the best for 2023 to Diya members, may the peace be with you
I am wondering about the cone material sound signature of some midrange units. Of course, all things being equals, i.e layout, designer's talent, etc. At the end, a driver must be chosen.
Kevlar is often talked for its neutrality, known as far I remember since the 80s. I do not remember the Focal and Davis sound of those days, never heard the yellows ScanSpeak, but B&W is known for good ones in the 800 series and cheaper models too.
I liked the Seas Excell woven composit midwoofer (woven plastic à la Discovery SS line) ? Peereless silver serie with its glass fiber, as wavecore with its odd glass fibers non woven cone are all said very good. Ok cone material is not alone in the driver sound but its sounding signature is often particular.
What your experiences over more classic euphonic paper cones for instance. I was lurking on drivers I can affoard for my budget midwoofer for a short 250 hz to 1100/1500 hz app. with a 6"-ish size and due to average budget several ref are appealing me for that midwoofer task with minimum 90/91 2.83V sensivity:
https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...p-6-108pro-mid-woofer-6-5-8-ohm-150-wmax.html (carbon composit. woved ?)
https://www.bmsspeakers.com/index.php-314.html?id=5s117_curves0 (paper cone)
and a less modern challenger but 8" pro mid (certainly more difficult for passive filter newbie to tame the upper range) https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...udax-hm210z10-mid-range-8-8-ohm-240-wmax.html
There are 2 papers with PHL Audio and BMS : pro but low THD
The Kartesian LOM seems modern with interresting T&S : low Qts and low mechanical loss, certainly detailled... but that old woven cone is less tempting than fiber glass !
I wanted to put a more expensive Wavecore with its glass fiber cone, but 4 ohms is too much lowish impedance to reach the 90 to 91 dB sensivity needed to handle some baffle step compensation.
Any though please ? Is it just euphonic paper VS colder Composit or not important and better to focus on the H3/H5 harmonics and T&S parameters as well as datasheet magnitude.
Thanks
I am wondering about the cone material sound signature of some midrange units. Of course, all things being equals, i.e layout, designer's talent, etc. At the end, a driver must be chosen.
Kevlar is often talked for its neutrality, known as far I remember since the 80s. I do not remember the Focal and Davis sound of those days, never heard the yellows ScanSpeak, but B&W is known for good ones in the 800 series and cheaper models too.
I liked the Seas Excell woven composit midwoofer (woven plastic à la Discovery SS line) ? Peereless silver serie with its glass fiber, as wavecore with its odd glass fibers non woven cone are all said very good. Ok cone material is not alone in the driver sound but its sounding signature is often particular.
What your experiences over more classic euphonic paper cones for instance. I was lurking on drivers I can affoard for my budget midwoofer for a short 250 hz to 1100/1500 hz app. with a 6"-ish size and due to average budget several ref are appealing me for that midwoofer task with minimum 90/91 2.83V sensivity:
https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...p-6-108pro-mid-woofer-6-5-8-ohm-150-wmax.html (carbon composit. woved ?)
https://www.bmsspeakers.com/index.php-314.html?id=5s117_curves0 (paper cone)
and a less modern challenger but 8" pro mid (certainly more difficult for passive filter newbie to tame the upper range) https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...udax-hm210z10-mid-range-8-8-ohm-240-wmax.html
There are 2 papers with PHL Audio and BMS : pro but low THD
The Kartesian LOM seems modern with interresting T&S : low Qts and low mechanical loss, certainly detailled... but that old woven cone is less tempting than fiber glass !
I wanted to put a more expensive Wavecore with its glass fiber cone, but 4 ohms is too much lowish impedance to reach the 90 to 91 dB sensivity needed to handle some baffle step compensation.
Any though please ? Is it just euphonic paper VS colder Composit or not important and better to focus on the H3/H5 harmonics and T&S parameters as well as datasheet magnitude.
Thanks
There are definite sound differences from just the cone/interface material alone.
Most of it occurs just below the surround's resonance and extends upward in freq. from there. Below this pass-band you still get some cone "flavor" from the hardness of the cone's material vs its internal loss character (and particularly as it interacts with the surround).
So when you consider the driver's low-pass filter, you need to consider the slope you will work with.
IF I were doing a 6-6.5" midrange around 90 db that wasn't to expensive I'd use this one:
https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...-hm170c0-mid-woofer-6-5-8-ohm-120-wmax-2.html
..and I'd port it (bass reflex at rear panel) with a vent tuning freq. well below the high-pass filter. I'd also have a fairly large volume for it. In neither instance would it be done to increase lower freq. output, but rather to achieve that compliance result that provides better low-level detail and depth of field - almost "stat"-like in a low-loss ("slippery" interior panels) enclosure with good internal pressure on the cone provided by the vent.
I really like the low resin fabric on this driver with the inverted roll surround (even though it always introduces some problems). It just tends to provide more of a "hi-fi" result when used properly. (..mechanically note the low measured Rms.)
Most of it occurs just below the surround's resonance and extends upward in freq. from there. Below this pass-band you still get some cone "flavor" from the hardness of the cone's material vs its internal loss character (and particularly as it interacts with the surround).
So when you consider the driver's low-pass filter, you need to consider the slope you will work with.
IF I were doing a 6-6.5" midrange around 90 db that wasn't to expensive I'd use this one:
https://dibirama.altervista.org/hom...-hm170c0-mid-woofer-6-5-8-ohm-120-wmax-2.html
..and I'd port it (bass reflex at rear panel) with a vent tuning freq. well below the high-pass filter. I'd also have a fairly large volume for it. In neither instance would it be done to increase lower freq. output, but rather to achieve that compliance result that provides better low-level detail and depth of field - almost "stat"-like in a low-loss ("slippery" interior panels) enclosure with good internal pressure on the cone provided by the vent.
I really like the low resin fabric on this driver with the inverted roll surround (even though it always introduces some problems). It just tends to provide more of a "hi-fi" result when used properly. (..mechanically note the low measured Rms.)
Last edited:
Lynn Olsen has a good rundown, even though it was written some time ago, & probably won't cover the latest whiz-bang inventions:
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/speaker-design2.html
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/speaker-design2.html
@ScottG ,
Hi, Yup I thougth it was a good choice that Audax HM17C00 , it is known to have a rocky hi bass punch. Unfornatully it is less soundy in the midrange related to the better aerogel above say 400 hz something. And of course its aerogel 6" brother has an awfull impedance curve and magnitude for a passive filter. that's why I putted on the list the 8" mid aerogel instead. But rigth, I am too have a closer look again on that -" woven carbon cone. The upper resonance of the Kartesian is armfull, consequence of rigid detailled cone I assume.
I have also the choice to let climb (I will try too) the 12" Faital 12PR320 that is the bass unit. But I am conceptually worried about a so high >1100 hz cut-off whatever its good linearity... pistonic behavior of a 12" is untill 400/600 hz according the unit.
too bad than the 6 pro aerogel or paper from Audax can not be crossed as low as 300 hz for instance. I am reluctant to put a mid that has less than 2 octaves between the bass and tweeter unit.... well... We would like to but can not test it all... at least not me ! the horn I will use is an OS of 26 cm (10" st260) from mabat (with either the BMS4550 first choice or the Faital HF108R, I can affoard)
Hi, Yup I thougth it was a good choice that Audax HM17C00 , it is known to have a rocky hi bass punch. Unfornatully it is less soundy in the midrange related to the better aerogel above say 400 hz something. And of course its aerogel 6" brother has an awfull impedance curve and magnitude for a passive filter. that's why I putted on the list the 8" mid aerogel instead. But rigth, I am too have a closer look again on that -" woven carbon cone. The upper resonance of the Kartesian is armfull, consequence of rigid detailled cone I assume.
I have also the choice to let climb (I will try too) the 12" Faital 12PR320 that is the bass unit. But I am conceptually worried about a so high >1100 hz cut-off whatever its good linearity... pistonic behavior of a 12" is untill 400/600 hz according the unit.
too bad than the 6 pro aerogel or paper from Audax can not be crossed as low as 300 hz for instance. I am reluctant to put a mid that has less than 2 octaves between the bass and tweeter unit.... well... We would like to but can not test it all... at least not me ! the horn I will use is an OS of 26 cm (10" st260) from mabat (with either the BMS4550 first choice or the Faital HF108R, I can affoard)
Make sure to buy only driver which can be serviced in the farer future with new rubber surrounds close or identical to the original ... like those standard types SR100/SR110/SR120 from Dr. Kurt Mueller (DKM) in germany (only in large quantities)
Full recone sets are very rare in the hifi-world! (except PA drivers)
Avoid to buy foam surrounds they will be rotten in 10 years no matter what you do!
A high quality replacement takes a lot of time and experience!
I have seen terrible repairings even from known repair shops ....
Better to invest more money than be disappointed!
good luck
Full recone sets are very rare in the hifi-world! (except PA drivers)
Avoid to buy foam surrounds they will be rotten in 10 years no matter what you do!
A high quality replacement takes a lot of time and experience!
I have seen terrible repairings even from known repair shops ....
Better to invest more money than be disappointed!
good luck
Im using the audax pr170mo first order at 300hz
no issue even loud
i would try at least as i feel the 170mo can tolerate lower then the specs says
that said, the scan speak revelator at 92db is also a mid i have to try
https://www.scan-speak.dk/product/18m-4631t00/
anyone tried this mid?
Yes youknowyou, i was lurking on it. The 8 ohms was too lowish spl...and I am not confortable with the 4 ohms impedance unit. Troels liked the 8 ohms...in the level of an audiotechnology. My feeling is he likes even more the 5" M revelator midrange of his 851 loudspeaker...too much low sensivity for meeting the 12pr320.
well, thats a efficient 12"!
maybe look for those 93db woofers?
i myself will probably build a 3 way with the 7" revelator 92db and mate with a 93db woofer! I have so many projects to try!
but really, try those PR170MO!
Happy New Year everyone!
My vote goes to PHL for the classic paper cone/flat surround dedicated 6.5 inch mid https://www.phlaudio.com/fileadmin/user_upload/phl_audio/1120_SpecSheet.pdf By the way... PHL have just released (Dec 22nd) a massive new driver range and have huge financial backing as they are now part of the "La Manufacture Devialet " group.
If you have spare money... How about experimenting with a pair of Beyma 6 inch woven carbon https://www.beyma.com/speakers/Fich...rs-data-sheet-low-mid-frequency-6MCF200Nd.pdf Not sure about the small sealed metal back though, but it simplifies installation and one would assume Beyma know what they are doing?
My vote goes to PHL for the classic paper cone/flat surround dedicated 6.5 inch mid https://www.phlaudio.com/fileadmin/user_upload/phl_audio/1120_SpecSheet.pdf By the way... PHL have just released (Dec 22nd) a massive new driver range and have huge financial backing as they are now part of the "La Manufacture Devialet " group.
If you have spare money... How about experimenting with a pair of Beyma 6 inch woven carbon https://www.beyma.com/speakers/Fich...rs-data-sheet-low-mid-frequency-6MCF200Nd.pdf Not sure about the small sealed metal back though, but it simplifies installation and one would assume Beyma know what they are doing?
91 db/2,83 v is ok for the midwoof with the faital...i do not want the 6rs140 though.
PS The PHL is available in 16 Ohms... https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/speaker-phl-audio-1130-16-ohm-6-5-inch.html I love the 12.7Bl to just 10g Mms... Thats an amazingly "fast" driver, the standard 8 Ohm is is still superb with an 8.5 Bl motor and 10g Mms and both sound amazing in small sealed box loading.
Thanks hydrogenalex,
You liked its sound so ?
Wondered if a 5" is not too lowish for a 10" horn above?
You liked its sound so ?
Wondered if a 5" is not too lowish for a 10" horn above?
Yes, I really love the PHL 6.5 inch dedicated midrange... I built a kit based on this https://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/download/Humble Homemade Hifi_Mezzo Galactica.pdf (He has dozens of amazing designs https://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/ )
For a three way or line array I would highly recommend this driver 250Hz or 300Hz up to 2 Khz or there abouts. I have never used passive crossovers, only active crossovers and now with DSP and Eq and high quality DACS and A to D's at affordable prices you can really maximise the performance of almost any driver quite easily.
I also love the midrange from the following - 10 inch Volt https://voltloudspeakers.co.uk/loudspeakers/bm25004-10/ I used it open baffle with a sealed 15 inch Beyma bass below and a Beyma TPL 200 above.
Slightly bigger version is the amazing 12 inch Beyma https://www.beyma.com/en/products/c/low-mid-frequency/112P80FEV28/altavoz-12p80fe-v2-8-oh/ (Only used the ferrite version but the Neo version also has great feedback)
and the astonishing (and sadly discontinued) Precision Devices PD 158...https://www.precision-devices.com/products/archived-products/pd-158/ But this Beyma https://www.beyma.com/en/products/c/low-mid-frequency/115P80FEN8/altavoz-15p80fe-n-8-oh/ is a great replacement... Slightly better below 100 Hz and almost as good in the critical 80Hz to 500Hz band.
Obviously all very different drivers and design goals, but all amazing drivers.
For a three way or line array I would highly recommend this driver 250Hz or 300Hz up to 2 Khz or there abouts. I have never used passive crossovers, only active crossovers and now with DSP and Eq and high quality DACS and A to D's at affordable prices you can really maximise the performance of almost any driver quite easily.
I also love the midrange from the following - 10 inch Volt https://voltloudspeakers.co.uk/loudspeakers/bm25004-10/ I used it open baffle with a sealed 15 inch Beyma bass below and a Beyma TPL 200 above.
Slightly bigger version is the amazing 12 inch Beyma https://www.beyma.com/en/products/c/low-mid-frequency/112P80FEV28/altavoz-12p80fe-v2-8-oh/ (Only used the ferrite version but the Neo version also has great feedback)
and the astonishing (and sadly discontinued) Precision Devices PD 158...https://www.precision-devices.com/products/archived-products/pd-158/ But this Beyma https://www.beyma.com/en/products/c/low-mid-frequency/115P80FEN8/altavoz-15p80fe-n-8-oh/ is a great replacement... Slightly better below 100 Hz and almost as good in the critical 80Hz to 500Hz band.
Obviously all very different drivers and design goals, but all amazing drivers.
I added the attachments from zaph audios page for the LF00264 from B&W, also some threads on them on the forum.
You can see how clean it is without a surround resonance and a smooth FR, very clean CSD etc. A notepad thingie where the models numbers on most of the B&W FST mids assigned to they're respective speaker/s, and a impedance curve from the 800 signature FST.
Just the kevlar resonance at 3,5 k ish that needs a gentle notch and it's very smooth all out to 10k. Also note how the cone breakup peak is barely visible on a standard 25 DB CSD without a notch on it and is pretty much dead in 0,5 msec.
Now all they're drivers are not the same, the 801 used a 7" and current ones use a 150mm trandsucer so cone area of 5-5,5".
But with 1mm xmax distortion below 350 or so rapidly increases, and depends on required volume, 4 ohm units with 94-98 db sensitive, and not all are as clean as the example.
As for the sound of the Material that someone else can share they're subjective opinion on that has strong feelings for it either way.
It depends on the paper cones and how they are treated. Pro drivers in general use very lightweight papercones, and coated to resist water. Stiffening and damping cones for temporal behavior adds weight, cost in extra production steps.
Also for a pro producer it is a disadvantage, you never noticed they're rated sensitivity is ususally taken from a cone-breakup area? as higher sensitivity for else equal parameters=more sales. Also notice in the linked video how it is mentioned to take advantage of resonances and amplify them to get more output 🙂
Look at the video below, actually a good watch for anyone that likes compression driver.
Start at 40 mins, and hear they're discussion and examples on temporal behavior / breakup that lasts the rest of the vid.
And you can see why i like one of the producers and avoid Compression drivers from the other, because of they're design priorities.
Everybody today obsesses about THD, CSD are useless in many's opinion.
And if one thinks group delay is important and obsess to get it under X milliseconds, what is the point when the cone resonates 3 times longer over half it's bandwidth due to untreated design problems in the transducer?
Also yet many wonder what it is about they're compression drivers that makes they're ears hurt, even though it's EQ'd flat in a decent horn 🤣 🤣
While i don't feel strongly for a specific cone material, it's importance is debatable.
If you prioritize temporal behavior strongly over other things, and like high efficiency drivers, you will have eliminated 95%+ of them to begin with, just so you know. Also that info does not exist in published datasheets normally.
Can't tell you what to prioritize that is a personal choice. But temporal behavior in the room dominated part of the audio band is obviously a wasted thing to obsess about, and most can't measure that part accurately anyways.
Attachments
Last edited: