Peerless SDS is really fine and inexpensive!
Peerless by Tymphany SDS-135F25CP05-04 5-1/4" Paper Cone SDS Woofer 4 Ohm
Just replacing a 8" with smaller doesn't help much, you must cut a new baffle!
Peerless by Tymphany SDS-135F25CP05-04 5-1/4" Paper Cone SDS Woofer 4 Ohm
Just replacing a 8" with smaller doesn't help much, you must cut a new baffle!
Attachments
well if 4 way and better baffle shape isnt an issue then there is certainly improvement to be had that way.
"but how will it change the SOUND"
The reason i mention simply swapping out the 8 for a well behaved 5 has more to do with the difference in the "sound" of a well damped cone in breakup VS a cone operating as a piston, and how that may match the ribbons character. Something I cannot explain well but I suspect it has to do with coloration's associated with well damped materials and their mechanical properties effect.
I have no doubt that 8 is a good one. In my own experience just about any cone that can be run basically without a crossover can have something "special" about its sound. I believe this is largely responsible for the attraction to single driver systems.
However to my ears ( years of developing ribbons etched into my ear brain thang), its a better match to have a cone that is not in breakup mode to match a ribbon no matter how well behaved the cone is.
When I first noticed this effect it was experimenting with a 2 inch dome between 8" cones and small ribbons. This avoiding the smooth BUT somehow less "clear" sound of just a good 8 inch with the ribbon. Eventually tried some planers in place of the dome and got a similar result. From there got rid of the dome and the planers and went to smaller cones in place of the 8. Eventually realizing that some small cones ( particularly metal) had a similar clarity without the use of the dome.
Some research into this leads me to believe that although some cones measure very good through their breakup region, there still seems to be something about there sound that is not as clear as a cone that not in breakup.
Anyway in the end IF you bought a good 4-5 inch driver you can experiment and use it in more than one way. You can simply replace the 8" driver , OR, you can use it as a 4 way and maybe make new baffle shape. Eather way there should be a good outcome in there somewhere.
Whelp, I ordered another MiniDSP 2x4 last night. Getting rid of the cap and coil on the tweeters and moving them to the DSP realm will have immediate advantages. Also, my Ebay amp arrived today so I'll have all of the capability to investigate more 3 way and 4 way options. I also forgot that I have 4 Dayton DA-115's on hand from an earlier project. Time to start playing around. Thanks everybody! I'll keep you posted.
The DA-115s are a seriously crappy driver for open baffle. The basket is too closed and the magnet too large in diameter. They also have quite low sensitivity. It MIGHT make a cheap woofer for a closed box, but you have much better choices when it comes to OB. The requirements are not the same for each type of speaker driver. Choose wisely.
Maybe. It depends on whether you actually do any measurements and crossover development, or if you think you can tune "by ear". Which is it? DSP just makes it faster and easier to get the speaker up and running, it does NOT make any promises about whether the speaker will sound good or not. That is the designer's problem. DSP is just a tool, and it can be easily misused or misapplied.
I agree. That's why I forgot I had them. Any thoughts on these?
Dayton Audio CF120-4 4-1/2" Woven Carbon Fiber Midwoofer 4 Ohms
Or these? Peerless by Tymphany 830992 4" GFC Cone HDS Woofer
These interest me as well: Dayton Audio RS100P-4 4" Reference Paper Woofer 4 Ohm
Maybe you would be interested in these:
Dayton Audio DMA105-4 4" Dual Magnet Aluminum Cone Full-Range Driver 4 Ohm
I haven't tried them myself, but the 3.5" version DMA-90 is great in an OB application. You could also give them a try. Both are very affordable.
Dayton Audio DMA105-4 4" Dual Magnet Aluminum Cone Full-Range Driver 4 Ohm
I haven't tried them myself, but the 3.5" version DMA-90 is great in an OB application. You could also give them a try. Both are very affordable.
DSP makes it faster and easier to really screw everything up. My approach may be unconventional but I still start out with a WinPCD just to see how drivers will behave. Then I start in on the DSP settings and then I measure from the listening position.
Haven't seen these. Definitely interesting. I try to shy away from metal cones because I used variations on that theme for years. I prefer (for better or worse) paper/composite, FG, CF, or ceramic/anodized. I have an irrational avoidance of poly cones.
I also have a pair of TG9's (4 ohm version) on hand but (all things being equal) I hate white cones.
SB Acoustics SB10PGC21-4 looks interesting although its sensitivity is only 84db, but as you are using DSP with individual amps for each of drivers you could easily compensate for that difference.
SB Acoustics, SB10PGC21-4 - Meniscus Audio
C.M
SB Acoustics, SB10PGC21-4 - Meniscus Audio
C.M
I've seen this one and I like it and I've had favorable experiences with SB Acoustics. I think they are an outstanding value.
Just a quick update if anyone is still interested. These PS95's were on sale so thought I'd give 'em a go. That's a temporary mounting situation and hopefully this weekend I can get them mounted on the baffle under the tweeters.
Just ear-balling the X/O at this point but the results are promising. I think the major improvement at this point is getting rid of the cap and coil on the tweeter and going full DSP. Another 120 watts of power in the system doesn't hurt either.
Just ear-balling the X/O at this point but the results are promising. I think the major improvement at this point is getting rid of the cap and coil on the tweeter and going full DSP. Another 120 watts of power in the system doesn't hurt either.
Attachments
Current X/O settings. I do have some EQ on the upper mid; a very shallow Q 2dB hump centered at 2Khz. I think that may have something to do with their nakedness. Time will tell. Quick smart phone measurements (don't judge) show fairly flat response from 40 - 12 Khz at the listening position. I do have a +3dB high shelf on the tweeters above 10 khz but that may be due to my 53 year old ears. Anyway the imaging does seem to be incrementally better. Not earth-shatteringly better but at least now I have much better control over ALL of the drivers. Win-Win. Oh, and for the $20 a pop I paid for the PS95's: great little driver for the money.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.