Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dayton Coaxial w/Silk Dome

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dayton Coaxial w/Silk Dome

    Has anyone used these? Possibly in a horn?

    http://www.parts-express.com/dayton-...8-ohm--295-386

  • #2
    Door prizes at MWAF. Should be well represented at FW next year.
    John H

    SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

    Comment


    • #3
      Perhaps in Synergy/Unity horns? I'm also thinking in a midrange WG baffle. The coaxial tweeter would eliminate including a tweeter WG contour, which can be difficilt to accommodate.

      Comment


      • #4
        Here's a photo of an earlier project similar to what interests me for these drivers:

        https://flic.kr/p/ggD2QH

        Having a single large guide would simplify the baffle and enclosure shape.

        Comment


        • #5
          Keeping this thread going...

          Would anyone have suggestions for dimensions for a large petal type horn for this driver? I've been thinking this could be an interesting way to try a horn, perhaps a 30" diameter X 30"-60" deep to take advantage of the lower frequencies. The horn crossection would be an arc, rather than conical, it might also take the shape of a tractrix or spiral curve. I'm interested in what others suggest to make the most of these driver's potential. The design and fabrication interests me.

          Comment


          • #6
            Tim we could model one in horn response to see if it would hold up to horn loading.
            John H

            SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

            Comment


            • #7
              That would be great, I don't use HornRsp though, I would appreciate the modeling if someone were to take it on. Perhaps it would clarify the suitability of this idea.

              Were it to seem suitable in a given horn or WG, I can make the petal segments and assemble the horn, or mill a suitable WG. With some guidance, I can also set up to test using Holm Impulse, though my testing experience and success are limited.

              This driver configuration is a little unusual I think, the dome in the woofer center, the small diameter of the coaxial tweeter/woofer combination seems like it could connect nicely, the question is its acoustic suitability, and if suitable in what shape horn or WG.

              The sound from the example in the photo surprised quite a few people, especially given the drivers were quite modest.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'll do a few models and you can decide. I'm not sure I can model the tweeter in HR. I'll start with the mid. This will be a bit of a learning experience for me as well.
                John H

                SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thank you, this will be interesting.
                  Would it be sensible to ignore practical building considerations initially, just look for nice integration of the driver and contours to optimize sound? I can follow up with a CAD model and if this seems promising, work out the milling & etc.

                  I'll send an alternate email address for files.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Here's my first pass. Sealed 10 liter box. The units are metric cm and cm2. The response is power response and not actual driver response. I think I can share most files here.

                    See if this makes sense.
                    John H

                    SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thank you, I'll need to look for HornRSP tomorrow to understand the data, it really is new to me, as are horns. I've only worked with WGs.

                      Is 10 litres the volume of the horn, were it a sealed chamber?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The abbreviations are S1= beginning area 1 cm2, S2= ending area 1. S3= ending area 2. Con is conical section length cm, Exp is exponential section length. Total horn length is 152 cm, total horn volume is 145. The rear part of the driver is enclosed in a sealed box of 10 liters.

                        It's probably a good idea to look at horn response help file so some of the other factors make sense.
                        John H

                        SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Shall do, thank you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Here’s a short horn model. What it looks like, is we’re not gaining anything when horn loading this driver. When lengthening the horn the mid frequencies fall off well below what a tweeter can reach (first model).

                            The mid response cannot reach the tweeter unless the throat area becomes much smaller than the opening of the driver. That would create a small chamber that the tweeter would be in. That doesn’t seem viable.

                            With measurements of the shape of the cone and more TS parameters for the tweeter we could see what gain a short horn section was providing for the tweeter.

                            So, I think you could do a short length wave guide/ horn and not create any problems. It would sure look cool. I can’t imagine any benefit except in the tweeter low end response and peaking midrange. That might work OK for a highish efficiency 3-way, but the tweeter would be the weak link imo.
                            John H

                            SLS-85, BMR-3L, Mini-TL, BR-2, Titan OB, B452, Udique, Vultus, Latus1, Seriatim, Aperivox,Pencil Tower

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              It was an interesting possibility, thank you for simulating the response and designing the enclosure and horn.

                              I wonder if there are similar drivers that might be more suitable. They are a bit odd, but perhaps this is something manufacturers are working with?

                              Better to know it would be inferior. I'll need to order one of the drivers.

                              I do have an oval guide I did a few years ago to try with a Peerless 5 1/4" subwoofer.(Still untried) The throat opening is just about right to fit the current woofer/tweeter driver. I'll need to add a separate ring to blend the125mm X 135mm oval throat to the ~125mm surround diameter. The guide should finish about 3" deep. The overall baffle is 2' square.

                              I suspect the guide will boost the 500Hz. up signal, which may then blend with the high section of the tweeter response better. Just speculating though.
                              Is it reasonable to attribute the tweeter response rise to the woofer cone acting as a WG? That seems likely to me, that it acts as a conical guide. I suspect as it vibrates the vibrations influence the dome sound waves, and may produce a significant potential for distortion

                              Any suggestions for setting up and testing to produce useful data?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X