Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dayton vs Accuton/ScanSpeak/Seas

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by r-carpenter View Post

    The "chosen one". Amorphous core OEM.
    Those are going to be killer speakers when you are done. Thats a very good choice of drivers IMO, and the Raal and Accuton mix well together.

    Comment


    • #47
      ohaple I've been researching a lot of drivers over the past few months and decided on RAAL Accuton Accuton 3-way, so it's reassuring someone else came up with the same conclusions. Do you have any experience with Mundorf tweeters, I'm still slightly undecided between Mundorf and RAAL?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by CedarWind108 View Post
        ohaple I've been researching a lot of drivers over the past few months and decided on RAAL Accuton Accuton 3-way, so it's reassuring someone else came up with the same conclusions. Do you have any experience with Mundorf tweeters, I'm still slightly undecided between Mundorf and RAAL?
        No, never used Mundorf. The only high-end tweeters I have experience with are the accuton ceramics, Raal ribbon, and the diamond dome in the B&W803D3.

        The accuton ceramic tweeter is more forgiving of more music, but the Raal is more revealing. The Raal can be fatiguing depending on the music. We actually have near-identical towers, where the only difference is the tweeter and the shape of the boxes (using same volumes). The Raal is more fun for critical listening, but the Accuton ceramic is better for general listening since it is more forgiving. Due to our room limitations I don't have much advice on the difference in imaging, but the ribbon horizontal dispersion is a little nicer for listening with multiple people. Either one will integrate nicely with a ceramic mid.

        FWIW: If money were no object and I could only own one, it would be the Raal. Even coming from the B&W803D3, we were hearing minor things in recordings that we hadn't heard before.

        Unfortunately I didn't do a good writeup on the Raal system, but here is the log for the accuton one: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...tower-speakers

        For the Raal system I think we used the Original 140-15D.

        Also, besides our design, take a look at Vapor Audio Joule, it uses a very similar setup and there are some reviews around to help you assess better how the ceramic mid and Raal play together.

        At 95db sensitivity for the tweeter, 89db for the Cell mid, and I think 84 for the woofer, it was also a perfect candidate for active crossovers.

        Comment


        • #49
          There are some arguments speaking against products that has short product liftime.
          Difficulty getting a new driver when old is blown or broken.

          By Seas and other old firms you get consistency of parameters, materials and physical dimentions year in and year out.
          Also have a look at total cost of speaker. Can something be saved at interconnects, amp or dsp/crossovercomponents that can be used at speaker elements instead?

          I have long experience of driving standard SEAS/ scanspeak/peerless/vifa elements active (miniDSP/Behringer) with very good results. They can play very loud and clean with sharp filters.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by ohaple View Post
            -We prefer the sound of non-DSP active crossovers to DSP active crossovers, and both sounded better than passive. In our limited tests, switching to an active crossover made way more difference than upgrading to a substantially better amp. Active crossovers also make the design process easier when you are experimenting with the crossover point.
            @ Ohaple, very interesting. I'm running software DSP crossover using Equalizer APO w Voicemeeter for windows and find the same preference for active over passive. Would you share what you're using for non-DSP active crossover and how flexible it is?

            Thanks,

            Duc

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by hoxuanduc View Post

              @ Ohaple, very interesting. I'm running software DSP crossover using Equalizer APO w Voicemeeter for windows and find the same preference for active over passive. Would you share what you're using for non-DSP active crossover and how flexible it is?

              Thanks,

              Duc
              Of course. The only non-dsp option we have used are those made by Xkitz. They have many models. The one used for our 3-ways is the new-ish K231 3-way active crossover. They are only a little more flexible than a passive crossover. You can swap out crossover frequencies easily by changing the module ($10 each). It also has built in BSC and gain control for each driver. Unfortunately I think all of his models limit you to 4th order LR crossovers only, so some more nuanced designs won't work with them.

              The one used on my budget accuton bookshelves is the X-Amp, which has the passive crossover and good quality chip amps on a single board (you still need a power supply). That unit allows you to adjust the crossover point by swapping out resistors, or by having him do it for you and buying a new $5 module. It also has BSC and gain control.

              I think when people see my accuton bookshelf setup they are baffled (pun intended) since I am driving such high end drivers with chip amps. To my ear, the chip amps perform great, and the benefits of the active crossover exceed those of going to a higher quality amp. Those accuton bookshelves sound awesome to me, and yet the total cost (including crossovers and amps) was around $1200 if I remember right. Our big Raal 3-ways use 3 Parasound Halo amps and while they sound somewhat better, its not night and day.

              If you are interested to read an article on it, XKitz posted one here: https://www.xkitz.com/blogs/making-t...s-vs-passive-1

              I am always weary of snake oil in these sorts of self-serving articles but I found most of what he claims to be accurate in our listening, if a little over-exaggerated.

              You will lose all of the flexibility you have in adjusting phase and flattening out poor frequency response, so you still need to properly design the box.

              Comment

              Working...
              X