Two 3FE25-16ohm in parallel is about 97dB. Put in a 0.53x scale Karlsonator.
Mini Karlsonator (0.53X) with Dual TC9FD's
Mini Karlsonator (0.53X) with Dual TC9FD's
That 0.53x Karlsonator cabinet is a ML-TQWT with Karlson aperture and reaches a substantial 50Hz with about same efficiency as highs. The bass is very good and for most music you won’t miss a sub.
If you really want to dig deeper with lower fs you are looking at much larger and expensive drivers that won’t have as good top end.
If you really want to dig deeper with lower fs you are looking at much larger and expensive drivers that won’t have as good top end.
With this fine SET you must use Alnico FR or Field Coils that are somewhat rare today, avoid Ferrite magnets.
This big cone have great presence:
http://www.commonsenseaudio.com/an12alnicospecs.jpg
The room is small?
Nonsense. Ferrite magnets will work just fine. So will ~3" class drivers. Dual drivers is even better.
I run the 2x 3FE25-16 0.53x Karlsonator with a 1 watt tube amplifier (1.3w max before clip) and it is more than adequate in a pretty large room, and would highly recommend the dual 3FE25 karlsonator, its perfect for flea power amplifiers.
I run the 2x 3FE25-16 0.53x Karlsonator with a 1 watt tube amplifier (1.3w max before clip) and it is more than adequate in a pretty large room, and would highly recommend the dual 3FE25 karlsonator, its perfect for flea power amplifiers.
So what you are saying is that
a/ All AlNiCo magnets are created equal. And
b/ The mere fact that a driver possesses an AlNiCo magnet (irrespective of its grade / quality, actual strength, the overall motor, suspension & cone design) means that it is automatically superior to a driver with a ferrite motor.
Twaddle.
AlNiCo can (as in 'can') have some advantages over ferrite magnets. It also possesses some disadvantages too. It is not automatically 'better', and many drivers currently produced using it do so for marketing, not acoustic purposes. Superiority depends on the quality of the magnet, and of the motor design (assuming otherwise identical drivers). As for drivers with AlNiCo magnets having a natural affinity with SET amplifiers -not if they already have a high Q they don't, since all you'll do is raise it even higher. They can work well. Another 'can', not 'automatically do'.
a/ All AlNiCo magnets are created equal. And
b/ The mere fact that a driver possesses an AlNiCo magnet (irrespective of its grade / quality, actual strength, the overall motor, suspension & cone design) means that it is automatically superior to a driver with a ferrite motor.
Twaddle.
AlNiCo can (as in 'can') have some advantages over ferrite magnets. It also possesses some disadvantages too. It is not automatically 'better', and many drivers currently produced using it do so for marketing, not acoustic purposes. Superiority depends on the quality of the magnet, and of the motor design (assuming otherwise identical drivers). As for drivers with AlNiCo magnets having a natural affinity with SET amplifiers -not if they already have a high Q they don't, since all you'll do is raise it even higher. They can work well. Another 'can', not 'automatically do'.
No, you'd either need to ask the designer or disassemble one of their drivers, either to investigate production markings or analyse it with suitable lab. test gear.
However, the following statement is on their website:
Which if you're taking like-for-like is true to a point (how much so depends on the specific grades of both the AlNiCo and the ferrite). But the AN drivers aren't actually like-for-like, except in one instance. Compare the B*L factors of the AlNiCo models with their ferrite equivalents:
Super 6.5 ferrite B*L = 8.695
Super 6.5 AlNiCo B*L = 4.494
Ferrite model has 1.93x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
Super 8 ferrite B*L = 11.84
Super 8 AlNiCo B*L = 4.356
Ferrite model has 2.718x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap
Super 10 ferrite B*L = 9.065
Super 10 AlNiCo B*L = 6.662
Ferrite model has 1.36x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
Super 12 ferrite B*L = 8.866
Super 12 AlNiCo B*L = 8.066
Ferrite model has 1.099x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
The 12in units are the exception; these are clearly quite similar as far as motor strength is concerned. In all the other cases, according to their own data the AlNiCo models actually have weaker motors (the magnets may be stronger than the equivalent ferrite, but they're not actually equivalent & are presumably smaller) and this is reflected in their consistently higher Qt figures. That's fine, the ferrite & AlNiCo models were obviously not designed for the same thing. But it's a good example that you can't just assume x material invariably provides y result.
However, the following statement is on their website:
Which if you're taking like-for-like is true to a point (how much so depends on the specific grades of both the AlNiCo and the ferrite). But the AN drivers aren't actually like-for-like, except in one instance. Compare the B*L factors of the AlNiCo models with their ferrite equivalents:
Super 6.5 ferrite B*L = 8.695
Super 6.5 AlNiCo B*L = 4.494
Ferrite model has 1.93x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
Super 8 ferrite B*L = 11.84
Super 8 AlNiCo B*L = 4.356
Ferrite model has 2.718x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap
Super 10 ferrite B*L = 9.065
Super 10 AlNiCo B*L = 6.662
Ferrite model has 1.36x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
Super 12 ferrite B*L = 8.866
Super 12 AlNiCo B*L = 8.066
Ferrite model has 1.099x the magnetic strength of the AlNiCo model in the VC gap.
The 12in units are the exception; these are clearly quite similar as far as motor strength is concerned. In all the other cases, according to their own data the AlNiCo models actually have weaker motors (the magnets may be stronger than the equivalent ferrite, but they're not actually equivalent & are presumably smaller) and this is reflected in their consistently higher Qt figures. That's fine, the ferrite & AlNiCo models were obviously not designed for the same thing. But it's a good example that you can't just assume x material invariably provides y result.
Last edited:
Thanks for the instructive reply I appreciated.
I asked why the ANs have bigger and stronger magnets than the famous Fostexes F120A/200A and so have better parameters as SPL, Rated Power and bigger cone sizes, unfortunately BL from Fostex are so low they dont inform it, others TS pars also scarce:
http://tokospeaker.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/f120apdf.jpg
I noted the F120A magnet is small only 211g
http://tokospeaker.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/f200adatasheet.jpg
I have the Classic10Alnico and inspecting the magnet back plate which have some hollows to cooling I see the magnet is a cylinder not a donut, so its really a Alnico, but I have interest to know what type of Alnico it use.
I asked why the ANs have bigger and stronger magnets than the famous Fostexes F120A/200A and so have better parameters as SPL, Rated Power and bigger cone sizes, unfortunately BL from Fostex are so low they dont inform it, others TS pars also scarce:
http://tokospeaker.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/f120apdf.jpg
I noted the F120A magnet is small only 211g
http://tokospeaker.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/f200adatasheet.jpg
I have the Classic10Alnico and inspecting the magnet back plate which have some hollows to cooling I see the magnet is a cylinder not a donut, so its really a Alnico, but I have interest to know what type of Alnico it use.
no it is not, alnico motors are much sensitive in low power range, with better resoution. that is why even today when they are expensive, still using in some sensitive medical equipment and pf course in instrument picups
I dont know any picup made from ceramic or neodimium aloy?
...
My voice going to some alnico model, with good other chrs from merit.
And You dont need over 95db from 1W cca. I listened before 25 years RCA LC1A with 1W cca 10Y SE amp, and it was good to remember always...
...
Maybe from replicas of Diatone?
Diatone alnico speaker - Google Search
I refrain to say it but since you mention they are great performers in the first Watt, I would like my headphone had Alnico bars but they use NEO.
The Fostex F120a is a 4 1/2in drive unit and Audio Nirvana do not produce a driver with an AlNiCo magnet in that size, so we can set that particular driver aside as no meaningful comparison can be drawn.
The Fostex F200a was an 8in driver equivalent to the size of the Super 8 and Classic 8. It had a B*L factor (which you can easily calculate from the other data) of about 8.4. By comparison the Super 8 AlNiCo has a B*L factor of 4.356, and the Classic 8 AlNiCo has a B*L factor of 5.6. So they do not have 'bigger and stronger magnets' than the equivalently sized, and sadly defunct, F200a. They actually have significantly less magnetic strength in their VC gaps. Note also that these drivers do not have the same engineering goals and have significant differences in their overall design.
The F200a is rated & measures at roughly 90dB 1m/w. The equivalently sized Super 8 AlNiCo is rated at 90.04dB 1m/w and Classic 8 AlNiCo is rated at more or less the same (91dB 1m/w). They all have roughly the same impedance, so I don't see where the ANs are 'better' in terms of SPL.
As far as power-handling goes, the F200a is classed at 27w rated with 80w music power. The equivalently sized Super 8 AlNiCo and Classic 8 AlNiCo are both rated at 20w with 30w music power. So I don't see where the ANs are 'better' in terms of their rated power-handling either, since both are significantly lower than the F200a.
It's nice than AN provide larger drivers, but you can't compare drivers of different sizes and draw any meaningful comparisons. About the best you can say on that score is 'they produce driver in larger sizes.'
I'm sorry, but you are making that up without any proof whatsoever, and not only that, you are also completely wrong. The F200a (which has been out of production for years) did not have a B*L factor 'so low they don't inform it' -it has a B*L factor of ~8.4 which is much higher than the equivalently sized AN drivers with AlNiCo magnets.
Yes, the F200a has not been made for some years and dates from a time when Fostex did not provide as much written data as they do now, as their target market (mostly Japan at the time it was designed) wasn't all that interested.
Two things there.
1/ The physical magnet weight doesn't tell you a great deal other than its weight. Different grades of AlNiCo have different strengths for a given size / weight (that applies to all types of magnet). And
2/ Do you think that it being a 4 1/2in driver, which is approximately half the size of a 6 1/2in unit, might have something to do with that?
You'd either have to ask the designer, or take the driver apart & either with knowledge of the magnetic grades identify that from the production markings, or take it somewhere specialising in magnets that would be able to do that for you.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I thought the main difference was that AlNiCo is a good conductor so that in times past before the shorting ring was invented for Ferrite magnets the AlNiCo would have lower distortion.
I have an Audio Nirvana 15" Ferrite and it sounds superb. Really superb. They no longer make the 15" in Ferrite so if you don't want to pay for AlNiCo the 12" is the next best (publshed FR curves look better for the 12" than many of their smaller drivers). I have the Super (with whizzer) which I recommend over the Classic (no whizzer) if you want wide treble dispersion.
I have an Audio Nirvana 15" Ferrite and it sounds superb. Really superb. They no longer make the 15" in Ferrite so if you don't want to pay for AlNiCo the 12" is the next best (publshed FR curves look better for the 12" than many of their smaller drivers). I have the Super (with whizzer) which I recommend over the Classic (no whizzer) if you want wide treble dispersion.
Last edited:
What is not?
'Resolution' unfortunately is a subjective term without a specific technical meaning when it comes to loudspeaker drive units. The others are also implementation specific. This is not to say that AlNiCo doesn't have a number of technical advantages. But simply possessing an AlNiCo magnet does not automatically mean a driver is wonderful. A lot of poor drivers have been built with AlNiCo magnets over the decades.
They're also expensive due to economies of scale and the materials involved.
Not surprising. That was Harry Olson's masterpiece & one of the finest wideband drive units ever produced.
What about them?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.