super 10
i am new to this forum and have to say that i am blown away with the level of knowledge i have encountered here.
i am in the process of buying a pair of Audio Nirvana drivers, now the model is the problem...Super 10 or Super 12
from my reading of the post it seems that the Super 12 is a likely candidate for OB designs although on the large side.
as for Super 12 and Bass reflex....HUGE boxes
the Super 10 seems to be more frindly in the size department, but which is the more sensible driver?
Also can anyone send me plans, detailed if possible in building a Horn loaded or other type of box for the Super 10 drivers.
i understand that strong powerfull bass is possible if i use a exoctic box, and since i am handy with my hands, God bless my parents for that
, i would really like to give them a go as i think i might be more pleased than the Super 12.
i am new to this forum and have to say that i am blown away with the level of knowledge i have encountered here.
i am in the process of buying a pair of Audio Nirvana drivers, now the model is the problem...Super 10 or Super 12
from my reading of the post it seems that the Super 12 is a likely candidate for OB designs although on the large side.
as for Super 12 and Bass reflex....HUGE boxes
the Super 10 seems to be more frindly in the size department, but which is the more sensible driver?
Also can anyone send me plans, detailed if possible in building a Horn loaded or other type of box for the Super 10 drivers.
i understand that strong powerfull bass is possible if i use a exoctic box, and since i am handy with my hands, God bless my parents for that
, i would really like to give them a go as i think i might be more pleased than the Super 12.Tonytex,
I own the AN Super Cast Frame 10" and have the 2.8 MKII Ambience bass reflex enclosure that is listed on www.commonsenseaudio.com and the bass is great.
I listen to a lot of different styles of music and am very pleased with the way they sound.
I use a Kingrex T20U amp and FLAC audio files and it's the best sounding system I've ever owned.
I think you would be very happy with the 2.8 enclosure.
Also, you can call David at commonsenseaudio and ask him some questions about the different drivers and enclosures.
I own the AN Super Cast Frame 10" and have the 2.8 MKII Ambience bass reflex enclosure that is listed on www.commonsenseaudio.com and the bass is great.
I listen to a lot of different styles of music and am very pleased with the way they sound.
I use a Kingrex T20U amp and FLAC audio files and it's the best sounding system I've ever owned.
I think you would be very happy with the 2.8 enclosure.
Also, you can call David at commonsenseaudio and ask him some questions about the different drivers and enclosures.
Update
Hello group,
I have finally finished the CSA 2.8 enclosure modifications.
If some cannot remember I was having some missing lower-end from my AN Super8s in the suggested 2.8 enclosure.
I have retained the basic original enclosure design less the following:
1. Placed felt on back side of basket; result - none really, it sounds about the same.
2. 8cm diameter reflex tubes at 9cm in length; result - fantastic with the SET amplifier but there is a little too much bass with the gainclone. The result is fantastic with the SET and the vinyl collection.
Now I am happy with the results.
Thanks scottmoose - maybe you can repost the response curve with my above configuration? This way we can compare the theory with my result.
Hello group,
I have finally finished the CSA 2.8 enclosure modifications.
If some cannot remember I was having some missing lower-end from my AN Super8s in the suggested 2.8 enclosure.
I have retained the basic original enclosure design less the following:
1. Placed felt on back side of basket; result - none really, it sounds about the same.
2. 8cm diameter reflex tubes at 9cm in length; result - fantastic with the SET amplifier but there is a little too much bass with the gainclone. The result is fantastic with the SET and the vinyl collection.
Now I am happy with the results.
Thanks scottmoose - maybe you can repost the response curve with my above configuration? This way we can compare the theory with my result.
Scottmoose said:
I hope you are still watching this thread. As I consider buying the super 10 CF questions are rampaging in my poor ignorant brain.
This cabinet seems tuned at 40hz, what would one at 35 or 30hz look like? Would it still make sense or 40hz flat is the maximum reasonable result the super 10 can give?
Is there a tried & proven backloaded horn compatible with the super 10 that will give comparable results in the bass area?
Thank you very much.
Buondì!
what do you want to do with this project, what are the objectives?
I am happy with the normal AN 8" and think it is enough for a typical "Italian room". I have before in the past lstened to 10" fullrange but larger that 8" they become annoying - the sound is too strong (you can correct with filter but it isn't pure because there are signatures of the components). If you have a typical loud room (like here in Italy) I would not recomend the "Super" series. Take the "Normal".
If you are thinking of horn, this will occupy much space and is very heavy.
The cabinet is key to make any driver great. In bocca al lupo,
MV
what do you want to do with this project, what are the objectives?
I am happy with the normal AN 8" and think it is enough for a typical "Italian room". I have before in the past lstened to 10" fullrange but larger that 8" they become annoying - the sound is too strong (you can correct with filter but it isn't pure because there are signatures of the components). If you have a typical loud room (like here in Italy) I would not recomend the "Super" series. Take the "Normal".
If you are thinking of horn, this will occupy much space and is very heavy.
The cabinet is key to make any driver great. In bocca al lupo,
MV
Audio Nirvana 2.8 Ambience
Hi, Greetings from India!
Glad I have come to your post wading through many many. I specifically wanted opinion on Audio Nirvana 2.8 ambience speeakers.
Now that you have spent some time with these speakers what is your opinion now?
Secondly between MDF and high density wood which one will you recommend for cabinet. I have this rubberwood panel in mind:
http://www.rubcogroup.com/pannel.htm
Thirdly I find the wide front Series 1 more elegant, will change of design make any difference?
Thoughts/suggestion from anyone else reading this would be welcome
thanks in advance
S. Bhat
ranger3 said:
Hi, Greetings from India!
Glad I have come to your post wading through many many. I specifically wanted opinion on Audio Nirvana 2.8 ambience speeakers.
Now that you have spent some time with these speakers what is your opinion now?
Secondly between MDF and high density wood which one will you recommend for cabinet. I have this rubberwood panel in mind:
http://www.rubcogroup.com/pannel.htm
Thirdly I find the wide front Series 1 more elegant, will change of design make any difference?
Thoughts/suggestion from anyone else reading this would be welcome
thanks in advance
S. Bhat
Re: Audio Nirvana 2.8 Ambience
First, the 10" AN drivers tend to beam. The result is the high end is weak when listening off axis. Since the MkII enclosure has a regular AN 8" on top, the high frequencies tend to be more evenly distributed as of result of reflection of the walls and ceiling. In most cases this will improve the sound. If you bi-amp these speakers, you can control just how loud the top driver will play allowing you to adjust to taste.
Second, the additional driver on top improves the bass. This is always a good thing. Also, the 2 3" port holes deliver much better bass than the 1 6" port. I've built both.
As far as wood choice, it's really personal preference. I wanted to stain mine, so I used birch. I have just recently finished staining them and hope to post some pictures soon.
I was told the wide version of the speaker will sound the same as the narrow version. Since they are both 2.8 cubic foot enclosures and use the same ratio's, I guess this makes sense.
Allen...
I really like the MkII enclosure. The MkII solved 2 weaknesses that the regular 2.8 cubic foot enclosure has.bnsbhat said:
First, the 10" AN drivers tend to beam. The result is the high end is weak when listening off axis. Since the MkII enclosure has a regular AN 8" on top, the high frequencies tend to be more evenly distributed as of result of reflection of the walls and ceiling. In most cases this will improve the sound. If you bi-amp these speakers, you can control just how loud the top driver will play allowing you to adjust to taste.
Second, the additional driver on top improves the bass. This is always a good thing. Also, the 2 3" port holes deliver much better bass than the 1 6" port. I've built both.
As far as wood choice, it's really personal preference. I wanted to stain mine, so I used birch. I have just recently finished staining them and hope to post some pictures soon.
I was told the wide version of the speaker will sound the same as the narrow version. Since they are both 2.8 cubic foot enclosures and use the same ratio's, I guess this makes sense.
Allen...
I decided to stay away from the 10 and 12 inch versions of the AN. If you compare drivers, the cones get bigger from 8 to 12 but the magnets do not. So you've got higher moving mass with the same motor power = slower driver. Rise time is a major if not primary attraction of fullrange drivers. However if your goal is better bass and you don't wish to use helper bass drivers then the 10 or 12 might be perfect for you.
Re: Re: Audio Nirvana 2.8 Ambience
Thanks for the immediate and detailed reply. Answered many of my worries.
I am planning bi-wiring using this board:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripath-3-X-TA2...739934&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72:1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318
The top speaker could be independently amped/switched of.
Further thoughts are most welcome
S. Bhat
ranger3 said:
Thanks for the immediate and detailed reply. Answered many of my worries.
I am planning bi-wiring using this board:
http://cgi.ebay.com/Tripath-3-X-TA2...739934&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72:1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318
The top speaker could be independently amped/switched of.
Further thoughts are most welcome
S. Bhat
Actually, Dan Wiggins of the defunct Adire Audio (and he's not alone in this) has pointed out that, within reason, transient response has little to do with moving mass, voice-coil inductance being the more significant factor. YMMV of course. Personally I wouldn't be running the CSA cabinets as-is either, but whatever floats your boat.
Scottmoose said:
Scottmoose,
I also have a pair of Lowther DX3s in the CSA 2.8 MkII enclosure with the 8" AN on top.
For the DX3, what enclosure would you recommend?
Keeping in mind that I don't want to add any electronics which would lower effeciency. Also, that they are in a room against the back wall close to the corners and no subwoofer would be used.
I guess bass is the big concern here for me.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks,
Allen...
Transient response has little to do with moving mass?!?! 
And yet Feastrex took great pains to get their drivers down to 2g and big surprise they arguably have the most 'immediacy' or 'transient response' of anything out there.
Wave your arm back and forth as fast as you can. Now add a 2lb exercise weight. Can't do it as fast, can you? Simple physics.
That comment was as absurd as MJ adding mass to the Alpha15.
And yet Feastrex took great pains to get their drivers down to 2g and big surprise they arguably have the most 'immediacy' or 'transient response' of anything out there.
Wave your arm back and forth as fast as you can. Now add a 2lb exercise weight. Can't do it as fast, can you? Simple physics.
That comment was as absurd as MJ adding mass to the Alpha15.
I read the Adire paper. Seems to make sense, but I just don't believe it.
An object at rest wants to remain. An object moving wants to continue.
Is inductance important? Very much so. I totally agree with the argument for keeping it low and I agree it plays a part for transients and certainly high freq. response.
But we have a world of high-end manufacturers trying always to GET THAT WEIGHT down and get that motor strength up. Why? A quicker driver producing more lifelike sound will result. Ribbons, Electrostatics, Feastrex, Lowther Etc Etc Etc.
Moving mass 'within reason' has no bearing on transients? Total BUNK!
An object at rest wants to remain. An object moving wants to continue.
Is inductance important? Very much so. I totally agree with the argument for keeping it low and I agree it plays a part for transients and certainly high freq. response.
But we have a world of high-end manufacturers trying always to GET THAT WEIGHT down and get that motor strength up. Why? A quicker driver producing more lifelike sound will result. Ribbons, Electrostatics, Feastrex, Lowther Etc Etc Etc.
Moving mass 'within reason' has no bearing on transients? Total BUNK!
Well, as suggested, try writing a paper with documented evidence to disprove it, rather than simply stating 'it's bunk' or 'absurd', which aren't (if you'll forgive my pointing it out) very scientific comments. You might have noticed that the aforementioned paper does exactly that. If you don't like it, that's your problem.
Re the DX3, then sans any corrective circuitry, I'd be inclined to get it into a horn, which is what it's actually designed for & will attenuate its naturally rising response through the upper mids & HF.
Re the DX3, then sans any corrective circuitry, I'd be inclined to get it into a horn, which is what it's actually designed for & will attenuate its naturally rising response through the upper mids & HF.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.