Right ...I cant seem to stop speaker shopping!
I am looking at Mark Audio drivers, even though my current project is still under construction. I like the look of these drivers and even though i am unlikely to make a FR design, I figure the majority of users will be here, and hence the opinions i am seeking, here also.
I am looking at the Alpair 6 or 10 for Either FAST project OR a 2way 'convential' speaker, but using 1st order slopes, Wide band operation of drivers etc.
Looking at the FR graphs i like the look of the Alpair 6 for FR design, but then im unsure if the Alpair12 has the guts to fill in below for a FAST design....maybe Alpair 10 would be better as a wideband 2 way project/FAST design? decisions decisions.. can i even get them shipped to me in the UK and what are the prices like?
OPinions anyone?
I am looking at Mark Audio drivers, even though my current project is still under construction. I like the look of these drivers and even though i am unlikely to make a FR design, I figure the majority of users will be here, and hence the opinions i am seeking, here also.
I am looking at the Alpair 6 or 10 for Either FAST project OR a 2way 'convential' speaker, but using 1st order slopes, Wide band operation of drivers etc.
Looking at the FR graphs i like the look of the Alpair 6 for FR design, but then im unsure if the Alpair12 has the guts to fill in below for a FAST design....maybe Alpair 10 would be better as a wideband 2 way project/FAST design? decisions decisions.. can i even get them shipped to me in the UK and what are the prices like?
OPinions anyone?
Last edited:
Hi!
I've fairly recently completed a somewhat similar project, with maybe slightly different design goals.
I've summarized it here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/152888-introducing-thesis.html
These are closer to a 2-way speaker. I'm using the Alpair5 as a "mid-tweet" and crossing over 2nd order in the 800-1000hz range. This alleviates the primary issue with the Dayton DA175 midwoofers, which is a fairly nasty breakup in th 1.5-2khz range due to the aluminum cone. Other than that (if you have room for a large enclosure) those woofers sound so, so nice, and the price is great! Harmonic distortion with 2 of them in series is very low, noticeably cleaner than my roommate's pair of B&W 602s.
The Alpair5 plays down below 200hz, and has a beautiful midrange. Vocals and voices REALLY stand out on these. Furthermore, they're a small enough driver that the off-axis response issues are fairly well up in the subtle outer edges of human hearing, so they have very little "beaming" effect.
I haven't heard the Alpair6, but I have built a test speaker with the Alpair10, and I can contest that it plays low and clean. Certain frequency ranges in the speaker are outstanding.. again, vocals here are dynamite! I'm not 100% sold on them yet, as it seems like there's a bit missing somewhere, I'm guessing due to the cone-breakup issues... but the listening was certainly done in a not-very-optimal enclosure, so I've much more testing to do!
I've fairly recently completed a somewhat similar project, with maybe slightly different design goals.
I've summarized it here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/152888-introducing-thesis.html
These are closer to a 2-way speaker. I'm using the Alpair5 as a "mid-tweet" and crossing over 2nd order in the 800-1000hz range. This alleviates the primary issue with the Dayton DA175 midwoofers, which is a fairly nasty breakup in th 1.5-2khz range due to the aluminum cone. Other than that (if you have room for a large enclosure) those woofers sound so, so nice, and the price is great! Harmonic distortion with 2 of them in series is very low, noticeably cleaner than my roommate's pair of B&W 602s.
The Alpair5 plays down below 200hz, and has a beautiful midrange. Vocals and voices REALLY stand out on these. Furthermore, they're a small enough driver that the off-axis response issues are fairly well up in the subtle outer edges of human hearing, so they have very little "beaming" effect.
I haven't heard the Alpair6, but I have built a test speaker with the Alpair10, and I can contest that it plays low and clean. Certain frequency ranges in the speaker are outstanding.. again, vocals here are dynamite! I'm not 100% sold on them yet, as it seems like there's a bit missing somewhere, I'm guessing due to the cone-breakup issues... but the listening was certainly done in a not-very-optimal enclosure, so I've much more testing to do!
The mark audio have really grabbed a lot of interest. it is not often when a manufacturer asks, listens, and actually takes what we have to say to heart.
Next MA projects are to EnABL Alpair 6, and to do enclosures for the incoming A7 (deciSize miniOnken designed) & A12 (harder nut to crack). Also to verify that the new CHR works in the already done boxes.
dave
Next MA projects are to EnABL Alpair 6, and to do enclosures for the incoming A7 (deciSize miniOnken designed) & A12 (harder nut to crack). Also to verify that the new CHR works in the already done boxes.
dave
comparisons between what i have and Alpair 10
here are some links:
Alpair 10(im sure you know where they are anyway)
Alpair 10 Full Range | Markaudio
and my visatonal130:
Visaton - Lautsprecher und Zubehör, Loudspeakers and Accessories
Clearly if one complares the FR graphs then the MA driver wins hands down for HF extension, i suspect the coil wind and length and gauge all contribute to this. The response is flat to within about 2dB, except that bump at 200Hz which probably wouldnt be an issue anyway. but the 'ultra light' cone isnt all that light. i like the polymer chassis, i have some audax ap130zo here and i have had them for donkeys years, clean basket no sounds of its own and an even lighter cone...think less than 6g so 60% that of the Alpair.
dividing Sd/mms gives about 0.13g/cm²
overall performance would be nice though i think.
My visaton al130 have the characteristic peak of an Al cone, and VC designed for woofer duty not FR, however Sd/Mms yields a better 0.11g/cm², though BL is a little lower.
Knowing this, I think i would be happy with the visatons, and that i can be assured that the alpair 10 would offer similar performance overall in a FR application, though maybe a FAST design, or 2 way would be a pointless exercise, as the performance gains over my current audition system would be argueable.
This does make me wonder what visaton could do with the lil 130mm ally cone driver should they apply some FR VC winding to the format! moreso, why didnt Audax do a FR version of the HDA series 130mm driver? sacriledge!
here are some links:
Alpair 10(im sure you know where they are anyway)
Alpair 10 Full Range | Markaudio
and my visatonal130:
Visaton - Lautsprecher und Zubehör, Loudspeakers and Accessories
Clearly if one complares the FR graphs then the MA driver wins hands down for HF extension, i suspect the coil wind and length and gauge all contribute to this. The response is flat to within about 2dB, except that bump at 200Hz which probably wouldnt be an issue anyway. but the 'ultra light' cone isnt all that light. i like the polymer chassis, i have some audax ap130zo here and i have had them for donkeys years, clean basket no sounds of its own and an even lighter cone...think less than 6g so 60% that of the Alpair.
dividing Sd/mms gives about 0.13g/cm²
overall performance would be nice though i think.
My visaton al130 have the characteristic peak of an Al cone, and VC designed for woofer duty not FR, however Sd/Mms yields a better 0.11g/cm², though BL is a little lower.
Knowing this, I think i would be happy with the visatons, and that i can be assured that the alpair 10 would offer similar performance overall in a FR application, though maybe a FAST design, or 2 way would be a pointless exercise, as the performance gains over my current audition system would be argueable.
This does make me wonder what visaton could do with the lil 130mm ally cone driver should they apply some FR VC winding to the format! moreso, why didnt Audax do a FR version of the HDA series 130mm driver? sacriledge!
Last edited:
Mark Fenlon spent a long time working with Ted Jordan, helping with tooling, manufacture & design.
Since stepping out on his own, he has taken what he learned and added a lot of innovative advancements.
dave
well that makes sense, the MA drivers seem much more akin to any need i may have(should i build FR one day), than the jordan/bandor drivers. These always had High Vas, high Qts, low Fs, low sensitivity; as i recall. I guess thats good for a closed box design, but i found them difficult to design for, AND meet my design critieria. MA are more akin to normal 'hi end' drivers in that respect, and IMO, and hence easier to design for...now if only they can produce a 130mm driver with Mms of less than 7g like the Audax AP130ZO and maybe similar TS parameters. I know that maybe they werent the best driver in the world, i think the HDA caused as many problems as it solved, and the motor wasnt 'hi-end', but they were fairly high-end SQ,easy to design for, and dirt cheap..the polymer chassis certainly made a bit difference over the older HM series pressed steel ones. The resolution blew the supposedly higher end paper cone 5" away, and the 55-60Hz Fs was managable, bass wasnt a problem despite the 2.5mm xmax. pity they stopped making/developing speakers for the DIY folks.
food for thought Mark
my perfect 5" driver:
Fs = 50Hz(ish)
Qts = 0.35-0.45
vas = 10-15 litres
Mms = sub 6g
Xmax = 3mm+/-
Sens = 86-90dB/watt
wide range/FR
flat response or easily filtered to correct response
thats it...as if it wasnt too demanding
food for thought Mark
my perfect 5" driver:
Fs = 50Hz(ish)
Qts = 0.35-0.45
vas = 10-15 litres
Mms = sub 6g
Xmax = 3mm+/-
Sens = 86-90dB/watt
wide range/FR
flat response or easily filtered to correct response
thats it...as if it wasnt too demanding
Last edited:
Umm, you probably *want* that "bump" at 200 Hz, depending on your baffle - it largely compensates for baffle step loss.
*IF* that freq. response chart is accurate, both in linearity and performance off-axis at higher freq.s, then this is pretty much the *best* "fullrange" driver there is with respect to basic measured attributes in a design that stands a good chance of needing no filtration.
If however you are looking for a two-way.. well there are other drivers available that might be better for different reasons like extended low freq. performance or a higher degree of linearity at higher freq.s with low harmonic distortion.
Note that both Jordan and Bandor are in your (relative) neighborhood, and have similar offerings. (..though not *that* similar, especially to the Alpair 10.)
Still, as far as single drivers go (provided the chart shown is correct), I don't see how you could go wrong with the Alpair 10 (..assuming you can handle the modest sensitivity and it's demands with regard to fs/extension and enclosure volume).
Last edited:
Hi,
From the list of suppliers that Dave posted I can vouch for Spectrum Audio in Germany. I ordered a pair of EL70s (CSS drivers designed by Mark Audio) from Wolfgang and had them within 4-5 days of the payment clearing.
Another European supplier of Mark Audio drivers to add to Dave's list is Juoigâ in the Netherlands.
Regards,
Ewan
The SEAS Nextel W15LY001 fits that easily and where it misses out, it's insignificant. I've recently completed a design/build where it's crossed over at 5.5kHz and still sums with the tweeter to 10kHz so very wideband in my books. The woofer uses a 1st order crossover with an undersized zobel and 2nd order on the tweeter to achieve a very wide overlap of almost 3 octaves.
Some comments on your first post.
I believe it's best to use FR drivers for fullrange speakers as isn't that their charm or preferred use as they seem to have a strong following in that configuration. Using a FR in a 2-way etc using 1st order crossovers is not as easy as it seems due to the wideband nature without smooth controlled roll offs which are essential for low order crossovers. It can be done but the partnering driver has to be chosen carefully. I'll give 2 examples using a FR125S.
First a 2-way using a Peerless 830875 to do the lower end to take the bass duties away from the FR125S. With a 1st order crossover, the crossover point was about 1100Hz to achieve the required result. Not an ideal place to crossover and in the end the 830875 partnered with a good tweeter sounded much better. Really, when adding a woofer, it's best to go active so you can get steeper slopes and lower crossover points.
The second was the use of an Audax AW010E tweeter and the addition of a second FR125S to make an MTM for a builder that loved the driver but had problems with it's shortcomings. This one worked as it increased the power handling dramatically, brought out the recessed mids of the FR125S, increased SPL to 89dB, added air and sparkle to the top end plus only needed a cap and an inductor. The only reason it worked was that the AW010E had a frequency response that was the inverse of the FR125S, a high Fs and suitable slope for 1st order use. It was only through research of heaps of tweeters that a suitable one could be found that would match the 1st order filtered FR125S top end (crossover around 7.5kHz). A lot of effort compared to designing a normal 2-way with drivers that do roll off in the right places plus it's still not an ideal crossover for an MTM even though it sounds very good according to the owner (replaced his SS 18W8531 / SEAS 27TDFC speaker).
If you want a 2-way, it's still better to go with other drivers that are more suitable for this purpose as there are plenty around. For 1st order crossovers then you have to research drivers even harder.
Last edited:
thanks very informative.
i am considering a small FR project in the future for PC speakers, and if im impressd enough then they may make it into the bedroom stereo set up...i have my 2 ways and im not sure , good as they are, the MA will out do them for the best comprimise, although they may have a little better imaging, and technically be closer to a point source. Still i will endeavor to find out first hand, as im sure that these are the best FR drivers about to date. Fostex dont really ring my bell! heard them and didnt like the biased presentation at all. after seeing specs and reading about them, I simply HAVE to try som MA drivers out of pure curiosity, and fascination with them.
The 2 ways i have are only in test boxes at the mo, but im still amazed how articulate they are, considering theyre in an oversized sealed box of 18 litres, rather than 0.7 Qb volume of 5 litres, and the xover is choc blocked together with el cheapo 3 amp or less speaker wire....i guesstimate the F3 to be around 100Hz and Qb around 0.5.
in their finished guise they should have F3 at 40hz and similar definition to the sealed box , if what is said about tapered QW designs is true.
i am considering a small FR project in the future for PC speakers, and if im impressd enough then they may make it into the bedroom stereo set up...i have my 2 ways and im not sure , good as they are, the MA will out do them for the best comprimise, although they may have a little better imaging, and technically be closer to a point source. Still i will endeavor to find out first hand, as im sure that these are the best FR drivers about to date. Fostex dont really ring my bell! heard them and didnt like the biased presentation at all. after seeing specs and reading about them, I simply HAVE to try som MA drivers out of pure curiosity, and fascination with them.
The 2 ways i have are only in test boxes at the mo, but im still amazed how articulate they are, considering theyre in an oversized sealed box of 18 litres, rather than 0.7 Qb volume of 5 litres, and the xover is choc blocked together with el cheapo 3 amp or less speaker wire....i guesstimate the F3 to be around 100Hz and Qb around 0.5.
in their finished guise they should have F3 at 40hz and similar definition to the sealed box , if what is said about tapered QW designs is true.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.