Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

[Chris Roemer]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

The Dayton looks as if it is a copy of the Aura, however the Bl is a bit less and Xmax is rated at 4mm whereas the Aura is 5.45. The Aura seems to be an all around better driver. Sensitivity is even better with the Aura at 84 dB/W vs. 82.6 for the Dayton. Both seem to have reasonably smooth response curves.

Neither has a thermally conductive former, polyimide for the Dayton and Kapton for the Aura.
Both have aluminum cones and it would seem logical to conduct the heat from the VC to the cone.

Has anyone done independent tests of these, or real world experience with them side by side?

I have a pair of the Aura's but have not done anything with them yet and I don't have the Dayton's to compare.

I can't seem to find ANYthing on your NS4-255-4F drivers (I've got ms cats going back 10 years). You seem to have all the info on them. Unless you want to post it, all people can do is guess.

My guess is that they won't deliver the extended bass that the ND105-4s can. THOSE will do a strong 40 in a vented box, actually playing musically into the 30's. The -4D looks like 60 would be about its limit. The 4" AURAs seem to generally have a higher Q than Dayton's 105-4.

Chris

[Pete Basel]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

I can't seem to find ANYthing on your NS4-255-4F drivers (I've got ms cats going back 10 years). You seem to have all the info on them. Unless you want to post it, all people can do is guess.

My guess is that they won't deliver the extended bass that the ND105-4s can. THOSE will do a strong 40 in a vented box, actually playing musically into the 30's. The -4D looks like 60 would be about its limit. The 4" AURAs seem to generally have a higher Q than Dayton's 105-4.

Chris

Where do you get this idea? The T&S parameters are very similar, however the Aura has a stronger motor with a Qts that is better suited to vented. The Aura is better in every way. If you think the Qts is too low, add some series resistance for the crossover inductor.
Here are more but also not the -4F:
http://www.roaster-coffee-shop.com/h...0speaker/AURA/

The -4F is not at the above site, also not here under Aura:
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/spec_sheets/index.php

Can't seem to find the -4F right now, can't remember if it is the same as the -4D I think there were black and silver cone versions.
This is where it was at Madisound, wayback machine perhaps?
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/ns4-255-4f.pdf

[Chris Roemer]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Where do you get this idea? The T&S parameters are very similar, however the Aura has a stronger motor with a Qts that is better suited to vented. The Aura is better in every way. If you think the Qts is too low, add some series resistance for the crossover inductor.
Here are more but also not the -4F:
http://www.roaster-coffee-shop.com/h...0speaker/AURA/

The -4F is not at the above site, try here under Aura:
http://www.madisound.com/pdf/spec_sheets/index.php

Can't seem to find the -4F right now, can't remember if it is the same as the -4D I think there were black and silver cone versions.
This is where it was at Madisound, wayback machine perhaps?
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/ns4-255-4f.pdf

Well, as I said, I'm guessing.

I've measured (here: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...hlight=nd105-4 ) and used many of the ND105-4s, and dozens have built my Nano Neos and ntns and everyone says that they really deliver the low bass. IMO, the ntns (an MTM) are the equivalent of an 8" system for bass output.

You say their T/S parms are similar. Not only can't I find them (on the net), it seems like YOU can't find them (on the net) either. Asking someone to compare things w/out any data isn't really the way to go. If you've got your drivers' T/S parms, why keep them a secret? Have you verified them with measurements, or built anything with them?

[Pete Basel]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Well, as I said, I'm guessing.

I've measured (here: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...hlight=nd105-4 ) and used many of the ND105-4s, and dozens have built my Nano Neos and ntns and everyone says that they really deliver the low bass. IMO, the ntns (an MTM) are the equivalent of an 8" system for bass output.

You say their T/S parms are similar. Not only can't I find them (on the net), it seems like YOU can't find them (on the net) either. Asking someone to compare things w/out any data isn't really the way to go. If you've got your drivers' T/S parms, why keep them a secret? Have you verified them with measurements, or built anything with them?

Like I said, there were many similar version of this driver such as black vs. silver cones. The data sheet might be on my old computer, I know I looked at the specs when I bought them and seemed to remember Madisound saying just use the data sheet for the black cone - don't remember exactly. I opened this thread having search for it online and while I searched for the -4F, didn't notice that I had probably opened the -4D .pdf. Right now the -4D is all I have, not holding anything back LOL. Seems you _want_ the Dayton driver to be better seeing as if you believed my first post you would not have made the comment.

OK found the -4D spec on my computer here so this was the one they said to use.

[Chris Roemer]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Like I said, there were many similar version of this driver such as black vs. silver cones. The data sheet might be on my old computer, I know I looked at the specs when I bought them and seemed to remember Madisound saying just use the data sheet for the black cone - don't remember exactly. I opened this thread having search for it online and while I searched for the -4F, didn't notice that I had probably opened the -4D .pdf. Right now the -4D is all I have, not holding anything back LOL. Seems you _want_ the Dayton driver to be better seeing as if you believed my first post you would not have made the comment.

OK found the -4D spec on my computer here so this was the one they said to use.

I don't think I WANT the Dayton to be better. I designed the PicoNeo using the ND90-8, but when I found out that ms was dumping the NS3s for $12.50 a pop (half the price of the Daytons, which HAVE had price increases BTW), I GLADLY scoped out their performance. I found them to be very similar to the ND90, and irrelevant to which one might be technically superior, I've bought over a dozen of the AURAs because they're so cheap, and if not better, definately a close (enough) contender.

Since you already own the NS4s (and they're NLA), what exactly do you want to know? Why not design a box and XO for them and use them. I would.

Chris

[Pete Basel]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

why does everyone ignore the (by all rights, completely superior) FR89EX?

Yes, very nice driver!

Not ignoring it, it is 3" vs. these that are 4" and therefore these have more VD given the very roughly equal Xmax. Also price, FR89EX is significantly more expensive.

[DDF]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Hi Peter,

I measured the ND105-4s two weeks ago in the Nano Neo box for a friend in Ottawa. Attached is the result over angle, along with the Nano Neo on axis.

I didn't like the edge surround bauble on the ND105 driver, too hard to eq out passively.

Below are the TS params I took (but didn't get Vas).

How much did you want to spend on the driver? I measured the W4-1720, its a keeper. I chose it over the ND105. If you're interested, I could post results for it as well.

Other options:

If you're not terrified by the insane break up near 10k, look into the FW146.

There are also a few nice looking and inexpensive Peerless drivers in the 830xxx family worth looking into, such as the $17 830656 at Solen (though Le is high, so distortion may not be top notch, but haven't measured it).

Dave

TS params
71.212 "Fs Hz"
3.951 "Re Ohms[dc]"
31.492 "Res Ohms"
4.748 "Qms "
0.596 "Qes "
0.529 "Qts "
0.488 "L1 mH"
0.535 "L2 mH"
1.489 "R2 Ohms"
0.127 "RMSE-load Ohms"

[Pete Basel]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Thanks Dave that is good to know. I already have the Aura's and I was just wondering how close they are to the Daytons in real life. Your T&S measurements and FR will help with that.

[Chris Roemer]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Thanks Dave that is good to know. I already have the Aura's and I was just wondering how close they are to the Daytons in real life. Your T&S measurements and FR will help with that.

You can't take T/S measurements "in-box", not for designing another box anyhow. Your "Fs" is actually the upper peak resulting from the tuning, then there's the lower peak, and in between (but not directly in-betweeen) is the Fb valley. The Qts is also not "free-air".

The "system" plot on-axis looks pretty nice, except that I can tell this is the very first XO with a bit of a "lift" around 2-3kHz (which was comped out after the speakers were measured at Iowa DIY in late 2010). These were originally designed (with the ND105-4s on sale at $12 each) with a VERY tight budget of $55 for the pair for drivers and XO. I think you'd agree that this is not bad performance for a tight budget, a small (0.3 cf) box, +/-3dB, and a strong 40Hz.

Chris

[DDF]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

You can't take T/S measurements "in-box", not for designing another box anyhow. Your "Fs" is actually the upper peak resulting from the tuning, then there's the lower peak, and in between (but not directly in-betweeen) is the Fb valley. The Qts is also not "free-air".

The "system" plot on-axis looks pretty nice, except that I can tell this is the very first XO with a bit of a "lift" around 2-3kHz (which was comped out after the speakers were measured at Iowa DIY in late 2010). These were originally designed (with the ND105-4s on sale at $12 each) with a VERY tight budget of $55 for the pair for drivers and XO. I think you'd agree that this is not bad performance for a tight budget, a small (0.3 cf) box, +/-3dB, and a strong 40Hz.

Chris

The Qts is free air (I measured them free air)

That's a huge midrange peak, I personally would have went with a far larger inductor. I heard it instantly. Was the second crossover published?

[isaeagle4031]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Chris did make a more expensive crossover for the neos along with the ntn version.

[Whitneyville1]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

The Aura's have a higher F0 than the Dayton's: The Aura "D's" show 60Hz which you might could get into the 40's with. I'd use Chris' shaping coil/resistor as on the ND90 to help out. The Aura's will need to be a two-way, but the Nuance $2.50 buy-out tweeter should do the job. It's not the most sophisticated tweeter in the world, but with a small inductor and a couple of resistors and caps, it can be "tamed". It's small size means you can cross it high and mount it close to the woofer. If we had the T/S data, we could be more specific on the "F" as to enclosure size, XO, etc. You can get there by "guesstimating" and listening, but it will take you longer.

[DDF]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Chris did make a more expensive crossover for the neos along with the ntn version.

Thanks, where can I find the 2nd xover?

[isaeagle4031]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

Look at Chris Roemer's page on here. There are 2 different xovers for the nanoneos and 1 for the ntns. I built the ntns as a tower version TL variant and was very happy with the way the system sounded. Not super effiecent, but very cool to get solid 40Hz bass out of 4" drivers. Everyone who heard them really liked em.

[routhun]

Re: Dayton ND105-4 vs. Aura NS4-255

I bought a pair of Aura NS4-255-8A, they are lying in the box as I could not find appropriate (any) design. Any design's using this driver?