..I was just referencing that piotr z was commenting on something I'd already commented on. 
BTW, baffle-step loss can easily be seen in the Edge program I linked to on page 1 of this thread.
It's a VERY easy program to use, just:
make the baffle dimensions,
then spec. the driver diameter & place it FULLY on your baffle,
then increase the number of sources a bit,
then make sure the mic distance is 2 meters,
then move the mic in front of the driver (..centered-on the driver).
Look at the pressure loss that occurs on the low-end: that's your baffle-step loss.
Note: it doesn't factor-in spl-reinforcement from the floor for a particular freq. and driver proximity, it doesn't factor-in loss's from driver T/S param's and enclosure volume. It's just there to show that loss from the baffle, gain from diffraction near/above that loss, and some irregularity higher in freq. with diffraction vs. driver placement relative to a very primitive "driver" as placed on that baffle.. BUT ONLY FROM THE 0 degree AXIS.
It's very basic, but you have to know that it is very limited relative to a real-world result.
Still, it's easy to use (quick to) and can be useful.
BTW, baffle-step loss can easily be seen in the Edge program I linked to on page 1 of this thread.
It's a VERY easy program to use, just:
make the baffle dimensions,
then spec. the driver diameter & place it FULLY on your baffle,
then increase the number of sources a bit,
then make sure the mic distance is 2 meters,
then move the mic in front of the driver (..centered-on the driver).
Look at the pressure loss that occurs on the low-end: that's your baffle-step loss.
Note: it doesn't factor-in spl-reinforcement from the floor for a particular freq. and driver proximity, it doesn't factor-in loss's from driver T/S param's and enclosure volume. It's just there to show that loss from the baffle, gain from diffraction near/above that loss, and some irregularity higher in freq. with diffraction vs. driver placement relative to a very primitive "driver" as placed on that baffle.. BUT ONLY FROM THE 0 degree AXIS.
It's very basic, but you have to know that it is very limited relative to a real-world result.
Still, it's easy to use (quick to) and can be useful.
Last edited:
That's fine, if you like the sound *well-enough then there really isn't any need to try it dipole (..plus, there are a host of issues when you do that related to pressure loss from the dipole **cancellation.) Something you can also try-out with the Edge when checking the "dipole" box. (..and if you don't use it with any baffle, you'd just make the baffle the same size as the driver and place that driver on top of that out-line making sure it's actually on it and not "grey'ed out").
**that's something automatically accounted for with the Great Heil: it's specifically measured without any baffle and designed to be without any baffle (unlike the Beyma).
*for a subjective opinion on this here is Danny from GR Research:
Selecting Tweeters and Why it Matters! - YouTube
Last edited:
Here's a new 6.5" LaVoce midrange speaker which looks exceptional for $60.
97dB, cloth surround, very nice response, and healthy xmax
LaVoce MAF061.50 6-1/2" Professional Midrange Driver 8 Ohm
97dB, cloth surround, very nice response, and healthy xmax
LaVoce MAF061.50 6-1/2" Professional Midrange Driver 8 Ohm
You mention that you have around 30 sqm.... So I would suggest a smaller and more elegangt solution, with a more controlled and even dispersion.
I play with a 5" midrange from an old Acoustic Elegance speaker, combinede with a Seas DXT tweeter and some very narrow cuts on the front baffel - like these:
Heissmann Acoustics | DXT-MON RLY | Monitor speaker
I belive you can use most metal midranges in the 5" segment, from Seas or SB. They are cheap and when used and EQ'ed well, they play absolutly great.
My grunt with paper midranges, are that they seem to dampen some detail, cause the simple fact that paper is softer than metal. A metal midrange might breakup around 9-10Khz.... but that should not be an issue when crossed arund 2Khz. Paper breakup more nicely, but way before... maybe already at 3Khz sometimes. This might give a "softer" sound or a "romantic" "tone" in the speaker.... but I dont prefer this.
When using a 6-7" midrange - I would go for a larger waveguide to fit the lower X-over:
Test Peerless XT25TG-30 / 04 at Waveguide WG-300
The XT tweeter works much better in waveguides, cause the distance from the tweeter itself to the waveguide, is much more uniform than with a normal dome shape.
Many drivers in many price ranges, are actually really good. It's much more important how you place them in the cabinet, the size/shape of the cabinet, the crossover, the EQ and the mix/combination of drivers.
And please use a minimum of 2-3 well placed subwoofers..... it clears up the region beneath 100hz..... ALOT! Which also helps you hear the midrange/tweeter much more easily.
I play with a 5" midrange from an old Acoustic Elegance speaker, combinede with a Seas DXT tweeter and some very narrow cuts on the front baffel - like these:
Heissmann Acoustics | DXT-MON RLY | Monitor speaker
I belive you can use most metal midranges in the 5" segment, from Seas or SB. They are cheap and when used and EQ'ed well, they play absolutly great.
My grunt with paper midranges, are that they seem to dampen some detail, cause the simple fact that paper is softer than metal. A metal midrange might breakup around 9-10Khz.... but that should not be an issue when crossed arund 2Khz. Paper breakup more nicely, but way before... maybe already at 3Khz sometimes. This might give a "softer" sound or a "romantic" "tone" in the speaker.... but I dont prefer this.
When using a 6-7" midrange - I would go for a larger waveguide to fit the lower X-over:
Test Peerless XT25TG-30 / 04 at Waveguide WG-300
The XT tweeter works much better in waveguides, cause the distance from the tweeter itself to the waveguide, is much more uniform than with a normal dome shape.
Many drivers in many price ranges, are actually really good. It's much more important how you place them in the cabinet, the size/shape of the cabinet, the crossover, the EQ and the mix/combination of drivers.
And please use a minimum of 2-3 well placed subwoofers..... it clears up the region beneath 100hz..... ALOT! Which also helps you hear the midrange/tweeter much more easily.
Hello!
Im working on analysing all the drivers
Below might seem like a mess so here is a link for the spreadsheet tha I am working on
Dropbox - Spreadsheet.ods - Simplify your life
i will sit downn later and try to reply to all the suggestions, just a lttle bit of extra work this week
To be clear about the system
BEYMA TPL 2000 from 20000hz
Midrange 300-2000hz
AETD15M Midbass 50- 300hz (baffle is made already and tuned to 50hz) 160 liters
AE IB18HT 0-50hz Infinite baffle subwoofer I use a PA sub while waitning
Dropbox - 2020-08-29 16.42.35.jpg - Simplify your life
Bohlender Graebener Neo10 Planar Transducer 75 90 150 6000
115x226mm Very cool easy installation not so linear 370usd Scaspeak 12MU/4731T00 80 90 200 3000
120mm Nice looking motor
255 eur FaitalPro 6PR160 120 95 200 5000
145mm
80 eur Flexunits 4 H 52 06 13 120 89 100 5000
4” Looks ok
287 eur Visaton TI 100 Titan 40 86 150 5000
4” very cool
144 eur Peerless TC9F 30 87 150 5000
4”
14eur Eton 4-218 Arcosia 50 87 200 2000
4” looks too modern
378 eur 12-250TC 250 98 50 17000
12” VERY BIG
85eur lavoice maf061.50 120 97 400 2000
6.5”
plays loud
60 eur Görlich-Podszus MT 130 T 50 86 50 3000
5” Nice looking
281 eur Morel SCW-636 Neodym 150 87 100 2000
6.5” too modern?
319eur 505 Electrostatic Loudspeaker Panel
700aud / pair
Im working on analysing all the drivers
Below might seem like a mess so here is a link for the spreadsheet tha I am working on
Dropbox - Spreadsheet.ods - Simplify your life
i will sit downn later and try to reply to all the suggestions, just a lttle bit of extra work this week
To be clear about the system
BEYMA TPL 2000 from 20000hz
Midrange 300-2000hz
AETD15M Midbass 50- 300hz (baffle is made already and tuned to 50hz) 160 liters
AE IB18HT 0-50hz Infinite baffle subwoofer I use a PA sub while waitning
Dropbox - 2020-08-29 16.42.35.jpg - Simplify your life
Bohlender Graebener Neo10 Planar Transducer 75 90 150 6000
115x226mm Very cool easy installation not so linear 370usd Scaspeak 12MU/4731T00 80 90 200 3000
120mm Nice looking motor
255 eur FaitalPro 6PR160 120 95 200 5000
145mm
80 eur Flexunits 4 H 52 06 13 120 89 100 5000
4” Looks ok
287 eur Visaton TI 100 Titan 40 86 150 5000
4” very cool
144 eur Peerless TC9F 30 87 150 5000
4”
14eur Eton 4-218 Arcosia 50 87 200 2000
4” looks too modern
378 eur 12-250TC 250 98 50 17000
12” VERY BIG
85eur lavoice maf061.50 120 97 400 2000
6.5”
plays loud
60 eur Görlich-Podszus MT 130 T 50 86 50 3000
5” Nice looking
281 eur Morel SCW-636 Neodym 150 87 100 2000
6.5” too modern?
319eur 505 Electrostatic Loudspeaker Panel
700aud / pair
Nice midrange drivers!
I would avoid a seam in the voice spectra if possible. Consider where to cut the sub/midbass also.
Some basics
Crossovers: Basics
I would avoid a seam in the voice spectra if possible. Consider where to cut the sub/midbass also.
Some basics
Crossovers: Basics
I would go for a high efficiency prosound 8" mid in this case. There are many to choose from that would work well.
The B&C 8PE21 is a popular choice.
Electrostatic won't match dynamically....better option is the BG Neo10 if you want to go that route. A pair would be better for that crossover point.
You will need a measurement mic for best results.
The B&C 8PE21 is a popular choice.
Electrostatic won't match dynamically....better option is the BG Neo10 if you want to go that route. A pair would be better for that crossover point.
You will need a measurement mic for best results.
Very much interesting drivers indeed.
The visaton and the flexunits have very nice frequency response.
The crossover can than be really flexible.
Really have to dig into overstuffed baffles.
Also maybe the speakers should be hanging from the roof to kill some resonance.
Good thing for the vakuum cleaner also, not so Good if i want to refurnish the room in a different way because of the holes in the roof
The reason in crossing My sub so low now is probably because it has a pretty Hard sound and in compensating it's Early rollof. I might let it Up a Little when the ae sub arrrives.
The visaton and the flexunits have very nice frequency response.
The crossover can than be really flexible.
Really have to dig into overstuffed baffles.
Also maybe the speakers should be hanging from the roof to kill some resonance.
Good thing for the vakuum cleaner also, not so Good if i want to refurnish the room in a different way because of the holes in the roof
The reason in crossing My sub so low now is probably because it has a pretty Hard sound and in compensating it's Early rollof. I might let it Up a Little when the ae sub arrrives.
I do like the sound very much but the only thing that arrive so far is the tweeters.
Since i made the boxes already there is a hole for the welfare and one for the tweeter.
Should i make a round Hole instead for the midrange and put the Twitter on top of the speaker
or should i make a smaller box for the mid range and put on top of the speaker?
Since i made the boxes already there is a hole for the welfare and one for the tweeter.
Should i make a round Hole instead for the midrange and put the Twitter on top of the speaker
or should i make a smaller box for the mid range and put on top of the speaker?
I have been looking at baffle step correction.
Is it a benefit to do correction in order to be able to cross higher?
Than we have a new frequency range again to cover
Is it a benefit to do correction in order to be able to cross higher?
Than we have a new frequency range again to cover
My main Loudspeaker is a 5.1/4 aluminium from the other AE -Acoustic Energy- designer Phil Jones, -https://airpulsepro.com/about - Phil Jones Bass Speaker Design: Klippel Part 1 - YouTube - Phil Jones Bass: Our mission is to bring musicians around the world revolutionary products that deliver performance, reliability, and quality . Nice guy I emailed some years ago.
It's very good in my 40 square-meter, full of details and not harsch. 4 octaves but a big notch towards 2k hz for the tweeter... Of course metal mids asks complex filters but can sounds correct .... to me at least. I just dunno for the phase with all that filters complexity though : zobel, impedance notch, spl notch... often also use of ferro fluid in aluminium speakers that make them difficult to refurbishafter 15 years if you have not the correct grade - but I suspect we become a little deaf and it's of a less importance after 50 !
What ScottG is saying about the "zippy" concept - trade mark
, like it - is also very imortant to my ears and some of musician friends. I try to look at the waterfall for that not knowing nore having extended experience of drivers that may have land in my hand- and I stop it for my own understanding around the "decay and harmonics" words or I could not associate sound character to some engineering details as pointed out by Scott, to corelate what is looked for in front of how is made the driver, I must make short cuts at my modest level. Of course the combo amp/driver stays very important as well -and some things can be solved in the DAC dev as well in relation to the amp/speaker combo-.But sure, graphs and datasheets don't say ALL the truth and they have to be heard to know really as it's about subttle equilibrium and trade offs at the end of the day! - Really curious about Arbeth : poly not foamed for the mid & bass and often Seas metal for the tweet... Seems poor in soundstage but very good in spl equilibrium and decay.
Btw that's why today I'm looking towards some others technology as horns or ESL for simpliest -well?- filters, more cheap amps choice but still good details and equilibrium... though not sure about soundstage and ESL - and cheap amps, lol
- Look, all the good drivers of the list when smooth and detailed are very low spl volume and many high spl limited.So dahlenmarcus, I have the feeling you maybe should have to ask if not already what spl curves and total spl, style of music you want, then try to choose around that... For my limited experience - loudspeakers listener for 40 years - the most difficult to me is the low to 200 hz but know DSP seems to help if of a good quality enough - adc/dac - dynamic level - forgiven music signature experience in the mids and highs - = expensive.
Perhaps for the fun of the list as well (?) :
large band, no control but enjoyable sound if subjective dynamic loved and clearness - paper- : Supravox 16 cm & 13 cm or EMS speakers - some has aluminium mushroom dust cap
-. Mid bass aluminium from SB Acoustic - AND for detail low spl but still good music and more full range, why not a Jordan speaker as well : Jordan Eikona - E J Jordan DesignsI personaly looks toward some Faital compression, but the difficulty of the horn and final curve without DSP is still problematic to me and bulky. I have also a driver I like a lot for its neutrality and acurate sound : the Scan Speak 2.5" 10F : 500 hz to 4 khz in 8 ohms or more 700 hz to 4 k hz in 4 ohms and flater ! And I'm not surprised to read about Audio Techknology as I always liked the Dynaudio sound that seems to my ears a good trade off for all music style !
All that poisons to choose
Last edited:
DE250s can sound excellent, but like every compression driver, they must be processed correctly. You cannot simply add a capacitor and expect them to sound good.
I use them down to 900Hz.
Chris
More interesting input
I dont know IF i understood you right but i like a rock eq setup.?
I like the speaker svs prime tower and dislike klipch speakers.
I dont know IF i understood you right but i like a rock eq setup.?
I like the speaker svs prime tower and dislike klipch speakers.
My main Loudspeaker is a 5.1/4 aluminium from the other AE -Acoustic Energy- designer Phil Jones, -https://airpulsepro.com/about - Phil Jones Bass Speaker Design: Klippel Part 1 - YouTube - Phil Jones Bass: Our mission is to bring musicians around the world revolutionary products that deliver performance, reliability, and quality . Nice guy I emailed some years ago.
It's very good in my 40 square-meter, full of details and not harsch. 4 octaves but a big notch towards 2k hz for the tweeter... Of course metal mids asks complex filters but can sounds correct .... to me at least. I just dunno for the phase with all that filters complexity though : zobel, impedance notch, spl notch... often also use of ferro fluid in aluminium speakers that make them difficult to refurbishafter 15 years if you have not the correct grade - but I suspect we become a little deaf and it's of a less importance after 50 !
What ScottG is saying about the "zippy" concept - trade mark
But sure, graphs and datasheets don't say ALL the truth and they have to be heard to know really as it's about subttle equilibrium and trade offs at the end of the day! - Really curious about Arbeth : poly not foamed for the mid & bass and often Seas metal for the tweet... Seems poor in soundstage but very good in spl equilibrium and decay.
Btw that's why today I'm looking towards some others technology as horns or ESL for simpliest -well?- filters, more cheap amps choice but still good details and equilibrium... though not sure about soundstage and ESL - and cheap amps, lol
So dahlenmarcus, I have the feeling you maybe should have to ask if not already what spl curves and total spl, style of music you want, then try to choose around that... For my limited experience - loudspeakers listener for 40 years - the most difficult to me is the low to 200 hz but know DSP seems to help if of a good quality enough - adc/dac - dynamic level - forgiven music signature experience in the mids and highs - = expensive.
Perhaps for the fun of the list as well (?) :
large band, no control but enjoyable sound if subjective dynamic loved and clearness - paper- : Supravox 16 cm & 13 cm or EMS speakers - some has aluminium mushroom dust cap
I personaly looks toward some Faital compression, but the difficulty of the horn and final curve without DSP is still problematic to me and bulky. I have also a driver I like a lot for its neutrality and acurate sound : the Scan Speak 2.5" 10F : 500 hz to 4 khz in 8 ohms or more 700 hz to 4 k hz in 4 ohms and flater ! And I'm not surprised to read about Audio Techknology as I always liked the Dynaudio sound that seems to my ears a good trade off for all music style !
All that poisons to choose
If you like what you are currently getting in the configuration, I'd say stick with it but make some *large round-overs on the sides of the face-plate for the Beyma to lower diffraction a bit.
*at least an inch.
So basically a "box" of it's own but is only wider than the face-plate of the Beyma by virtue of the added round-overs.
This would work reasonably well with angled/chamfered edges (instead of round-overs):
Attachments
Last edited:
No. It's actually a disadvantage in several respects.
The only real advantage is distortion and power-handling with respect to the midrange IF it really needs it and you can't (audibly) stand a steep high-pass filter for that midrange (that really needs it).
Something like the Scan Illuminator 4" or the AT Flexunit 4" won't need such a dramatic ("steep") high-pass filter - even at slightly less than 300 Hz.
Last edited:
..an open-back Neo 10 will just have greater subjective clarity, but you really should consider the same (open back) for the Beyma IF you decide you want to select the Neo 10 (..in contrast to the suggestion I just made in post 58 above).
Imaging won't be quite as defined in space laterally with a wide-baffle design, BUT the overall design would be much easier to accomplish: both in building the box and baffle + reducing the complexity of the filter.
Think *large baffle board with the bottom portion as a closed/vented box for the woofer along with rockwool framing around the baffle on the rear immediately above the woofer's box that extends to the rear of the baffle, and perhaps that rockwool framing as deep as the woofer box extends. Both the Neo 10 and the Beyma would have no enclosure: just attached to the baffle.
*perhaps a rectangle of: 42cm wide by 115cm tall.. maybe even taller than that.
Last edited: