Interesting. Would increasing the bass cavity to 2ft3 (by making it a floor stander?) need much xover modification ?
Those satori drivers looks promising in many ways but in others not so.
I am very tempted to build a 3-way using 5" and 8" sb-nacs, i hope troels comes up with a kit very soon.
Troels crossbracing looks a bit weak, are thoses really for stiffening the box walls or is they more for damping? If the bracing is very thin i presume they will flex and give damping, like viscoelastic dampening?
I am very tempted to build a 3-way using 5" and 8" sb-nacs, i hope troels comes up with a kit very soon.
Troels crossbracing looks a bit weak, are thoses really for stiffening the box walls or is they more for damping? If the bracing is very thin i presume they will flex and give damping, like viscoelastic dampening?
Actually that MR13P has 4" cone - it should be measured to half of surround roll.
Some controversial info given - WM xo at 380 or 580Hz? MT xo first or second order?
Some controversial info given - WM xo at 380 or 580Hz? MT xo first or second order?
That 1.5k dip concerns me. It might not be annoying, but It would force me to look for a different mid.
It worries me as well. The nrx series of mid woofers look better behaved, no idea if they sound better though. Troels does say the dip is inaudible (200hz wide but 2.5db drop).
4" SB12NRXF25-8 :: SB Acoustics
This is cone edge resonance, obvious driver's design fault as it lies inside of passband and is impossible to get rid off with any kind of passive nor active correction. It manifest itself also in HD, CSD and impedance traces... Thankfully (to psychoacoustics) this is quite narrow dip and not as much hearable for audiophile ears.
Last edited:
The Tympany NE123 looks very similar to the MR13P. The datasheet is a bit jiggly at ~1500Hz, but not in 3rd party measurements.
I got a pair of the NE123 cos they seem nice enough + I wanted something like an Illuminator (very sleek motor) but I didn't want to pay Illuminator prices.
Links:
(1) not mine, but a project with pretty graphs:
Vifa NE123-8 and SS D3004 MTM - iAMP - DIY way to build Your own amplifier
(2) shows the (similar) NE180, which looks great.
Timothy Feleppa's Pages: Speaker Measurements - Woofers 5" to 8"
I got a pair of the NE123 cos they seem nice enough + I wanted something like an Illuminator (very sleek motor) but I didn't want to pay Illuminator prices.
Links:
(1) not mine, but a project with pretty graphs:
Vifa NE123-8 and SS D3004 MTM - iAMP - DIY way to build Your own amplifier
(2) shows the (similar) NE180, which looks great.
Timothy Feleppa's Pages: Speaker Measurements - Woofers 5" to 8"
I believe that the dip is caused by the very rigid and deep cone profile. Half wavelength of diameter gets almost nulled.
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_migrated/content_uploads/KLIPPEL_Sound_Radiation_Poster_01.pdf
https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/_migrated/content_uploads/KLIPPEL_Sound_Radiation_Poster_01.pdf
Attachments
Last edited:
U
I am not an expert like some here but I am sure crossover mods would not be required to make a floorstanders.
Look at some other TG designs where it is a bookshelf and he gives details on how to make a floorstander without crossover mods.
I am not an expert like some here but I am sure crossover mods would not be required to make a floorstanders.
Look at some other TG designs where it is a bookshelf and he gives details on how to make a floorstander without crossover mods.
Last edited:
You would need to keep baffle width and drivers in the same position (relative to baffle edges), extending the baffle downwards would likely not make a big difference. Box volume needs to be the same or you go with another alignment due to larger box.
That dip at 1.5k seems low for that size of midbass, as the original papyrus Satori 7" woofer also shares this blemish- and it's quite a bit larger.
I've not had a set of Satori, nor listened for an extended period to say for certain on them, but I had a set of CAW634 Morels with this same characteristic dip. I just felt something was missing or off from them in the mids. I replaced them with TSCW636 woofers because the Supremes did not exhibit a dip in the spec-sheet, but in fact a small peak of about a dB or 2. These do not have this sense of missing anything at all, and measured no dip.
I'm not usually of the opinion that you can't hear a dip, but that the tonal balance can be affected by such a thing, causing dissatisfaction aurally. Sometimes with a higher HD product, a dip is required to make them listenable. If there is low HD in the range of the blemish, I feel it won't sound right.
Later,
Wolf
I've not had a set of Satori, nor listened for an extended period to say for certain on them, but I had a set of CAW634 Morels with this same characteristic dip. I just felt something was missing or off from them in the mids. I replaced them with TSCW636 woofers because the Supremes did not exhibit a dip in the spec-sheet, but in fact a small peak of about a dB or 2. These do not have this sense of missing anything at all, and measured no dip.
I'm not usually of the opinion that you can't hear a dip, but that the tonal balance can be affected by such a thing, causing dissatisfaction aurally. Sometimes with a higher HD product, a dip is required to make them listenable. If there is low HD in the range of the blemish, I feel it won't sound right.
Later,
Wolf
Here it is easy to check responses of different Peerless NE drivers, with deep cones like Satori Transducers Archive - Tymphany
The dip could be 1-1-0 box mode too? Midrange box is roughly 16cm cube
amroc - THE Room Mode Calculator (press "Do it anyway" box)
The dip could be 1-1-0 box mode too? Midrange box is roughly 16cm cube
amroc - THE Room Mode Calculator (press "Do it anyway" box)
Last edited:
I don't think there would be much if any XO mod, so long as you keep the driver placement. The bigger box will increase the bass extension, but shouldn't force a change to the Bass Mid XO point. I might lower the vent frequency by lengthening the tube.
It looks like people are putting the Satori WO24P woofers in too small a box without having measured the real T/S parameters.
Here are measurements of the 4 ohm version WO24P-4:
Courtesy of www.audioexcite.com >> SB Acoustics “Satori” WO24P-4
As you can see the measured T/S parameters differ significantly enough from spec to warrent a much larger box (almost twice the size than the 60-65L people seem to be using based on spec T/S). It seems likely to me that there's a similar difference in spec and actual T/S for the 8 ohm version.
I've seen comments on this woofer that it sounds "deep" but not the "fastest", or that it is a little bit "rounded" sounding etc. Well yes that's what you may get in a non optimal tuned box.
Measurements suggest however that it will be the best performing woofer of its size in the bass / lowest mids when placed in a properly tuned /sized box. My personal preference is sealed.
Here are measurements of the 4 ohm version WO24P-4:
Courtesy of www.audioexcite.com >> SB Acoustics “Satori” WO24P-4
As you can see the measured T/S parameters differ significantly enough from spec to warrent a much larger box (almost twice the size than the 60-65L people seem to be using based on spec T/S). It seems likely to me that there's a similar difference in spec and actual T/S for the 8 ohm version.
I've seen comments on this woofer that it sounds "deep" but not the "fastest", or that it is a little bit "rounded" sounding etc. Well yes that's what you may get in a non optimal tuned box.
Measurements suggest however that it will be the best performing woofer of its size in the bass / lowest mids when placed in a properly tuned /sized box. My personal preference is sealed.
Last edited:
What do you mean by real T/S parameters?
T/S are curves and what numbers you get depend on where the measuring device chooses to pick points off the curve.
I have found that typically the T/S that people measure at home (particularily with cheap automatic tools) have higher Qt, Fs than the factory numbers, but i have found the factory numbers most often give a more appropriate box. I only use measured parameters to match drivers into pairs.
dave
I thought it was the other way around. That people often found that factory T/S parameters are "sweetened" to look better on paper. With some brands known to do this worse than others. Though I often read SB Acoustics are one of the more honest brands regarding T/S.
That difference measured by audioexcite.com is quite large though, from Qts of 0.4 spec to 0.48 measured.
Anyhow I have the WO24P-4 at home now and will do careful measurements myself after burn in.
SB measure at 1V which often gives slightly more impressive numbers than a small signal test.
e.g. look at zaph's 3 way using SB 12" woofers. Mild qts discrepancy between his Qts and the manufacturer's Qts. I bought a quad of the same woofers and measured a bigger discrepancy.
Probably not a huge difference in outcome, but may make a difference when shopping. If you directly compare the SB specs to those of manufacturers who use small signal tests, the cheaper SB drivers will oftrn appear to have motors as strong as a more expensive competitor's driver.