New OB driver - Hawthorne Silver Iris

JohninCR · « **Reply #20 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 03:41 am »

Manowar,

The bass augmenters are something in development by HawthorneAudio. Depending on their final specs I'd probably use a pair in a push/pull and vibration cancellation cab as a subwoofer for my HT.

As I understand they will have good sensitivity and be a good match for any full ranger that needs bass support. Let's say you used your Iris's on a small to reasonable flat(ish) baffle. Then you'd probably want to add another woofer to really fill out the bass. I have a feeling they'd be a great match for the B200 owners looking to fill out their bass response.

Yes, the Iris is a coax from HawthorneAudio.

Good luck with your searching. I'm finished with my 2 yr search.

John

-Richard- · « **Reply #21 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 03:43 am »

Hi JLM,

Thanks for your brief but fascinating overview of your life...

I wish you the greatest happiness imaginable in your new home...
and in your new dedicated listening room...how delightful!!!!

One thing is quite certain...your thirst for a deeper understanding of
what you can do to get you closer to the magic of music is apparent
from your unquenchable explorations in these forums...

It is AC members like you that lend a certain balance and sobriety to
this often over heated hobby...

Warm Regards -Richard-

fabaudio · « **Reply #22 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 03:46 am »

Quote from: JohninCR

Quote from: fabaudio
Guys - check out these drop dead beauties courtesy of Darrel http://perfect8.com/

Darrel who? Not Darrel Hawthorne I'm sure. Nothing worse than unachievable claims. They're pretty though, but I bet obscenely priced.

Courtesy of Darrel Hawthorne.

fabaudio · « **Reply #23 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 03:46 am »

Quote from: JohninCR

Quote from: fabaudio
Guys - check out these drop dead beauties courtesy of Darrel http://perfect8.com/

Darrel who? Not Darrel Hawthorne I'm sure. Nothing worse than unachievable claims. They're pretty though, but I bet obscenely priced.

Courtesy of Darrel Hawthorne.

Manowar · « **Reply #24 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 04:17 am »

Thanks John,

I had heard so many good things about the B200's except in an OB there would not be enough bass for my taste. I would ultimately like to get bass extension into the low 30's if possible from an OB design using a good full range driver for the mids and highs and one or two bass drivers. Power the woofers with their own amplifiers and a separate amp for the fullranges...similar to BD-Designs Quasar MKII OB's..nice!!!

Another coax driver built by PHY-HP... see below... looked very promissing and has great reviews, but then I found out how much they were$$$ I went back to the B200's. And now thanks to your discovering the Hawthorne Iris's I have another option.

I e-mailed Darrel at Hawthorne and asked him if he could get me a price on the 15" bass augmentation drivers. and if they are as affordable as the coax ones then I can do some experimenting in an OB. If all else fails I can always build a couple sub enclosures for them.

http://phy-hp.com/English/Products/KM30_E.html

Thanks again,
John

JohninCR · « **Reply #25 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 04:22 am »

Fabaudio,

Sorry about that. I misunderstood your post and didn't read it as Darrel being the one to refer you to that website.

Novell,

The bass augmenters should be more economical. Let me know if you find out when they are due out from Hawthorne.

mcgsxr · « **Reply #26 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 02:26 pm »

JohninCR - nice catch, they sure look like an interesting, and satisfying option! I like the b200's I am running, and am willing to play around with getting them to blend with some bass creation options I am working on, but these look like a great option to get 90% of the sound one needs, in a straightforward install.

One of these summers, I will have to bug JLM to let me drive out there, and hear those TL's of his, I have long been interested in that tech, but have not heard any single drivers done that way.

Hope that the bass augmenter information is out soon, I could use some temptation!

JLM · « **Reply #27 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 07:42 pm »

Sounds like a great idea Mark!

JoshK · « **Reply #28 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 08:04 pm »

fwiw, open baffle designs, both hi-eff & conventional, both full range and multi-driver have seen a resurgence in popularity quite a number of years ago (prompted by Linkwitz's Pheonix?). There are a ton of designs and a lot of experimentation already done for whatever your philosophy. I'd look at diyaudio.com and do some searching and you'll find a ton of designs done.

Nuuk & Thoersten (Ku__ Yang Wang) have done OB designs using full range hi-eff drivers supplemented by bass drivers for the lowest octaves. Then there are the Black Dahlia's.

For more conventional drivers/multi-way, there are the Orions, NaOs & Arvo Pärts and many variations on them. Then there are tons of commercially available OB designs.

There is a dude on this forum that has a gallery of his clear baffled OB PHY based speakers supplemented by a huge artful H frame sub.

Just so you know, the B200 on OB is not at all alone or even an early arriver to the field of OB popularity.

JohninCR · « **Reply #29 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 09:55 pm »

Josh,

While I respect that designers you mentioned have much more experience and knowledge about audio than I, all of those designs require EQ to get rich full bass even with the added bass driver(s). I've even had prolonged arguments with some of the people you mentioned regarding their position that the visual baffle width from the front determines the point where bass rolls off due to dipole cancellation.

This is just one example of an "old school" premise related OB's that is flat out wrong. In any discipline fresh ideas and tools are needed to advance. What is new here is the Silver Iris, a full range unit which is capable of rich full bass at significant volume levels without assistance and with my non-standard baffle the Iris puts out rich full bass without EQ.

I'm a firm believer in keeping things simple.

JoshK · « **Reply #30 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 10:14 pm »

So I am assuming you are using a bass driver with downward sloping amplitude with frequency response and high Qts? Visual baffle width does determine where bass cancellation begins, but if the drivers themselve have physical attributes that make up for this you can go a little way further down the spectrum before the dipole affect takes away your bass.

I have seen it done with some Lambda drivers where the user had they custom made for dipole use so that they only needed a tiny bit of "eq" (passively in the xo) to boost low bass.

-Richard- · « **Reply #31 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 11:18 pm »

Hi JohninCR,

Thanks so much for the drawings and measurements...your gifts as a
speaker designer are nicely matched with your gifts as an illustrator...
first rate work...a pleasure to study and learn from...

It seems every time someone generates a fresh take on an approach
to audio...which in-an-by-itself is rare...there is always a great deal of
resistance...intellectual or otherwise...

That is to be expected...however like you, I see myself as being in a
constant state of learning...what the Zen masters call being the ever
present student...always a student...and therefore always open to a
fresh understanding of what is possible...

Again I want to thank you for sharing with us your wonderful insights
and work with OB's...as I wrote in another thread yesterday in response to
Occam's wry observation that OB's have been around for quite some time:

"...It is rather the idea that we have been conditioned to believe that the magic
we are looking for in reproduced sound comes in expensive boxes that
have been created with vodoo science and complicated computer programs
that calculate secret interior dimensions...when in effect sticking a driver in
a plank of plywood with a hole cut out gets you very close to a "real" and "live"
musical experience that almost all conventional speaker designs fail to do...
no matter what they cost...or the hype that surrounds them...
That is new...in the sense of a new awareness of what is possible...and for
very very cheap...and one could actually create it for oneself with a
minimum of skills..."...

DMason's wish to turn all of us into DIY audio experimenters using the OB
speaker design...to help liberate us from expensive super-hyped boxed
speakers...is nicely matched by Darrel's honest wish to sell his Silver Iris
drivers to all of us so we can see for ourselves the fun and joys that
building simple OB's can generate...not to mention the catharsis one
undergoes by exposing oneself to this magical music maker...
quite extraordinary really...

I am really looking forward to getting Darrel's Silver Iris 15 inch driver...
and experimenting with it...and I have every intention of building a version
of your Pentegon shaped "The Joint Chiefs" OB wonder!

And it is thanks to you, John, for inspiring us to give this new driver a try...
and for inspiring us to once again take up the challenge of designing a
new approach to a DIY OB design...nice work!!!!!

Warm Regards -Richard-

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #32 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 11:27 pm »

All I want to know is if the 15" cone was implemented as a cd waveguide for the coax tweeter.

JohninCR · « **Reply #33 on:** 15 Jan 2006, 11:51 pm »

Cool another "old schooler". No the driver doesn't have a downward slope in response and the Qts is only .91 .

The "visual width" premise is definitely incorrect and I can prove it. Visual width does have some benefit, but it's related to floor boundary.

Josh,
Before we get into this, do you have an open mind with regard to the possibility that "visual width" is not as important as you currently believe and do you understand why U-Baffles have 6db deeper extension? I believe this is an important topic, so much so that deserves it's own thread, however, I really don't want to have another drawn out debate with someone that refuses to accept the possibility that the so called experts could be wrong.

Before you decide on how to proceed, think about this: I'm using a 15" full range coax unit, the Silver Iris, with a quote Qts of .91 and Fs of 41.8 . Is say "quoted" because I haven't measured them myself (what for I'm not putting them in a box?). The front driver mounting baffle of this OB alignment is a pentagon barely larger than the driver. That pentagon is the comprizes the total visual width, eg that's all you see directly on axis with the baffle, yet the -3db point is below Fs without EQ of any kind.

This might be fun and interesting.

John

JohninCR · « **Reply #34 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 12:32 am »

Quote from: ooheadsoo

All I want to know is if the 15" cone was implemented as a cd waveguide for the coax tweeter.

I don't think so. The mouth of the little tweeter horn protrudes through the base of the cone a few millimeters and looks to be about 2" in diameter.

JoshK · « **Reply #35 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 12:32 am »

yeah, I get you....I thought you were talking about a flat baffle, if you use U or other folded baffle, then you can lengthen the distance travelled before acoustic shorting begins.

JohninCR · « **Reply #36 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 01:27 am »

Josh,

Single full range coax, 95+ sensitivity, small form OB, -3 below 40hz with no EQ and that doesn't peak your interest. Did I mention really nice sound? I must have missed something in my searches. Please direct me to some other drivers that can do that except maybe some custom Lambda's at triple the price and 6 months or more wait time.

I'm an OB enthusiast and good driver selection is quite limited unless you are willing to put together quite a complex system of drivers, XO's, EQs, and muliple amps. Not only is this at a minimum somewhat costly, the first timers are resistant to the complexity and we end up having to pull them kicking and screaming over to the boxless side of reality. Once their ears get a taste, it's a different story, but if we want more and better drivers for open air use, then we have to make it easy for first timers to achieve great results.

FWIW, we need to come up with a different term than "acoustical short circuit". That's the kind of thing that makes people think bass waves get to the edge of the baffle and cancel out, but that's not what happens. What really helps me to design effective OBs is visualizing what is happening with the front and rear wave fronts.

That's my 2 cents for today.[/b]

JohninCR · « **Reply #37 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 01:47 am »

Richard,

Somehow I missed your post earlier. Thank you for the kind words of support.

My response to someone who says OB's have been around for a long time is "sex has been around even longer, and that's not stopping me"

Manowar · « **Reply #38 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 04:15 am »

Hi JohninCR,

I went back and reread your first post, that I originally read through too fast...I apologize for that. I did not realize you were speaking of two systems a home theater and the two channel in which you say the Hawthorne Iris in your Joint Chiefs baffle design you are getting frequency extension into the 30's!

That is exactly what I was looking for. When you replied previously you had mentioned that I might need a subwoofer or multiple drivers if I used a traditional flat baffle design!... but not with The Joint Chiefs.
The reason I had mentioned the BD-Designs Quasar MkII is because it will go into the 30's and It is a really nice looking design... and very substantial, except it is not the simplist, as it uses three drivers per side and built in sand amps and EQ...and quite expensive and that does not include the wood for the baffles!

I also like simple too

It looks like I will be ordering a couple of drivers from Darrel at Hawthorne soon!
On another note, I have access to a complete machine shop with welding equipment if you would be interested in a rigid steel stand for the Joint Chiefs! made out of rectangular or square stock tubing that could be mass loaded with sand or ball bearings, I would be willing to help you come up with a neat design that would look cool and be functional at the same time! I will build and donate these to the interesting sounding Joint Chiefs.

As I mentioned I was planning some designs with rect, tubing that would hold a OB also.
PM me if your interested!

Thanks again,
John (Manowar)

JohninCR · « **Reply #39 on:** 16 Jan 2006, 07:54 am »

Hi Manowar,

Right now I'm just using mine for 2 channel. Pink Floyd is about the lowest content music I listen to and I'm satisfied with the bass. -3db at or below 30hz in a single drive unit is a wish, I don't think can come true. If have that if I want to biamp to my current OB augmenters with 4 12" per side, but they are max output limited and I'm liking them better by themselves. I don't miss the low 30's where the Iris's are rolling off pretty quick. The inactive augmenters make a perfect stand for my Joint Chiefs right now.

I can't go with all 15's for my HT for space reasons. I have to wait for Hawthorne to come out with matching 12"s, 10"s or maybe even 8"s to put in a similar, but smaller, cabs in order to implement them in my HT. I'll have to test first, but I will probably have to deaden my room some more to go fully OB for HT. The Chiefs do have a big enough sound to replace my OB line arrays for my HT mains. If I ever get around to good drivers in my arrays, I may go back to arrays for HT. I believe arrays are optimal for HT if you have a big screen and it's nice to have that option for 2 channel when you want a front row at the concert type listening experience (arrays take you there better than point sources and points sources bring them to you better....a very different sound) The driver cost is just too high for me at this point, plus we're talking about multiple amps per channel, active XO's, etc. for my ultimate HT solution.

In the meantime, frugal and simple solutions come really close. Speaking of frugal, with these Iris's in a simple cab plus something like a $30 Sonic Impact T-amp (or splurge and get the souped up $100 model from parts express) and we're talking about incredible sound for pocket change that could kick the butt of many $10k systems with an audible difference which even an average Joe can actually hear, due to the OB sonic difference.

BTW, thanks for the offer on the stands, but I'm down in Costa Rica and the $3/lb I pay for air shipping from Florida with my courier service would kill me. Also, I like to listen quite loud on occasion and with these 15"s, I think I may have to go overboard with mass in the base. I don't want even micro vibrations and want to see just how far I can take these Iris's. I have some sacks of concrete for another project for the house.That's probably the simple solution, especially since I have a low cost helper who's good with that kind of thing. ( He he, the advantages of living in a developing country

) That should be another straightforward, relatively simple and low cost solution that I'll pass along to everyone.

I just remembered another aspect that makes things simple with the Joint Chiefs. The pentagon comes to a point at the top and it makes a perfect sight for aiming the speakers. It's like a rifle sight. I hate that whole toe-in and placement dance. Point your Joint Chiefs exactly where you want in an instant.

I've also come up with an idea for remote control toe-in and even have the motors and remote controls, but haven't gotten to that line on the "things to try" list. I really should, because it's another of those things that anyone can really hear a real difference, even as it occurs. That should be a cool sound effect. It would benefit ALL speakers, and therefore commercially viable, especially for the "cost is no object" croud. I shouldn't even post this idea in public, because the design is just an engineering problem with a range of solutions. Oh well, I already have a successful unrelated business and would likely never get around to a commercial design even if I do build some for myself....my contribution to the betterment of audio. Anyone want to do a joint venture?