Yuck ... What I am trying to ask, is how does someone go about knowing which drivers to pair with which, without any knowledge of how they sound?
For examples:
I've been reading where Rev driver are considered on the warm side of neutral, with lot's of bass. Whereas Seas Excel seem to be more on the less warm side, with a snappier sound, and transparent midrange.
But other than that, here is a simple example. Say I've heard the Hiq OW2 , and thought they were airy and light sounding. Amazing disappearing act, yet would only play so loudly without revealing their 3/4" limitations.
So if I wanted to use a pair of those tweeters, should I now look for a midwoofer that is more in line with the Seas basic described sound above, instead of the Rev, which may need a more robust tweeter that sounds slightly fuller ?
Does this make ANY sense at all ?
For examples:
I've been reading where Rev driver are considered on the warm side of neutral, with lot's of bass. Whereas Seas Excel seem to be more on the less warm side, with a snappier sound, and transparent midrange.
But other than that, here is a simple example. Say I've heard the Hiq OW2 , and thought they were airy and light sounding. Amazing disappearing act, yet would only play so loudly without revealing their 3/4" limitations.
So if I wanted to use a pair of those tweeters, should I now look for a midwoofer that is more in line with the Seas basic described sound above, instead of the Rev, which may need a more robust tweeter that sounds slightly fuller ?
Does this make ANY sense at all ?
Hey Flaxxer,
I think that much of this will come from personal experience. I encourage you to visit audio shows, DIY gatherings, and buy cheap parts!
So, I would strongly encourage you to start inexpensively. I LOVE the ScanSpeak revelators. Absolutely adore them, but in the 4" to 5" area there are a lot of drivers you should consider for your first pair. Peerless and FaitalPro among them, for a lot less money.
Also, the thing to remember is you won't know what you like until you are doing it yourself. I remember a friend of mine named Rong. He spent a year talking about a Harley Davidson motorcycle. Changing the model, changing the saddle bags. Hard tail, soft tail.
In the end he never got on a single motorcycle!
I think you should spend only enough money to make it worth the learning experience for you. Recognize you may not be happy with the results, but that your 2nd or 3rd try will be much better.
You will also learn to tie together your crossover deisgn, drivers and personal choices MUCH better after this. In fact, your first speakers should be thought of more of a learning laboratory than an attempt to build your last pair.
At $40/woofer it is a LOT easier to change things up, and make mistakes than at $250.
Best,
E
I think that much of this will come from personal experience. I encourage you to visit audio shows, DIY gatherings, and buy cheap parts!
So, I would strongly encourage you to start inexpensively. I LOVE the ScanSpeak revelators. Absolutely adore them, but in the 4" to 5" area there are a lot of drivers you should consider for your first pair. Peerless and FaitalPro among them, for a lot less money.
Also, the thing to remember is you won't know what you like until you are doing it yourself. I remember a friend of mine named Rong. He spent a year talking about a Harley Davidson motorcycle. Changing the model, changing the saddle bags. Hard tail, soft tail.
In the end he never got on a single motorcycle!
I think you should spend only enough money to make it worth the learning experience for you. Recognize you may not be happy with the results, but that your 2nd or 3rd try will be much better.
You will also learn to tie together your crossover deisgn, drivers and personal choices MUCH better after this. In fact, your first speakers should be thought of more of a learning laboratory than an attempt to build your last pair.
At $40/woofer it is a LOT easier to change things up, and make mistakes than at $250.
Best,
E
Don't buy into ANY generalizations about how an entire line of drivers "sounds". That is completely misleading and useless info. Each driver model is different from the next model and all are a compromise in cost, design approach, materials, and construction. Using a kind of emotional connection to "sound" is how people who do not understand audio on a more technical level try to assign meaning to what they hear.
A system that you hear might sound a particular way just because of the way that the drivers have been implemented, good of bad, or from some other part of the system (e.g. the crossover or cabinet) rather than being an inherent trait of the driver itself. I say "might", because certain characteristics can be attributed to some performance failings of a particular driver, but this is on a model-specific basis only. Also, I assume you did not go around listening to "drivers" but to "loudspeakers". How can you separate out the "driver sound" from implementation "sound"?
Do not fall into that lazy emotional way of audio analysis. Learn to understand what about ANY particular driver might make it sound a certain way when used in a particular application from a technical standpoint. In many cases, the only way to tell is to perform your own measurements on a driver of interest or find measure data that others have posted from people that you can trust.
A system that you hear might sound a particular way just because of the way that the drivers have been implemented, good of bad, or from some other part of the system (e.g. the crossover or cabinet) rather than being an inherent trait of the driver itself. I say "might", because certain characteristics can be attributed to some performance failings of a particular driver, but this is on a model-specific basis only. Also, I assume you did not go around listening to "drivers" but to "loudspeakers". How can you separate out the "driver sound" from implementation "sound"?
Do not fall into that lazy emotional way of audio analysis. Learn to understand what about ANY particular driver might make it sound a certain way when used in a particular application from a technical standpoint. In many cases, the only way to tell is to perform your own measurements on a driver of interest or find measure data that others have posted from people that you can trust.
Understood guys. I had no clue, but Erik's first sentence confirmed what I figured.
@ Erik ... I'm not trying to build a certain speaker, via my post. I just have several designs, or drivers that I have always wanted in a pair of speakers. Which got to me to wondering ... Just how DOES a person choose. As far as my future speakers are concerned. Some are simply must haves.
I must build a Hiq 2 way, Carreras. Love those tweeters ... I must own a large Rev 3 way. And because they are inexpensive, and really interesting to me, I want to build 2 ways using both the Dynavox woofers, and the Eclipse woofers ( possibly with the B&G Neo3. These are things I have wanted for years. Now I have the time and money to do so.
As for my first build, I am in the middle of a large Focal build, using their own xovers. But that is not really anything but a mad scientist project I'm enjoying. And I am also building a Scan/Raal computer monitor pair at this time with member, Zvu's awesome help.
I don't have the cart in front of the horse. I ask questions a certain way, where I can best try and glean what I am trying to figure. I'm not planning... just learning.
@ Erik ... I'm not trying to build a certain speaker, via my post. I just have several designs, or drivers that I have always wanted in a pair of speakers. Which got to me to wondering ... Just how DOES a person choose. As far as my future speakers are concerned. Some are simply must haves.
I must build a Hiq 2 way, Carreras. Love those tweeters ... I must own a large Rev 3 way. And because they are inexpensive, and really interesting to me, I want to build 2 ways using both the Dynavox woofers, and the Eclipse woofers ( possibly with the B&G Neo3. These are things I have wanted for years. Now I have the time and money to do so.
As for my first build, I am in the middle of a large Focal build, using their own xovers. But that is not really anything but a mad scientist project I'm enjoying. And I am also building a Scan/Raal computer monitor pair at this time with member, Zvu's awesome help.
I don't have the cart in front of the horse. I ask questions a certain way, where I can best try and glean what I am trying to figure. I'm not planning... just learning.
For me it is simple.
The specific driver must at least meet the intended performance goal or even surpass it and fit to the area of application.
That includes a listening test as parameters will not "tell" you "everything" about a particular driver.
Of course over time when you get to know some drivers you will have a few go to drivers which will stand out, maybe because of the price-performance ratio, engineering "art", a certain property which will appeal to you (personal preferences) or because of other reasons.
Listening to the driver is the most important part and is something one must do himself.
Everyone hears different and has different preferences.
One specific speaker might sound wonderful for one person but horrible to another.
And then the sound of the speaker is also dependent on the surrounding.
Room, enclosure, amp, placement, temperature, humidity, ...
One specific speaker might sound good, but then change maybe the enclosure or the amp or the room and it can sound "horrible".
There are a lot of factors to consider.
Like already mentioned get a few drivers, experiment.
You simply need experience.
The specific driver must at least meet the intended performance goal or even surpass it and fit to the area of application.
That includes a listening test as parameters will not "tell" you "everything" about a particular driver.
Of course over time when you get to know some drivers you will have a few go to drivers which will stand out, maybe because of the price-performance ratio, engineering "art", a certain property which will appeal to you (personal preferences) or because of other reasons.
Listening to the driver is the most important part and is something one must do himself.
Everyone hears different and has different preferences.
One specific speaker might sound wonderful for one person but horrible to another.
And then the sound of the speaker is also dependent on the surrounding.
Room, enclosure, amp, placement, temperature, humidity, ...
One specific speaker might sound good, but then change maybe the enclosure or the amp or the room and it can sound "horrible".
There are a lot of factors to consider.
Like already mentioned get a few drivers, experiment.
You simply need experience.
As for me, usually I start with an idea. Like: Desktop monitor and then parts I think could be very nice to play with or listen to.
Sometimes you'll get stuck and do half a dozen of the same idea, sometimes your mind will wander. You'll see a speaker in a magazine or an antique store. Four days later you'll have an Aha moment and start shopping for parts.
Best,
E
Sometimes you'll get stuck and do half a dozen of the same idea, sometimes your mind will wander. You'll see a speaker in a magazine or an antique store. Four days later you'll have an Aha moment and start shopping for parts.
Best,
E
The most common rule would be that drivers compliment each other with overlapping response curves in the targeted XO frequency range without serious break-up's that might ruin the performance and that sensitivities are in order, woofer being the least sensitive and the midrange and tweeter somewhat louder so that these can be padded down. The sound is mostly achieved by voicing the units in a certain way one finds acceptable.
I did not explain myself well again. I wasn't speaking about the technical reasons to pick a driver to work with another. I know those basics from my reading, although Lozjek broke it down really nicely!
I was referring to what it was that made a person say .... hmm, these two should blend together beautifully. based on their general sound characteristics. But this has already been covered above as well. Experience. Thank you ALL so much for your help.
I was referring to what it was that made a person say .... hmm, these two should blend together beautifully. based on their general sound characteristics. But this has already been covered above as well. Experience. Thank you ALL so much for your help.
The "sound" of the loudspeaker can be quite drastically influenced by the crossover. The crossover point you choose, how well "phase matched" the drivers are in the crossover region, how much baffle step compensation is used, whether or not certain response features (resonances, etc.) are "smoothed out" - all of these can impact the sound.
One way to get a feel for these thigns, and how important (or not) they may be, is to start with a not-too-expensive but robust woofer and tweeter (say a 6" woofer and 1" dome tweeter), put these in a cabinet, and then use a DSP to implement an active crossover for the loudspeaker pair. DSP makes it so easy to play with all the variables in the crossover, even in real time. Then you can make a change and listen. This will help you gain invaluable experience with crossover design choices without having to build a bunch of loudspeakers to get it.
You could buy a miniDSP 2x4HD and a 4-channel power amp and have all that you need to implement this scheme. It would also be good to have a calibrated measurement mic (starts around $50) and a computer. Taking certain measurements of the loudspeaker system will cut down on the guesswork significantly and reduce frustration.
One way to get a feel for these thigns, and how important (or not) they may be, is to start with a not-too-expensive but robust woofer and tweeter (say a 6" woofer and 1" dome tweeter), put these in a cabinet, and then use a DSP to implement an active crossover for the loudspeaker pair. DSP makes it so easy to play with all the variables in the crossover, even in real time. Then you can make a change and listen. This will help you gain invaluable experience with crossover design choices without having to build a bunch of loudspeakers to get it.
You could buy a miniDSP 2x4HD and a 4-channel power amp and have all that you need to implement this scheme. It would also be good to have a calibrated measurement mic (starts around $50) and a computer. Taking certain measurements of the loudspeaker system will cut down on the guesswork significantly and reduce frustration.
This makes me think of workflow. Of late I've seen all sorts of variations, and it's not that they are necessarily bad or end in a bad result, but that things really could be done a bit better. With that in mind:
1st: Break-in drivers (..see other sources on that).
2nd: Run driver through T/S testing with Impedance measured and a "rub-buzz" test. Look at parameters to see if they aren't horrible. Look at impedance to see if there is a serious problem. Listen during rub buzz test for, you guessed it: rubbing and buzzing. Sort out faulty drivers for return.
3rd: test on large open baffle with chamfered rear (of baffle) for driver if required. Make sure front of baffle is "clean" usually with re-usable putty near driver and baffle intersection. Listen to the signature as it goes through its "sweep".
Zaph's (always a good source) is a good example of a good test baffle:
Zaph|Audio
Zaph|Audio
4th: Import that data into a modeling program and start modeling. Make sure level differences are accounted for (..not just with respect to the overall design, but particularly level differences between the same drivers for the left and right loudspeaker). Generate a variety of designs based on physical constraints for your intended loudspeaker. Look at axial response variations (both vertically and horizontally) at different distances.
5th: ONLY once you've got a few models you'd like to try: then physically create them (the boxes) and usually with re-usable parts. I tend to use cardboard + round-over stock of varying edge profiles (a grouping of stock for various lengths) + tape (particularly for corners and around drivers) + damping for the cardboard (mostly interior of "box") + wood frame (again from grouping of stock of various lengths). You can build a nice "erector"-set of materials for less than $100. As you become more proficient - you can add clay sculpting to create more complex baffles (..I'd personally really like a nice 3D printer for this portion).
6th: Then try them with various crossovers DIGITALLY (..I like Soundeasy for this). Play with loudspeaker tilt a bit. Constantly measure the result. Alter crossovers. Constantly listening for differences.
7th: Only once you have a design you feel comfortable with should you start cutting into wood.
8th: listen again, if excellent - "push" to passive component crossover and listen again (make adjustments as required) for final result.
IF you don't do it like this you are asking for:
A. a mediocre result (..though who knows, you could get lucky). It's AMAZING what modest alterations in design can do for a loudspeaker with respect to their "sound". Near identical designs can sound quite different with just modest changes in crossover and BAFFLE (and driver placement). Box volume on the other hand is pretty much as modeled, but external shape (beyond the baffle) and internal shape (relative to how the drivers react) can also impact the result significantly (though usually not as much as the crossover/baffle/driver placement).
B. a LOT of scrap wood from just a few changes.
..of late, I've been seeing people do very basic box modeling for volume, cutting wood and building the box, putting drivers in, measuring, and then modeling a crossover from that in something like xsim. You can get a decent result from this, but you'll rarely get that "dialed-in" extraordinary result. You can even add-in the digital crossover to this work-flow to get a better result, but that does substantially limit the baffle shape, driver placement, etc. that combine with the crossover for that excellent result. If you want to make a box change - then you are back to cutting wood.
Last edited:
As for the thread topic..
1. "Efficiency" (average) + bandwidth + linearity for the operating pass-band and matching to other drivers, respective of a range of suitable baffle shapes.
2. Directivity pattern linearity (off-axis performance) in conjunction with various crossovers (below, at, and above crossover).
3. Average impedance, Mms, Fs, Vas, linear excursion (and a few other parameters) - relative to intended us.
Note: 2 and 3 are often "flipped" depending on driver type and basic design. IF I'm just looking for a woofer for a 3-way I look at #3 and don't care much about #2. But if I'm looking for a 2-way midbass then #2 gets priority.
4. Materials choice, particularly surround material and shape for a given driver. Then motor and basket (..and air flow).
5. Resulting decay profile.
6. Resulting non-linear distortion profile.
1. "Efficiency" (average) + bandwidth + linearity for the operating pass-band and matching to other drivers, respective of a range of suitable baffle shapes.
2. Directivity pattern linearity (off-axis performance) in conjunction with various crossovers (below, at, and above crossover).
3. Average impedance, Mms, Fs, Vas, linear excursion (and a few other parameters) - relative to intended us.
Note: 2 and 3 are often "flipped" depending on driver type and basic design. IF I'm just looking for a woofer for a 3-way I look at #3 and don't care much about #2. But if I'm looking for a 2-way midbass then #2 gets priority.
4. Materials choice, particularly surround material and shape for a given driver. Then motor and basket (..and air flow).
5. Resulting decay profile.
6. Resulting non-linear distortion profile.
Last edited:
Wow ... Thanks to you CharlieLaub. I love this !!!
Damn Scott ... talk about owing a big "thank you". Your posts above just opened up everything to me now. Very basic information I had not considered.
I am very good with wood. I'm going to build three total enclosures. Large, med, and small. Each COMPLETELY modular via rabbetting. I will be able to alter volume, sealed or ported, and baffle infinitely via slide or bolt in walls, ports, slots, and baffles. This will also allow me to experiment with damping options as well. One for bottom cabinets. One for large to smaller bookshelf speakers, and one for smallish speakers. Thanks for quoting CharlieLaub, and expounding.
I already have a 4 channel amp, and a MiniDSP 2x8, with a measurement mic on the way as of yesterday. I have a good laptop and REQWizard installed.
And Bill Poster ... THIS is the kind of info on drivers I need! Saves me funds on notoriously difficult drivers to design with.
I feel like I just won the lottery !
Damn Scott ... talk about owing a big "thank you". Your posts above just opened up everything to me now. Very basic information I had not considered.
I am very good with wood. I'm going to build three total enclosures. Large, med, and small. Each COMPLETELY modular via rabbetting. I will be able to alter volume, sealed or ported, and baffle infinitely via slide or bolt in walls, ports, slots, and baffles. This will also allow me to experiment with damping options as well. One for bottom cabinets. One for large to smaller bookshelf speakers, and one for smallish speakers. Thanks for quoting CharlieLaub, and expounding.
I already have a 4 channel amp, and a MiniDSP 2x8, with a measurement mic on the way as of yesterday. I have a good laptop and REQWizard installed.
And Bill Poster ... THIS is the kind of info on drivers I need! Saves me funds on notoriously difficult drivers to design with.
I feel like I just won the lottery !
I choose drivers by looking at their objective performance / distortion. Descriptions like "muddy", "laid back", "snappy", "warm" etc are subjective descriptions of a complex cocktail of distortion. It is extremely difficult to judge a single driver's performance when it is part of a complete multi-way speaker. Ever listened to speaker after disconnecting one or more of the drivers? It sounds like garbage, even if the remaining drivers are performing well. I could go on forever about the limitations of subjective analysis but there is a good run down here: Zaph|Audio
The idea of a crossover is to 'hide' as many driver defects as possible by choosing a crossover frequency such that none of the drivers have to play in frequency ranges which they have defects. If you have a woofer with a defect at 3kHz and a tweeter which distorts below 1kHz, by choosing a crossover frequency of 2kHz you hide the problems of both drivers.
So what defects are there? Well personally I consider (in order of importance):
-Non linear distortion i.e. harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion. This is rarely published by the manufacturers. Zaph Audio is one of the few places you will find comparable non-linear distortion data for many drivers. In most cases you will have to measure non-linear distortion yourself. I prefer doing harmonic distortion sweeps since they are easier to interpret than IMD measurements and they show the non-linear behaviour of a driver vs. frequency. If you use a driver over a frequency range which it delivers low harmonic distortion in a harmonic distortion sweep, you will generally avoid most non-linear distortion problems. Whatever non-linear distortion is produced by the driver, you are stuck with it. The only thing you can do is avoid using a driver through frequency ranges where it is unacceptably bad. Crossover to another driver which doesn't have a non-linear distortion problem through that frequency range.
-Linear distortion i.e. frequency response. Generally the usable frequency range of a driver is determined by it's mechanical resonance (fs) at the low end and cone breakup at the upper end. A driver with a flat frequency response will be easier to integrate into a system than a driver which has a response that looks like a rollercoaster. That said, linear distortion can be 'fixed'. With enough crossover/filter work you can hammer any response into a flat line, just that you should prefer to not have to resort to it (or put up listening to a non-flat response!).
-Impedance and Sensitivity. Generally you want the tweeter to have the highest sensitivity and the woofer to have the lowest sensitivity. It is much easier to attenuate a tweeter in a passive crossover than it is to attenuate a woofer because to create a constant attenuation vs frequency usually requires building a conjugate network to flatten the drivers impedance. Flattening the impedance of a driver with a low resonant frequency requires large valued, big and expensive crossover components. The other thing to consider - especially for tweeters - is that there aren't multiple resonant impedance peaks or other impedance abnormalities. If there are, this may require additional work flattening the impedance to get your crossover filters to behave. If you plan to use multiple woofers in parallel then you may need to consider that the overall impedance doesn't become too low for your amplifier to drive.
-T/S parameters. Really only applicable for bass drivers, determines how big the enclosures will be and how low they will go.
-Physical Appearance. Pretty obvious this one - who doesn't like their speakers looking pretty? That said, just because some speakers drivers belong to the same 'series' does not mean that they are a good match for each other. Fair warning that just because say a 7" woofer is a good performer doesn't mean that it's 4" brother in the same 'series' is also a good performer or that they will integrate well together.
There's no reason you can't match a paper woofer with an aluminium midrange and a soft dome tweeter. That said, it is likely that drivers with contrasting construction materials will look strange together so often people avoid using sets of drivers that visually contrast each other. I'll admit that I have been guilty of avoiding using certain drivers together for that reason too.
-Price. I have to disagree that 'you get what you pay for'. There are some very expensive drivers that are simply garbage, and there are some very affordable drivers which could be used in a world-class system provided that you implement the crossover perfectly. Many manufacturers produce both excellent drivers and mediocre ones at similar price points. Some manufacturers have consistently mediocre or poor drivers at ridiculous price points, and some manufacturers have consistently good to excellent drivers but at consistently high price points.
What does seem to be the case is that the more expensive drivers from any given manufacturers line up generally have more benign distortion problems, so you are more likely to produce acceptable sounding speakers without being an expert crossover designer.
As an example, there is a $200 7" Danish-built woofer that does not have any severe distortion problems out to 10kHz so you could literally cross it at any frequency without major disaster. There is also a $50 7" Asian-built woofer which performs on par with the Danish woofer to about 1kHz, after which it suffers some rather severe linear and non-linear distortion problems due to cone breakup. As long as you cross it below 1kHz, it performs as well as the Danish woofer. Yet many people do not like this Asian woofer because they tried to cross it above 1kHz and did not get good results. If you are building a 3-way system which requires a crossover point of 800Hz, which one do you buy? I'd buy the Asian one of course! Then I have $150 to spend on a better mid/tweeter. That is why you should never make a subjective assessment of a driver when it is in a finished speaker - how would you know about the problems of a driver if the crossover has been skillfully designed to hide them?
...And finally there are also manufacturers that produce 7" woofers which are more expensive than said Danish 7", yet are out performed in every possible way by both the Danish 7" and the Asian 7"
The idea of a crossover is to 'hide' as many driver defects as possible by choosing a crossover frequency such that none of the drivers have to play in frequency ranges which they have defects. If you have a woofer with a defect at 3kHz and a tweeter which distorts below 1kHz, by choosing a crossover frequency of 2kHz you hide the problems of both drivers.
So what defects are there? Well personally I consider (in order of importance):
-Non linear distortion i.e. harmonic distortion, intermodulation distortion. This is rarely published by the manufacturers. Zaph Audio is one of the few places you will find comparable non-linear distortion data for many drivers. In most cases you will have to measure non-linear distortion yourself. I prefer doing harmonic distortion sweeps since they are easier to interpret than IMD measurements and they show the non-linear behaviour of a driver vs. frequency. If you use a driver over a frequency range which it delivers low harmonic distortion in a harmonic distortion sweep, you will generally avoid most non-linear distortion problems. Whatever non-linear distortion is produced by the driver, you are stuck with it. The only thing you can do is avoid using a driver through frequency ranges where it is unacceptably bad. Crossover to another driver which doesn't have a non-linear distortion problem through that frequency range.
-Linear distortion i.e. frequency response. Generally the usable frequency range of a driver is determined by it's mechanical resonance (fs) at the low end and cone breakup at the upper end. A driver with a flat frequency response will be easier to integrate into a system than a driver which has a response that looks like a rollercoaster. That said, linear distortion can be 'fixed'. With enough crossover/filter work you can hammer any response into a flat line, just that you should prefer to not have to resort to it (or put up listening to a non-flat response!).
-Impedance and Sensitivity. Generally you want the tweeter to have the highest sensitivity and the woofer to have the lowest sensitivity. It is much easier to attenuate a tweeter in a passive crossover than it is to attenuate a woofer because to create a constant attenuation vs frequency usually requires building a conjugate network to flatten the drivers impedance. Flattening the impedance of a driver with a low resonant frequency requires large valued, big and expensive crossover components. The other thing to consider - especially for tweeters - is that there aren't multiple resonant impedance peaks or other impedance abnormalities. If there are, this may require additional work flattening the impedance to get your crossover filters to behave. If you plan to use multiple woofers in parallel then you may need to consider that the overall impedance doesn't become too low for your amplifier to drive.
-T/S parameters. Really only applicable for bass drivers, determines how big the enclosures will be and how low they will go.
-Physical Appearance. Pretty obvious this one - who doesn't like their speakers looking pretty? That said, just because some speakers drivers belong to the same 'series' does not mean that they are a good match for each other. Fair warning that just because say a 7" woofer is a good performer doesn't mean that it's 4" brother in the same 'series' is also a good performer or that they will integrate well together.
There's no reason you can't match a paper woofer with an aluminium midrange and a soft dome tweeter. That said, it is likely that drivers with contrasting construction materials will look strange together so often people avoid using sets of drivers that visually contrast each other. I'll admit that I have been guilty of avoiding using certain drivers together for that reason too.
-Price. I have to disagree that 'you get what you pay for'. There are some very expensive drivers that are simply garbage, and there are some very affordable drivers which could be used in a world-class system provided that you implement the crossover perfectly. Many manufacturers produce both excellent drivers and mediocre ones at similar price points. Some manufacturers have consistently mediocre or poor drivers at ridiculous price points, and some manufacturers have consistently good to excellent drivers but at consistently high price points.
What does seem to be the case is that the more expensive drivers from any given manufacturers line up generally have more benign distortion problems, so you are more likely to produce acceptable sounding speakers without being an expert crossover designer.
As an example, there is a $200 7" Danish-built woofer that does not have any severe distortion problems out to 10kHz so you could literally cross it at any frequency without major disaster. There is also a $50 7" Asian-built woofer which performs on par with the Danish woofer to about 1kHz, after which it suffers some rather severe linear and non-linear distortion problems due to cone breakup. As long as you cross it below 1kHz, it performs as well as the Danish woofer. Yet many people do not like this Asian woofer because they tried to cross it above 1kHz and did not get good results. If you are building a 3-way system which requires a crossover point of 800Hz, which one do you buy? I'd buy the Asian one of course! Then I have $150 to spend on a better mid/tweeter. That is why you should never make a subjective assessment of a driver when it is in a finished speaker - how would you know about the problems of a driver if the crossover has been skillfully designed to hide them?
...And finally there are also manufacturers that produce 7" woofers which are more expensive than said Danish 7", yet are out performed in every possible way by both the Danish 7" and the Asian 7"
Last edited:
Quick questions ... I am not trying to do this. But knowing the answer will help me understand something I am reading abt.
If you design a well integrated 2 way xover. Then later want to change to a three way, does the low pass you add effect what you had in the two way already ? Do you have to re-tweak, if the two way is staying the same ?
How does adding a low pass, now making a bandpass, effect the slope or inductance of the existing two way ?
This is hard putting in words
And the second questions is, I understand choosing low QTS drivers, and why. But only from curiosity, what things can be done to make high QTS drivers work in enclosures? Does AP membranes work ? Or are they only suitable for OB ?
If you design a well integrated 2 way xover. Then later want to change to a three way, does the low pass you add effect what you had in the two way already ? Do you have to re-tweak, if the two way is staying the same ?
How does adding a low pass, now making a bandpass, effect the slope or inductance of the existing two way ?
This is hard putting in words
And the second questions is, I understand choosing low QTS drivers, and why. But only from curiosity, what things can be done to make high QTS drivers work in enclosures? Does AP membranes work ? Or are they only suitable for OB ?
Perfect! That is just the info I was looking for! I'm currently working on learning how everything effects the freq response. As well as how to choose drivers, based on different parameters. So this helps a lot. I can't wait until I receive the microphone, where I can start seeing it first hand.
PS: Mic not here yet, but SE Scans are arriving sometime today.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.