AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Planar Circle => Topic started by: steve f on 13 Oct 2012, 10:15 pm
-
I know, or at least read, that most of the planar guys here favor Maggies. I want to know what you guys think about B-G planar magnetics. Anyone here have experience with them? Also how do they compare with electrostatics? I'm looking for another speaker project. Your opinions matter. Thanks.
Steve
-
I know, or at least read, that most of the planar guys here favor Maggies. I want to know what you guys think about B-G planar magnetics. Anyone here have experience with them? Also how do they compare with electrostatics? I'm looking for another speaker project. Your opinions matter. Thanks.
Steve
I don't know much about their speakers, but their drivers -- Neo-8, RD series, etc. -- are very highly regarded. Satie here used the Neo-8's to upgrade the midrange of his Tympani IV's. Stats are still the most detailed/least colored speaker technology other than plasma, but the BG drivers, like Maggies, will play louder.
-
I'm currently using a pair of Neo3 PDRs and should be getting some 'stat mid/tweeter panels before too long. I'm hoping they are a fair bit better but we'll see. At the least I should be able to remove a "way".
http://www.eraudio.com.au/Mini_Panels/mini_panels.html
-
I have the neo 3pdr too and was looking at those stat panels as well as the neo8 and 10..The waterfall plot had me a bit cautious...I plan to use the GR 12" servo subs for the bottom. Keep us posted.
-
I'm curious too. My immediate concern would be that the panels are 6.6" wide, and yet the polar response seems to be good to 12 kHz. I'd expect a driver that wide to beam pretty badly. Also wonder what kind of SPL's you get.
-
During my correspondence with Rob from ER Audio, when talking about those panels, he said they go "very loud".
Just as a matter of interest he also told me that they go down as low as 150Hz.
He seemed very excited about those panels.
It may also be of interest to know that these panels are already incorporated into one other make of (hybrid) ELS.
Hope this fills in a few details.
Regards.
Bruce
-
Bruce, Rob said that to me too. He also said that they are well-insulated and so not as subject to arcing as the Quad 57s (my only other experience with ESLs). Not that I ever arced them but for a main system I'd like to not have to worry about that factor.
The commercial speakers are the Sonic Blades - http://liquidbase.com.au
Mine will have a slightly larger woofer (on open baffle) :)
Josh, I'm curious about that too.
cab, I decided not to worry about the CSD. You can't have everything - for a 1/4 the price of a RAAL dipole tweeter :) At any rate, I'll try to make some measurements when I receive them.
-
Just a little more.
I am not sure that it is greatly relevant but you can tuck it away in the backs of your minds.
Rob did point out to me that this panel is particularly useful for a centre channel in a multi channel system.
Certainly that makes a very cheap centre channel!
Regards
Bruce
-
Bump back on topic. Does anyone else have additional information on B-G? Either drivers or completed speakers? Since most of you are Maggies guys, any comparisons between the two? Thanks.
steve
-
Bump back on topic. Does anyone else have additional information on B-G? Either drivers or completed speakers? Since most of you are Maggies guys, any comparisons between the two? Thanks.
steve
Steve, I ran Maggie MMGs with open baffle woofers that I created for nearly 5 years. One developed the dreaded conductor lamination and I swung back to the DIY side of things. I loved them, but they are so low sensitivity, that even with a monster amp like a Krell KSA-250 I had here for a while, you lose some dymanics. The BG drivers also have the upper hand in that they have double sided magnets, which lowers distortion and creates a push-pull action which allows more "jump" factor when you really get the SPL up there.
BG planars are really wonderful drivers when used correctly and properly filtered. Open baffle, they all tend to have a rising response which is not a problem as long as you can create create a crossover, or in my case turn some knobs on some DSP to correct for it. I have more direct experience with the smaller drivers of the Neo series, like Neo3, 8 and most recently Neo10 than the RD75, but the RD have always sounded excellent when I've heard then in systems.
My own open baffles are using a pair of Neo10 per side. These are running with Raal ribbon tweeters and a pro audio, high sensitivity woofer with Rythmik subs for below 60Hz. Surrounds use a pair of the Neo8 for mids and highs. Not the best thing to do, but for how often I use surround, they are OK.
I also am developing a new studio monitor for one of the engineers at our studio that uses the newest Neo8-S and a smaller Raal for mids and highs. The resolution and micro-dynamics of this thing is crazy! And it's not that tipped up top-end, false type of detail either.
Outside of my own creations, you are going to start seeing more and more designs using the Neo10 pop up this year. They only became available for OEM and DIY use about 2 years ago and it usually takes that long for manufacturer to release new product. Danny over at the GR Research circle has a whole line of speakers(undwer the Serenity Acoustics name) based on the Neo10/Neo3 combo, Dennis Murphy from the Salk circle uses the Neo8 in his Carnegie line of speakers and Dan Neubec over at the Parts Express forum made a great 3 way system using the Neo10. Both Danny and myself feel that the Neo10 is the best midrange driver we have ever heard. I bought about a dozen different drivers when prototyping my open baffles and the Neo10 won hands down over any other driver I tried.
So, I'd say that Maggies have the same special sound that all large membrane speakers do, which is having such a large surface area on items like piano or cello just sounds so right, BUT BG takes the prize for better dynamics and resolution. Buy enough Neo10 and you can still have a huge radiating surface, but it gets expensive...
Hope this helps.
Greg
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=68428)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=27923)
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=69508)
-
I'm curious if you tried an mtm configuration on your ob with the neo10 and raal? Just seems intuitive that having them in a line would be a good thing....
-
I'm curious if you tried an mtm configuration on your ob with the neo10 and raal? Just seems intuitive that having them in a line would be a good thing....
A traditional MTM arrangement would have put the Neo10 rather farther apart than they should be since the Raal is so tall. It's all about center to center distance and xover frequency for proper blending of an MTM. I did try an odd solution by putting them all horizontal and stacking them up MTM, but preferred the side-by-side layout.
The Super 7 that Serenity is offering uses an MTM arrangement with the Neo10 on their sides, but with a Neo3 which is about 4 inches shorter than the Raal, so it may work well. And Danny's crossing over to the Neo3 lower in frequency than the Raal is comfortable with.
Greg
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=37955)
-
Thanks for the explanation.
-
I also am developing a new studio monitor for one of the engineers at our studio that uses the newest Neo8-S and a smaller Raal for mids and highs. The resolution and micro-dynamics of this thing is crazy! And it's not that tipped up top-end, false type of detail either.
How did you find the Neo 8-S compare sonically to the Neo 8? I know the amplitude response is somewhat smoother and the cutoff frequency lower, distortion lower, etc., but I was a bit concerned by the 8-S's waterfall plot, which seemed to show ringing gradually dying away rather than the cliff-like waterfall of the Neo 8.
(I'm thinking of replacing the old midranges in my Tympani IVa's with lines of Neo 8's or 8-S's, something that Satie here did with great success with his Tympani IV's.)
-
If you are looking at something different but want superb clarity check out JansZen's new zA2.1 offering. I have a pair on order and hope to have them soon. They carry many of the design characteristics of the BGs and are a true ESL. I have Maggie 1.7s currently and I see these as a much more room-flexible option, if not also quite a step up in sound.
http://www.janszenloudspeaker.com
-
I have a pair of RD-75's and all I can say is they are transparent,wonderful on sound staging ,and depth. The midrange is excellent as well.
-
To be honest Josh, we are still tweaking Xover and EQ points, so I am not 100% sure about the final opinion of the Neo8S. I have not seen a BG waterfall plot of the Neo8S, but if you compare the original Neo8 plot from BG with the Neo8S plot on the Audax Proraum webstore, they appear to be scaled the same, but I would caution making a direct comparison without knowing details of each measurement. I certainly do not hear anything yet that calls attention to itself and having DSP always helps with prototyping and the ability to surgically EQ things to see if they sound better that way. So far, the resolution and "speed" is spot on with what we were hoping for from this design.
I know it's native frequency response looks rather scary, more like a metal cone driver going into break-up, but they DO NOT have that same kind of sound at all and once eq'd closer to flat, just sound clean and effortless. I even had someone ask me once if they sounded like plastic because someone else had said that they did. I have seen a few people around who end up buying a bunch and then selling them all off due to not liking the sound. I can only imagine that they are generally not skilled enough with passive Xover and filter design to get the driver flat enough to give it a fair chance. I would include myself in that group...not enough patience for soldering a bunch of iterations of crossovers. Give me a knob to turn or a mouse to click please for instant A/B feedback. Once flattened, I feel that they do not really have much of a sonic signature at all which is the ideal, right?
I would be very curious to ask the designer what the mechanism is exactly that causes the rising response though...
Maybe once I get the new measurement rig set up, I can do a comparison of the two drivers. At least they will be under the same conditions.
Greg
-
If you are looking at something different but want superb clarity check out JansZen's new zA2.1 offering. I have a pair on order and hope to have them soon. They carry many of the design characteristics of the BGs and are a true ESL. I have Maggie 1.7s currently and I see these as a much more room-flexible option, if not also quite a step up in sound.
http://www.janszenloudspeaker.com
I signed up for the sweepstakes they were having. No luck...
You really must report back with your thoughts once they arrive and you've had time for some good comparisons.
-
I use Neo8 line arrays to substitute for my Tympani IV mids. Though the .7 series may have improved enough so that the benefit is not as much, the T IV mids sound downright thick compared to the Neo8 array. In a line array the Neo8 does not have much of a FR hump. The FR runup is a cavity resonance, not a breakup mode - so does not affect the surrounding frequencies and once flattened it is a non-issue.
I can't find a difference in speed between the Neo8 and a stat, though the diaphragm on the Neo8 is heavier than the thinnest stats. I think that is because of the trannies on the ESLs smearing the signal some. Having worked the XO in the below 2khz up to over 10khz to the maggie ribbon, I can't say that one is better than the other at low volumes. At high volumes the Neo8 is definitely better. The Neo8 is also outrageously efficient and a line array of 6 kicks in about a 95-6 db sensitivity at 1khz.
I share Josh's concern over the overhang of the waterfall plot of the Neo8-S, but I think it should be compared by ear under the best test conditions - that do not include DSP . I am still a digital skeptic - possibly because of the Neo8's unreal levels of resolution - even mediocre vinyl sounds better than CD and far livelier than even 24/96, a friend calls it "uncivilized" sound now that he skips a preamp to play his DAC and phono stage straight into the amp.
The somewhat similar planar drivers in VMPS' RM series speakers is also very impressive in all aspects and allows my modster friend to distinguish among resistors and wires.
I know it is an expensive proposition, but you (studiotech) should give a full length line array a try - at least in the midrange.
I think the more recent version of the RD series from BG are similar sounding but have lower sensitivity and don't enjoy the benefit of being a segmented array (not having vertical waves in the midrange/low treble running up and down the diaphragm. ) The older RD ones used a different and less heat resistant and strong diaphragm - as implied by sales lit from nearly a decade ago.
-
To be honest Josh, we are still tweaking Xover and EQ points, so I am not 100% sure about the final opinion of the Neo8S. I have not seen a BG waterfall plot of the Neo8S, but if you compare the original Neo8 plot from BG with the Neo8S plot on the Audax Proraum webstore, they appear to be scaled the same, but I would caution making a direct comparison without knowing details of each measurement. I certainly do not hear anything yet that calls attention to itself and having DSP always helps with prototyping and the ability to surgically EQ things to see if they sound better that way. So far, the resolution and "speed" is spot on with what we were hoping for from this design.
I know it's native frequency response looks rather scary, more like a metal cone driver going into break-up, but they DO NOT have that same kind of sound at all and once eq'd closer to flat, just sound clean and effortless. I even had someone ask me once if they sounded like plastic because someone else had said that they did. I have seen a few people around who end up buying a bunch and then selling them all off due to not liking the sound. I can only imagine that they are generally not skilled enough with passive Xover and filter design to get the driver flat enough to give it a fair chance. I would include myself in that group...not enough patience for soldering a bunch of iterations of crossovers. Give me a knob to turn or a mouse to click please for instant A/B feedback. Once flattened, I feel that they do not really have much of a sonic signature at all which is the ideal, right?
I would be very curious to ask the designer what the mechanism is exactly that causes the rising response though...
Maybe once I get the new measurement rig set up, I can do a comparison of the two drivers. At least they will be under the same conditions.
Greg
I see Satie mentioned the cavity resonance. Since I plan to keep my crossover about where Magnepan has it, and since it apparently goes away when you use them in a line of 8, that shouldn't be an issue for me. I'll be very curious though if you learn more about how they sound. The plan I hatched with Satie is to get a pair each of 8's and 8S's and compare them audibly. Then get the preferred one for the rest of the arrays -- I don't think the odd pair would make much of a difference. But it seems that the 8S has a different efficiency and is 8 ohms, besides which it needs different tuning, so this no longer seems like a particularly practical approach.
-
I see Satie mentioned the cavity resonance. Since I plan to keep my crossover about where Magnepan has it, and since it apparently goes away when you use them in a line of 8, that shouldn't be an issue for me. I'll be very curious though if you learn more about how they sound. The plan I hatched with Satie is to get a pair each of 8's and 8S's and compare them audibly. Then get the preferred one for the rest of the arrays -- I don't think the odd pair would make much of a difference. But it seems that the 8S has a different efficiency and is 8 ohms, besides which it needs different tuning, so this no longer seems like a particularly practical approach.
We'll, either version is going to need tuning, so that shouldn't stop you from considering either version. What range do the original Maggie Tymp mids cover? That might make all the difference in which model you choose. I can tell you that either version ought to be more resolving than any older Maggie could ever hope to be, but it's all up to giving the Neos a fair shot, which means having the ability to properly adjust them. Can you use DSP to at least prototype? Then if you feel that you can get the sound you are after, mock up passives?
The 8 ohms ought to not matter either as you can work out different versions of series-parallel to achieve the final value you are after. You do NOT have to match the same Ohm level as the rest of the system, so long as you get the relative SPL level correct.
Greg
-
We'll, either version is going to need tuning, so that shouldn't stop you from considering either version. What range do the original Maggie Tymp mids cover? That might make all the difference in which model you choose. I can tell you that either version ought to be more resolving than any older Maggie could ever hope to be, but it's all up to giving the Neos a fair shot, which means having the ability to properly adjust them. Can you use DSP to at least prototype? Then if you feel that you can get the sound you are after, mock up passives?
The 8 ohms ought to not matter either as you can work out different versions of series-parallel to achieve the final value you are after. You do NOT have to match the same Ohm level as the rest of the system, so long as you get the relative SPL level correct.
Greg
The Iva's crossover points are roughly 300 and 3000 Hz, so neither the 8 nor the 8S should have any trouble. However, I understand from Satie's experience with the IV's that it's desirable to push the woofer's crossover lower. He also experimented with pushing up the ribbon crossover, but found the lobing too troublesome. Satie also prefers single pole crossovers to Magnepan's higher-order ones. I'm planning to experiment with high slope FIR crossovers in DSP, though I'm not sure if this will work out since I'm doing it in my HTPC and I haven't figured out yet how to route the audio from a video-capable media player like VLC to VST plug-ins. If that doesn't prove practical, I imagine I'll end up with a single pole PLLXO. Either way, I'll be triamping, maybe biamping initially since I only have two power amps now.
My concern with comparing the 8 and 8S has more to do with practicality rather than doability. I'm pressed for time and having to measure and equalize them to make a fair comparison would take some of it. So I was a bit disappointed to hear that I couldn't just throw them on the amplifier, adjust levels, and switch back and forth. Still, it sounds like I'll have to bite the bullet unless it turns out that someone else has made the comparison. My main concern is with the waterfall, since the response aberrations can be dealt with. As you say, it's hard to compare the two waterfalls without knowing what settings they used, but the clean waterfall was what impressed me about the Neo 8 originally, since I've come to associate a "cliff-like" waterfall with stat-like detail. The 8S waterfall looks like it rings pretty badly across the board. It may just be that they set it to sacrifice time domain precision to get more frequency domain precision, in which case the ringing could just be an artifact. Or I was thinking it might have something to do with the addition of the Neo 10-style surround.
One thing I'm certain of, based on both Satie's experience and the specs -- both the 8S and 8 will sound cleaner than the IVa's midrange. I gather the 8 is just short of a stat. So it's just a matter of deciding which one would be best. The 8S seems to go lower, has lower distortion, higher output (not necessary in this case). IIRC, the cavity resonance starts a bit higher in the 8. I'm not so concerned with on-axis response, since I can fix that easily enough with DSP -- more with clarity.
The RD-50 is also a possibility, I haven't ruled it out, it does have a lower recommended crossover point than the 8's.
-
Josh, a 300hz xover point, especially with low order slopes is really pushing it for the regular Neo8. Even the Neo8-S is gonna be taxed running that low. What about 3 or 4 Neo10 rather than 6 Neo8? I might be able to help you out with those. Be about the same price for a more capable driver.
The absolute minimum for the RD on the spec sheet is for a sealed enclosure. Running open baffle is not going to work well that low. Even sealed, that is rather low and I'd recommend at least 300hz.
Greg
-
Here's a pict to show the relative sizes of the Neo3, 8 and 10.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=69858)
-
Josh, a 300hz xover point, especially with low order slopes is really pushing it for the regular Neo8. Even the Neo8-S is gonna be taxed running that low. What about 3 or 4 Neo10 rather than 6 Neo8? I might be able to help you out with those. Be about the same price for a more capable driver.
The absolute minimum for the RD on the spec sheet is for a sealed enclosure. Running open baffle is not going to work well that low. Even sealed, that is rather low and I'd recommend at least 300hz.
Greg
It depends on listening levels, I played the Neo8 array without any XO on it for a while (I adjusted the XO for the ribbon and bass to work with the natural rolloff of the mid arrays). The results were very good and you don't hear any straining at normal listening levels as the sensitivity of the Neo8 is so great. The array fills in the bottom octave of the FR curve (relative to a single Neo8) so that you have a natural roloff at 300 hz or just below. I ended up with a LP in the 6-8khz range for better dispersion from the ribbon, and put in a 100-150 hz HP to protect the tube power amp. When using SS with higher power on the mids I still do so but in order to protect the drivers from bottoming out.
-
Regarding Neo8 and Neo10, data published by German Hobby HiFi
say that Neo10 has about 5 times greater radiating surface than Neo8.
I am in Sydney, Australia at the moment so I have not the exact figures at hand.
As an illustration to your picture Greg.
/Erling
-
Guys,
It's now 2017 and I know this thread is old but I just purchased a set of BG drivers to replicate an Infinity Beta system. I wanted to see if any of you had any updated thoughts/suggestion on the BG drivers?
Thanks
Paul
-
Regarding Neo8 and Neo10, data published by German Hobby HiFi
say that Neo10 has about 5 times greater radiating surface than Neo8.
This is not true, not 5 times the radiating surface. Just take a look at the picture above and you see that is impossible.
-
Regarding Neo8 and Neo10, data published by German Hobby HiFi say that Neo10 has about 5 times greater radiating surface than Neo8.
While the BG Datasheets don't specify exact membrane dimensions, I would imagine the dimensions given inside the mounting flange would be somewhat close. If the membrane dimensions are closer to the dimensions of the aperture hole cutouts, the calculations should still be somewhat relative.
BG Neo8 = 176.38 mm X 67.6 mm = 11,923 mm2
BG Neo10 = 226 mm X 102.54 mm = 23,174 mm2
Therefore, the BG Neo10 should have ~ 2 X (1.94) the radiating surface of the BG Neo8
Steve
-
Love the Neo3's and Neo10's in my 3-way OB with 3x8" H-Frame servo subs.
-
Electrically segmented hybrid ESL's are an attractive option for DIY. Segmentation gives a beautiful dispersion pattern and if an active bi-amp setup is used rather than a passive crossover, world class results are assured (you can actually build a better ESL than you can buy these days). Best of all; building the actual driver from scratch is uniquely rewarding. Really, the hard part is the woodwork... the rest is relatively easy.
-
Enjoying the BG Neo10's with the GT Audio Works 20" ribbons in The Megaliths I built with the 6x12" servo subs.
The baffles were originally sized for BG Neo3-PDR's before Christie Digital bought them and stopped external sales. Now that they are available again, still contemplating swapping out the tweeters.
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=172080)
-
Guys,
It's now 2017 and I know this thread is old but I just purchased a set of BG drivers to replicate an Infinity Beta system. I wanted to see if any of you had any updated thoughts/suggestion on the BG drivers?
Thanks
Paul
Still running the Neo10's at home and loving them. After finishing the home open baffles, I developed a midfield style studio monitor using the Neo8-S and the Raal OEM ribbon. To my ears, the Neo series drivers are still some of the best mids around. Thank goodness we can get them again from PE.
Greg
(http://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=172356)
-
Hmm, Greg. I have an extra Neo-8 and a Raal ribbon sitting on a shelf in my storeroom. I'm wondering if they might be used in a configuration like yours. Would you be willing to share your plans?
-
Studiotech,
Nice. Looks like an FPE panel to accommodate the RAAL tweeter and Neo midrange planar magnetic driver!
Best,
Anand.
-
Hmm, Greg. I have an extra Neo-8 and a Raal ribbon sitting on a shelf in my storeroom. I'm wondering if they might be used in a configuration like yours. Would you be willing to share your plans?
Other than what I've posted here and other forums, I'm afraid I can't give exact details. With some diligent research, you can sort out something nice.
-
Studiotech,
Nice. Looks like an FPE panel to accommodate the RAAL tweeter and Neo midrange planar magnetic driver!
Best,
Anand.
Correct. Good eye, Anand. Trying to keep them as physically close as possible. We get our logo and then the client's name or company engraved on those panels.
-
Has anyone tried putting an ER Audio mini panel in a box/cabinet? I understand the off axis issues due to it's size but it could cover the range >200hz. I already have the dipole thing covered in another system with ML CLS Z 2s.
-
How did you find the Neo 8-S compare sonically to the Neo 8? I know the amplitude response is somewhat smoother and the cutoff frequency lower, distortion lower, etc., but I was a bit concerned by the 8-S's waterfall plot, which seemed to show ringing gradually dying away rather than the cliff-like waterfall of the Neo 8.
...
FWIW, horn loaded NEO8S waterfall response.
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/testing-the-s-version-dual-planar-transducer-front-horn-using-bg-neo8s (https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/testing-the-s-version-dual-planar-transducer-front-horn-using-bg-neo8s)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-myzVyGMF76c/Xa8kSXTFUeI/AAAAAAAAE6c/68GxlfA-Zi4mwQdPuwtWuWsDySzzsGk9gCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Burst%2BDecay.JPG)
-
I recently came into possession of a pair (actually 2 pair :)) of RD75's.
I plan to use a Marchand active crossover to split the bass from the RD75's and then a passive high pass to the tweeters so I can use only two amps. I have a Pass Labs X250.5. Not sure what other amp to get.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=209460)
This is the first pair.
The second pair are a NIB set.
-
This looks a little more like it.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=210678)