OK, so it is representative of the performance of the driver in the enclosure
Poor CSD=not so good driver for excellent details
I think I'll stick with the ribbons.My problem is not exactly floor space but "desk" space as my listening place is in front of two desks which cover the whole length of the wall. I precisely don't want a tall enclosure (ugly solution, but I have no choice...)
Concerning bass, I have an active sub that goes from 63Hz down to 20Hz so no bass problem. The bass driver will help from 280Hz to 40Hz or so.
The measurements were taken in the enclosure, but there is almost no damping behind the driver itself (only in corners). The thing that looks wrong is the big resonnance between 1 and 2 kHz, I hope it comes from the baffle resonnances and the enclosure
According to people's opinion, it seems to be an excellent driver. But according to Fostex's graphs, it seems that it has a very uneven response with +6dB from 1.5 to 3 kHz and + 10dB at 14 kHz and 7 kHz. Though 3dB are easy to equalize, such peaks are hard to remove and I think this driver wouldn't be suitable in a balanced system.
But maybe I'm wrong !
I went on the website and read with my poor German what the guy says. The Veravox seems to have more "punch" and to be more analytic than the FX120, precisely what I really enjoyed with the Supravox 165GMF ! I like alive, clear and "energic" sound
Compared to the FX120, the 165GMF is far more analytic, far faster and has far more dynamics than the FX120.
I'd be very interested to hear your comparisons between the Veravox and the Fostex drivers ! I hope your girlfriend won't notice this stuff
!The "no tweeter" advantage of the JXR6 makes it a theorically good candidate. That's why I found it so interesting at first.
But I'm afraid it can't handle the dynamics of a bigger driver, have so much punch etc... Moreover, the CSD graphs published on the Web show it needs 0,4ms to damp anything from 1kHz to 20kHz, which is far from being fantastic.
Is it really an awesome driver compared to more "conventional" drivers with paper cone ?
Anyway, Thanks everyone for your very helpful posts !
Don't get too stuck on the graphs. They say we feed off of the peaks. If you check over at Decware.com under is Lowther Gadget, there is a white paper posted regarding the Lowther DX55 and the Decware Gadget. Anyway, the graphs look horrible. But Steve's response is that every driver he's ever measured is all over the place. It just needs to be like that in the right way.
Go to Decware.com / Articles / scroll down to Lowther DX55
All I'm saying is trust your ears a bit here. Chances are a ruler flat driver is going to sound that way.
Go to Decware.com / Articles / scroll down to Lowther DX55
All I'm saying is trust your ears a bit here. Chances are a ruler flat driver is going to sound that way.
I posted a scan of the Veravox 5S´s frequency response here:
ultimate fullrange but unfortunately the links don´t seem to work anymore. If you have a week time I´ll put them up again.
I´ve listened to this one and it was damn marvellous with acoustic music at least.
ultimate fullrange but unfortunately the links don´t seem to work anymore. If you have a week time I´ll put them up again.
I´ve listened to this one and it was damn marvellous with acoustic music at least.
Found the graph elsewhere;-)
some fullrangers measured from Hobby Hifi
Below the Veravox 5S it says something like:
an excellent fullranger even whilst the treble seems a bit "messy",
above all it´s one of the best 13cm midranges.
(from ftp directory )
greets
Jens
some fullrangers measured from Hobby Hifi
Below the Veravox 5S it says something like:
an excellent fullranger even whilst the treble seems a bit "messy",
above all it´s one of the best 13cm midranges.
(from ftp directory )
greets
Jens
one1speed said:
I'm running mine 'full range', with just the enclosure rolloff as LF filter, so it's running to around 120Hz. It would probably sound better - and handle more power - if crossed over around 200Hz. The earlier JX53 was designed for 500Hz with a first octave x/over, so the JXR6 in similar circumstances should be able to handle 250Hz. Lower if using a higher order x/over.
I agree with the comment that measurement graphs aren't the entire story (I doubt any two manufacturers measure their drivers in exactly the same way). Where it excels is in the fine, low-level detail, stop-start transients and imaging - the latter presumably from having no x/over or separate HF driver.
youyoung21147 said:Poor CSD=not so good driver for excellent details
youyoung
Can I ask what you mean here? What do you mean by CSD? I ask, as I'm looking into ribbons vs. horn super tweeters.
With the ribbons, because you need all the extra circuitry for protection, I'd guess they would work out about the same in the end, no?
I'd like to hear your explaination of this, if you don't mind.
Thanks!
one1speed said:
This is just a graphical display (Cumulative Spectral Decay) of an impulse response measurement - almost exclusivly to show the time it takes for the driver to mechanically settle (stop) for a given freq. and spl (sound pressure level).. The graph he posted of the fostex driver is a CSD.
Horn tweeters are usually compression driver tweeters and typically have poor decay qualities.. however they are often rated at their average spl 1 watt at 1 meter. Given that most compression drivers are more efficent than all other drivers, the comparison is not exactly "apples to apples" because while the cleaner "normal" driver will be working at 1 watt at 1 meter, the compression driver at that same spl may be working at less than a 10th of a watt at one meter which MAY (depending on the driver) provide a cleaner decay at that spl.. Here is a comparison between a pro planar tweeter and a typical compression driver in the same bandwidth:
http://www.stageaccompany.com/en/products/ribboncd.php
and interesting little thread on the subjective qualities of pleated ribbons over the reinforced ribbons (and other drivers):
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/discuss.cgi?read=374328
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/discuss.cgi?read=374328
Interesting..
RAAL has a ribbon that is slightly thicker than others, but it isn't pleated nor is it reinforced with plastic like the NEO fountek drivers. The mass however is similar to the pleated variety (i.e. damn low).
The CSD is quite nice - down to -25 db on average.
http://www.raalribbon.com/products_flatfoil_70-10.htm
They also have an even larger driver that appears to have "side-steped" some of the vertical dispersion problem while retaining a lower usable freq. response.
If I had cash to blow - I'd spend it on a pair of those larger drivers..
(they are at Solen as well)
RAAL has a ribbon that is slightly thicker than others, but it isn't pleated nor is it reinforced with plastic like the NEO fountek drivers. The mass however is similar to the pleated variety (i.e. damn low).
The CSD is quite nice - down to -25 db on average.
http://www.raalribbon.com/products_flatfoil_70-10.htm
They also have an even larger driver that appears to have "side-steped" some of the vertical dispersion problem while retaining a lower usable freq. response.
If I had cash to blow - I'd spend it on a pair of those larger drivers..
(they are at Solen as well)
Scott
Thanks much. As we're on this subject, I sent an email off to LCY last night before I left work asking a couple questions regarding efficiency, etc. LAU Chiu-Yin, the president, sent a great response with several graphs and a crossover he designed just for my system. I thought this was pretty amazing!
I'll check into your links, thanks for taking the time...
Thanks much. As we're on this subject, I sent an email off to LCY last night before I left work asking a couple questions regarding efficiency, etc. LAU Chiu-Yin, the president, sent a great response with several graphs and a crossover he designed just for my system. I thought this was pretty amazing!
I'll check into your links, thanks for taking the time...
Thanks a lot Joensd for the graphs !
It looks like the Veravox 5S should be cut off earlier than 10kHz looking at the graphs. 6kHz should be OK.
On the Cantare-as website, they show as a thumbnail the page of Hobby Hifi where the Veravox 5S is tested. Though the frequency response is far from being linear (though not as uneven as the FE168EZ's), it seems that there is no cone resonnance before 9kHz, which is a good point.
I hope the bass response is not as awful as the graphs suggest it. I hope they didn't use a wide baffle and that the series 220µF cap reduces bass extension.
As ScottG explained it before me, this graph is one of the most interesting because it shows how fast a driver stops to emit sound when signal is stopped. If it stops fast, the details that come after aren't "covered" by the resonnances of the cone and can therefore be fully heard.
It's like when your are speaking in a hall : the echo makes what you say less understandable for others because they hear what you said before at the same time.
Interesting ! I think it has detered me from buying the Neo CD2.0
Nice, very nice, beautiful but... Too expensive !
Going back to the Veravox 5S, I've seen a document that doesn't show the same bass response as Hobby Hifi's graphs.
What do you think about this ?
http://www.picosound.de/BerichtForumstreffenPico.pdf
It is at page 11, black curve.
It looks like the Veravox 5S should be cut off earlier than 10kHz looking at the graphs. 6kHz should be OK.
On the Cantare-as website, they show as a thumbnail the page of Hobby Hifi where the Veravox 5S is tested. Though the frequency response is far from being linear (though not as uneven as the FE168EZ's), it seems that there is no cone resonnance before 9kHz, which is a good point.
I hope the bass response is not as awful as the graphs suggest it. I hope they didn't use a wide baffle and that the series 220µF cap reduces bass extension.
As ScottG explained it before me, this graph is one of the most interesting because it shows how fast a driver stops to emit sound when signal is stopped. If it stops fast, the details that come after aren't "covered" by the resonnances of the cone and can therefore be fully heard.
It's like when your are speaking in a hall : the echo makes what you say less understandable for others because they hear what you said before at the same time.
Interesting ! I think it has detered me from buying the Neo CD2.0
Nice, very nice, beautiful but... Too expensive !
Going back to the Veravox 5S, I've seen a document that doesn't show the same bass response as Hobby Hifi's graphs.
What do you think about this ?
http://www.picosound.de/BerichtForumstreffenPico.pdf
It is at page 11, black curve.
youyoung21147 said:
I believe that has been corrected with a shelving eq.. Additionally, that design provides baffle step compensation via rear horn loading (..and then shows the summation).
The nice thing is the driver's response has a wid-band predictable deviation that can be filtered. In a passive configuration (as shown) you are simply padding down the higher freq. response via a "shelving" circuit. In an active configuration you can either do the same OR elevate/boost the response (in the midrange) to achieve nominally the same eff. as it has originally (i.e. 95 db). In otherwords you can make an easy amplitude fix - particularly in an active configuration. It isn't something I would concern myself with unless I wanted both a passive design and a reference spl above 91 db (1watt/1meter).
I'd try to talk to member Andreas Guhde about the driver for more information.. If you can't "ping" him here then this is his website:
http://www.cantare-as.de/
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.