High Efficiency Speaker Asylum

Re: Try it and hear ..Mag baby - do you think it will do OK with direct radiators?

158.252.25.2

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email ] [ High Efficiency Speaker Asylum ] [ FAQ ]

In Reply to: Re: Try it and hear ...Thanks PJ and WHG posted by Magnetar on July 03, 2001 at 15:20:20:

MAGNETAR -
I think horns despite legend may be easly to sum sometimes than direct radiators - I got 95dB Dayton 15" 295-070 - if I don't cook up a cone driven midhorn then I'll have to pick a 8" - probably Beta 8cx and xover around 400hz. I expect an interaction dip between xover Z and box/driverZ unless I use a lcr network across Beta 8 - or monkey with hi-pass filter Q.
Since the Behringer is 4th order - tell me how you used it to "zero" towards a workable passive network - did you still end up with 2nd order electical filters in your horn system? I figure 1st or 2nd order is about all I can use in this Dayton reflex system - I've gotta keep the woofer choke dcr low - also want to keep cost down. Parts are so high its sometimes cheaper to biamp.
Freddy

Follow Ups:

Re: Try it and hear ..Mag baby - do you think it will do OK with direct radiators? Magnetar 11:34:44 07/04/01 (1)
If your going to use an 8" mid-woofer around 400 cycles most 8" drivers should be a fairly flat load at the bottom end of your bandpass with rising resonance under 100 cycles or 2 octaves away. This shouldn't present much of a problem. The Dayton woofer seems a bit strange however if the response falls of at 400 cycles. The 4" coil Dayton model will do a couple of more octaves without a problem.
If the Dayton is that limited in bandwith (I got this from reading your previous post) why not either cross over lower, say 200-300 cycles or send them back to parts express and get a wider bandwith driver (like the 4" coil model or maybe an Eminence driver) that won't require a complex passive crossover and may allow you to use a smaller or wider bandwith mid or mid-tweeter?
What's nice about the Behringer is the ability to crossover at almost an unlimited amount of frequencies plus attenuate the mismatch in driver efficiencies while listening or measuring. Being a 4th order crossover it won't mimic a lower order design. It will allow you to get some useful information on the sound of the different drivers (alone and used together) in your room that would otherwise require you to buy a bunch of parts and build several passive networks. You may find the Behringer to be sonically superior in the end provided you start out with drivers that don't get flaky within an octave of their intended bandwith. In an ideal (well, make that 2 octaves) situation like this you won't need passive parts to contour the response or smooth resonance.
I guess my point, is provided you have the amps to go along with the crossover, it may be adventagous to go ahead and use the thing then once the sound seems acceptable you have more information to determine what direction you want to go with a passive network. I've used crossover along with passive frequency contouring networks and impedence eq's with good results. Wider bandwith direct radiator drivers are easier IMO. Getting the drivers up and operational is the first step ; ^ ) IMO
My passive network is a first order electrical, but is positioned to use the mechanical rolloff of the horns/drivers and includes a impedence/contouring eq on the midrange horn/driver. I still prefer using the Behringer on the low pass of the basshorn (4th order) an octave or so above simple first order 300 cycle passive because it seems to get rid of some nasties at the top end of the TAD 12/horn... but overall driving it all with either my 300b or 2a3 amps sounds more cohesive and realistic. Maybe I'll use a second pole further up. Using a second order doesn't sound good to me with this combo. First order is warmer with more presence and SNAP.
Hope this helped.

Magnetar..
Warning: Goverment studies have proven horn loudspeakers are addicting and may lead to intense, uncontrollable musical bliss.
- Re: .Mag baby -that's helpful - not sure about Dayton 295-070 freddyi 13:16:38 07/04/01 (0)
  Magnetar -
  almost suspect the Behringer and bi/tri-amping with old amps would be as cheap as trying to impliment a passive network
  The 295-070's graph looks OK - good/flat to about 1khz than a peak around perhaps 1.4Khz - it sounds more rolled off than indicated in the Eminence graph - but there's little on-axis rise indicated - I guess i'll keep them - they seem like they should make a decent bass unit with f3 around bass guitar's E and some suppport to 32Hz - I don't know if they could mate with a compression horn or not - my only drivers are 1" Eminnece
  btw - on your 4" voice-coil Dayton are the cones positioned where they appear to be a bit "outward"? - these Dayton and some other speakers I've owned have a slight forward looking bias to their surround adn cone rather than being flat - doesn't appear to cause distortion in the passband
  yeah - I imagine 1st order with triode amps is more cohesive - with hte Dayton adn 95dB sensitivity I expect to be using a 60 watt NAD - think that will do "better" with limited sensitivity speakers than good triode stuff - I was able to use my puch-pull parallel 6BX7 Eico ST-70 with a 8 inch WTW made of Klipsch KG parts - not a great speaker but it really came "alive" with hte not feedback amp adn 6DJ8 up front - I almost liked this amp better than my parallel 2A3SE - great string bass from old Edgarhorn 100.
  BTW - I'm tempted to make a new midbass 80Hz 1/4 size straight horn - would you go hyperbolic or will trax work? - also - how about a 2:1 mouth aspect? -cna't get any woodwork done here -have to seek a cutter.
  Freddy

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Signature Sound

[ Signature Sound Lounge ]

You can not post to an archived thread.