Please post links to 15WU projects
I found two for 18WU:
Illuminator-Monitor
Illumina-66
Trying to decide between the two to make desktop computer speakers
I found two for 18WU:
Illuminator-Monitor
Illumina-66
Trying to decide between the two to make desktop computer speakers
The Revelator's are $80 less expensive and lower distortion than the Illuminators and often can be used in the same cabinets.
One benefit though of the Illuminator seems to be absolute power handling. Here's another Illuminator kit:
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/2-way-speaker-kits/lumine-one-2-way-speaker-kit/
It is a little large for a desktop speaker. Also consider the low-Qts Revelator in a sealed enclosure as a starting point
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.c...peak-15w/8530k-00-5-revelator-woofer-low-qts/
I saw that kit, looks good
I guess I was looking for some one who built one of these speakers and could describe the sound a little. Not sure how useful that would be though.
I already have a .33-.44 cu. ft, enclosure built. I should check to see how big it is I guess.
The CSD of the illuminator might be problematic from what I read.
Distortion graphs look pretty similar. I would pick the illuminator actually because it's a little higher maybe, but smoother, but I'm not sure if that matters in a distortion graph or tells you anything about what the cone is doing.
Actually I'm not a fan of neo magnets. Seems like when you try to get something small do the size of something big, there are always drawbacks, especially in electronics. I read they lose there magnetism faster than ferrite over time, years, decades.
Then again I like the illuminator cone a little better.
I guess I'll just wing it.
I can do 18WU in sealed box with 6600
or 15WU in ported box and 6600 or XT25
15WU will look/fit better in the box
Maybe I need to use this setup because they will be so close to my head
But I like the sound of sealed and I feel like small midwoofers are a waste
I listen to really low volume 99% of time time and they are very close to my head (~2 ft).
I guess I was looking for some one who built one of these speakers and could describe the sound a little. Not sure how useful that would be though.
I already have a .33-.44 cu. ft, enclosure built. I should check to see how big it is I guess.
The CSD of the illuminator might be problematic from what I read.
Distortion graphs look pretty similar. I would pick the illuminator actually because it's a little higher maybe, but smoother, but I'm not sure if that matters in a distortion graph or tells you anything about what the cone is doing.
Actually I'm not a fan of neo magnets. Seems like when you try to get something small do the size of something big, there are always drawbacks, especially in electronics. I read they lose there magnetism faster than ferrite over time, years, decades.
Then again I like the illuminator cone a little better.
I guess I'll just wing it.
I can do 18WU in sealed box with 6600
or 15WU in ported box and 6600 or XT25
15WU will look/fit better in the box
Maybe I need to use this setup because they will be so close to my head
But I like the sound of sealed and I feel like small midwoofers are a waste
I listen to really low volume 99% of time time and they are very close to my head (~2 ft).
Have you seen the discussion we've been having about the Mundorf and RAAL drivers?
Maybe your problem is fixating on a dome.
Erik
I heard these Revelator 15W speakers at a DIY get together and they were outstanding. I had a hard time believing how much well defined bass these could generate. But 15L may be too large for you.
https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/carrera
They're available as a kit too: Carrera Full Kit (Pair)
https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/carrera
They're available as a kit too: Carrera Full Kit (Pair)
I'm running the Revelator 18W series right now. In my 1 bedroom apartment according to OmniMic they are about 4db down at 25 Hz from my peak at around 200Hz. Outstanding for a 7" woofer, but requires a ported box that's definitely too big for a desktop. Basically given my apartment, this is better bass than I have any right to expect.
So, if the smaller SS Revelators are cut from the same cloth, as they say, you should get the same. Oh, did I mention they sound great? They do.
Best,
Erik
Best looking 2-way speaker (or photo) I've ever seen.
I think I'll use the 6600 and 18WU in sealed box.
Can't beat that look. I think the 18W almost looks better though.
15W in the same box just wouldn't look as good, I think.
Although, now that I think about it, I'll have metal grills, so it won't matter.
I think I'll use the 6600 and 18WU in sealed box.
Can't beat that look. I think the 18W almost looks better though.
15W in the same box just wouldn't look as good, I think.
Although, now that I think about it, I'll have metal grills, so it won't matter.
Attachments
Last edited:
I want to use the 18WU, I think
I never really like anything ported as much as sealed or aperiodic vented
Only pro audio woofers with strong magnets, low QTS and high suspension compliance sound okay to me in a ported box
Even then I think: maybe they would sound even better in a sealed box
Why would some one want a 4 ohm driver over an 8 ohm, other than sensitivity?
The lower BL of 4 ohm drivers bugs me
But then I think maybe they have thicker gauge VC wire, but the 4 ohm doesn't seem to
Which is strange because both the 8ohm and 4ohm versions seem to have 4 layer VC, so if that's true and the wire isn't thicker and it has no gaps means the 4ohm VC is shorter. Something wrong there, I think.
I never really like anything ported as much as sealed or aperiodic vented
Only pro audio woofers with strong magnets, low QTS and high suspension compliance sound okay to me in a ported box
Even then I think: maybe they would sound even better in a sealed box
Why would some one want a 4 ohm driver over an 8 ohm, other than sensitivity?
The lower BL of 4 ohm drivers bugs me
But then I think maybe they have thicker gauge VC wire, but the 4 ohm doesn't seem to
Which is strange because both the 8ohm and 4ohm versions seem to have 4 layer VC, so if that's true and the wire isn't thicker and it has no gaps means the 4ohm VC is shorter. Something wrong there, I think.
It's purely a design decision. The 4 Ohm version is a better match for most tweeters. The 8 Ohm easier to run in parallel. SS does a nice job of covering several bases at once. In some sizes for instance they offer similar drivers with different Q's making it easier to fit into sealed or ported.
Not the first, or last model line to gain voltage sensitivity this way. Of course, power response is similar in 8 or 4 Ohms.
The 6.5" is in fact overkill in size and output for desktop speakers. In my apartment they fill the place with bass. Go down to the 5" if that's where you'll put them.
Best,
Erik
How a woofer/speaker plays at low volume is important to me.
Troels writes: "Lots of low-level detail too thanks to the rigid cone and high mechanical Q."
But SS illuminators have low Qms of 3.x, no?
Illuminator-Monitor
Trying to decide between these drivers mostly:
Wavecor WF182BD04
Wavecor WF152BD04
Wavecor TW030WA07 (no ferrofluid) and 08(ferrofluid)
Scanspeak Illuminator 15WU/8741T-00
ScanSpeak Illuminator 18WU/4741T-00
D3004/660000
High BL and low Qts I think will be important, but I could be wrong
Two things irritate me: harsh/loud treble and muddy/slow bass/midbass
Troels writes: "Lots of low-level detail too thanks to the rigid cone and high mechanical Q."
But SS illuminators have low Qms of 3.x, no?
Illuminator-Monitor
Trying to decide between these drivers mostly:
Wavecor WF182BD04
Wavecor WF152BD04
Wavecor TW030WA07 (no ferrofluid) and 08(ferrofluid)
Scanspeak Illuminator 15WU/8741T-00
ScanSpeak Illuminator 18WU/4741T-00
D3004/660000
High BL and low Qts I think will be important, but I could be wrong
Two things irritate me: harsh/loud treble and muddy/slow bass/midbass
Jimmy,
Troels is wrong. Detailed sound comes whenever you design
a speaker following the general rules of good speaker design,
no matter the cone material. A lot of drivers meet the quality
requirements for a detailed sound.
Two things that irritate you, can be avoided by voicing
it right and choosing a woofer with favorable TS parameters
for the desired cabinet type.
Focus not on Bl, rather on how ragged the FR on an infinite
baffle is, whether it suits your SPL needs and if you will
be able to filter out the cone break-up.
Troels is wrong. Detailed sound comes whenever you design
a speaker following the general rules of good speaker design,
no matter the cone material. A lot of drivers meet the quality
requirements for a detailed sound.
Two things that irritate you, can be avoided by voicing
it right and choosing a woofer with favorable TS parameters
for the desired cabinet type.
Focus not on Bl, rather on how ragged the FR on an infinite
baffle is, whether it suits your SPL needs and if you will
be able to filter out the cone break-up.
I used an active setup
I'd like to think I can filter ANYTHING
I like tight bass/midbass and no tweeter distortion and harshness
I wanted to build a ported box, but I have never liked the sound of ported.
Best setup I had was LPG metal dome tweeter and Eton 8-800.
About .7 cu. ft. and aperiodically (spelling?) vented, but box and amp was really nice.
I put those on my desk actually.
I'd like to think I can filter ANYTHING
I like tight bass/midbass and no tweeter distortion and harshness
I wanted to build a ported box, but I have never liked the sound of ported.
Best setup I had was LPG metal dome tweeter and Eton 8-800.
About .7 cu. ft. and aperiodically (spelling?) vented, but box and amp was really nice.
I put those on my desk actually.
If Troels was referring to having a stiff, and non-resonant cone, then I completely agree with. Sounds like an ideal piston, the very ideal cone drivers attempt to be.
Now, within that a lot of different T/S parameters can have cones like that, and it can be made a lot of different ways. From Papyrus, paper to carbon fiber and sandwich construction.
You want the cone to neither distort the signal, nor store energy and re-radiate it in some other fashion, at some later point in time. Then after that all you have to worry about is frequency response, dynamic range and thermally induced compression. Easy.
Best,
Erik
I think so. The biggest issue with this IMHO isn't the speaker but the room. The lower speaker's f3 goes, the more trouble they get into with room modes.
Second biggest issue is port noise, easily ameliorated with the proper hardware.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Also, remember a ported speaker might have lower f3 but higher f10 (-10db) point than sealed.
IMHO it's not just ported vs. sealed. It's design, placement, room acoustics. I promise I can build a bad cabinet for either type of alignment. :0)
There are several good kits that are ported. Just off the top of my very not-bald head:
- The Zaph ZRT
- Klang Tong Nada can be done ported (never heard it)
- My own monitors use a similar woofer to the ZRT in a "bookshelf" enclosure. Nothing wrong with the bass at all.
- The list goes on.
Erik
I think, I'll go Wavecor TW30 and WF182
I might make a port, but I'll stuff the enclosure 100% and probably stuff the port too
Port has to be tuned really low otherwise it irritates me and even then, I've never heard a ported speaker, other than a pro audio that sounds good.
I guess I could put a passive radiator on it, but then I'm stuck with a cone that just flaps around in the back.
I might make a port, but I'll stuff the enclosure 100% and probably stuff the port too
Port has to be tuned really low otherwise it irritates me and even then, I've never heard a ported speaker, other than a pro audio that sounds good.
I guess I could put a passive radiator on it, but then I'm stuck with a cone that just flaps around in the back.
I would really like to know what non-pro speakers you have been listening to with such obvious port problems.
Best,
Erik
Maybe what's obvious to one person isn't obvious to another
The Revelator's are $80 less expensive and lower distortion than the Illuminators and often can be used in the same cabinets.
Also the WU is superior to the W in almost every way.
The distortion numbers that are cited are mostly insignificant, IMHO.
The CSD of the WU is more troubling than anything, but in reality I don't know if it's noticeable.
Although the W's nonlinear distortion is lower in the bass range where it is significant.
Although again, the WU surpasses it when it really matters, especially if you have a 2-way setup, then WU is almost a no-brainer.
I do like the Revelator series better, but not for reasons others might.
But then again it is a cut cone that is glued together.
There's a lot of stuff that is important to me, but no so much to others.
That's why I DIM
Seems as 95 cm cone is okay, I was gonna go with 150 maybe
I guess I'll keep it to 95-130 cm^2.
I like the TW30 tweeter, the XT25 has better numbers than TW30 according to Zaph the great.
That maybe be a little teeny weeny bit audible to me, if at all, but the TW30 crushes the XT25. XT25 is great when used with 3-4 inch woofer, maybe 5, if on axis.
I would like to listen to more ported speakers though. All but light cone, low mms, high BL, stiff surround, bass sounds slow. I think that's mostly Qts spec, minus suspension stiffness.
I been looking at the math recently. Generally it's the specs that are important to look at, then construction, then looks (for me), then distortion, but a lot of that doesn't come into play and when it does it's at the woofers limits.
I could go on and on
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.