I can only speak for what i have heard, given the limited size, hard to choosebetween the Alpair10PeN, or the Alpair 10.3eN. The paper cone a bit more romantic. Based on my MAOP 7/Alpair 7.3eN experience Leif’s driver should with have a slight edge over A10.3eN. They will sound similar.
Alpair 10ms does some things better than A10.3eN, but i have not EnABLed any or given them a long term listen )dsmn, time to drag seasick uo the stairs and listen to them some more)
dave
Alpair 10ms does some things better than A10.3eN, but i have not EnABLed any or given them a long term listen )dsmn, time to drag seasick uo the stairs and listen to them some more)
dave
From those i know (nobody knows them all), the Alpair 10.3 without a doubt, never used the enabled version, the MAOP10.2 is very similar, but not better in my eyes, just slightly different.
The 10P is also very close but a bit darker (less treble) sounding because of the roll off of the paper cone, any of the 3 will be good and differences are small. The main difference is in the treble.
The mid is almost the same, and vey high resolution without getting so detailed that it takes away the focus.
And as bonus, they do bass also very well for a fullrange. Not like a big (sub)woofer, but better than most dedicated midbass drivers. I've used the 10P as midbass in a design for high quality bookshelfs, using a SB Satori TW29BN as tweeter for someone that does not like fullrange driver systems. And he is very happy with it. That guy is a studio engineer and works in his studio with ATC and Klein & Hummel monitors, so he knows what good neutral sound is...
But if i choose it will be the 10.3. I use a pair in a reflex bookshelf daily in my office as office speakers on my desk and used others in other builds.
The 10P is also very close but a bit darker (less treble) sounding because of the roll off of the paper cone, any of the 3 will be good and differences are small. The main difference is in the treble.
The mid is almost the same, and vey high resolution without getting so detailed that it takes away the focus.
And as bonus, they do bass also very well for a fullrange. Not like a big (sub)woofer, but better than most dedicated midbass drivers. I've used the 10P as midbass in a design for high quality bookshelfs, using a SB Satori TW29BN as tweeter for someone that does not like fullrange driver systems. And he is very happy with it. That guy is a studio engineer and works in his studio with ATC and Klein & Hummel monitors, so he knows what good neutral sound is...
But if i choose it will be the 10.3. I use a pair in a reflex bookshelf daily in my office as office speakers on my desk and used others in other builds.
A 5 or 6” driver will start beaming quite early.
they will need to be aimed at your head, and will fall off quite fast off axis.
they will need to be aimed at your head, and will fall off quite fast off axis.
I have heard Alpair 10Maop, Alpair 11MS, Alpair 12p, Fostex Fe207E, Visaton bg20, Monacor sp-205/8.
Alpair 11MS have best transients but Alpair 10Maop have the best sound.
Alpair 10.3 have I never heard.
Alpair 11MS have best transients but Alpair 10Maop have the best sound.
Alpair 10.3 have I never heard.
"MAOP10" is the best choice for sound quality, and "TangBand W5-1880" is next best.
"CHP-90 mica" is the best choice for cost performance, and "Alpair10.3" is next best.
"CHP-90 mica" is the best choice for cost performance, and "Alpair10.3" is next best.
Alpair 10M in a very well optimized box.
It took three years to optimize this.
The result is more than acceptable.
It took three years to optimize this.
The result is more than acceptable.
Hi,
What is the frequency window needed and the minimum spl ? Is it to challenge the Audax or another project ?
If low efficienty is ok, have a look too to the paper glass fiber from Wavecore.,they need a notch though to tame the break-ups in the treble range.
I do not know also if someone has tried the new Alpair speeder less ?
The 18thSounds 6" with the weird suround in 8 ohms version is good but imo in the same ballpark than the P17M0 maybe goes higher in frequency.
What is the frequency window needed and the minimum spl ? Is it to challenge the Audax or another project ?
If low efficienty is ok, have a look too to the paper glass fiber from Wavecore.,they need a notch though to tame the break-ups in the treble range.
I do not know also if someone has tried the new Alpair speeder less ?
The 18thSounds 6" with the weird suround in 8 ohms version is good but imo in the same ballpark than the P17M0 maybe goes higher in frequency.
I will use the wideband in a 2 way first order from 200hz and up, supported by a 15” on the bottom (Omega pro 15)
i realized i should have added the wanted efficiency which is around 94db
I was considering seriously WE 755 drivers but i opted for a smaller wideband in the hope to get better treble extension
right now the contender is
fostex fe168ez
Last edited:
Look at the tangband FR...the one with the aluminium phase plug has a better QP than the usual one with the copper phase plug bullet which is more in the 300 plus USD.
Imo less distorsion than Fostex and flater.
Imo less distorsion than Fostex and flater.
Member
Joined 2006
How about the Sony Holey basket with a 2.5" cone? 😀
Please see posts #145, 146 below as how its fared with other modern and vintage full range drivers (including Altec 755A and 755C as seen in the background in the photo) in my view, tested on a big open baffle.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/what-is-the-best-full-range-driver.227544/page-8
Attached is a set of the Sony measurements done by my friend. 😀
Please see posts #145, 146 below as how its fared with other modern and vintage full range drivers (including Altec 755A and 755C as seen in the background in the photo) in my view, tested on a big open baffle.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/what-is-the-best-full-range-driver.227544/page-8
Attached is a set of the Sony measurements done by my friend. 😀
Attachments
Last edited:
That sony would need eq for the rising esponse,no bueno
should have also added i only want paper cone wideband
fostex fe168ez is more about 91db. Paired with omega pro 15, i should have maybe too much bass. If so, id swap for a 95db B&C woofer
so yeah, im looking for the best modern hi efficiency paper wideband… NO whizzer cone please
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2006
Please read post #145 in the link I provided... 😀
Yes, it paper cone, keep in mind measurements were done on axis.
Yes, it paper cone, keep in mind measurements were done on axis.
It should be noted that the Sinelis uses a “frankenstein” A10. I expect to getthe bass potential of teh A10.2, but with the better/smoother top and greater DDR on the mids of the A10.3.
We cannot get that driver. Without thinking much about it, NAOP 10.2 or A10.3 in a Pensil (or the cousin Festival, for a more formidable appearance) will be very close in sonics. And if one finesses the box a bit more one should be able to do even better.
The A10p if you want something more romantic.
dave
Now we are looking for a midTweeter. 94 dB is very limiting, For instance FE168eSigma is a 6.5” and you had us ignore that. I already had in mind the better FF165wk (needs a few tweaks, but so doe the 168). Not as nice as any of the A10s (different, not as smooth, qon’t go as low (you don’t care bout that). Yends to be prefered with heavy rotation of rock and such.
Going from 3 to 6.5 will open up a lot more choices, and no need to do bass as well.
Are you going to biamp?
dave
There is also the 5 from EMS speaker with aluminium dustcap. But 200 hz xover is too much low for that efficienty.
You will have a lot of baffle step in the midrange so you loose around 3 to 5 dB in an average room.
You will not find a FR without double cone that goes full range to the treble and that can handle 200 hz in the same time. And even less lower if you want 6 db slope xo.
3 and 4" are too small to marry with a 15 that low. It never will have enough xmax and Sd for a good blend at that 200 hz frequency because of high efficienty needed anx in the PA catalog.
So you need a 3 ways or plan higher XO... 400 hz for a good 15 is the usual limit. You can try some rare 8" that climb on axis and profit of their upper roll off to blend to 1.5 tweeter with no low pass on the 8 and a 1st slope high pass a little high :
Emminence beta 8 plus peereless tx32 (texteme). The c to c and off axis will be off course a trade off.
Or you sacrifice a lot of the efficienty of the 15 to rule the bafle step and manage more a low 91 dB for instance (ideal cut off at the baffle step according the width of the enclosure).
There is also the BC 8pe21 you could xo more 400 to 500 hz for home use with 12 dB slope minimum...but needs a tweeter as well.
You will have a lot of baffle step in the midrange so you loose around 3 to 5 dB in an average room.
You will not find a FR without double cone that goes full range to the treble and that can handle 200 hz in the same time. And even less lower if you want 6 db slope xo.
3 and 4" are too small to marry with a 15 that low. It never will have enough xmax and Sd for a good blend at that 200 hz frequency because of high efficienty needed anx in the PA catalog.
So you need a 3 ways or plan higher XO... 400 hz for a good 15 is the usual limit. You can try some rare 8" that climb on axis and profit of their upper roll off to blend to 1.5 tweeter with no low pass on the 8 and a 1st slope high pass a little high :
Emminence beta 8 plus peereless tx32 (texteme). The c to c and off axis will be off course a trade off.
Or you sacrifice a lot of the efficienty of the 15 to rule the bafle step and manage more a low 91 dB for instance (ideal cut off at the baffle step according the width of the enclosure).
There is also the BC 8pe21 you could xo more 400 to 500 hz for home use with 12 dB slope minimum...but needs a tweeter as well.
Last edited:
yeah, should have been clearer.
system will be first order series xo. Drove with el84 PP tube amp, no bi amp
paper cone and hi efficiency and no need of eq are the only limitations.
xo can be 200hz even up to 350hz