FAST /WAW speaker design questions?

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
I am curious to try a F.A.S.T set up and before even thinking of speaker types and details I need to understand some basics first.

I am concerned about matching output speeds from different types of designed. I prefer the sound of sealed subs, can the full range be a horn/ TQWT or would it not be a good match?

Is it advisable that the FR speaker design needs to cut off at same frequency as the crossover cut off point e.g. Port tuning/ TQWT length or does this not matter?

Any other advice to get a coherent design to work would be welcome. :)
 
There is no such thing as "speed" in speakers. There is poor integration of bass and mid frequencies.

If you like a sealed sub, fine. Use a sealed full-range. Pick a sub that can cross at 300Hz give or take. Ideally no higher to preserve the linear phase characteristics of the full-range. Pick a full-range as small as you can that will cross at 300Hz.

Of course reality dictates moving the cross-over to match the choice of drivers. My personal speakers use the Audax HM210C0 and the Scan Speak 10F-8424G0 crossed at 500Hz with a Harsh phase linear XO.

Bob
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Usually a WAW (Woofer assisted wideband… there is finely a move to lose the FAST moniker) has an XO high enuff that one does not need to attempt to extend the LF and sealed or aperiodic midTLs (or OB) are commonly used.

Like any XO the cutoffs need to create a smooth hand-over. That is specific to the exact implementation.

I am rushing away at the moment, i can post a lot more on the subject including examples we have built.

dave
 
As usual, Uncle Bob's advice is right on the nose.


OK, Scott, I'll bite "TLA" = Transmission Line, Aperiodic ? I see Dave is still catching up to your new testament acronym

Jerms - doesn't the LT suck up a lot of power? Mind you, thanks to classD, that's probably never been cheaper per watt.
 
As usual, Uncle Bob's advice is right on the nose.


OK, Scott, I'll bite "TLA" = Transmission Line, Aperiodic ? I see Dave is still catching up to your new testament acronym

Jerms - doesn't the LT suck up a lot of power? Mind you, thanks to classD, that's probably never been cheaper per watt.

Vs a ported or TL, much more power would be required to extend low response. It all has to come from the front wave.

How the driver response scales vs power becomes an issue possibly. Assuming two woofers rather than a single sub....
 
Last edited:
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Small sealed box EQ'd for bass is only worth considering if small is the priority

Subwoofer Assisted Wideband is the New Testament renounce the anachronistic acronym FAST

Subwoofers are rarely an appropriate chose. They are all to often "atmosphere generators” and don’t reach high enuff with enuff finese.

dave
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Some pictures:

Alpair 12pWeN/Alpair 7.3eN MTM, woofers in ML-TL, midTweeter in aperiodic midTL.

A12pw-MTM-comp.jpg


SDX7eN/A7.3eN, woofers sealed, midTweeter in aperiodic midTL.

Ellipsa-1st-veneered.jpg


SilverFlute W14eN (push-push)/FF85wKeN, woofers in ML-TL, midTweeter in aperiodic midTL.

tysenV2-passive.jpg


Peerless 830870 (push-push)/FF85wKeN, woofers in ML-TL, midTweeter in uFonkenSET (reflex pushed towards aperiodic).

uFonkenSET-matched-woofT.jpg


dave
 
Thanks for all the great advice here. Really getting interested now.

If you like a sealed sub, fine. Use a sealed full-range. Pick a sub that can cross at 300Hz give or take. Ideally no higher to preserve the linear phase characteristics of the full-range. Pick a full-range as small as you can that will cross at 300Hz.

Of course reality dictates moving the cross-over to match the choice of drivers. My personal speakers use the Audax HM210C0 and the Scan Speak 10F-8424G0 crossed at 500Hz with a Harsh phase linear XO.

300Hz for crossover, a lot higher than expecting.

From a quick browse of small FRs obtainable in UK I found a few options.
FR58EX - 2" Full Range - Fountek - 8ohm: Amazon.co.uk: Electronics
Dayton Audio ND90-4 3-1/2" Aluminum Cone Full-Range: Amazon.co.uk: Hi-Fi & Speakers
SB Acoustics SB65WBAC25-4 Full-Range
SPX-32M

The Audax/ Scan Speak combo are out of my price range for now.

Have a look at the Nautiloss topic if you want interesting "sealed" and damped TL.
Or The Dagger. Both by XRK971

These look like fun. Will explore these idea some more.

Small sealed box EQ'd for bass is only worth considering if small is the priority

What would be a ideal size for a sealed woofer cabinet?

planet10, Your wide baffle speakers look great. Interesting to see this combo. I never thought of using 2 woofers per channel.

As XO is higher than I expected, is there still need for a sub plate amps or can I just use 2 Power amps?
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
300Hz for crossover, a lot higher than expecting.

Typical WAW XO is 150-400 Hz. In the speakers i posted pictures of, for the MTM we use 240/250 Hz (1st order PLLXO/4th order (built into HT receiver)), ~800 Hz passive, the wide SDX7 system, 160 Hz(1st order PLLXO), W14 (Tysen V2, 240 Hz PPLXO, 450 passive), uFonken 240 Hz ((1st order PLLXO).

From a quick browse of small FRs obtainable in UK I found a few options.
FR58EX
Dayton Audio ND90-4
SB Acoustics SB65WBAC25-4
SPX-32M

Not familiar with any of those, but have extensive experience with FR88ex (it is OK), and the Dayton is an Aura OEM, i have had the NS3 which is decent and probably the most bass capable 3”.

Probably also out of your budget but outstanding (all priced/pr):
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-6m-2/?v=3e8d115eb4b3
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-6p-2/?v=3e8d115eb4b3
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-5/?v=3e8d115eb4b3

We’ll be trying the A5.2 in the next Tysen V2 prototype and have neglected the slightly larger A6x.

planet10, Your wide baffle speakers look great. Interesting to see this combo. I never thought of using 2 woofers per channel.

2 7” drivers move air similar to a 10” but typically have greater HF extension. The SDX7 reaches just over 1.7k, the SF something like 5k, and the A12pw and the 4” Peerless about 10k. It is really quite amazing to hear the bass that can be had out of a pair of the Peerless. We also have a prototype with 4 Peerless, but we have run into construction/box resonance issues, and the box design is far to hard to execute more than once.

As XO is higher than I expected, is there still need for a sub plate amps or can I just use 2 Power amps?

Plate amps usually do not have an XO high enuff for a proper WAW, they are more useful when adding a (sub)woofer below a FR with fairly extended LF capabilities (60-100 Hz)

dave
 
Not familiar with any of those, but have extensive experience with FR88ex (it is OK), and the Dayton is an Aura OEM, i have had the NS3 which is decent and probably the most bass capable 3”.

Probably also out of your budget but outstanding (all priced/pr):
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-6m-2/?v=3e8d115eb4b3
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-6p-2/?v=3e8d115eb4b3
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/alpair-5/?v=3e8d115eb4b3


dave

THanks for info and suggestions Dave. As I would not have to buy expensive plate amps the speaker budget will be higher for speakers.

This one is closer to budget for the FRs
http://www.kjfaudio.com/product/chs-70/?v=79cba1185463
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
This one is closer to budget for the FRs
chs-70

The CHS is a Pluvia 7 without the dimple on the dustup. AFAIK it was an early production run and i suspect that being out of stock they may not get any more but replace the slot with the Pluvia 7s. This driver is voiced such that it sounds much like the Alpair 7.3 but does not have the same level of DDR (ability to reproduce small detail) but is likely more robust.

We got 2 pair of these when Mark was soliciting opinions on the new basket — we like the basket a lot. Chris is using it in a milliSize enclosure for one of his sets of surround speakers (height ones i believe).

dave
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
WAW? This is the full range forum, what the heck is a wideband!

Well true that WAWs (aka FASTs) usually find their home in the fullrange forum, this is the multiway forum :)

Technically a fullrange would have 10 octave capability, none do (althou some modern ones legitimitely do 9 octaves) so a better term than Full Range is Wide Range. So if we are working to lose 1 acronym considered to be weak, why not 2?

dave
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.