Assuming the published data & back-calculating the rest, then you could try this:
L = 60in
St = 16in^2
Sl = 256in^2
Zd = 30in
Dv = 3in
Lv = 0.75in
Lag all internal surfaces 1in OC-703, or equivalent rockwool, SAE-F10 felt, jute underlay, Ultratouch or equivalent. It's a relatively acoustically efficient load but the price is power-handling so go easy on the volume knob.
Awesome! Really appreciate you guys taking the time to help out everyone, even noob/lurkers like myself.
I have a pair of Diaclones (the cheap ones) with stamped steel basket and ceramic magnet. Nice speakers, sweet sounding, I like them very much. Good sensitivity too.
Víctor
Right, vented, it's ideally designed for 2*Fs/Qts' = ~162 Hz = BLH or EBS.
Qts' = Qts + any added series resistance [Rs]: HiFi Loudspeaker Design
[Rs] = 0.5 ohm minimum for wiring, so may be higher if a super small gauge is used as a series resistor.
BUT!......... Qes = 0.47*8.69/[8.69-0.47] = 0.4969, so which is more accurate, Qes or Qts?
IME, they're all bogus.
Presume these are the 'measured' specs: pair MeloDavid HiEND 6.5inch DIATONE P610 rebuild MK3 fullrange speaker 2020V|speaker speaker|speakers p610diatone speaker - AliExpress
Scott, what did you use?
GM
Last edited:
Without additional information (I confess I hadn't been following the thread closely of late), the same as you [both] link to, with the 0.5ohm series R added in. I have 'reservations' about the accuracy of any of these figures too, but without being in a position to measure a pair, or know their production QC tolerance, not much else to do without falling back on traditional alignments. Although come to think of it, the latter might end up being more representative.
Same as the link I posted.
DAAS measuring system used: http://file.yizimg.com/190486/2008051410035476.PDF
GM
edit: Qts = [Qes*Qms]/Qes+Qms]
Pg. 42 example: Qes = 1.8, Qms = 4.88, Qts = 1.32 with no added series resistance.
[Qes*Qms]/Qes+Qms] = 1.315
So it's not a software problem.
DAAS measuring system used: http://file.yizimg.com/190486/2008051410035476.PDF
GM
edit: Qts = [Qes*Qms]/Qes+Qms]
Pg. 42 example: Qes = 1.8, Qms = 4.88, Qts = 1.32 with no added series resistance.
[Qes*Qms]/Qes+Qms] = 1.315
So it's not a software problem.
Last edited:
What has the world come to, if we can’t trust an auction site’s vendor data?
On a more serious note, I don’t want to hijack the thread with my ignorance and a driver with so many unknowns.
I still have the Fe-127E and they make for a much more elegant solution and are a known quantity in a metronome.
@planet10 if I go with the DiaKen, I night PM you as there are a couple of questions on the plan.
Thanks again for pitching in everyone.
On a more serious note, I don’t want to hijack the thread with my ignorance and a driver with so many unknowns.
I still have the Fe-127E and they make for a much more elegant solution and are a known quantity in a metronome.
@planet10 if I go with the DiaKen, I night PM you as there are a couple of questions on the plan.
Thanks again for pitching in everyone.
You're welcome!
Just so we're clear, not trying to scare you off using this or any other driver, only that when there's these kinds of discrepancies it's a good plan to design for a worst case scenario, which means an oversize enough cab to [acoustically] EQ [frequency shape] and tuned a little lower if need be.
Before T/S this was the norm, but T/S 'trims all the fat off', leaving little room for error from a purely technical POV, so specs really need to be pretty accurate when one wants the smallest cab as practical.
In short, if you want this driver and preferably in this cab, then Scott can add some 'wiggle room' if need be and worst case is you may need to add a bit of extra stuffing or some series resistance to flatten its response.
GM
Just so we're clear, not trying to scare you off using this or any other driver, only that when there's these kinds of discrepancies it's a good plan to design for a worst case scenario, which means an oversize enough cab to [acoustically] EQ [frequency shape] and tuned a little lower if need be.
Before T/S this was the norm, but T/S 'trims all the fat off', leaving little room for error from a purely technical POV, so specs really need to be pretty accurate when one wants the smallest cab as practical.
In short, if you want this driver and preferably in this cab, then Scott can add some 'wiggle room' if need be and worst case is you may need to add a bit of extra stuffing or some series resistance to flatten its response.
GM
Hi all,
We recently moved, and I'm planning on building a set of speakers for the living room of our house. My wife loves the look of the metronome, so I'd like to see if we can make it work. Having done a bit of research, the larger drivers from Mark Audio (particularly the Aplair 11 MS) look attractive.. but I really have no basis for picking one good driver over another, and am looking for some advice.
I have an 11W Pioneer SX-304B receiver (push-pull 6BM8 pentodes), and a 39W (42W into a 4Ω load) solid state Sansui 3500. I'm assuming the Sansui would be more appropriate match for the middle-ish efficiency of the Mark Audio drivers. I have no subwoofer, but woud be open to getting one someday.
As far as music, mostly 70s-80s prog rock (think something like Alan Parsons "fall of the house of usher"), occasional big band or jazz or folk.
The space is a little over 600 sq ft (60 m^2), 8' ceilings (2.4m). I've attached a diagram of the space. It's not exactly rectangular, but the major dimensions are approx. 25' x 32' (7.6m x 9.7m) Typical listening position would be about 13' (4m) away from the proposed location of the speakers, but we'd use them for ambient background music for parties.
The initial proposed location of the speakers are marked by red X on the diagram. They'd be about 3' (1m) away from the wall, placed up against stair railing (the stairs lead down, so it's more like a hole in the floor than a wall).
If anybody has any advice as to whether pursuing metronomes might work (and in what configuration: drivers, location, bipole or not), that would be appreciated. My default choice is to have single Alpair 11MS drivers in appropriately sized metronomes, and eventually augment with sub if needed; but I don't have the experience or intuition to know if that would be a decent setup or not.
We recently moved, and I'm planning on building a set of speakers for the living room of our house. My wife loves the look of the metronome, so I'd like to see if we can make it work. Having done a bit of research, the larger drivers from Mark Audio (particularly the Aplair 11 MS) look attractive.. but I really have no basis for picking one good driver over another, and am looking for some advice.
I have an 11W Pioneer SX-304B receiver (push-pull 6BM8 pentodes), and a 39W (42W into a 4Ω load) solid state Sansui 3500. I'm assuming the Sansui would be more appropriate match for the middle-ish efficiency of the Mark Audio drivers. I have no subwoofer, but woud be open to getting one someday.
As far as music, mostly 70s-80s prog rock (think something like Alan Parsons "fall of the house of usher"), occasional big band or jazz or folk.
The space is a little over 600 sq ft (60 m^2), 8' ceilings (2.4m). I've attached a diagram of the space. It's not exactly rectangular, but the major dimensions are approx. 25' x 32' (7.6m x 9.7m) Typical listening position would be about 13' (4m) away from the proposed location of the speakers, but we'd use them for ambient background music for parties.
The initial proposed location of the speakers are marked by red X on the diagram. They'd be about 3' (1m) away from the wall, placed up against stair railing (the stairs lead down, so it's more like a hole in the floor than a wall).
If anybody has any advice as to whether pursuing metronomes might work (and in what configuration: drivers, location, bipole or not), that would be appreciated. My default choice is to have single Alpair 11MS drivers in appropriately sized metronomes, and eventually augment with sub if needed; but I don't have the experience or intuition to know if that would be a decent setup or not.
Attachments
Last edited:
I've been playing around with hornresp to try to model the Alpair 11 MS driver in a metronome based on tweaking the published alignments for other drivers, and might be on the right track. By starting out trying to reproduce a known alignment with a known driver and response curve, I believe I learned quite a lot about how metronomes model in hornresp. A few observations along the way:
- Stuffing makes a big difference. A ragged curve with a bad looking peak and dip heading up from f3 becomes nice and flat with some stuffing added in the model
- I think I was wrong about my assumptions of amplifier choice. Maximum SPL seems to be limited more by driver excursion than power. It looks like my 11W Pioneer has the potential drive the Alpair 11 MS past 4mm excursion (a somewhat nebulous engineering limit based on other threads about mark audio drivers and potential for cone damage)
- If I accept 4mm excursion in the bass frequencies as a soft limit, I can get about 95dB max SPL, which at the listening position of the couch would be in the mid 80s, I think, which is perfectly fine
Attachments
I was going to say the same thing but not at all for the same reason. Forget about power handling. It is next to meaningless.
But the Pioneer, of restomodded to current standards, likely smokes the Sansui, and teh Alpai ris good enuff to show the differences.
dave