Applying A7.3 into small sealed cab (formerly CHR-70 Gen 2 vs Gen 3)
What is the difference between the CHR-70 Gen 2 driver and the Gen 3 driver?
The spec sheet for the Gen 2 doesn't seem to be published (or perhaps it was, but no longer on the markaudio site). This comes as it would appear that my local distributor seems to still be holding onto CHR-70 Gen 2 units.
Based on the data-sheet for the Gen 3 it would appear that there are numerous improvements incorporated into the newer driver which I would be missing out on if I elected to go with the Gen 2 driver. But what does this mean to the sound?
I am not all that worried about loss of bass extension, as my plans involved FAST. However I would need the TS information to check design.
Quite specifically I am after good vocal performance, and based on some reading it would seem that I would be missing out?
What is the difference between the CHR-70 Gen 2 driver and the Gen 3 driver?
The spec sheet for the Gen 2 doesn't seem to be published (or perhaps it was, but no longer on the markaudio site). This comes as it would appear that my local distributor seems to still be holding onto CHR-70 Gen 2 units.
Based on the data-sheet for the Gen 3 it would appear that there are numerous improvements incorporated into the newer driver which I would be missing out on if I elected to go with the Gen 2 driver. But what does this mean to the sound?
I am not all that worried about loss of bass extension, as my plans involved FAST. However I would need the TS information to check design.
Quite specifically I am after good vocal performance, and based on some reading it would seem that I would be missing out?
Last edited:
Not necessarily. They're different, and the current CHR has had some changes over the course of its production run also, particularly the addition of the arrestor. The current unit is rather like the original Alpair 7 in some ways. More HF extension, LF performance reasonably akin -perhaps a little more. Both decent drivers; if you can get the older units at a reduced price, great. If there's little difference, I'd buy the current model. G2n.2 data sheet attached to this BTW.
T/S parameters have been very close across Gen 1, 2, 3. Such that my dCHR-Ken is suitable for all with no changes. The Gen3 has changed enuff that for the smaller milliSize box we can now vent it.
Buggest visible change is the different dustcap on Gen3, likely responsible for much of the gain at the top.
Despite what Scott says, Alpair 7 is still much more refined.
dave
Buggest visible change is the different dustcap on Gen3, likely responsible for much of the gain at the top.
Despite what Scott says, Alpair 7 is still much more refined.
dave
Scott, thanks for attaching the datasheet.
Hmm, so it would seem like the difference is not such a big deal. The Gen 2 is not favourably cheaper than the going price of the Gen 3 but the same distributor doesn't have Gen 3's, so waiting time + price is likely. It is a little annoying.
Alpair 7's... a lot more expensive, but it's definitely tempting.
Hmm, so it would seem like the difference is not such a big deal. The Gen 2 is not favourably cheaper than the going price of the Gen 3 but the same distributor doesn't have Gen 3's, so waiting time + price is likely. It is a little annoying.
Alpair 7's... a lot more expensive, but it's definitely tempting.
The Alpair 7.3 is a very nice sounding driver
and quite a few folks have done FAST projects with them.
I've decided to go with the Alpair 7.3... now the box!
Currently sealed cavity, depth 190mm, width 150mm, height 150mm average (sloped approx 30 degrees) which is about 4.2 L
I'm dwelling on whether the sloped wall is worthwhile at all. It is going to be more work. Although it does have the advantage of allowing me to make my woofer cavity slightly larger.
Currently sealed cavity, depth 190mm, width 150mm, height 150mm average (sloped approx 30 degrees) which is about 4.2 L
I'm dwelling on whether the sloped wall is worthwhile at all. It is going to be more work. Although it does have the advantage of allowing me to make my woofer cavity slightly larger.
Sealed should be fine, and should end ensure no flapping around at very low frequencies. Our preference isfor aperiodically damped midTL for a FAST, we have gotten fantastic results in our latest A7.3eN + 2xSDX7en FAST (1st order xo at 160 Hz)
dave
Subjectively? - with sufficient power ( EL84 P/P for the A7s and mono bridged Dayton APA150s on the SDX7s) - more than adequate for this cowpoke, pardner
Unfortunately, both rooms available in my own domicile are not quite suitable for their wide elliptical footprint - too much furniture very near to the speaker locations - narrow footprint towers such as the Pensils, or MicroTowers sound great here, and pass the WAF with flying colors. The Ellipses and Facets with multiple side firing midwoofers , not so much
I was responsible for the basic shape, Chris gets all the credit for the execution.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.