Best midrange, bar none

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic. Read 12082 times.

richidoo

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #20 on: 4 Nov 2008, 08:57 pm »
You're right, midrange starts pretty low, probably 200Hz could be called midrange. I think midrange is best defined as the range of frequencies that our ears are most sensitive to, the sounds of survival. From the sound of a man's voice 100Hz on the low end, (trombone, male singer) up to the sound of animals to eat, or screaming baby, probably 2.5kHz (rock guitar solo, violin, female singers.)
Your crossover is intriguing! I might PM you to learn more.
Thanks
Rich

denverdoc

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 204
Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #21 on: 5 Nov 2008, 07:22 pm »
I've used the RD75's for 4 years and found them to be very impressive. Many of the shortcomings were mentioned, but I never found high SPL's or dynamics to be one of them--even with 200 watts/side, these were extremely capable and I like on occasion to listen at very high volumes. Certainly these could outplay any dynamically based system I have owned at under 10k/pr.

Plus given their LA nature, they fall off with distance about half as fast. The original plan was to mate them with a line array of 6" OB midwoofers, before XO'ing down to a pair of IB 18" xbl woofers.

I never made it that far as sound with two scan speak 7" drivers per side was entirely satisfactory. The subs were too scary for normal listening so I used them mainly for vid.

I played around with XO point a bit, and finally ended up with 350Hz, just to avoid power issues.

What helped make this project a success IMHO was use of a DEQX which removed resonance from 5K area, and helped with high end response, eliminating need for supertweeter. Overall the most satisfying system I have owned, but only my first DIY project. I look to trying something new for much smaller listening area I have now using OB design, moving coil midwoofers and perhaps one of the new AMT (Heil) drivers from Aurum Cantus or Mark and Daniel sourced.



Russell Dawkins

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #22 on: 6 Nov 2008, 09:07 am »
richidoo,

that paper you linked to on page one by John E. Johnson Jr. said this:

Now, the use of beryllium in tweeters is not entirely new. It actually dates back to the early 1980s. However, until the last couple of years, beryllium was only used as a coating on another metal. Pure beryllium tweeter domes are a recent advance in the technology, and pure beryllium as a material to work with is only manufactured in the US, France, and Russia. Other countries manufacture it as an alloy.

I guess he hasn't heard of the Yamaha NS1000M which went on sale in 1975 and uses not just a 1.2" Beryllium tweeter but also a 3.5" Beryllium midrange dome both of which were pure, not coatings, and were manufactured by sputtering Beryllium onto copper formers which were melted away later in the manufacturing process.

Owners seem to think that these speakers have outstanding midrange quality, and are very dynamic in the mids to boot.

richidoo

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #23 on: 6 Nov 2008, 01:56 pm »

richidoo

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #24 on: 6 Nov 2008, 02:03 pm »
If paper is your thing, I would like to nominate another contenda:


Feastrex D5nf

It is fast, beautiful sounding and full range to boot!

Brucemck

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 293
Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #25 on: 12 Nov 2008, 12:36 pm »
If paper is your thing, I would like to nominate another contenda:


Feastrex D5nf

It is fast, beautiful sounding and full range to boot!

Do you have an enclosure design for that beauty?

Measurements?

richidoo

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #26 on: 12 Nov 2008, 02:02 pm »
Bruce, There are cabinet designs out there, and a lot of experimenting, especially in Japan with more on the way. I have built 2 designs by Scottmoose and planet-10 based on their Chang series. Mine play 60Hz-18kHz in a freddie chang box.

http://www.frugal-horn.com/spawn.html
http://homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FH/download/FreddieChang-map-040308.pdf

Brucemck

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 293
Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #27 on: 12 Nov 2008, 11:59 pm »
Richidoo ... (or Danny) ... what would you think about supplementing the low end of one of those Feastrex drivers with something like the OB7 low end or the new high efficiency 15" dipole low end unit Danny is working on?  That would allow the feastrex to run full range down to 100hz or 200hz and would take a lot of load off that small paper cone.

Might also supplement the very high end with one of Danny's planars or a great tweeter?

All a long winded way of saying, suppose this is an amazing MIDRANGE driver that can easily handle 200hz to 5khz or 10khz.  How to exploit that?

Danny Richie

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #28 on: 13 Nov 2008, 02:28 am »
Quote
Richidoo ... (or Danny) ... what would you think about supplementing the low end of one of those Feastrex drivers with something like the OB7 low end or the new high efficiency 15" dipole low end unit Danny is working on?

I have kind of been there and done that with the full range drivers. I even have some setting on my desk as computer speakers right now. Some are really good. I have also designed crossovers for speakers just like what you just mentioned.

I did crossover design work on these: http://www.azzolinaaudio.com/index.html

Adding an additional low frequency driver is not hard. Making a two way design out of it works great.

I would imagine some of our direct servo subs would be ideal.

Quote
Might also supplement the very high end with one of Danny's planars or a great tweeter?

This actually doesn't work very well. In fact adding any super tweeter to a full range driver winds up cancelling the on axis response in one area while adding a lot of gain in another area. It makes a real mess out of the response all across the top end. Even if you find a spot with a minimal amount of cancellation, move up or down a few inches and you'll have the massive cancellation again.

Another thing that I have noticed is that as good as many of these drivers are, they are still not as good as a good tweeter from about 2 or 3kHz and up. The smaller diameter tweeter will always have a better (wider and more even) off axis response as well. So if you are going to use a tweeter then you might as well design the crossover to take advantage of the strengths of the tweeter and cross it in a lower range.

However, I have noticed that one can add a rear ambience type tweeter facing to the rear or facing to the rear and/or upward will add a little upper end air and space without directly cancelling or disrupting the on axis response.

Another thing to remember is that the heart of the midrange (or vocal range) is in the 300 to 500Hz range.


Brucemck

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 293
Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #29 on: 13 Nov 2008, 02:59 am »
Danny, those horns make your line arrays look downright dainty  :D

Angaria

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 362
Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #30 on: 13 Nov 2008, 03:31 am »
Is it possible to improve the "ultimate mid range" by horn loading it?  i.e. is it possible to lower distortion at a given volume level the same manner that waveguides work for tweeters?

Danny Richie

Re: Best midrange, bar none
« Reply #31 on: 13 Nov 2008, 02:18 pm »
Quote
Is it possible to improve the "ultimate mid range" by horn loading it?

Well, it does add some low end gain.