Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Look Ma .... No Crossover

75.179.179.173

Posted on January 25, 2010 at 11:32:40
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5430
Joined: July 6, 2002

Using a Marchand XM44 (LR4 topology) to triamp my Tympani/Neo 8 Mod speakers, I have been complaining about an excess of op amps in the midrange bandpass. In order to address this, I was applying various low order passive line level crossovers. The best sounding was a bessel 2nd order bass LP with a first order mid bandpass and treble HP. This - however, required setting up the midrange/treble panels in front of the bass panels in order to match phase. This restriction damaged spatial resolution. With 2nd order bessel as well - on all drivers, there had been no crossover region gain to speak of when keeping the panels in their equidistant arc - where imaging seems to be best.

A few weeks ago I looked at one of BG's in wall pro speakers using a line array of Neo8 such as my own, and noticed their acoustic crossover. When I was reading about the Prometheus II speakers some time later I realized that the power handing of the Neo8 and its high sensitivity (96 db or so for a 6 part line array) may actually allow running it full range, so that I need only fill out the extreme ends with the bass panels and tweeter. And there was this recent measurement of a Neo8 line array (see Image URL) with better instrumentation than I have.

So I unplugged the midrange from the Marchand crossover and tapped the preamp. I first listened to the midrange driver alone (XM44 turned off) with SS, and played it fairly loud (greater than 100 db spl peak at my listening seat). With Bach/Mariner piano concertos on CD, I noticed that the low level harpsicord continuo that was previously totally lacking in reverberant characteristics and had totally no texture at all had finally come to sound like a harpsicord. I had always attributed this reproduction flaw to it being low level digital, since low level harpsicord came out clear in LP playback. Well, it is clearer now...

In short, the Neo8 line array was doing very well from a bit below middle C up to the high harmonics. Significantly better even than with a first order crossover. So much so, that you could hear the volume adjustments on the DG Tchaikovsky/Richter LP, and Richter's breathing had its own image on the stage. This is something I had never heard before - DG's golden era recordings never revealed the engineer's slight of hand, nor did the solo artist's breathing ever come through on their recordings.

I repeated the listening test with the Marchand turned on with the crossover points unchanged for the bass and tweeter at -6 db points of 300 and 5000HZ (-3 db at 240 & 6000). There was no loss of clarity nor of detail, and their integration was good though not perfect. Definitely viable as is.

Driving the midrange via the Marchand, I was struck by how much more detail the brighter sounding Schultz/Nuforce 8.5 had managed to get while the Dynaco MkIII's despite being upgraded with true premium parts and operating in Triode (KT90 EH) could not do the same. Playing both without the midrange crossover, there was no great shakes difference between the SS class D amp and the Dynaco Triodes in their presentation of detail and the tonal balance became much closer. The "detail" was an artifact of the Marchand's op amp brightness. It was emphasized on the single ended Nuforce, and partially canceled out on the push-pull Dynaco - or at least so I am guessing.

The message here is to all ye tri-ampers of Tympanis, MG3.x and MG20s, give yourself a boost with the Neo8 line source. It has less distortion and much much higher sensitivity than the original maggie midranges and so can be powered by low watt SETs and middle power triodes of the 40 watt range. Power handling allows it to be run sans crossover - thereby removing phase issues from the bulk of the musical output. A line of 6 to 8 drivers per side will set you back under $1K and is easy to assemble and wire.
The attack of piano hammers on metal strings sounds real for the first time (I grew up with two grand pianos in the living room and was always disappointed that reproduced piano could never come through correctly in this aspect). Not even in ESL57s - that could not handle the dynamic swing, nor on the original CLS or the Acoustats, and only on a few Apogee systems managed to come close. Incredible.

Now I need to work on determining new crossover points and slopes to perfectly integrate the bass and ribbon tweeter.


Note to graph - this is for a line of Neo8 PDR, the Neo8 will have less of a high frequency droop and will fall off on the bass at a lower frequency (about half an octave lower), The Neo8 PDR loses extension and output in favor of better HF dispersion.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Verrrry innnterrresssting, M'sieur Satie!! :-)) ..., posted on January 30, 2010 at 23:55:34
andyr
Manufacturer

Posts: 12661
Location: Melbourne
Joined: September 2, 2000
We might have to take this off-line as I am most interested to find out more about what you have been doing ... and no-one else seems to be interested! :-))

I take it you bought a Neo8 line array (or 2?) to experiment with, to replace the mid driver in your Tympanis?

Q1: How many Neo8s in each line array?

From looking at their web-site, they appear to have an 8ohm impedance ... so how did you arrange the drivers (in terms of ending up with a "reasonable" total resistance)?

From playing about with different combinations, I seem to get the following possibilities:
* 6 x Neo8s: 2 pairs of series runs of 3:
Result is 24ohms || 24ohms = 12ohms. Not very good!
* 6 x Neo8s: 3 parallel pairs, each pair in parallel:
Result is 4ohms || 4ohms || 4ohms = 1.33ohms. Not very good!
* 6 x Neo8s: 3 parallel pairs, each pair in series:
Result is 16ohms || 16ohms || 16ohms = 5.33ohms. Acceptable!
* 7 x Neo8s: 3 parallel pairs, each pair in series, plus 1 in parallel:
Result is 16ohms || 16ohms || 16ohms || 8ohms = 3.33ohms. Better!

Q2: What do you mean by "Playing both without the midrange XO"?

You were just playing the Neo8s by themselves, without the bass & tweeter and so the Marchand was out-of-circuit?

Just to hear what the basic driver sounded like with each amp?

Q3: And what do you mean by "Power handling allows it to be run without crossover"?

It seems to me the Neo8s are still acting as a mid range and so need a bass panel and a tweeter .. although you can move the -6dB point of the tweeter XO up to 5KHz (which is well above the "critical" frequency range)?

BTW, you have 2 Tymp bass panels per side, right? But your Tymps are earlier than IVs/IVas ... so they don't have a true-ribbon? It seems to me that for the ultimate Maggie, you should use the Tymp bass panels with the Neo8 line arrays plus a pair of true-ribbons?? :-))

Regards,

Andy

 

RE: Verrrry innnterrresssting, M'sieur Satie!! :-)) ..., posted on February 1, 2010 at 06:32:30
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5430
Joined: July 6, 2002
Hey Andy

The Neo8 driver impedance is 3.75 ohms and I wired them in 3 parallel pairs in series for a total of 5.1 ohms.

I used the regular, not the PDR version

I did run the line arrays alone with no bass or treble, and was amazed at what I got. But I feared for the driver's health if they were driven beyond their low frequency limits so I kept the crossover in... until I read about the Prometheus II - where the midrange runs without any crossover, and decays into the bass acoustically. With their high sensitivity and intended target market of SET owners, the power limits of the amps are far below the damage threshold for the driver at any frequency.

So now I am running the Neo8 array with no crossover at all, and adding in woofers and tweeters with the active crossover (LR4 Marchand XM44) to fill out the extremes. There is the natural acoustic dropoff of the arrays - second order on bass from about 150 hz, and HP rolloff is 3-6 db at 10 khz steepening further up beyond 14 khz. (But there is no electronic crossover (not passive not active).

To underline how much I like what I am getting, the story is that every time I go in to measure the line arrays again so that I can reset the crossover points on the Marchand, I end up listening to music and foregoing the measurements. The overlap area sounds a little ragged in the lower midbass, and in the lower treble because I have not adjusted the crossover points yet.

The Tympani are Tympani IV and there are 2 woofer panels per side.

Power handling of the Neo8 allows you to run them well below their point of onset of rolloff - and they can be run safely at any reasonable ourpur level.

 

Thanks, Satie ..., posted on February 1, 2010 at 13:51:40
andyr
Manufacturer

Posts: 12661
Location: Melbourne
Joined: September 2, 2000
Aah, I see it. So you use the Marchand XM44 to give you just 24dB bass LP and 24dB ribbon HP? The Neo8s themselves run "full-range"??

If I've got it right then that's a terrific setup as in the magic mid-range ... there's no XO to produce phase anomalies! :-)) But what polarity do you connect them with ... reversed (as I presume in the stock T-IV, the mid-range is reversed - like my IIIas) or with the same polarity as bass and ribbon?

I could try BG's as the next step in my "Frankenpans", once I get the first version to work. You may have read my 2 posts about them ... I am mating the bass panels from a set of 2.5s with the mid panels & ribbons from some T-IVas, to give me something which is very similar to my present IIIas ... except the mid panel is on a separate sheet of mylar from the bass panel! Thus reducing IM distortion, I am hoping. :-))

I'll make another post shortly, when I get the hardwood frames back from the cabinet maker (and then there'll be a final post when the drivers are all installed in the frames and I'm listening to them).

There will be 2 frames per side - one for the bass panel and the other for the mid panel plus ribbon. So it would be relatively simple to have a pair of substitute frames made up, which would fit a line of BGs in place of the T-IVa mid panel. Of course, I'd have to adjust my XO, too.

Please let me know what XO points you end up with.

Regards,

Andy

 

Frankenpans and clarification, posted on February 1, 2010 at 18:55:38
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5430
Joined: July 6, 2002
Andy

I recall having asked you about obtaining Tympani bass panels for your project. You were saying that none were forthcoming.

Though the II bass panels are designed to work further up in frequency, the midrange problem with the Tympani (all models) was a degree of thickness in the upper mids, and a thinness in the midbass. The Tympani IVA came close to solving the problem but not entirely. It seems the wires needed for sufficient midbass output were too heavy to get clear upper mids a decade+ above.

So the point I was making (trying to make?) to you before, was that the mids on the Tympani panels you got for your Frankenpans are very good - but no cigar.

Re details

I still have not measured the line array in its current configuration, since hearing Prokofiev PC3/Argerich is so much nicer than measuring anything. But I estimate that I have the Neo8 array dropping off beginning at about 150 Hz (by ear and other peoples measurements). The Marchand bass-mid crossover was set for LR4 at 300 hz so looking at LR4 phase at the 150 hz area on a 300 hz crossover: f/fc =0.5 you have 90 degrees of phase - so the drivers are orthogonal in phase at the acoustic crossover point, which would remain the case if phase were inverted. The same is true for the HP, where at 10 khz I have f/fc at 1.5 and 90 degrees of phase (the HP was set at LR4 5khz on the Marchand).

 

RE: Frankenpans and clarification, posted on February 1, 2010 at 19:10:15
andyr
Manufacturer

Posts: 12661
Location: Melbourne
Joined: September 2, 2000
Nono, Satie, :-))

I only got T-IVa mid panels & ribbons. The guy who gave them to me (hemholtz) uses the 2 bass panels each side to augment his 3.5s.

The T-IVa mid panel has the same no. of wires as my IIIa mid panels - and uses the same 31g wire. And the ribbons are identical - they're the old 2ohm ribbon which my IIIas have, instead of the current 3ohm ribbon which the 3.5, the 3.6 & the 20s/20.1s use.

So they should deliver the same sound as my IIIa mids ... except they will no longer get "interfered with" by the bass panels flapping. :-))

I am using MG-2.5 bass panels for the bass panels in the Frankenpans. These have the same number of wires as the bass panels in my IIIas, and use the same 23g wire. Area and resistance is identical.

Still, I agree with you that the mids on my Frankepans - while being better than the mids on my IIIas - won't be as good as an array of Neo8s. But that's the next evolution of the Frankenpans, after I've got them up and running! :-)) The purpose of the Frankenpan project is to deliver something that's basically identical to my IIIas ... but with the mids on separate sheets of mylar to the bass panels, to reduce IMD. :-))

Regards,

Andy

 

Page processed in 0.022 seconds.