What about the Zaph driver for the mid?
Zaph Audio ZA14W08 5" Mid/Woofer from Madisound
Supposed to be close to seas excel performance, but without the price.
Works out around AUD $160 a pair landed in Aus.
Something like this for a woofer in a sealed box maybe?
Peerless SLS 830668 10" Woofer - Coated Paper Cone from Madisound
or if anyone could stretch to 12"
Peerless SLS 830669 - 12" Woofer - Coated Paper Cone from Madisound
Just putting it out there!
Oh I'm in Melbourne too.
Mark
Zaph Audio ZA14W08 5" Mid/Woofer from Madisound
Supposed to be close to seas excel performance, but without the price.
Works out around AUD $160 a pair landed in Aus.
Something like this for a woofer in a sealed box maybe?
Peerless SLS 830668 10" Woofer - Coated Paper Cone from Madisound
or if anyone could stretch to 12"
Peerless SLS 830669 - 12" Woofer - Coated Paper Cone from Madisound
Just putting it out there!
Oh I'm in Melbourne too.
Mark
Same woofer available from Speakerbits in Melbourne but at the Australian price of $138 AUD-
I have looked at that woofer myself but haven't tried it, I think that for realistic bass 2 in parallel would be preferable.
About the second thread on an improved "Reference System" yes it probably needs a complementary thread, but such a system really does need to be 4-way or 3.5-way for that last infra-bass octave.
If either of these projects go ahead then this would be the best opportunity to start a group buy for the drivers.
Bearing in mind that the "Ultimate reference system" is going to have very poor WAF and is almost guaranteed to start WW# 3 with our significant others. Not forgetting that it will have a significant cost as well.
I have looked at that woofer myself but haven't tried it, I think that for realistic bass 2 in parallel would be preferable.
About the second thread on an improved "Reference System" yes it probably needs a complementary thread, but such a system really does need to be 4-way or 3.5-way for that last infra-bass octave.
If either of these projects go ahead then this would be the best opportunity to start a group buy for the drivers.
Bearing in mind that the "Ultimate reference system" is going to have very poor WAF and is almost guaranteed to start WW# 3 with our significant others. Not forgetting that it will have a significant cost as well.
I agree the ultimate reference is not an option. But lets not set our sights too low either. My wife has approved both these dimensional footprints.
I'm surprised that no suggestions have come the local distributors given they have the most to gain.
I'm surprised that no suggestions have come the local distributors given they have the most to gain.
Attachments
Consider these two strategies for choosing a group design.
1) Survey the best DIY and company sponsored 3-way designs on the internet. Discuss and critique each. Vote to select one. Create a WIKI to optimize construction details and get group buys of expensive components.
2) Commission one top designer to build a speaker based upon the group's goals and tax any WIKI purchases to pay him/her. Ask speaker companies like AES Lambda and Parts Express to provide a modest discount for a group purchase to get folks off the fence.
The are genius speaker designs on the internet. There are genius speaker designers on diyAudio.
1) Survey the best DIY and company sponsored 3-way designs on the internet. Discuss and critique each. Vote to select one. Create a WIKI to optimize construction details and get group buys of expensive components.
2) Commission one top designer to build a speaker based upon the group's goals and tax any WIKI purchases to pay him/her. Ask speaker companies like AES Lambda and Parts Express to provide a modest discount for a group purchase to get folks off the fence.
The are genius speaker designs on the internet. There are genius speaker designers on diyAudio.
If you could get a danish member in on this, he could build the enclosure
Then you might be lucky to get Troels Gravesen in on this, if he likes the design
This danish member would deliver enclosure and drivers to Troels, and its going
You wouldnt need to pick an existing design, but could do your very own thing
One issue
Drivers needs to be available around the world
Group buy on drivers? That could show to be difficult, and might be questionable if theres any financial gain
I think the biggest challenge would be to agree on a design, and budget
And to keep a firm grip on things
Then you might be lucky to get Troels Gravesen in on this, if he likes the design
This danish member would deliver enclosure and drivers to Troels, and its going
You wouldnt need to pick an existing design, but could do your very own thing
One issue
Drivers needs to be available around the world
Group buy on drivers? That could show to be difficult, and might be questionable if theres any financial gain
I think the biggest challenge would be to agree on a design, and budget
And to keep a firm grip on things
Last edited:
Nice pick-up on what I was thinking.
Another matter I have been thinking about is for that group buy to be co-ordinated by this forum acting as an OEM purchaser, it would mean that we need to buy 1000 of each driver minimum, BUT. if we could do that we could have the drivers designed and manufactured to our requirements and the resulting profits would go to keeping this forum ahead of the game and perhaps pay for the new server.
The 15 dB peak at 9k -- i didn't include the FE127e in my list of FR mid candidates because of a lessor peak.
It is ironc that Zaph in his tests gave drivers a hard time for peakiness, and then he puts his name on this?
If you want a metal cone mid...
Mark Audio CHR-70/Darcher Audio
dave
Personally i'd rather stay away from metal cones.
Nice smooth impedance is important to me too.
We wouldn't have to buy a thousand of an existing design, however globally that represents 500 pairs which is not a massive amount.
The coordination is the issue.
Just for the record, when I said that the Xover was important, I didn't mean (as indicated by Karsten Sømand) that it's important to buy audiophile components. What I meant is, that to get a good freq response, and to give the drivers the best working conditions, it is very important to construct a good filter.
This means, taking care of the drivers impedance, compensate for baffle step, reduce any peaks due to membrane brake up etc. This is much more important than using excotic components!
Take a good look at Troels and Zaps homepages to get an idea of what it takes. Measure, simulate, listen, measure, simulate listen ......
Another important thing is the room acoustics .... don't spend all the money on gear, and forget about the room, it is often as important as the speakers themselves!
There are many good pages on the net, but you can take a peek at my two pages here to start with. Here about the overall room, and here abour first reflections.
..... that's just my 2 cents
This means, taking care of the drivers impedance, compensate for baffle step, reduce any peaks due to membrane brake up etc. This is much more important than using excotic components!
Take a good look at Troels and Zaps homepages to get an idea of what it takes. Measure, simulate, listen, measure, simulate listen ......
Another important thing is the room acoustics .... don't spend all the money on gear, and forget about the room, it is often as important as the speakers themselves!
There are many good pages on the net, but you can take a peek at my two pages here to start with. Here about the overall room, and here abour first reflections.
..... that's just my 2 cents
If this project is going for customized drivers it can be really exciting.
Then it will be possible to determine a lot of factors ie. impedance, sensitivity, x-max, Le, frequency range, cone material, VC former material, phase plug / dust cap material etc., etc.
One of my favorite mid ranges is this/these (see below) Vifas which unfortunately has become discontinued. Due to the size of the driver the sensitivity is relatively low.
However, please note the extended frequency range and the smoothness of the frequency response. Another important thing is the nice and sweet roll-off, off axis. This shows that the mechanical design of this driver is really, really good.
If using a driver like these it becomes a breeze to create the cross-over without a lot of components for compensation, peaks and dips etc...
Just for fun: If this driver was chosen for the project it might be possible to get the driver in a coated version and eventually with an extra magnet / bigger magnet to increase sensitivity. Or maybe in a 4 Ohm?, 6 Ohm?, 16 Ohm? version if this might fit better into the final design?!
BTW, Moondog55 states that it is necessary to go for a 4-way system to handle the lowest frequencies. I do not agree in this matter. It is absolutely possible to create a full-range 3-way system but there is, of course, no free lunch. The sensitivity of the system will be lower, the system will not be able to handle the same level of power and the drivers will be driven with more load. This will be a bit tough for the mid range which has to carry a heavy load since it has to be realtively wide banded.
If the lowest frequencies are wanted in the system it is very important that the bass driver has a low Fs. This because there is a roll-off for the frequencies lower than Fs. The suggested Monacor SPH-265 has an Fs = 23 Hz and a sensitivity of 90-91 dB/1W/1m. Not bad at all....
Link: MG10MD09-08 | Tymphany
PL11MH09-08 | Tymphany
Karsten
Then it will be possible to determine a lot of factors ie. impedance, sensitivity, x-max, Le, frequency range, cone material, VC former material, phase plug / dust cap material etc., etc.
One of my favorite mid ranges is this/these (see below) Vifas which unfortunately has become discontinued. Due to the size of the driver the sensitivity is relatively low.
However, please note the extended frequency range and the smoothness of the frequency response. Another important thing is the nice and sweet roll-off, off axis. This shows that the mechanical design of this driver is really, really good.
If using a driver like these it becomes a breeze to create the cross-over without a lot of components for compensation, peaks and dips etc...
Just for fun: If this driver was chosen for the project it might be possible to get the driver in a coated version and eventually with an extra magnet / bigger magnet to increase sensitivity. Or maybe in a 4 Ohm?, 6 Ohm?, 16 Ohm? version if this might fit better into the final design?!
BTW, Moondog55 states that it is necessary to go for a 4-way system to handle the lowest frequencies. I do not agree in this matter. It is absolutely possible to create a full-range 3-way system but there is, of course, no free lunch. The sensitivity of the system will be lower, the system will not be able to handle the same level of power and the drivers will be driven with more load. This will be a bit tough for the mid range which has to carry a heavy load since it has to be realtively wide banded.
If the lowest frequencies are wanted in the system it is very important that the bass driver has a low Fs. This because there is a roll-off for the frequencies lower than Fs. The suggested Monacor SPH-265 has an Fs = 23 Hz and a sensitivity of 90-91 dB/1W/1m. Not bad at all....
Link: MG10MD09-08 | Tymphany
PL11MH09-08 | Tymphany
Karsten
Just for the record, when I said that the Xover was important, I didn't mean (as indicated by Karsten Sømand) that it's important to buy audiophile components. What I meant is, that to get a good freq response, and to give the drivers the best working conditions, it is very important to construct a good filter.
This means, taking care of the drivers impedance, compensate for baffle step, reduce any peaks due to membrane brake up etc. This is much more important than using excotic components!
Take a good look at Troels and Zaps homepages to get an idea of what it takes. Measure, simulate, listen, measure, simulate listen ......
Another important thing is the room acoustics .... don't spend all the money on gear, and forget about the room, it is often as important as the speakers themselves!
There are many good pages on the net, but you can take a peek at my two pages here to start with. Here about the overall room, and here abour first reflections.
..... that's just my 2 cents
Again I fully agree, Baldin. Sorry if my former writing could be misunderstood. What I meant was that it is extremely important to create a good cross-over. Both the cross-over function and also the components. The components have to be of a very good quality.
Especially the components directly in series with the drivers. It is relatively easy to find very good industrial parts which are much cheaper than "real HiFi" parts.
Karsten
and:
"Taking from the original thread "REFERENCE" here does not mean ultimate, but a system to which other systems could be compared and as a more simple project than some that have been posted. "
Seem important enough to be somehow moved to the front somehow?
Reading the title "Reference," my first thought was something like a Fostex T500AmkII on top, crossed > 10K to a Copper Field Coil Lowther, in a 140Hz carbon fiber LeCleach horn, sitting on a Klipsch style corner horn.
Better to add .5 version w/ tapped horns for bottom octave.
Or cut cost, easier, quicker build, not quite reference sound quailty, a unity style top, w/ simple conical horn to still have that mid-bass punch; again, best add TH for bottom octave. (basically what I'm building for shop system).
It took a couple pages to figure out that "reference" in this context means referes to how simple/inexpensive a project could be, not ultimate sound...
Doesn't "reference" seem kinda misleading?
Or is anyone else interested in the thought experiment of a "sound quality reference" system, being restraind to being only three-way, or 3.5?
The research Floyd Toole shows in his book strongly suggests that 1st reflections should not be damped. It is also important that they have a flattish FR.
If you can't get your speakers to image with the reflections in place play with repositioning the speakers... the research shows that this reflection is an aid to imaging.
dave
Hi Planet10
Yes that is correct, if you have that possibility, but I will postulate that you will need 1 - 2 meters from the speakers to the side walls for that to apply. In my room that is simply not an option, and I have shown what to do about it, if you indeed do not want to use absorption (which a lot of people do, which I think is a bad solution)
Yes that is correct, if you have that possibility, but I will postulate that you will need 1 - 2 meters from the speakers to the side walls for that to apply. In my room that is simply not an option, and I have shown what to do about it, if you indeed do not want to use absorption (which a lot of people do, which I think is a bad solution)
I started the thread as a follow on to the 2-way thread as a 3-way is so much harder to build than any 2-way.
I thought that by opening a new thread we could; AS A GROUP; give people who wanted to build their first big speaker a set of drivers and a cross-over that would work together and explain the whole process of matching frequency response and levels to produce what I would hope to be a relatively neutral speaker.
There are plenty of Ultimate Reference speakers documented but most of them are for people who have plenty of experience and bottomless pockets.
If they were still available I would have said using the combination of Vifa M-22/P13/ DN26 would have worked very well, but sadly those drivers are no longer available.
Lets have some constructive comments on currently made and readily obtained drivers.
Rabbitz has suggested 10inch woofer as a starting point, the Peerless woofer mentioned earlier looks ( on paper ) as a good starting point as sealed box appeals to me as a more suitable beginners project and is my personal preference anyway.
that means usually a 4 or 5 inch midrange and people have had good success with the Peerless 5.25s
Here is the thread about the Statements I previously mentioned which used the Tang Band W4-1337SD: HTGuide Forum - It's time for a Statement announcing my latest project..
And here is a quote regarding how they sound: "
Mid range: Here’s where the Statements really shine. The W4’s are ultra clear and detailed. It’s almost eerie when you first listen to them. My line arrays have been the most detailed speakers I‘ve ever heard until now. The Statements are now are my new standard. The W4 Titanium cones simply allow you to hear every nuance in the recording. Everything from the performer licking their lips to shifts in where they’re standing are audible. Obviously it takes really good recordings to hear these things but the Statements are up to the task. Tonal balance is exceptional. Very, very real sounding to my ears. Some of the thoughts that crossed my mind as I listened were smooth and refined sounding but huge amounts of detail."
And here is a quote regarding how they sound: "
Mid range: Here’s where the Statements really shine. The W4’s are ultra clear and detailed. It’s almost eerie when you first listen to them. My line arrays have been the most detailed speakers I‘ve ever heard until now. The Statements are now are my new standard. The W4 Titanium cones simply allow you to hear every nuance in the recording. Everything from the performer licking their lips to shifts in where they’re standing are audible. Obviously it takes really good recordings to hear these things but the Statements are up to the task. Tonal balance is exceptional. Very, very real sounding to my ears. Some of the thoughts that crossed my mind as I listened were smooth and refined sounding but huge amounts of detail."
Last edited:
good reading
Thanks for starting this thread and everyone's comments are interesting . I have a pair of Morel ten inch 1075's in a cabinet as a 2 way with a pair of Morel 29 tweeters and have been mulling over what to do about the midrange or lack of . I had been thinking of either a FR or mid with the tweeter in a separate cabinet on top of the Morel Woofer cabinet and using a Carver 300 Power amp and ART crossover to separate the woofer from the upper 2-way with it's passive x-over . How would you tailor the crossover point with regards to the cutoff for the woofer and where the mid starts ?
I see PE has started carrying the new Morel 55 version of the classic 58 mid and the sensitivity is almost the same as my other three drivers but I think it is only a 3 inch driver . It's paper though which is what I want to go with as opposed to metal .
How do you match your mid with regards to sensitivity of the other drivers ? I don't want to pad down the tweeter too much or the mid for that matter as I have a tube amp and not tons of power so I don't want to dissipate any power to a resistor.
Do you try and match the sensitivity exactly of the mid/tweet or is there a parameter for doing this ?
Thanks for starting this thread and everyone's comments are interesting . I have a pair of Morel ten inch 1075's in a cabinet as a 2 way with a pair of Morel 29 tweeters and have been mulling over what to do about the midrange or lack of . I had been thinking of either a FR or mid with the tweeter in a separate cabinet on top of the Morel Woofer cabinet and using a Carver 300 Power amp and ART crossover to separate the woofer from the upper 2-way with it's passive x-over . How would you tailor the crossover point with regards to the cutoff for the woofer and where the mid starts ?
I see PE has started carrying the new Morel 55 version of the classic 58 mid and the sensitivity is almost the same as my other three drivers but I think it is only a 3 inch driver . It's paper though which is what I want to go with as opposed to metal .
How do you match your mid with regards to sensitivity of the other drivers ? I don't want to pad down the tweeter too much or the mid for that matter as I have a tube amp and not tons of power so I don't want to dissipate any power to a resistor.
Do you try and match the sensitivity exactly of the mid/tweet or is there a parameter for doing this ?