Hi guys, I am relatively new to the hobby and everyone here has been such a great help. Anyway I have a couple of Dayton ps95 drivers sitting around that I would like to use as mid-tweets in a BR two way desktop speaker. It will be in a smallish bedroom/office on my computer desk about 6in from a wall and I hope to make it sound better than the Andrew Jones Pioneers SP-BS-22's I am using now.
My limitations
- Size: approximately 0.3 - 0.7 cu ft (some flexibility here),
- price (under $40 per driver ideally but also some flexibility if the value is
there)
- frequency-wise I would like to hit the low 50's if possible and lower is
better.
- Crossover design is the part I am least familiar/confident so I would like to keep it as simple as possible. I am thinking because of the ps95 acting as tweeter I may be able to get by with a first order (or 2nd order at most) lowpass on the woofer and let the ps95 run full range if possible (but I would love to hear your opinions if this is a bad idea).
I am struggling to find the best match for a woofer. i have looked at everything on PE from 4-8 inches and the choices seem overwhelming. Because of the low efficiency of the ps95 (85.5 db/w/m) I think anything above 86db is a poor choice (am I right in thinking this?) so that helps cut thing down a bit but that only eliminates a handful of options. so here are a couple I am considering and If you could help me understand the pros and cons of each (or suggest better alternatives) I would really appreciate it.
1. HIVI B4N (HiVi B4N 4" Aluminum Round Frame Midbass) I like the smaller size which should allow for a narrow baffle, impedence, sensitivity, price and frequency response are right in a reasonable enclosure (0.27cu ft). My concerns are that the metallic cone will be hard to blend with the paper of the ps95.
2. Dayton Audio DA135-8 5-1/4" (Dayton Audio DA135-8 5-1/4" Aluminum Cone Woofer) other than being a little bigger it has many of the same attributes as the HIVI except it can go much higher and so gives me more flexibility with the crossover. there is also a 7" (Dayton Audio DA175-8 7" Aluminum Cone Woofer) version of this driver that can go even lower that may be a good match.
3. Peerless by Tymphany 830656 5-1/4" (Peerless by Tymphany 830656 5-1/4" Paper Cone SDS Woofer) the main advantage of this is that it has a paper cone so that may be easier to blend with the ps95, also cheap and has a narrow cutout
4. Visaton W170S-8 6.5" (Visaton W170S-8 6.5" Woofer with Treated Paper Cone 8 Ohm) again paper cone may be better for my purposes and and goes low in a reasonable size cabinet.
5.HiVi M8N 8" Aluminum / Magnesium Woofer (https://www.parts-express.com/hivi-m8n-8-aluminum---magnesium-woofer--297-446)- a bit on the large side for my purpose but can really dig deep, though my target cabinet size would have to be smaller than ideal for this driver.
6. Dayton Audio DC160-8 6-1/2" Classic Woofer (https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-dc160-8-6-1-2-classic-woofer--295-305)
again paper cone goes nice and low in a reasonable size and price is good.
So any feedback would be great, are there important factors that I am missing here that would eliminate one or more? Should I be looking at other options? Thanks for all the advice and wisdom!
My limitations
- Size: approximately 0.3 - 0.7 cu ft (some flexibility here),
- price (under $40 per driver ideally but also some flexibility if the value is
there)
- frequency-wise I would like to hit the low 50's if possible and lower is
better.
- Crossover design is the part I am least familiar/confident so I would like to keep it as simple as possible. I am thinking because of the ps95 acting as tweeter I may be able to get by with a first order (or 2nd order at most) lowpass on the woofer and let the ps95 run full range if possible (but I would love to hear your opinions if this is a bad idea).
I am struggling to find the best match for a woofer. i have looked at everything on PE from 4-8 inches and the choices seem overwhelming. Because of the low efficiency of the ps95 (85.5 db/w/m) I think anything above 86db is a poor choice (am I right in thinking this?) so that helps cut thing down a bit but that only eliminates a handful of options. so here are a couple I am considering and If you could help me understand the pros and cons of each (or suggest better alternatives) I would really appreciate it.
1. HIVI B4N (HiVi B4N 4" Aluminum Round Frame Midbass) I like the smaller size which should allow for a narrow baffle, impedence, sensitivity, price and frequency response are right in a reasonable enclosure (0.27cu ft). My concerns are that the metallic cone will be hard to blend with the paper of the ps95.
2. Dayton Audio DA135-8 5-1/4" (Dayton Audio DA135-8 5-1/4" Aluminum Cone Woofer) other than being a little bigger it has many of the same attributes as the HIVI except it can go much higher and so gives me more flexibility with the crossover. there is also a 7" (Dayton Audio DA175-8 7" Aluminum Cone Woofer) version of this driver that can go even lower that may be a good match.
3. Peerless by Tymphany 830656 5-1/4" (Peerless by Tymphany 830656 5-1/4" Paper Cone SDS Woofer) the main advantage of this is that it has a paper cone so that may be easier to blend with the ps95, also cheap and has a narrow cutout
4. Visaton W170S-8 6.5" (Visaton W170S-8 6.5" Woofer with Treated Paper Cone 8 Ohm) again paper cone may be better for my purposes and and goes low in a reasonable size cabinet.
5.HiVi M8N 8" Aluminum / Magnesium Woofer (https://www.parts-express.com/hivi-m8n-8-aluminum---magnesium-woofer--297-446)- a bit on the large side for my purpose but can really dig deep, though my target cabinet size would have to be smaller than ideal for this driver.
6. Dayton Audio DC160-8 6-1/2" Classic Woofer (https://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-dc160-8-6-1-2-classic-woofer--295-305)
again paper cone goes nice and low in a reasonable size and price is good.
So any feedback would be great, are there important factors that I am missing here that would eliminate one or more? Should I be looking at other options? Thanks for all the advice and wisdom!
You don’t mention your low-end requirements (edit-you did and you can hit 50’s easy)? I have been happy with the 6-1/2” Dayton Classic in 0.50ft3 and it could easily go in a smaller box if you don’t need as much low-end.
I don’t personally consider an 8” woofer a desktop monitor size speaker, but that’s up to you. Good luck!
I don’t personally consider an 8” woofer a desktop monitor size speaker, but that’s up to you. Good luck!
Hi Etaion314,
If looking in the 6-6.5" driver class take a close look at the SB 17MFC35-8 @ Madisound for $60.30. This driver is very easy is to work with and requires minimal Xover parts. Typical of SB Acoustics, it is also made very well and looks to be worth much more then the asking price. I wish now I would have discovered the SB line when starting off in this hobby a few years ago. Just my 2 cents.
Best Regards,
Rich
If looking in the 6-6.5" driver class take a close look at the SB 17MFC35-8 @ Madisound for $60.30. This driver is very easy is to work with and requires minimal Xover parts. Typical of SB Acoustics, it is also made very well and looks to be worth much more then the asking price. I wish now I would have discovered the SB line when starting off in this hobby a few years ago. Just my 2 cents.
Best Regards,
Rich
Hi Etaion314,
If looking in the 6-6.5" driver class take a close look at the SB 17MFC35-8 @ Madisound for $60.30. This driver is very easy is to work with and requires minimal Xover parts. Typical of SB Acoustics, it is also made very well and looks to be worth much more then the asking price. I wish now I would have discovered the SB line when starting off in this hobby a few years ago. Just my 2 cents.
Best Regards,
Rich
+1 - if you can stretch your budget.
Thanks for the advice guys! I dont think I can stretch my budget that far for the SB for this project. The dayton classic does look very attractive.
Lojzek (nice to see fellow Croatians around!) - I am a little confused by the recommendation to use a woofer that is more sensitive than my tweeter (or in this case midtweet) I thought it was better to have the tweeter be more sensitive and put a resistor on it to bring it down to the woofer. I am wrong in thinking this? also thanks for pointing out the need for BSC, i am still new to this and dont fully understand yet, but have just looked up some articles and am starting to get it.
Lojzek (nice to see fellow Croatians around!) - I am a little confused by the recommendation to use a woofer that is more sensitive than my tweeter (or in this case midtweet) I thought it was better to have the tweeter be more sensitive and put a resistor on it to bring it down to the woofer. I am wrong in thinking this? also thanks for pointing out the need for BSC, i am still new to this and dont fully understand yet, but have just looked up some articles and am starting to get it.
Thank you Etaoin314, it is nice to be around among good people and be able to help around and learn a lot as well. Usually the tweeters are more sensitive than other drivers, so the need to pad tweeters down becomes necessary. Since you are to build a woofer assisted wideband loudspeaker, you can seize the opportunity to not waste any power in resistive elements, particularly because there is no point to further reduce the overall sensitivity. A simulation of a virtual loudspeaker can reveal what will be the case for a specific driver combination. Let me know what Dayton Audio drivers you are interested in and I will perform some for you to take into consideration. This baffle step thing is important because it can make a huge difference in how it will eventually sound. Speaker placed in open space well away from wall boundaries does not get the usual sound reinforcement as it would have been if it were close to corners and backwall. This should be decided before the design gets to be proclaimed finished, crossover wise. Let me know the baffle measures of the loudspeaker to be or I can propose some and will post here the results.
Last edited:
Thanks Lojzek! That certainly helps explain it. I had been seeing a lot of designs that took down the sensitivity of the high end and assumed it was a "rule" so it is helpful to understand the theory when you see the exception to the rule (i.e. when the high end is less sensitive).
So if I understand the baffle step problem correctly, i want to attenuate all frequencies above that correspond to a wavelength shorter than the width of my front baffle. in a traditional tweeter/woofer combination this is done by BSC circuit on the woofer and a resistor on the tweeter correct? however since I have a lot of latitude to choose my crossover point I would want to choose a woofer with higher sensitivity (6db in an anechoic chamber but more like 4-5 db in a live room) and cross it over to the "full range" driver at the frequency that correlates with the width of the front baffle. So the wider my front baffle the lower I can cross it over and that way I can avoid having to do a baffle step correction in the crossover. However i am still a little confused because based on this theory If I want a front baffle of 20cm i should cross over around 1700hz (as long as the woofer can go that high) correct? but when I put these values into this calculator (Loudspeaker Diffraction Loss and Baffle Step Compensation Circuits) It says that the midpoint of the transition between 2pi and 4 pi space is 570hz which seems way off. what am I missing. Thanks for your patience and insight!
So if I understand the baffle step problem correctly, i want to attenuate all frequencies above that correspond to a wavelength shorter than the width of my front baffle. in a traditional tweeter/woofer combination this is done by BSC circuit on the woofer and a resistor on the tweeter correct? however since I have a lot of latitude to choose my crossover point I would want to choose a woofer with higher sensitivity (6db in an anechoic chamber but more like 4-5 db in a live room) and cross it over to the "full range" driver at the frequency that correlates with the width of the front baffle. So the wider my front baffle the lower I can cross it over and that way I can avoid having to do a baffle step correction in the crossover. However i am still a little confused because based on this theory If I want a front baffle of 20cm i should cross over around 1700hz (as long as the woofer can go that high) correct? but when I put these values into this calculator (Loudspeaker Diffraction Loss and Baffle Step Compensation Circuits) It says that the midpoint of the transition between 2pi and 4 pi space is 570hz which seems way off. what am I missing. Thanks for your patience and insight!
The is likely to originate from the fact that you were calculating two different things. The 1,700 Hz is about the frequency where the wave length of the sound approaches the diameter of the cone and it gives you a hint that this is the range where you should cross your woofer to the tweeter, not your case anyway.
The other figure relates to baffle step frequency calculation. Whatever the results these calculators give you, it is merely general information. You will arrive at the point of making decisions once you start to measure and/or simulate the whole system (enclosure, drivers, filters).
The other figure relates to baffle step frequency calculation. Whatever the results these calculators give you, it is merely general information. You will arrive at the point of making decisions once you start to measure and/or simulate the whole system (enclosure, drivers, filters).
Thanks for your pateince with a novice! 1,700hz I just calculated based on taking my baffle width (20cm) and calculating the frequency for that wavelength 343m/s=0.2m*1715hz. now I am not sure if that is the correct way to estimate what frequency I will have to do my BSC. do I use the whole baffle width? Or do I have to use half the baffle width since the sound is coming from the center of the cone? Or do I calculate from the edge of the cone? Or is this just determined empirically and I should just choose a driver and go ahead and model it with a program.
We have many easy simulator programs for speaker design that are free. But they require lots of basic knowledge. First you can study just some specific issues, before starting to put all together.
The Edge helps to understand and study baffle and directivity effects. Another easy one is BDBS for Excel.
Google for "issue" + simulation or program
The Edge helps to understand and study baffle and directivity effects. Another easy one is BDBS for Excel.
Google for "issue" + simulation or program
Last edited:
The formula for the baffle step frequency:
f=115/baffle width; width in meters
Check the link in post #8.
baffle step frequency
thanks that is super helpful. So I think I am going to go with the HIVI 6in woofer and try to model that this weekend. it hits my frequency targets, seems reasonably easy to work with (at least one person on parts express comments has combined these two drivers with good results) and it does not hurt that it is a good looking driver. i will roll it off around 500-600 hz either 1st or second order depending on the modeling in a smallish cabinet <1cu ft. I'm thinking about making a mid horn for the ps95 similar to this:
https://wac.edgecastcdn.net/001A39/...D48DC0CEF2C8C5B.app1_1525371912660_L1800.jpeg
although i would do a parabolic or tractrix design but would have to calculate its size to boost the mids a bit to even out with the high end.
https://wac.edgecastcdn.net/001A39/...D48DC0CEF2C8C5B.app1_1525371912660_L1800.jpeg
although i would do a parabolic or tractrix design but would have to calculate its size to boost the mids a bit to even out with the high end.
update on the project
hey guys just an update. The enclosures are done! I am very happy with how they turned out. 13L with 2x 1.5" ports by 7" which should tune to ~50hz. I chose to go with the Peerless by Tymphany 830874 6-1/2" PPB Cone HDS Woofer which I got on a good sale. after listening to it with the dayton ps-95 i thought I could do better and chose the dayton-audio-dc28ft-8-1-1-8-silk-dome-truncated-tweeter instead. The crossover started as a 1st order 1mH coil and 5.6uF cap but it was too bright and the bass was too lean so I have been experimenting with 2mH and 2.7mH coils (all i have) and padding down the tweeter with L-pad 1ohm series 10ohm parallel (though this may be too much) anyway I am still not happy with the bass. when I compare it with my pioneer bookshelves they are far superior. I am at a loss what to do. I think I may need to do more stuffing. originally i used 3in thick foam on the sides and it sounded too muffled so i took it out, but may try some loose polyfill next and see if that helps. Any other ideas or guidance would be very helpfull.
hey guys just an update. The enclosures are done! I am very happy with how they turned out. 13L with 2x 1.5" ports by 7" which should tune to ~50hz. I chose to go with the Peerless by Tymphany 830874 6-1/2" PPB Cone HDS Woofer which I got on a good sale. after listening to it with the dayton ps-95 i thought I could do better and chose the dayton-audio-dc28ft-8-1-1-8-silk-dome-truncated-tweeter instead. The crossover started as a 1st order 1mH coil and 5.6uF cap but it was too bright and the bass was too lean so I have been experimenting with 2mH and 2.7mH coils (all i have) and padding down the tweeter with L-pad 1ohm series 10ohm parallel (though this may be too much) anyway I am still not happy with the bass. when I compare it with my pioneer bookshelves they are far superior. I am at a loss what to do. I think I may need to do more stuffing. originally i used 3in thick foam on the sides and it sounded too muffled so i took it out, but may try some loose polyfill next and see if that helps. Any other ideas or guidance would be very helpfull.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
You say crossover design is the part you're least familiar with. Join the club, me too. Unfortunately that's the most important part of your project. Many an otherwise promising project has been brought to a screeching halt with a bad crossover. That being the case, I'd recommend a kit for your first time out. Madisound, Meniscus, Parts Express, and Zaph Audio are a few of the places to find proven kit speakers. In the meantime you also might try familiarizing yourself with Jeff Bagby's free design programs. If you can learn to use them you'll be way ahead of the average novice.
Loudspeaker Design Software
Loudspeaker Design Software
What do you have to create a XO?
A mic (know how to use it), software to get an FR graph from the mic and some sort of “jig or DATS” to get T/S parameters for the speakers?
These are the minimum to get good results, along with mastering some XO design software - mentioned above are great tools and fairly easy to grasp the basics.
Can’t see your picture - was that a schematic, an FR graph or what?
A FR graph would assist greatly in giving you a place to start.
A mic (know how to use it), software to get an FR graph from the mic and some sort of “jig or DATS” to get T/S parameters for the speakers?
These are the minimum to get good results, along with mastering some XO design software - mentioned above are great tools and fairly easy to grasp the basics.
Can’t see your picture - was that a schematic, an FR graph or what?
A FR graph would assist greatly in giving you a place to start.
The picture was a pic of the speakers. I can’t get it to load unless I open in a new tab then it loads fine. (There does not seem to be a way to upload pic I can only link so I put a sharable link from my google drive. Is there a better way to do this? ) As far as tools I just got the omnimic and vats kit but am still figuring out how to use them. Are t/s parameters from manufacturer not accurate? As for design software I am using vituix cad but the learning curve has been kind of steep.
WRT kits, while they will certainly result in a better speaker than I can do myself, I’m not sure I can learn much from them as all the design work is already done.
Btw have you guys seen the parts express daily deal for the epique 5.25in drivers. I am pretty interested but when I got the frd file it kinda looked like a really hard driver to use with a huge valley in the 50hz to 100hz range Just curious on your guys thoughts on it
WRT kits, while they will certainly result in a better speaker than I can do myself, I’m not sure I can learn much from them as all the design work is already done.
Btw have you guys seen the parts express daily deal for the epique 5.25in drivers. I am pretty interested but when I got the frd file it kinda looked like a really hard driver to use with a huge valley in the 50hz to 100hz range Just curious on your guys thoughts on it
Enclosure volume is too small to load the drivers optimally. The xo network is ideally designed by measuring drivers responses in the far field (1m). Check my sig line.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.