Best new midwoofer?

[foxfire3]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Well, i know that. What i would like to know is real T/S parameters. I don't want end up using revelator 18W/8531G00 which is so out of specs.

Do you think that usher is really worth the money? European money?

BTW i like your bysantiums. I wish i could hear them sometime.

Here's a thread I started on the 8948A's T/S parmeters:

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=223753&highlight=usher+8948a

[Nassander]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

I must say, I absolutely loved the midrange / vocals from the RS180's I used in the MTM I did for the recording studio monitors. The details of that speaker are posted in a tread down below.

On the other hand, my Mandolins, which use the SB17 were designed to reach 39Hz and yeild a very flat overall response. I thought they get quite well in the bass.

I bring these up since you already have these drivers.
Jeff

Someone here just said it right, Rs180 has some curtain. Bass is great though!


Have you measured your sb17? My results are quite off specs being Qt 0.52, Vas 17.81L and fs 44,17hz.

I want that sb17 midrange mixed in dynamic bass of scanspeak.

[internova]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Ok. Sorry by misspelling.

I have Sb17 which are wonderful in midrange. And dayton rs 180 are pretty good in bass. Peerless 830875 are ok, but i have eight of them in different patch, and i don't like the midrange and the changing t/s parameters.. Hi-Vi 6.8 has indeed the bass, but kind off laid pack sound. Seas excel W18EX001 sounds really nice, but not without low crossing tweeter.

So back to topic. I want 6½" woofer which does it all. I had high hopes in Satori. Neodymium price rises makes that unavailable to me.

For what's worth, in my ears, SS8531 sounds better than SB17. W18EX001 sounds better than SB17 too. The difference is not huge. SB17 sounds wonderful and is a winner if price is a concern. But the other two give you a bit more on mid-range transparency and bass articulation. W18EX001 can be crossed at 2.5K. I've seen someone crossed it at 3K. I think Paul commented on W18 vs SS8531 and he favored the W18. For me, I got to have both. My favorite among these two keeps changing and sometimes depends on the music I'm listening. Vocals and Strings / Symphony sound different. I'm eager to see how Satori fares with W18 and SS8531.

I wouldn't worry too much about SS8531 out of spec. After burn-in, it hits very close to my target F3 and F10. Of course, I only have two samples.

[Nassander]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

For what's worth, in my ears, SS8531 sounds better than SB17. W18EX001 sounds better than SB17 too. The difference is not huge. SB17 sounds wonderful and is a winner if price is a concern. But the other two give you a bit more on mid-range transparency and bass articulation. W18EX001 can be crossed at 2.5K. I've seen someone crossed it at 3K. I think Paul commented on W18 vs SS8531 and he favored the W18. For me, I got to have both. My favorite among these two keeps changing and sometimes depends on the music I'm listening. Vocals and Strings / Symphony sound different. I'm eager to see how Satori fares with W18 and SS8531.

I wouldn't worry too much about SS8531 out of spec. After burn-in, it hits very close to my target F3 and F10. Of course, I only have two samples.

Now you have seen it crossed at 4khZ. http://www.penaudio.fi/products/cenya/

[Wolf]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Now you have seen it crossed at 4khZ. http://www.penaudio.fi/products/cenya/

That's a W16 in that speaker, not a W18.

Later,
Wolf

[jonasz]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

So back to topic. I want 6½" woofer which does it all. I had high hopes in Satori. Neodymium price rises makes that unavailable to me.

I think the Seas W18NX sounds wonderful, definately one to consider.

[Jeff B.]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Someone here just said it right, Rs180 has some curtain. Bass is great though!


Have you measured your sb17? My results are quite off specs being Qt 0.52, Vas 17.81L and fs 44,17hz.

I want that sb17 midrange mixed in dynamic bass of scanspeak.

That's interesting. My SB17's were almost exactly as advertised right out of the box. SEAS Excel's, on the other hand, were way off - enough that I couldn't even use them in my design.

I did cross my SB17's at 1700 Hz; it takes some crossover work to get right.

[Nassander]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

That's a W16 in that speaker, not a W18.

Later,
Wolf

You are absolutely right, my bad.

[internova]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

The designer said the 1.2K is a designed compromise to achieve other greater things. The driver is lighter than most usual suspects because of Neo motor (The Matrix?). Would baffle width change the peak at 1K for the driver? for example 8" or 8.5" (I know Jeff's 9").

It can go almost as low as a 7" Revelator in the right enclosure. It has less Xmax but I suspect its Xmax is sufficient. I was wondering how the mid-bass and mid-range would compare. Satori has great controlled break ups too.

Dave,

First, the OmniMic guy is the Praxis guy is the LMS guy is Bill Waslo, the originator of the frd file that we all copy. So, it's not like he doesn't have a lot of experience here. Here is an paste of exactly what he said in the guide, which I agree with in principle and in experience: "Waterfall plots are useful in identifying moderate to high Q resonances in a drivers's frequency response. The audibility of the features easily identified in waterfall plots is somewhat controversial, with some research indicating that the higher Q resonances seen in waterfall displays are significantly less audible than low-Q resonances not as visible in waterfall displays". I believe what Bill says here to be accurate; lower Q - wider bandwith anomalies are more audible than higher Q - narrow resonances are. In addition, dips are much less audible than peaks.

Second, a frequency response anomaly that changes significantly with a change in axis is acoustical in nature (diffraction being an excellent example). Whereas a response anomaly that remains fairly consistent over a wide range of axes is mechanical in nature; being caused by some mechanical cone, spider, duscap, etc. resonance.

The acoustical type can often fill in very nicely in the power response, and if it is a narrow dip, be very difficult to discern at all. A mechanical resonance, on the other hand, will require some type of intervention (ie; notch filter, DSP, etc.).

Diffraction peaks and dips that fill in with axial change are not very audible, the ones that can't fill in (like baffle step) are. It all comes down to what is causing the dip here. The lack of signature in the 3rd order plot appears to indicate that it is not from the motor. The change off axis may indicate surround diffraction. I will investigate this a bit further, but my experience leads me to think this will not be very noticeable at all.

Jeff

[scottq]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Jeff,

Thanks very much for posting your results and information. I look forward to trying the Satori series out!

There were several comments' tones that made me wince a bit in this post. In an effort to calm the seas, I just wanted to thank you for your efforts and contributions to the community.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

Regards,
Scott

[gowa]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Satori drivers are designed for subtlety and realism? Price: $287.80
Yikes!

[Jeff B.]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Jeff,

Thanks very much for posting your results and information. I look forward to trying the Satori series out!

There were several comments' tones that made me wince a bit in this post. In an effort to calm the seas, I just wanted to thank you for your efforts and contributions to the community.

Merry Christmas, everyone!

Regards,
Scott

Thank you, you are very welcome.

[Jeff B.]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

Satori drivers are designed for subtlety and realism? Price: $287.80
Yikes!

Yes, a woofer in this price range is not the best choice for very many people. That has to be a personal decision. I will say this, I much preferred it to the Audio Technology and the Seas Nextel woofers I had. Unfortunately, I can't make a direct comparison with comparable Scanspeak or even the Usher woofers, which are truly a best buy for performance. But the SB is really a very nice driver, and for someone it will make an excellent speaker.

[ErinH]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

I know it's taboo to discuss price with a driver, but I honestly feel that, while there is a law of diminishing returns, 'dimishing' does not necessarily mean 'diminished'.

Some drivers cost a lot of money compared to others but they also perform much better than those cheaper drivers. Ultimately, it's up to the user to decide what to buy. Maybe they won't benefit from those performance gains, but I just hate the notion a driver should be weighted solely on cost and the sometimes analogy that a costly driver isn't worth more than one that's 1/2, or 1/4 the cost. Obviously some drivers are priced well outside their worth range and testing shows it, but there are many drivers that cost $300 and perform better than 'value' drivers. So, yes, while many less costly drivers perform better than some more costly, it's not always the case and a more costly driver shouldn't be ruled out on cost alone IF the end user deems the cost worth it... even if the difference is diminishing... there still is a difference.


I apologize for that brain dump of a post.

And, Jeff, I do appreciate you taking the time to post this data and also answer my questions regarding measurement techniques.

- Erin

[internova]

Re: Best new midwoofer?

My measurement on a 8.5" baffle.



HD



both at 1 meter.

I want to cross it at 25-2600Hz. How should I deal with the 1K bump and 1.2K dip? The FR is smooth except the 1K bmp and 1.2K dip. I put it in a 0.5 CF box. I listened to music for a while on a bare driver. It sounds forward because no BSC has been applied. But very listenable. Also seems like a candidate for lower order crossover if the tweeter can do it.

Thoughts?

Here is the impedance. The box is tuned to 40Hz.