mids Tang Band W2-803SM or the Tang Band W2-800SL 2?

[Pete00t]

Thinking about a 3 way design. Which do you think would be a better mid range the Tang Band W2-803SM or the Tang Band W2-800SL 2? Also how reliable are TB's graphs?

[Wolf]

Thinking about a 3 way design. Which do you think would be a better mid range the Tang Band W2-803SM or the Tang Band W2-800SL 2? Also how reliable are TB's graphs?

I would use the 803 over the 800, due to the longer throw surround, the phase plug for power handling, polycone fr more benign response curve, and the higher Qts for a more feasible sealed alignment. The 800 SL might want you to vent it, depending on alignment.

If you want .zma and .frd for the 803, just holler...Beware of a higher Fs for both drivers too. My 803 pair came out about 214/215 Hz.

Later,
Wolf

[Thezeek]

Wolf, what is your take on this little TB 2" driver?
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...number=264-808
I had some at one time.

[Wolf]

I have been told that they don't sound very good, unless treated very carefully- like steeply highpassed. To me- they look like the least of the 2" line from TB.

The 803Sm and -1767 can take a lot more abuse. I tend to stay away from the older S-surround 2" from TB, as they are a lot older design, and are probably outdated considering the new stuff. I know they didn't take bass as well as the 803 and 1767, so take that as you may.

Later,
Wolf

[Pete00t]

I would use the 803 over the 800, due to the longer throw surround, the phase plug for power handling, polycone fr more benign response curve, and the higher Qts for a more feasible sealed alignment. The 800 SL might want you to vent it, depending on alignment.

If you want .zma and .frd for the 803, just holler...Beware of a higher Fs for both drivers too. My 803 pair came out about 214/215 Hz.

Later,
Wolf

You know know my e-mail send away. Maybe the Tang Band W2-748SG 2 is also worth another look as well

[Wolf]

You know know my e-mail send away. Maybe the Tang Band W2-748SG 2 is also worth another look as well

I've actually heald one of those, and it didn't look to me to be a very nice unit. It also has that S-surround that I don't trust much. The Xmax is a bit shorter too, so it won't handle as much power. The Qts is very low, wanting a horn or vented cabinet, unless you highpass steeply. Last I knew it was not a metal cone at all either. The pdf confirms it's just a poly too. Then if you look at the FR, it rolls off fairly fast below 1k, so it's really limited as a mid anyway.

My 2c,
Wolf

[ajinfla]

I would use the 803 over the 800, due to the longer throw surround, the phase plug for power handling, polycone fr more benign response curve, and the higher Qts for a more feasible sealed alignment. The 800 SL might want you to vent it, depending on alignment.

Would you believe I disagree? (get ready for the symphony)
If he were using them as a tweeter, I wouldn't....but he intends them as a mid. Therefore I think the larger Sd of the parabolic 800 may trump any of the 803 phase plug heat wicking benefit. Plus the 800 aluminum cone actually acts as a sink as well (neither is exactly HO, so I hope this is a smallish 3 way).
I would say tweet - 803, but mid - 800. My 2c

cheers,

AJ

[Wolf]

You are entitled to your opinion, but I hold little faith in the S-surround.
Too bad that larger Sd only gets you one more dB of extra sensitivity.
Later,
Wolf

[charlielaub]

I have plans for a pair of W2-800SLs that I have lying around: will use them as a tweeter in a 2-way with an 8" or 10" woofer, crossed over around 800 Hz. Something along the lines of a mini tower, I guess.

Although I have not seen off axis data on the driver I believe, based on my experience with other small inverted dome drivers, that the dispersion will be wide enough allow the 800SL to be used as a tweeter, at least up to the mid teens. That's good enough for my design goal for this speaker, because I have put emphasis on a low crossover point and low order (2nd) crossover. The 800SL has enough radiating area and Xmax to pull it off.

There is another 2" inverted dome by TB, the W2-748SG:
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...number=264-861
It might also make a workable tweeter capable of a low crossover point.

Wolf - can you go in to more detail about your opinion of the TB surround?

-Charlie

[Wolf]

Wolf - can you go in to more detail about your opinion of the TB surround?

-Charlie[/QUOTE]

It's a very small S curve, and some other older units were even "R-shaped", as they called them. I've held the -748, but not the 800SL. FWIW- it really limits the 'ease of travel', sortof like the cloth for pro drivers, or even a really stiff spider. The suspension on the -748 was *very* tight. I would say it's more similar to the cheap Radio Shack 2.5" mini-speaker than a true wide-range 2" driver.

To me, in a wideband driver you want the control, don't get me wrong, but ease of movement can help 'openness' in the midrange. I know I'm not using technical terms here, but that's my experience.

Also- be advised the -748 is a poly-mica, and not at all a metal cone, like the PE ad-copy reads for it.

Take that as you may, Chuck!
Later,
Wolf

[Thezeek]

Wolf, what is your take on this TB driver.
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/show...number=264-812
I can get a pair at a good price. Just do not know if I should.
Thanks

[Pete00t]

I was approached by my significant other. She asked why cant i use the drivers i already have for a project. We're hopefully moving in the spring so i know she doesnt want a large inventory to move with us. So to turn this thread in another direction.
I have appreciated all the response and thanks again Wolf for the files. Can any of the tb mids, or full ranges be used as a mid tweeter or mid range for the fountek Neo 1.5. They would have to reach 4000 to 4500?

[Wolf]

Most of the 3" conical drivers will reach that high without issues. It's if you can have the sensitivity you need that is the question. Don't use the -315 for that though. There is a not-so-nice suckout around 3k that makes that difficult.
W3-881 (benign poly-cone, and very smooth and flat respsonse),
W4-1052 (much overlooked, but a well-designed low mass cone. Has a dip that could become a problem: http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1..._W4-1052SA.jpg),
W3-1364 (flat according to zaph's measurements, and is usable where it counts for you),
W3-1878 (looks immensely flat on TB's plot, and has higher sensitivity than most of the lot),
W3-593SF (classic 871 but in a lower aesthetic factor),
W3-1335SB (resonance of metal, but definitely will work, and is easily compensated. Should sound as clean as W4-1337.),
W3-1797 (use a BS4 with this and avoid the energy at 4k a bit. IMO- this is your best option in a 3" for that ribbon from TB.)

Just be sure to xover above 250/300 Hz to avoid Xmax issues with most of the above.

Personally, the W3-881 (for zeek) is a very nice little wide-ranger, but filter out the bass. I heard them in Chad Gray's 'Olives' back in Dayton 05 as I recall.
http://chadgray.info/projectdetail.cfm?ProjectID=48

He used them all the way up, and it was nice!

Hope that helps!
Wolf

[Thezeek]

Cool. Thanks Wolf.