***18th july 2015 update***
Thank you to all contributors in my quest for the best midrange drivers.
Got many interesting suggestions and i sure will consider some of them.
Since this thread as drifted to more noise than signal not too long after his beginning, i'll now communicate essentially by private messages; so if you want to get updates on the test, video link, photos, data, etc... you'll need to send me a PM. Thank you and good luck in your future projects!
-------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
We will soon conduct a comparison (blind) test regarding Midrange transducers. Identification type blind test first, then appreciative test...
We have pretty much decided which will be tested among the ''big boys'' (see list below) but we'd like to throw in the game some lower-cost drivers as well... Who knows? An underdog might cause a surprise...
So basically, all drivers will be on an baffle, electronic xover from about 400hz to 7000hz (somewhat the minimum for comfortable listening), EQed and all SPL matched for fair comparisons.
So what i need is some drivers suggestions that can work in these frequencies.
Fyi: here is the list of our best contenders so far:
- Fullrange Voxativ AC-1.6
- ATC SM75-150
- Radian PB950 with Beryllium diaphragm + short horn
In addition, we might consider: Visaton B200, some Supravox, Seas exotic F8, Max fidelity PR65neo, etc...
Please let me know if you have any idea of mid drivers to submit, thank you in advance for your help. Results of the test will be posted later, of course.
-----------
FINAL Pre-selection List update:
Scan-speak 10F/8424G00
Scan-speak 12MU/4731T00
Voxativ AC-1.6
ATC SM75-150
Seas exotic F8
Fostex FF85wk
Vifa/Peerless TG9FD-10-8
Visaton Ti100
Visaton B200
Max Fidelity PR4 neo
Max Fidelity PR65 neo
Alpair 7.3eNc
Airborne FR151 paper cone version
Airborne FR151 wooden cone version
-----------------------
1st August 2015 Notes:
The biggest news (and maybe a little surprising) is: once SPL-matched, in a controlled Blind test environment, the drivers are in fact much more difficult to identify than expected.
For that reason, we will proceed with groups of 4 drivers for each test round. Drivers for each group will be selected for their potential of contrast between each other. Therefore, the identification should be easier and the whole exercise more enjoyable for participants.
Thank you to all contributors in my quest for the best midrange drivers.
Got many interesting suggestions and i sure will consider some of them.
Since this thread as drifted to more noise than signal not too long after his beginning, i'll now communicate essentially by private messages; so if you want to get updates on the test, video link, photos, data, etc... you'll need to send me a PM. Thank you and good luck in your future projects!
-------------------------------------
Hi everyone,
We will soon conduct a comparison (blind) test regarding Midrange transducers. Identification type blind test first, then appreciative test...
We have pretty much decided which will be tested among the ''big boys'' (see list below) but we'd like to throw in the game some lower-cost drivers as well... Who knows? An underdog might cause a surprise...
So basically, all drivers will be on an baffle, electronic xover from about 400hz to 7000hz (somewhat the minimum for comfortable listening), EQed and all SPL matched for fair comparisons.
So what i need is some drivers suggestions that can work in these frequencies.
Fyi: here is the list of our best contenders so far:
- Fullrange Voxativ AC-1.6
- ATC SM75-150
- Radian PB950 with Beryllium diaphragm + short horn
In addition, we might consider: Visaton B200, some Supravox, Seas exotic F8, Max fidelity PR65neo, etc...
Please let me know if you have any idea of mid drivers to submit, thank you in advance for your help. Results of the test will be posted later, of course.
-----------
FINAL Pre-selection List update:
Scan-speak 10F/8424G00
Scan-speak 12MU/4731T00
Voxativ AC-1.6
ATC SM75-150
Seas exotic F8
Fostex FF85wk
Vifa/Peerless TG9FD-10-8
Visaton Ti100
Visaton B200
Max Fidelity PR4 neo
Max Fidelity PR65 neo
Alpair 7.3eNc
Airborne FR151 paper cone version
Airborne FR151 wooden cone version
-----------------------
1st August 2015 Notes:
The biggest news (and maybe a little surprising) is: once SPL-matched, in a controlled Blind test environment, the drivers are in fact much more difficult to identify than expected.
For that reason, we will proceed with groups of 4 drivers for each test round. Drivers for each group will be selected for their potential of contrast between each other. Therefore, the identification should be easier and the whole exercise more enjoyable for participants.
Last edited:
The B&W FST driver.
The Accuton C173-6-090.
These should only really be used up as high as 2.5kHz though. Then again the ATC shouldn't really be used beyond around 3-3.5k for C2C matching.
The Accuton C173-6-090.
These should only really be used up as high as 2.5kHz though. Then again the ATC shouldn't really be used beyond around 3-3.5k for C2C matching.
Will the fq response be equalized for this test? Running op to 7000Hz is just crazy fo midwoofers because of their harsh cone resonance etc. issues. Likewise directivity of 8" vs. 3" is very different.
ie. I can't see any validity in this kind of test approach
ie. I can't see any validity in this kind of test approach
Last edited:
Midrange, not midwoofer.
Larger Sd means also that the center (origin, where the VC is attached ) will move faster that the periphereals, which is called break-up
A larger Sd means that the sound is created "by much more points" so a phantom sound might be audible ( it depends on the distance to the listener, so a -60 dB "phantom " sound might not be heard
also Mms...larger Sd brings to that.
Larger Sd means also that the center (origin, where the VC is attached ) will move faster that the periphereals, which is called break-up
A larger Sd means that the sound is created "by much more points" so a phantom sound might be audible ( it depends on the distance to the listener, so a -60 dB "phantom " sound might not be heard
no reason to go up to 7khz.it will only cause problems.2.5-3khz would be enough for most hi end tweeters.
If you are going to EQ them perfectly flat, then the standout non-linear performers in the range you want to use them, from my testing are:
Fountek FR88EX, Tang Band W3-1878, Vifa TC7FD00-04, Vifa NE95W-04, Vifa TG9FD10-08.
I haven't tested the Tang Band 75-1558SE but Zaph audio's results look amazing and if you're testing the SM75 you best test the TB too.
If 3KHz is considered instead, the Dayton RS52AN-8 becomes an option.
Fountek FR88EX, Tang Band W3-1878, Vifa TC7FD00-04, Vifa NE95W-04, Vifa TG9FD10-08.
I haven't tested the Tang Band 75-1558SE but Zaph audio's results look amazing and if you're testing the SM75 you best test the TB too.
Agreed. CTC distance is too much at 7KHz for the SM75 and others too.
If 3KHz is considered instead, the Dayton RS52AN-8 becomes an option.
Last edited:
For 2800 $ ( Voxativ AC-1.6 ) I would expect it to reach 7 k and beyond
same for the famous ATC
and same for any CD ( we're talking about the driver: dunno about a "short horn" )
same for the famous ATC
and same for any CD ( we're talking about the driver: dunno about a "short horn" )
That's so true ! We need to know the system.
I mean, the target is a BIG system obviously, so we need to collect every single piece of the puzzle.
BTW what's the meaning of EQ'ing a driver ??
I have done two blind tests that you may want to look at.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...nd-comparison-3in-5in-full-range-drivers.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...ind-comparison-3in-5in-drivers-round-2-a.html
Top drivers: Vifa TC9FD, Faital Pro 3FE22, Peerless P830986, ScanSpeak 10F/8424
I would add Vifa TG9FD-10-8, Visaton B80, and Dayton RS100P-4
But if I had to pick one, it comes down to smoothness of response, high sensitivity, and good dynamics: ScanSpeak 10F/8424
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...nd-comparison-3in-5in-full-range-drivers.html
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...ind-comparison-3in-5in-drivers-round-2-a.html
Top drivers: Vifa TC9FD, Faital Pro 3FE22, Peerless P830986, ScanSpeak 10F/8424
I would add Vifa TG9FD-10-8, Visaton B80, and Dayton RS100P-4
But if I had to pick one, it comes down to smoothness of response, high sensitivity, and good dynamics: ScanSpeak 10F/8424
Last edited:
Oh, I see: when looking at the FR graph, you're supposed to cut the 5 kHz peak
and to boost the 1 kHz dip 🙄
PM135ND : Ciare
Not just midwoofers. A midrange that performs well at 400 Hz is not going to perform well at 7kHz and any tiny upper midrange/tweeter that performs well at 7kHz is not going to perform well at 400 Hz.
It isn't clear quite what the OP wants to test. A conventional 5" midrange using a hard cone which works superbly in a conventional 3 way is going to sound dreadful in the proposed test. Is this a mistake or is it what the OP wants in his test?
Midrange implies use in a 3way speaker so I would expect decent performance over one decade ie 300-3000Hz or 400-4000Hz.
Personally I would never dream of running a midrange up to 7k, that is supertweeter territory in a 4way. It is of no practical interest to me how the ATC for example performs an octave above its intended passband and may well skew the test in a way that makes it almost useless.
Rather than running midranges up that high I would use a good, directivity matched tweeter and cross it in at the frequency appropriate for the mid tested.
Personally I would never dream of running a midrange up to 7k, that is supertweeter territory in a 4way. It is of no practical interest to me how the ATC for example performs an octave above its intended passband and may well skew the test in a way that makes it almost useless.
Rather than running midranges up that high I would use a good, directivity matched tweeter and cross it in at the frequency appropriate for the mid tested.
I would love tang band W3 1285SG to be included, in any qualitative measures.
I have a pair, but I've never found any public THD graphs for them.
I have a pair, but I've never found any public THD graphs for them.
To answer some questions and comments:
Yes, i know: 400hz to 7khz is very wide.
The only reason we aim for that is for listening comfort; According to some tests i have made, anything less than that becomes more difficult; the brain seems to search for low and hi frequencies. Also, for that reason (listening comfort) we don't want to do that kind of test on a woofer or a tweeter: midrange is the best for that kind of testing, despite the conditions... (Fyi: according to some pre-test i made, it will be VERY interesting to see the final results.)
That being said: we AIM for 400hz to 7khz but we might end up doing 550hz to 6000hz or 400hz to 5500hz or 600hz to 6500hz, etc... It will depend of the results obtained.
And YES, the Voxativ is perfectly at ease in these frequencies. The ATC is slightly out of his comfort zone but respond well with DSP corrections. We have a special version of the Radian PB950 with a spacer that allows to make some corrections in the lower frequencies without damaging it. It might work, or not. Need to be tested but i'm pretty confident about that.
Yes, i know: 400hz to 7khz is very wide.
The only reason we aim for that is for listening comfort; According to some tests i have made, anything less than that becomes more difficult; the brain seems to search for low and hi frequencies. Also, for that reason (listening comfort) we don't want to do that kind of test on a woofer or a tweeter: midrange is the best for that kind of testing, despite the conditions... (Fyi: according to some pre-test i made, it will be VERY interesting to see the final results.)
That being said: we AIM for 400hz to 7khz but we might end up doing 550hz to 6000hz or 400hz to 5500hz or 600hz to 6500hz, etc... It will depend of the results obtained.
And YES, the Voxativ is perfectly at ease in these frequencies. The ATC is slightly out of his comfort zone but respond well with DSP corrections. We have a special version of the Radian PB950 with a spacer that allows to make some corrections in the lower frequencies without damaging it. It might work, or not. Need to be tested but i'm pretty confident about that.
Last edited:
Yes, i thought of that.
Problem is you add a big variable in the test. That implies we already have a reference tweeter, but we don't. (i could use my RAAL 140-15D but that is MY reference, not everybody's...)
That also implies driver's integration/combination bias and might end up with ''yes but you should've try with this tweeter instead'', etc...
Aiming 7khz is ambitious, i do agree. Then again, you should pass the memo to the fullrange club ;-)
Like i said, i look for the most capable drivers out there. Then we will do some pre-testing.
If 4 drivers out of 5 are able to give good results between 400hz and 7khz, then the 5th will be discarded. If only 2 drivers are able to deliver, then we will reduce the range of frequencies until it becomes acceptable (and still listenable).
But so far it doesnt seem like a big problem as the best midranges are able to do the job.