Choosing the right 5" midrange

So, Andy, moondog and others, is the configuration mostly used with a 5" midrange mated to 2 x 8" drivers a 4 ohm midrange and 8 ohm woofers? What more, if any benefits does it give?

This is the dominant arrangement for good examples of your configuration. The reason for this is because it essentially optimises the many trade-offs if the objective is a practical high fidelity speaker for the home. Now some designers will have more specialised objectives which will change the trade-offs. For example an 8 ohm rather than a 4 ohm load. The resulting 8 ohm design will likely be a poorer speaker judged by the lesser constraints which admit 4 ohm designs but if 8 ohms is a requirement then this is irrelevant.

I have near zero interest in high end commercial speakers as they are way above what I can afford now and coulf anytime in my life, so I have no idea on what kind of brands or models to look at.. And with the limited information provided by these producers, i don't see what I might benefit from spending time googling them and selecting them and then further Google for more information about them.
Could you help me by writing what I'm supposed to look at, in more detail maybe, so I could Google those terms and maybe learn in a faster manner?

Im not asking you to do the work for me, but maybe help me a bit in the right direction. For someone not educated in electronics and without serious experience in speaker/diyaudio building, it sure can feel overwhelming at times.

The feeling I most often get at the end of another day trying to learn these things are severe confusion.

This is because you have not mastered the basics of how to design a speaker with the configuration you have chosen. I have suggested looking at the designs from those that do know how to design such speakers and then sitting down with some speaker design software with a first guess and swapping and changing things in order to teach yourself the trade-offs. The latter is pretty much unavoidable if you want to design your own speaker. It is possible to design your own speaker without looking at how experienced people have done it previously but it would be odd and the result is likely to be less than it could have been. A large chunk of the economy in the developing (now developed in many cases) was built by doing largely this.

Another option would be to read a good book or good online texts on the subject but the good is the tricky part. Most of what is online is not good. I learnt about speaker DIY in the 70s and then for the next few decades had no interest in the subject but the technical side of sound and engineering was a part of the day job. I am not well informed about current good sources on the basics of speaker DIY but others on the forum will be.
 
The design of a speaker system should not start with choosing the drivers.

You first need to define and put down the targets that you want to achieve. Size, efficiency, bass extension, "amplifier friendliness", application (home, outdoor, PA, mobile, etc.), difficulty of the build, financial constraints, and other things that may be specific to your situation. Once you know these, you can start thinking about how to implement things. Choosing the right drivers is part of this second step.

Starting with choosing the drivers is backwards and will not be an efficient approach to implement what you want. You'll just keep on bumping into things you don't want, and which you haven't put down in your definition of your targets.

It's not easy, I know. You are not the first one who gets bitten by attempting the backwards approach. Take a look at the Open Source Monkey Coffin thread. That was quite a process...
 
^All of that is defined from the very beginning of the thread. 1m tall, 25-35cm width (depending on woofers), depth depending on woofers, 2x8"/5"/1" configuration, 30-35Hz lower end, 100€ per midrange or less, 400/3000Hz crossover points (not fixed depending on drivers), 8 ohm, highest sensitivity achievable, for his room. It's all there.
 
Last edited:
diyAudio Member
Joined 2007
Personally I think almost any well regarded midrange would be usable.
All that is needed is for the driver to be reasonable flat for an octave either side of the crossover point and for the efficiency to be with-in a couple of dB of the woofers.
I consider the midrange the most important driver when listening and I would argue that if you listen to the driver in its own without a crossover and it sounds good then it will work as a midrange. Put it in a small box, drive it hard and listen.
Personally I have always liked using .5 woofer but these days I find it cheaper to add a small powered subwoofer as cost is often a deciding factor for me and the price of good quality and low DCR inductors of high values can exceed the cost of that small powered sub.
On a personal preference note I would use a 4" mid rather than a 5" but my experience with dedicated 5" mids has been restricted to the venerable Vifa P-13 or very cheap generic drivers.
Something else also, and possible irrelevant as Vifa no longer exist; but Vifa do mention that the old P-11 / M-11 drivers were suitable for use the first order XOs and I found this has made those particular drivers easy to work with and can handle quite high power levels when used with second order XOs as per the Vifa recommendations. So ask around and see if any of the drivers mentioned so far will work with simple first order XOs
 
Hi guys,

I just wanted to say thank you all for your contributions! Nice to see that the will to help a newcomer is so big, and I do learn from you.

I'm reading everything that's posted here, but aren't posting at the moment because I need to understand what's been posted already before moving on. Hopefully I'm able to do some simulations later on today, hopefully it will learn me something more.
I'm also checking what's available on the market when it comes to 8" drivers.

The Wavecor drivers are interesting for sure, and the build quality on them seems really good. I would like to see one in real life. I had somewhat of a thought of using different brands for the different drivers to maybe get a feel for the quality in real life, but that's just a wish that's has nothing in it for the design of the speaker. Besides, if I stick to Scandinavian manufacturers Im going to make a Scandinavian threesome. Stupid, yeah, funny, yes :)

I also came across the WF132TU Wavecor driver.
It's said to be designed for car audio applications, but the Qts and so on are reasonably normal.

I also looked up the Peerless Hds drivers on Peerless homepage, as I wanted to see what HDS drivers if any are still in production, and there are plenty that's seems to be available and in production.

There are some gem's in there I think, the 5,25" HDS 830991 in particular and also its brothers in the same size with different cone materials, and in the 4" size the polypropylene 830870.

I own 8 pcs of the 830875 6,5" nomex drivers that are going into the Elsinore speakers, and the performance and quality for the price, seems really hard to beat. I would like to try different drivers out, but maybe the cheap HDS is an easy reserve exit?

But they aren't available in 4 ohm, it seems.
I really can't see why Peerless put some HDS drivers put of production. They seem to have quite a nice concept going there, performance wise, for the price.
Likewise with the NE series, also out of production. Someone here know why?
 
Sticking to Scandinavian manufacturers will limit you to Seas and Scan Speak. All others are on different continent.

I wouldn't pay any atention about where something is built and whose name is on the brand if performance is there. If you allow that much subjectivity to set in, performance will definitely suffer.
 
Sticking to Scandinavian manufacturers will limit you to Seas and Scan Speak. All others are on different continent.

I wouldn't pay any atention about where something is built and whose name is on the brand if performance is there. If you allow that much subjectivity to set in, performance will definitely suffer.

Yes, brand and place of production is of no interest unless it has impairments on the quality of the sound reproduced.

But, aren't at least wavecor and peerless also designed in Denmark? A least there are Danish engineers in the design team?

Mondo and others, there are many that recommend Monacor drivers. I don't think I'm going in that direction, but we'll see. I can't put my finger on it, but it is something that makes me inclined to not going with Monacor.
 
Yes, brand and place of production is of no interest unless it has impairments on the quality of the sound reproduced.

But, aren't at least wavecor and peerless also designed in Denmark? A least there are Danish engineers in the design team?

Can i ask again, why would someones nationality in any design team be of importance for product performance ?

For Wavecore it could be (quite possible that designers are Danish) but Peerless hardly. Out of 1.4 bilion Chinese people you really think that they need to hire Danes to design their loudspeakers ? When Tymphany bought Vifa, Perless and Scan Speak, they've bought not just brands (secondary thing imo) but knowledge aquired through few decades of their existence. There are lots of geniuses in China so i guess there are plenty of those that can pick up where the Danes stopped at the time of aquisition.
 
Last edited:
If it's going to be a 3way in TMWW configuration then, then the 8" would most likely be parallel giving it 4ohms in LP section. Now if you add 4ohm midrange the impedance will drop below 3ohm, possibly into 2 ohm range in the midrange making it troublesome for many but the best amps to drive. Other thing to consider the the midrange level will be boosted by 1dB or more by the filter section, so really to match the low pass section you will have to attenuate the mid and tweeter. Unless you go multi amp and run the woofers from separate amp where you can match, bring up the levels things are very complicated with 4ohm mid. For a this build I would go DSP because it gives flexibility passive crossovers don't allow (EQ, time alignment, different slope order) and might sometimes cost less if the passive x-o turns very complicated.
 
...giving it 4ohms in LP section. Now if you add 4ohm midrange the impedance will drop below 3ohm, possibly into 2 ohm range in the midrange making it troublesome for many but the best amps to drive.

Why would that be the case? With a properly designed x-over, the amp sees either the woofers or the midrange, but not both in "full parallel".
 
This Revel 3way as example, but I bet it uses 8ohm mid...

Revel Performa F228Be loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com

Now most of the Peters designs have impedance that drops below 4ohms
SB Acoustics Xmax – PBN Audio
ScanSpeak B741 – PBN Audio
BTW, some interesting design choices and a few things to learn from x-o design, at least for myself.
It would be rather hard to keep impedance above 4 ohm with 2x woofers and 4 ohm mid. Also the BL of 8ohm drivers are higher than their low ohm versions.
 
I believe you're mixing up the meaning of the "4 Ohm" rating. The impedance of a "4 Ohm" speaker is allowed to get down to 3.2 Ohm in its operating range. Similarly, the impedance of an "8 Ohm" speaker is allowed to get down to 6.4 Ohm in its operating range.

The question is: what is the minimum impedance of the speaker system that is being designed here?
As I wrote a while ago, the answer to this question (and other design targets like efficiency and box volume) will define the choice of the woofer(s). Once the choice of the woofer(s) is fixed, one can continue to think about the midrange (which needs to fit the woofer SPL, impedance target, etc.).
 
Most mids will be much more sensitive than woofers you will use - even if you use 2 woofers per cabinet.

I am leaning towards 2x8" 8ohm woofers in parallel. This is important for me because i am:

1)working with passive crossovers so the values of components when crossing over low are still achievable and the prices are normal

2)working with passive crossovers so no possibility for raising lower frequencies to compensate for baffle step loss

In my opinion, you first must know what woofers and midrange you will be using. When you know that, you can choose the midrange impedance per your need.

Let me give you an example using 5" midrange that is 8 ohm and 91dB at 2,83V/1m in a cabinet that is 22cm wide. If you would use Scan Speak 22W8534 (an 8 ohm 88dB at 2.83V/1m distance) then 2 x 22W8534 in parallel would give you +6dB output at 2,83V/1m and in regard to that midrange: +3dB for doubling the cone surface and +3dB on lowering the impedance. In a loudspeaker cabinet that is 22cm wide, -6dB point (because of Baffle Step effect) will be somewhere between 200-250Hz. So you are ending up with real 88dB at 2.83V/1m in that region. If you make crossover point between the woofers and midrange at say 200-400Hz (as it should be done to get flat anechoic response down to 200Hz) you will have to attenuate the midrange by only 3dB (depending on crossover points and acoustic slopes of woofers and tweeter, more than 3dB attenuation may be needed).

If you know where you want your crossover points to be, that will lead you to cabinet width and further to woofer size and i think that is the place search should start. Woofers used will determine the highest achievable sensitivity of the finished loudspeaker. When you know what woofers you will use then you know the sensitivity at 2.83V/1m of your loudspeaker. Now you can choose your midrange and it will rarely demand a 4 ohm value (unless it is pretty small in diameter that 5" is most certainly not). My point is that you should bother yourself with nominal impedance of a midrange only when you know what woofers you will be using and boundary reinforcement due to woofers proximity to the floor.




That one has been hiding from me in plain sight. Thanks for pointing me to it.

First, in the example above you write that the mid used is a 8 ohm one, did you mean 4 ohm or is 8 ohm correct? I ask because the two parallel woofers in your example end up being 4 ohm.

If I follow your example given above, but switch out the midrange to a driver that is 88dB, then the mid and woofer end up at the same sensitivity after the baffle step. How would one do then? Attenuating the mid to be at the woofers sensitivity isn't possible, as it already is at the same level? If you could, please give me another example with different sensitivities on the drivers, and maybe I'll get it then..

This above question of mine could very well be a true example, as if I would use the 83869 HDS as woofer, and the NE149-04 as mid, it would end up as the above question.

I just don't get it.. I feel so incredible stupid. I just don't get it.
I should know this by now, but I don't.

Another question, between the HDS 83869 Nomex and 22W/8534, which would you prefer to use as woofers? These two drivers are a bit cheaper than the rest, so I would prefer to use either of them. Another option could be the SLS 830667 but it's low sensitivity and more of a subwoofer even if it should be able to be used in this speaker.
 
This above question of mine could very well be a true example, as if I would use the 83869 HDS as woofer, and the NE149-04 as mid, it would end up as the above question.

I just don't get it.. I feel so incredible stupid. I just don't get it.
I should know this by now, but I don't.

The 83869 HDS woofer is specified with a half-space sensitivity of 89 dB @ 2.83 Vrms @ 1 m. This corresponds to about 83 dB @ 2.83 Vrms @ 1 m at full-space conditions, i.e., below the "baffle step frequency". For example, if your baffle is 25 cm wide, the baffle step will be centered at about 500 Hz. To compensate for the baffle step, you'd need to attenuate the 83869 by 6 dB above 500 Hz to achieve flat SPL response into full space, which would be at 83 dB @ 2.83 Vrms @ 1 m.

The NE149-04 mid is specified at 89 @ 2.83 Vrms @ 1 m. You'd need to attenuate this driver by 6 dB to achieve the 83 dB level of the woofer.
 
At 500Hz it would be more like -3dB point of Baffle Step. It keeps on going down lower in frequency. Here's response of 6.5" woofer in a cabinet 21cm wide.

Кеф Р300 нискотона.png
 
................

This above question of mine could very well be a true example, as if I would use the 83869 HDS as woofer, and the NE149-04 as mid, it would end up as the above question.

I just don't get it.. I feel so incredible stupid. I just don't get it.
I should know this by now, but I don't.

Another question, between the HDS 83869 Nomex and 22W/8534, which would you prefer to use as woofers? These two drivers are a bit cheaper than the rest, so I would prefer to use either of them. Another option could be the SLS 830667 but it's low sensitivity and more of a subwoofer even if it should be able to be used in this speaker.

Don't beat yourself up, you're doing fine. Just need a little more time to soak in.

What Mbrenwa wrote stands. You would need to attenuate your midrange too because, although baffle step happens with it also, you are using it above the baffle step, not bellow. Woofers, on the other hand, you will be using bellow or at the baffle step frequency. 8 ohm woofer of 88dB/2.83V/1m connected in parallel will result in 4ohm and 88dB/2.83V/1m - by lowering the impedance in regard to input and by doubling the cone surface, you are gaining a 6dB boost which is useful for combating baffle step and keeping the relative sensitivity of the loudspeaker as high as possible with drivers used. You will be using a 4 ohm midrange and you will need to attenuate it 6dB (probably a bit more because of some effects crossover and woofer/tweeter slopes can have on midrange - but don't be concerned about it), but even if you were using 8 ohm midrange, it would still demand attenuation - but this time 3dB (because of doubling the impedance).

I consider HDS 830869 Nomex and Vifa 149-04 a superb drivers greatly overlooked by the diyers. They can be made to work together well and would demand only a good tweeter to pair with that midrange.
 
Last edited:
The country of origin and construction doesn't matter at all as long as quality is good. It was just a question because I've read somewhere that wavecor design team were made up of designer from peerless (?) who started an own company when thympany bought peerless/vifa?

I know the peerless drivers are made in China and it doesn't matter, the quality is still superb for the money. The 830875 driver I already have are nicely built. As I already have some peerless drivers, probably some of the best ones, the HDS tweeter and the 830875 at home, I'm somewhat inclined to choose peerless drivers for this build too.
It would be nice to use one of the 8"HDS as woofers, but how does they stand up against the W22 SS Discovery woofers? Another cheap choice could be the silver flute W20RC38, but they don't seem to be available in EU? Very cheap thou at madisound.

These 4 different drivers are all flat far up in the FR and without severe break up, so should be somewhat easy to work with, especially when used as woofers only. I do like to buy drivers that are versatile, could be used for other project later oon in time if I would like to.

What would you guys choose between them? This thread seems to go in the direction of the need to decide woofers at first. These 4 different woofers are at about the same low price point, and seem to give as much as possible for the money. All other drivers are 1,5 times or more over their price.

Shure, it would be nice to check other brands out, and I'm not sure on the decision of NE149, even if it were the driver I first got interested in. There is the 5"HDS 8ohm poly one too. Or the WF146TU5.
SB Acoustics seems to be the **** right now, and what almost everyone is using, and probably for good reasons, but I would prefer to use something else. Why, I dont know right now, just a preference.

Anyway, from the beginning of this thread I wanted a true dedicated mid driver, but I think it might be wise to try and use a midwoofer instead, as it would give me the oopurtunity to try a 2 way at first, or later or what not.

I'm getting all dizzy from checking drivers spec Sheet's so I've started to print out all of them that might be a part of this speaker, quite a bunch of papers printed so far but f*** yeah, it is so much easier to get a grip of the specifications. I don't get it, why companies have stopped printed catalogs, it makes things soo much easier to look at, whatever the thing being looked at is.

This half space specification, I guess that's the norm? I only see peerless specifying it, but for the sensitivity to be compared agiant other drivers it would need to be a standard to specify in half space?

Yeah, I really picked one of those interest least suited to my knowledge, I avoided math at all costs when in school, thinking I wouldt need it. Yes, another excellent choice made by the younger version of me..