Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Need a second opinion and curious, but a little disconcerting results dats v2

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

  • Need a second opinion and curious, but a little disconcerting results dats v2

    dats v2.¬* Do you find the results closely match the parameters on parts express site?

    I have been working with the dayton¬*PC83-4 driver for a few weeks, trying different box sizes.¬* The Fs say 80.1Hz .¬* When I run dats¬*I get around Fs 105Hz - Fs 107Hz.¬* I have tried at least 3 different drivers. I will change my box size by a bit.¬* ¬* Using windows¬*7 by the way.
    ¬*

    Now don't get me wrong I could be using in-correctly¬*but I don't think so. It's not brain surgery.

    Man my text seems to mess up on this forum lately
    On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

  • #2
    No

    Comment


    • #3
      It depends. Dayton's are typically pretty good. Did you break in the driver (suspension) 1st?
      Remember, your box will still model about the same w/an Fs of 105, IF your¬* Qts is also higher (like 0.70-0.80) AND your Vas is smaller (like, maybe 0.04).
      Unless your DATS is malfunctioning, there's little you can do to goof up Fs and Qts values. Vas is a bit more prone to error.

      And yes, the "upgraded" text editor officially stinks, now.

      Comment


      • #4
        Are you measuring the drivers in box? If so, then the results will generally be higher than the published spec. Fs is measured in free air.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Billet View Post
          Are you measuring the drivers in box? If so, then the results will generally be higher than the published spec. Fs is measured in free air.
          +1, Fs is defined as resonance in free air, not in a cab, which is Fb.

          ¬*
          www.billfitzmaurice.com
          www.billfitzmaurice.info/forum

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Billet View Post
            Are you measuring the drivers in box? If so, then the results will generally be higher than the published spec. Fs is measured in free air.
            I measure my drivers in free air. They have been broken in a bit, but I could try to play them longer. That is worth a look. Here 2 comparative images.¬* The one the left is Dayton, the one on the right is DATS.¬* Click image for larger version

Name:	side to side.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	102.4 KB
ID:	1375655
            On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Using WinISD, it DOES calc. nearly the same size "optimum" box, it does like a (5Hz?) higher tuning though.

              What's VERY odd, is that while the F3 spread is about the same, it gives the "to spec" vers. (Fs=80) the lower F3 (around 50Hz) and the 106Hz F3 vers an F3 of about 65Hz (using BassBox's Fbs).

              Using WinISD's tunings:
              Fs=80 model: F3 of 52 in 0.19cf tuned to 59Hz.
              Fs=106 vers.: F3 about 68 in 0.08cf tuned to 77Hz.

              Your (BassBox) F3 near 80 for the "spec" driver seems pretty high. WinISD says "50s" w/either tuning.
              It also thinks 70 is about right for your measured driver. (A 1.0" id by 3-1/2" long port.)

              YOUR 2nd model shows a tuning of 71Hz, but shows NO vent particulars (like your left-hand example).
              (From experience) it SEEMs like your F3s got "flopped" somehow?

              ¬*

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm going to do a sample of 4 drivers, and see how they turn out?¬*¬*

                Also never used WindSD.¬* I think I will give that a shot.
                On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Curious update? So I installed DATS V2 on a different pc to see if I would be a different result.¬* Results were very similar.¬* I tested two more PC-83-4¬* drivers for a total of 4.¬* They fs varies from Fs 105 - Fs 121.¬* All I can ascertain is that the tolerance on these drivers is not that tight.¬* Kind of disappointing.¬* If I don't get a close match my imaging could be way off.¬*

                  What do you think?
                  On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    P.S. If anyone here has DATS V2 and would willing to test the exact same driver I have to hear to see the result I would appreciate it.¬* I can send you a pair. I will do the test here and then you can do the test at your end and we can compare exact drivers? It would be very helpfull.
                    On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think I am going to try one more thing and let these play for at least 10 hours and redo the measurement again?
                      On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The Qts and Fs will likely match VERY closely (between DATS units). Those 2 parms control how low the driver can go. Vas (whos measurement is more error prone) along w/Qts control the required box size.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          So after playing the drivers for a while and re-tested the Fs has indeed dropped?¬* And the specs are closer now.¬* More playing will now be required. Then more dats testing
                          On the cheap diy. That is my motto - www.hifiposse.com

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X