A Subjective Blind Comparison of 2in to 3.5in drivers - Round 5

[Jay]

This happens a lot on this site, disregard for drivers based on price. I fail to see what price has to do with it.
Sure there "could or should" be more potential for greatness in more expensive drivers. But that doesn't make every expensive driver perform great or better at all than a cheaper one. The one thing I am sure about is that price is no guarantee for quality in this world. It should be, but it isn't.

I think we have talked about this before. Of course you are right that TC7 is the cheapest here for example, but not the worst. But I was talking about different level of quality. Even XRK thought that none of these drivers are better than 10F. And obviously TC9 is better than TC7, is it not?

I was talking about my situation where I have already had many drivers that I don't use. The chance is very low that I will need/want to buy another driver of such quality.

But I found that the TangBand is somehow special. May be not for Full Range?

 

[Jay]

technical people? Lol is everyone else a underling? Such arrogance....

Technical people THINK they can diagnose issues, not based on some secret knowledge, but by experience, and all people are fooled by the same audio psychological tricks of the brain. To an extent it is true, maybe you'd be surprised how many techies are deaf.

I have learned to understand people when they want a bass boost for example. Yesterday a friend asked me about equalization. I told him that for most professional, they prefer a flat FR. He is obviously prefer bass boost in most situation. He thinks it is more musical, foot tapping, etc. And he is right (but of course I have different preference).

Same with the taste bout these round 5 drivers. Nothing wrong with preferring driver A (but of course I prefer F/E/D for reasons I have mentioned). Some thing is more wrong IMO when there is technical bias and use more than just ears to decide.

 

[wesayso]

I think we have talked about this before. Of course you are right that TC7 is the cheapest here for example, but not the worst. But I was talking about different level of quality. Even XRK thought that none of these drivers are better than 10F. And obviously TC9 is better than TC7, is it not?

I was talking about my situation where I have already had many drivers that I don't use. The chance is very low that I will need/want to buy another driver of such quality.

But I found that the TangBand is somehow special. May be not for Full Range?

I know and while I do understand your point I think I just have trouble with the wording "cheap" in that sentence. The different level of quality as you state it need not be the most expensive, nor the cheapest. It can come from anywhere.
And remember, the best things in life are free .

 

[xrk971]

Hence the use of noise power and noise intensity measurements, by industry, in order to put a value to the perception (read annoyance) of large machine noise emission (BS EN 1680 if I recall)

How one would normalise a recording to meet "average sound power by octave with A weighting" ....?

Well that is a tough one.

So perhaps recording level should be set by first playing pink noise source and using dB meter to adjust level to match all drivers under test to some value, say 91dB at 0.5m. That would then account for some of the hotter drivers and push peak SPL down to have average SPL at a good level.

 

[Godzilla]

>>> And he is right (but of course I have different preference).

Exactly. And I am also right when it comes to my preference. As are we all.

 

[Eldam]

Cast or/and Poll lux ?

 

[mondogenerator]

So perhaps recording level should be set by first playing pink noise source and using dB meter to adjust level to match all drivers under test to some value, say 91dB at 0.5m. That would then account for some of the hotter drivers and push peak SPL down to have average SPL at a good level.

Well you have more knowledge regarding your recording setup and calibration if you will (I have recorded plenty, but only instruments, so same principles but vastly different ideals)

I don't wish to belittle your efforts, and I actually think you did a very good job (although I didn't participate in this round)

Following the logic of equal intensity per octave band, then a calibration with pink noise would seem like a better way to normalise the entire bandwidth.

However, I guess that the downside would then be perceived differences in volume at or below the XO, which you have minimised in previous rounds. And I cant see a way around this (going back to many degrees of freedom which can't all be controlled)

The only possibility, again guessing, would be to run all drivers full range. But again that opens up other areas where listeners may criticise.

I honestly think you're in a no win situation.

I guess you could EQ all flat, calibrate with pink noise and record. But again, I'm not sure if that fulfills your goals for testing, or if the idea or such extensive EQ (in some cases) is advisable.

This is why I think "hats off to you" but there are just some things, which I at least, can't see a way around, or a way to satisfy everyone and every goal/control measure. And its also why I refrain from criticising your efforts further (my only real issue in other rounds, was the recorded stereo ambience, and that is now gone. So I have nothing to critique )

 

[xrk971]

Mondo,
You are probably right. After 5 rounds I think the kinks are pretty much worked out. There really is not much that can be done to account for an outlier in response such as in this round. I think having a library of voice signatures for people to listen without having access to a listening room with speakers of interest available.

 

[Eldam]

I had been beaten myself thanks to the polls and bought a mic at Insem the x-750 stuff !

Hey, nobody like the pun about Castor & Pollux myth : pffffff

 

[xrk971]

I guess the poll is closed and votes are cast. Are we all ready for the big reveal?

Drum roll please...

 

[xrk971]

Round 5 Reveal

Without further ado, here is the answer key:

A = Alpine OEM p/n 68223392AA (Jeep Wrangler)
B = Tectonics Elements TEBM46C20N-4B
C = Fountek FR58EX
D = Peerless NE65W
E = Fountek FR88EX
F = Tang Band W2-852SH
G = Vifa TC7FD

It seems that since I posted the measurements beforehand, many people figured out the drivers based on listening to the sound signatures. Interesting how that works. As we all seem to know the big winner this time was not the flattest measuring driver, but the loudest and brashest one: the Alpine Jeep Wrangler. Congratulations to Alpine for knocking it out of the park! I imagine the local Jeep dealers are going to be getting some curious phone calls in the "Parts" department for people claiming to need replacement "tweeters" for the Wrangler's sound system.

It also seems that this is the first time Tang Band got on the podium with a second place finish tied with the TC7FD. Interestingly, both drivers in 1st and 2nd place were provided by member JLH. Maybe he knows a thing or two about good sounding drivers?

Thanks to all for participating, and thanks to folks who provided drivers: Byrtt for FR58EX, JLH for Alpine and W2-852SH.
I actually provided the rest of the lineup myself this time.

Here are the responses shifted for clarity:

Here is the un-shifted data to show why driver A was so much louder than the others (2dB per division scale to exaggerate differences). Note the +/-1dB span at 500Hz that I worked to try to set the relative levels:

Here are the measured Impulse Responses:

Alpine Jeep Wrangler:

Tectonic Elements BMR:

Fountek FR58EX:

Peerless NE65W:

Fountek FR88EX:

Tang Band W2-852SH:

Vifa TC7FD:

 

[Eldam]

There is a Jeep Wrangler to winn ?

 

[xrk971]

There is a Jeep Wrangler to winn ?

Yes, wasn't that your pick? The fast red racecar?

 

[freddi]

I figured the Alpine was picked as lots were auditioning with loudspeakers plus enjoyed its ramp up in the mid treble which made things "clearer" than the reference tracks. Its horrible that I picked FR88EX to sound resonably close to the reference - hehe

can some of the flatter drivers be eq-ed to emulate the Alpine? - or does its dustcap behavior dominate the character?

 

[xrk971]

I figured the Alpine was picked as lots were auditioning with loudspeakers plus enjoyed its ramp up in the mid treble which made things "clearer" than the reference tracks. Its horrible that I picked FR88EX to sound resonably close to the reference - hehe

can some of the flatter drivers be eq-ed to emulate the Alpine? - or does its dustcap behavior dominate the character?

I liked the FR88EX - that was my pick too. The Alpine's dustcap is reported to be affixed with a soft resilient rubbery glue to abate resonances. I imagine the big peaks are the carbon fiber cone and surround breakup. This driver is unusual in that it has a soft treated cloth half-roll surround (similar to the one on my old school RS 40-1197 FE103). I think the carbon fiber poly cone is impedance mismatched to the surround and that is the resonance source. If a thicker rubber surround like that used on the FR88EX, perhaps more of the breakups could be dampened. But hey, the resonances are what made it win hands down.

I think some have said this: in a fast moving SUV blazin' through a bumpy dirt road, this extra "grit" in the sound may actually increase intelligibility over the drone of rubber tires and pavement. It's definitely worth a listen and the price is not going to set anyone back at all. May be tough for folks in Europe or Asia/Australia to get though.

 

[freddi]

there's still some left at US Ebay (pulls - I think) Jeep Wrangler JK 14 15 Dash or Sound Bar Speaker 4" Alpine | eBay

 

[Eldam]

Hummmm, I voted for A first & E second ! This A cone sings like metal cone while the metal cone of the second not so much while having détails (but less than A in my setup) !

Hope I will able next week to measure my setup with more precision with my new mic !

 

[xrk971]

there's still some left at US Ebay (pulls - I think) Jeep Wrangler JK 14 15 Dash or Sound Bar Speaker 4" Alpine | eBay

That's a good price.

 

[peterbrorsson]

Without further ado, here is the answer key:

A = Alpine OEM p/n 68223392AA (Jeep Wrangler)
B = Tectonics Elements TEBM46C20N-4B
C = Fountek FR58EX
D = Peerless NE65W
E = Fountek FR88EX
F = Tang Band W2-852SH
G = Vifa TC7FD

It seems that since I posted the measurements beforehand, many people figured out the drivers based on listening to the sound signatures. Interesting how that works. As we all seem to know the big winner this time was not the flattest measuring driver, but the loudest and brashest one: the Alpine Jeep Wrangler. Congratulations to Alpine for knocking it out of the park! I imagine the local Jeep dealers are going to be getting some curious phone calls in the "Parts" department for people claiming to need replacement "tweeters" for the Wrangler's sound system.

It also seems that this is the first time Tang Band got on the podium with a second place finish tied with the TC7FD. Interestingly, both drivers in 1st and 2nd place were provided by member JLH. Maybe he knows a thing or two about good sounding drivers?

Thanks to all for participating, and thanks to folks who provided drivers: Byrtt for FR58EX, JLH for Alpine and W2-852SH.
I actually provided the rest of the lineup myself this time.

Here are the responses shifted for clarity:

Here is the un-shifted data to show why driver A was so much louder than the others (2dB per division scale to exaggerate differences). Note the +/-1dB span at 500Hz that I worked to try to set the relative levels:

Here are the measured Impulse Responses:

Alpine Jeep Wrangler:

Tectonic Elements BMR:

Fountek FR58EX:

Peerless NE65W:

Fountek FR88EX:

Tang Band W2-852SH:

Vifa TC7FD:

The Jeep looks like a Lowther in response..... My vote was for TC Elliot Dane....

Peter

 

[Godzilla]

I ranked G first (Vifa) and A last (Alpine). In fact my notes indicate I would not believe anyone would choose A. I wrote “sucks” in my notes. It sounded very splashy and sibilant to me.

When I chose G I guessed it was one of the larger diameter drivers because - I felt - it had the fullest sound overall. I was wrong about cone diameter.

That the Alpine won (I remember Alpine fondly as the best car stereos of the 1980s with their beautiful green glowing lights) indicates why so many enjoy ragged drivers like Lowthers. Variations in frequency response create a sonic signature that’s exciting for many.

In this instance, the least flat driver won (followed by two flatties). Again, an inexpensive driver performed better than the expensive ones. I love that trend.