of the spectrum before we went out for mole. It may change your mind on how good a speaker can be as well. Something tells me your expectations may be beyond the available media.
Dan
Dan
Hi,
the advantages of ESLs at least in a freq-range >150Hz as I see them are:
- large membrane areas --> best possible matching to the air impedance over the entire freq-range
- advantageous membrane shapes like strip shapes are easy to manufacture --> a circle is surely not the optimum membrane shape regarding acoustic properties
- active membrane-area and-shape easily controllable by electrical means --> segmentation, also controls directivity
- directivity --> more direct sound, less room interaction, less early reflections
- dipolar distribution --> reflected sounds with considerable time delay. This gives also a higher degree of freedom to differently weigh the amount of direct and reflected sounds by positioning and acoustic treatment
- more even volume level distribution over distance with cylindrical distribution character --> allows for generally lower volume level settings
- linear drive system --> lowest distortion. Audio tranny and electronics become the limiting parts not the speaker itself.
- no mass related issues within the audible range --> how different against even lightweighted domes, not to talk of midrange or bass-cones
- an excellent force-to-weight-ratio in the counting freq-range (the mids)
- lower number of energy storage mechanisms --> basically just one, the base resonance Fs, and this can be placed outside the used freq-range
- much lower break-loose forces --> dynamic range increased towards lowest levels --> improved lowlevel resolution
- driving forces ´work´ directly on air --> no coupling elements like voice coil bobbin and glue joints with their distinct mechanical issues
- wide bandwidth --> less crossover point issues
- no inductance modulation of voice coil -> less drive nonlinearities
- no thermal issues due to resistive heating of a voicecoil --> linear increase in loudness over the entire dynamic range, no thermal compression
- due to the missing of resistive losses very high efficiency values of up to 30% possible (spoiled only by audio tranny as coupling element)
- usable -and best used- without casing --> no internal (early) reflections
There should be enough points to find that correlate with the impression of high resolution.
I assume there are more advantages, but I don´t want to totally freak out the poor dynamic driver fans. 😉
jauu
Calvin
the advantages of ESLs at least in a freq-range >150Hz as I see them are:
- large membrane areas --> best possible matching to the air impedance over the entire freq-range
- advantageous membrane shapes like strip shapes are easy to manufacture --> a circle is surely not the optimum membrane shape regarding acoustic properties
- active membrane-area and-shape easily controllable by electrical means --> segmentation, also controls directivity
- directivity --> more direct sound, less room interaction, less early reflections
- dipolar distribution --> reflected sounds with considerable time delay. This gives also a higher degree of freedom to differently weigh the amount of direct and reflected sounds by positioning and acoustic treatment
- more even volume level distribution over distance with cylindrical distribution character --> allows for generally lower volume level settings
- linear drive system --> lowest distortion. Audio tranny and electronics become the limiting parts not the speaker itself.
- no mass related issues within the audible range --> how different against even lightweighted domes, not to talk of midrange or bass-cones
- an excellent force-to-weight-ratio in the counting freq-range (the mids)
- lower number of energy storage mechanisms --> basically just one, the base resonance Fs, and this can be placed outside the used freq-range
- much lower break-loose forces --> dynamic range increased towards lowest levels --> improved lowlevel resolution
- driving forces ´work´ directly on air --> no coupling elements like voice coil bobbin and glue joints with their distinct mechanical issues
- wide bandwidth --> less crossover point issues
- no inductance modulation of voice coil -> less drive nonlinearities
- no thermal issues due to resistive heating of a voicecoil --> linear increase in loudness over the entire dynamic range, no thermal compression
- due to the missing of resistive losses very high efficiency values of up to 30% possible (spoiled only by audio tranny as coupling element)
- usable -and best used- without casing --> no internal (early) reflections
There should be enough points to find that correlate with the impression of high resolution.
I assume there are more advantages, but I don´t want to totally freak out the poor dynamic driver fans. 😉
jauu
Calvin
Last edited:
In sections...
I think the most detailed bass driver I've heard has been either an Eton 11" or the SS 22W/8857T. Dayton RSS210HF-4 is also very high on the list.
The most detailed mid(s) I've come across have been the:
SS 15W/8530-K00
TB W4-1337SA
TB W4-1798S
Morel MDM55
Usher 9845
Accuton C92
Seas Excel W15
Vifa W18-wood pulp
Focal 5k kevlar
PHL 1120
Tweeters:
Seas T25-001 and Millenium
Vifa XT25TG30
TB 25-1743S
SS Air-Circ and 9500
Dayton RS28A
Usher 9950-20
BG Neo3PDR
Hiquphon OW3
Morel MDT33
There are plenty more, but this is a short list off the top of my head.
Later,
Wolf
I think the most detailed bass driver I've heard has been either an Eton 11" or the SS 22W/8857T. Dayton RSS210HF-4 is also very high on the list.
The most detailed mid(s) I've come across have been the:
SS 15W/8530-K00
TB W4-1337SA
TB W4-1798S
Morel MDM55
Usher 9845
Accuton C92
Seas Excel W15
Vifa W18-wood pulp
Focal 5k kevlar
PHL 1120
Tweeters:
Seas T25-001 and Millenium
Vifa XT25TG30
TB 25-1743S
SS Air-Circ and 9500
Dayton RS28A
Usher 9950-20
BG Neo3PDR
Hiquphon OW3
Morel MDT33
There are plenty more, but this is a short list off the top of my head.
Later,
Wolf
Who's worked with this new Scan-Speak mid? It might be quite a detailed unit, not seen any waterfall plots yet though. BL doesn't seem terrifically high but I have high hopes for it 😀
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/15m-4624g00.pdf
http://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/pdf/15m-4624g00.pdf
11cm cone nice smal cone and high QMS links direct to low Rms flat response high soundpressure very nice.
Yes, definitely midrange units. How does it sound? It's a well-specced unit at a very reasonable price.
SA 8535
totally and without doubt in my own little mind, but, and I mean a big bertha butt question is : why can i used in the mid-range to match the qualities of such a superb tweeter ?
AGREED,
totally and without doubt in my own little mind, but, and I mean a big bertha butt question is : why can i used in the mid-range to match the qualities of such a superb tweeter ?
Attachments
The Audax HM100z0 was indeed memorable. After reading that several esteemed members has put it on their top list, I'll have to say... me too! 🙂.
However, I must add that combined with the Audax HD3P Gold Piezo tweeter it is a listening experience. The strenghts of the HM100Z0 are well known and I concur. I would like to add where the HD3P takes over. First of all, it unique that it is elliptical, it diffracts less... a lot lot less that typical tweeters. This adds to the inherent sweetness or is it the Gold part? (conductor) 🙂. Secondly, the vertical dispersion. When combined with the HM100Z0 and tilted back, such that the oval profile of the tweeter almost becomes a circle when directly in front of the tweeter does several things. Vertical separation between the midrange/tweeter is reduced, front to back dispersion because of the elongated vertical dispersion. A sense of spaciousness was what I remembered. So, I have to reaffirm those faded, if not forgotten audio memories, other than the adjectives describing them, I will be rebuilding my Audax HD3P/HDA system. Can't wait to hear it again. Can't wait to hear what it sounds like with FIR based crossovers 🙂. Thanks for the trip back through memory lane.
BTW, I tinkered with my HD3P and know how to repressurize it 😀.
(edit) Just wanted to add, tilting also brings the acoustic centers closer.
However, I must add that combined with the Audax HD3P Gold Piezo tweeter it is a listening experience. The strenghts of the HM100Z0 are well known and I concur. I would like to add where the HD3P takes over. First of all, it unique that it is elliptical, it diffracts less... a lot lot less that typical tweeters. This adds to the inherent sweetness or is it the Gold part? (conductor) 🙂. Secondly, the vertical dispersion. When combined with the HM100Z0 and tilted back, such that the oval profile of the tweeter almost becomes a circle when directly in front of the tweeter does several things. Vertical separation between the midrange/tweeter is reduced, front to back dispersion because of the elongated vertical dispersion. A sense of spaciousness was what I remembered. So, I have to reaffirm those faded, if not forgotten audio memories, other than the adjectives describing them, I will be rebuilding my Audax HD3P/HDA system. Can't wait to hear it again. Can't wait to hear what it sounds like with FIR based crossovers 🙂. Thanks for the trip back through memory lane.
BTW, I tinkered with my HD3P and know how to repressurize it 😀.
(edit) Just wanted to add, tilting also brings the acoustic centers closer.
Last edited:
There is an opening on the back of the tweeter. Upon opening you'll see foam. Its covered by the label. I will be installing a check valve over the orifice and pump air via syringe. I'll have to find out if there is a recommended PSI setting.
Sure. Still looking for the right valve. Something that'll maintain the cavity volume behind the tweeter. The opening is tapered hole from around 1/8 to 1/16.
Hi Scott, how would you load the MO version to match Aurum Cantus G1 (at 2500Hz crossover ) is there more detail I can retrieve somehow? At the moment I'm trying open baffle, would some some type of waveguide or horn do better?
OB for the MO is about the best you can do provided you have dealt with diffraction and excursion. The MO is not the highest "detail" retrieval driver, just good with a fairly natural sound. By and large the way to extract more detail from it is lower excursion - which usually entails a higher/steeper high-pass filter for the driver (a waveguide can help with this, but can also "harm" the detailed presentation as well at higher freq.s.). I particularly would NOT recommend using a waveguide unless you were also using a substantial waveguide for the G1. Note however that a *passive* filter for the high-pass filter can also reduce detail.
This may sound counter-intuitive, but if you are already going "active" for your filter then consider a large oil-based cap as a DC "block" for your G1 to *lower* it's detail to better match your MO. (Obliggato brand has these at decent prices.)
If you aren't going "active" for your filter, then doing that will certainly improve detail.
Another way (which could ruin the drivers) is adding a material to the diaphragm which has a higher young's modulus - like very low weight aluminum sourced from gilding supplies (i.e. "leaf"). You could alternatively put on a stiffening compound (again, which could ruin the drivers), but that would exacerbate the modes in the driver and cause upper freq. "peaking".
Oh, also make sure the baffle is chamfered on the rear for the driver. Also, the larger the baffle the lower the excursion (depending on driver placement and high-pass filter).
Last edited:
Depends on how steep your crossover is, and what you're pairing it with. 😉
Seriously, I'd be looking at 24dB at around 500Hz, higher with a lower order.
BTW, the Z0 is available again, though I haven't tried any of the new production.