Full range speakers are good at a wide range of frequencies. Often the low end is something that needs augmenting as small full range speakers seem to be very good at mids and highs. Rather than use a FAST design, why not combine complementary full range speakers (largish and smallish) of similar sensitivity and use something like a 1st order crossover which requires the drivers to have good performance 2 octaves beyond the specified crossover point? I feel like full range speakers should cope well with this. If crossed at the right point, wouldn't this be a relatively simple 2 way that overcomes a lot of the limitations of full range speakers?
Are there any validated designs like this?
I realise that I am probably missing something but curious to why this wouldn't be a good idea.
Are there any validated designs like this?
I realise that I am probably missing something but curious to why this wouldn't be a good idea.
Last edited:
How about a fawt ?
Full range - augmented - woofer - technology
My thiel's woof (3-way) was 6db crossed, 8" all the way up to 800hz, then 3" till 3khz.
The local fast project crosses a 3" to an 8" near 900hz, even has baffle step.
People really like it.
I think mark audio was going in this direction (3" full range 6db crossing to larger full range).
Bob brines seemed to move away from an 8" full range to a 3" plus woof also.
So, yes, it is a good idea.
But matching drivers, needing flat z-curves for 6db crossover.
Needing z-spikes to be nowhere near crossover points.
More drivers, more little parts, etc.
My 2x4" run wide open was more transparent than the 3 way 6db, but it had no bass and couldn't play at a decent volume to me, let alone a 5" baffle with no baffle step, and too small vertical sweet spot.
Full range - augmented - woofer - technology
My thiel's woof (3-way) was 6db crossed, 8" all the way up to 800hz, then 3" till 3khz.
The local fast project crosses a 3" to an 8" near 900hz, even has baffle step.
People really like it.
I think mark audio was going in this direction (3" full range 6db crossing to larger full range).
Bob brines seemed to move away from an 8" full range to a 3" plus woof also.
So, yes, it is a good idea.
But matching drivers, needing flat z-curves for 6db crossover.
Needing z-spikes to be nowhere near crossover points.
More drivers, more little parts, etc.
My 2x4" run wide open was more transparent than the 3 way 6db, but it had no bass and couldn't play at a decent volume to me, let alone a 5" baffle with no baffle step, and too small vertical sweet spot.
Last edited:
Real bass woofer will also have more Xmax and be generally more robust handling the lower end than same size FR drivers you'd like to use for that.
Not saying it's impossible. Especially if combining with external powered subs.
The imagination is the limit in DIY Audio. 🙂
Not saying it's impossible. Especially if combining with external powered subs.
The imagination is the limit in DIY Audio. 🙂
You don't need a sub, but for larger FR drivers you do need a tweeter. I'd say a 4" is about the maximum you can do a 2-way, after that you will need to support it at both ends.
I have a L. Cao F6 with a SB20PFC woofer and it's pretty good, but you can tell it needs a bit of fun at the top end. A small cheap ribbon would really hit the spot.
I tried the Alnico first but it had zero output above 5k. I think the drivers were damaged or counterfeit, or the manufacturer zoned out as the FA8 I had used before it was excellent.
I have a L. Cao F6 with a SB20PFC woofer and it's pretty good, but you can tell it needs a bit of fun at the top end. A small cheap ribbon would really hit the spot.
I tried the Alnico first but it had zero output above 5k. I think the drivers were damaged or counterfeit, or the manufacturer zoned out as the FA8 I had used before it was excellent.
Fawt - i love it. I was thinking something like Faital 3fe22 or Fostex FF85WK with something bigger which might get to 40Hz. Crossed over much higher than you would with a sub. Often the 3" ones seem to get better reviews for the highs and mids just as good as 4" versions.
Glad the idea is not ridiculous!
Glad the idea is not ridiculous!
Last edited:
For a version with the FR for the high frequencies, the problem is hd dispersion. Such a speaker will beam like a flashlight above 4-5 khz and that really effects the speaker performance.
//
//
TNT - i don't really understand. Are you saying that all 3" FR drivers are going to be alot more prone to dispersion which will affect off-axis listening over say a 1" tweeter for the highs? Wouldn't this equally apply to any single FR speaker or would this be worse when using 2 fullrange speakers of different size?
Hi,
I think the 2-way speaker with a fullrange is a nice concept, and it has been done. Personally, I prefer by much having the vital 100hz-300hz area reproduced by a clean large speaker in contrast to a small 8-inch trying to move too much air.
So I went with 18-inch bass driver and 8-inch treble driver, passive filter at app. 300Hz, but not first order, as this will not work in an OB.
In theory, a small FR driver may of course be "better", but when listening to music, I prefer the larger units, IF made well.
Best regards
Mattes
I think the 2-way speaker with a fullrange is a nice concept, and it has been done. Personally, I prefer by much having the vital 100hz-300hz area reproduced by a clean large speaker in contrast to a small 8-inch trying to move too much air.
So I went with 18-inch bass driver and 8-inch treble driver, passive filter at app. 300Hz, but not first order, as this will not work in an OB.
In theory, a small FR driver may of course be "better", but when listening to music, I prefer the larger units, IF made well.
Best regards
Mattes
Attachments
Beaming means that the high frequencies will be concentrated like a narrow cone and you need to sit in a specific position to enjoy a full sound quality.
//
That would work around beaming (not that beaming has to be a bad thing). The thing is that the frequency where you match up a tweeter to a larger driver below it, is also the same frequency where straight woofers of that size stop working well. In other words, the full range benefit doesn't get used at the top end. I think this also answers the original question.
Hi,
when using a fullrange driver for treble, beaming is part of the concept and has to be taken into account. When working with the on-axis frequency response, it means that we aim for a slightly rising response, to counter the beaming effect with regard to the room response.
Practically, it means that the so called sweet spot, a defined listening area, occurs. An 8-inch treble driver with a listening distance of a few meters will be a one woman/man show mostly, but not necessarily of the head-in a -vice type.
Depending on application, a 5-inch treble driver naturally has a wider listening area and may be enjoyed by more than one listener.
Sometimes, when demostrating my system to friends, I´m sitting not precisely in the middle, in a suboptimal position. It doesn´t sound bad, but the perspective is somewhat shifted, and it´s not as good as it is from the center position. This can be somewhat altered with the speakers being more close to each other than an equidistant triangle, and toed-in more than usual in order to cross the center-beam before the listener.
As Allen said, it doesn´t have to be a bad thing per se - but one should know what it´s about and work with system properties, not against them.
All the best
Mattes
when using a fullrange driver for treble, beaming is part of the concept and has to be taken into account. When working with the on-axis frequency response, it means that we aim for a slightly rising response, to counter the beaming effect with regard to the room response.
Practically, it means that the so called sweet spot, a defined listening area, occurs. An 8-inch treble driver with a listening distance of a few meters will be a one woman/man show mostly, but not necessarily of the head-in a -vice type.
Depending on application, a 5-inch treble driver naturally has a wider listening area and may be enjoyed by more than one listener.
Sometimes, when demostrating my system to friends, I´m sitting not precisely in the middle, in a suboptimal position. It doesn´t sound bad, but the perspective is somewhat shifted, and it´s not as good as it is from the center position. This can be somewhat altered with the speakers being more close to each other than an equidistant triangle, and toed-in more than usual in order to cross the center-beam before the listener.
As Allen said, it doesn´t have to be a bad thing per se - but one should know what it´s about and work with system properties, not against them.
All the best
Mattes
I'm sorry, but I don't get it..? I get the concept of beaming, not a fan... 😛 Bit when using fr drivers open, this is one of the things they avoid so very well.
Say, if you'd do something like in Mattes speakers, but not ob, where you cross a large lf driver at 200-300hz to a rf in a sealed cab? If you use a good 15" pro driver it'll do both bass and midbass without breaking a sweat.
Say, if you'd do something like in Mattes speakers, but not ob, where you cross a large lf driver at 200-300hz to a rf in a sealed cab? If you use a good 15" pro driver it'll do both bass and midbass without breaking a sweat.
Surely there has to be a match of 2 fr speakers where they are both working in the range where they shine. Perhaps it won't go as low as a sub but might entend the range significantly more than a single fr. To me this will likely mean crossing higher than a FAST. Given that the 2 speakers could be quote closely matched for sensitivity and power handling, I also thought a simple 1st order crossover would work in this situation better than most. Not sure about the beaming - does this still apply to a good 3"? The idea would not be to get as low as possible, but to entend the curve as flat and as far out as possible. The only point to this would be if performance was significantly better across a wider range than a single fr is capable of and/or at least as good as a traditional 2 way.
Last edited:
Does it need to be two fr divers? Found this (10F/8424 & RS225-8 FAST / WAW Ref Monitor - diyAudio) and will jump in for some nice reading. 🙂 Also this! MA Alpair 10 2 + Beyma 12BR70 - YouTube
Hi,
of course beaming occurs with a 3" as well, but at higher frequencies. Assuming equal construction, beaming is a function of the cone diameter. And it does not mean it sounds bad...
A 3" might be a good thing down to 300Hz if you´re listening at low levels. It will be stressed at 300Hz at realistic listening levels, and that DOES sound bad.
The simple first order crossover may work, but I don´t think it´s a good recommendation for a start. The bass driver will most probably have a rising response after 300Hz, and you´ll want to attenuate this more that 6dB/octave. The FR driver, filtered with a single cap, will have a large response hump at resonance frequency, which needs to care about. You may aim at acoustic 6dB slopes in the end and this is a viable approach, but most certainly your filter will not be that simple anymore once you´re there... sorry.
Best regards
Mattes
of course beaming occurs with a 3" as well, but at higher frequencies. Assuming equal construction, beaming is a function of the cone diameter. And it does not mean it sounds bad...
A 3" might be a good thing down to 300Hz if you´re listening at low levels. It will be stressed at 300Hz at realistic listening levels, and that DOES sound bad.
The simple first order crossover may work, but I don´t think it´s a good recommendation for a start. The bass driver will most probably have a rising response after 300Hz, and you´ll want to attenuate this more that 6dB/octave. The FR driver, filtered with a single cap, will have a large response hump at resonance frequency, which needs to care about. You may aim at acoustic 6dB slopes in the end and this is a viable approach, but most certainly your filter will not be that simple anymore once you´re there... sorry.
Best regards
Mattes
.
I have read some of this already thanks. It may well be that the idea of using a fr with a woofer is as good or better. I was just wondering whether the idea of 2 fr drivers working together had been adequately explored. I don't have the knowledge or experience of most people here to know the theoretical limitations of such an idea. It wouldn't be that difficult to compare to a FAST for a particular small fr driver after playing around with the crossover.
I am not talking about high power handling here, say up to 25w with a sensitive speaker.
Last edited:
3fe22 has resonant frequency of 110Hz. It is pretty flat down to about 600Hz.
FaitalPRO 3FE22 - 3" Mid-range
FaitalPRO 3FE22 - 3" Mid-range
some questions and noob suggestions
1) why not BMR full range for less beaming ?
2) how about modular approach. F.A.S.T. is already popular ? why not add tweeter (like B&W speakers) have an active crossover and (In some music) if one wants the tweeter can be switched on or off ?
3) How about little treble boost/normal switch of 3db which can be turned on or off like studio monitors.
4) Jordan widebands ? which are known to have good top end response.
5) Acoustic lens to disperse high frequencies ?
Regards
1) why not BMR full range for less beaming ?
2) how about modular approach. F.A.S.T. is already popular ? why not add tweeter (like B&W speakers) have an active crossover and (In some music) if one wants the tweeter can be switched on or off ?
3) How about little treble boost/normal switch of 3db which can be turned on or off like studio monitors.
4) Jordan widebands ? which are known to have good top end response.
5) Acoustic lens to disperse high frequencies ?
Regards