Best Sounding Single Drivers

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #20 on:** 16 Nov 2010, 02:26 pm »

If we're taking a poll, I vote for allowing any topics that deal with widebanders.

There are -so- few posts on this circle. Often, a week goes by with just one, or sometimes no, posts. Isn't it worth something to liven up the discussion? If this circle got any quieter, I would probably forget to check it

JLM · « **Reply #21 on:** 17 Nov 2010, 01:15 pm »

I have no doubt that these speakers sound good, heck I own SD floorstanders, 2-way floorstanders, and 2-way standmounts with a sub and I like them all.

And I'd like to see this circle be busier too, but if you check with the posted ground rules these speakers don't fit the premise for this circle.

I just point this out in case the posters want to maybe stir up more conversation in a more appropriate arena.

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #22 on:** 17 Nov 2010, 02:24 pm »

Hi JLM, understood and those are good points.

I just read the criteria, and they seem ideological and not the way the hobby is really practiced. Jrebman says a couple times, "I have no interest in..." things like glorified midranges, telephone band etc.

Perhaps that's one reason why the circle is so quiet. I also notice that he got a lot of pushback on the narrowness of the definition from some very notable builders. Not trying to really stir things up (as there are other forums covering fullrangers) but it does seem sane to me to revisit the definition in light of the fact that the person who set the criteria is no longer here.

Or not! I can understand the purity angle too. I just got some AER Mk 1 which (I think) everyone would certainly consider to be "purist fullrangers," but my build narrowly misses the current criteria, which (to me) seems self-defeating for what is a pretty small niche in audio

I think if we were to propose a "Widebander Circle" people would say, Geez, doesn't the "Single Driver, Wide-Bandwidth Circle" already cover that?

No worries though, just saying.

Danny Richie · « **Reply #23 on:** 17 Nov 2010, 11:46 pm »

Let's face it. None of those full range drivers are really full range. They just get a full range signal.

And I have only found one of the little full range drivers so far that did not need some type of a compensation circuit for the baffle step loss. It is the little FR-125 woofers. They have the XBL^ motor structures that increase output to the lower end verses the top end.

The drivers that I sell that use the XBL^ motor have a similar response that is heavier in the bottom end.

http://www.gr-research.com/images/m130x.jpg
http://www.gr-research.com/images/m-165response.jpg

This can mirror image most of the baffle step loss common with an appropriate sized baffle.

So unless you use a really wide baffle (bad) then a compensation network is needed.

Some other full range drivers also have a rising response in the top end that also needs to be adjusted too.

And since they often don't cover the top end very well or the bottom end very well then adding drivers to cover that also is going to be real common.

So you have to expect that all of this stuff will be done with full range drivers.

planet10 · « **Reply #24 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 06:22 am »

Quote from: Danny on 17 Nov 2010, 11:46 pm

Let's face it. None of those full range drivers are really full range. They just get a full range signal.

You won't find many multiways that are full range either.

Today the best of the full-ranges can do 9 octaves.

dave

JohnR · « **Reply #25 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 07:02 am »

Quote from: rjbond3rd on 17 Nov 2010, 02:24 pm

I just got some AER Mk 1 which (I think) everyone would certainly consider to be "purist fullrangers," but my build narrowly misses the current criteria,

In what way?

JohnR · « **Reply #26 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 07:07 am »

Quote from: Danny on 17 Nov 2010, 11:46 pm

Let's face it. None of those full range drivers are really full range. They just get a full range signal.

You know what Danny? Maybe you should stop trying to convert people AWAY from the use of full/wide-range drivers, in what after all is a circle specifically set up for discussion about speakers using them. What you think is actually kindof irrelevant.

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #27 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:00 pm »

I think Danny's point was in support of mine -- that the criteria are too limiting when you look at the way the hobby is actually practiced.

It just seems arbitrary. Yes to a sub @80Hz, but no to a helper woofer @ 200Hz. Yes to Jordan JX92S MLTL but not if it uses Dr. Jim Griffin's tweeter mod (which improves the sound and response).

I guess there are "single driver purists" vs. "single driver enthusiasts." Really, we should have stuck with the term "wideband" as the Germans do (Breitband, broadband).

The AER Mk 1 build does not qualify because it's currently using an active crossover @240Hz to a woofer in a bass horn. If I changed that to a sub / plate amp @80Hz, it would apparently qualify but would not sound as good

JohnR · « **Reply #28 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:14 pm »

OK, so... use the regular speaker circle then... (why not?)

Danny Richie · « **Reply #29 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:29 pm »

I am not trying to convert anyone away from the use of full range drivers. The point is that people will add other drivers to them or put networks on them. So why structure the format to omit discussion of those things?

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #30 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:39 pm »

JohnR, are you familiar with the whole "single driver" culture?

People who build multi-ways are not much interested in wideband drivers actually. The people who are interested in wideband drivers are the people who would come here, to the "Single Driver, Wide-Bandwidth Speakers" circle.

This circle's criteria are so bizarrely restrictive that most wideband designs are being (arbitrarily) excluded, which is why this circle is quiet. It seems a shame.

It doesn't make much sense to post "wideband" stuff in multi-way when there is a circle with "wideband" in its title (but is exclusive to an extremely narrow subset of wideband). Does this not seem strange?

JohnR · « **Reply #31 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:47 pm »

Quote from: Danny on 18 Nov 2010, 02:29 pm

I am not trying to convert anyone away from the use of full range drivers. The point is that people will add other drivers to them or put networks on them. So why structure the format to omit discussion of those things?

The Facilitator who proposes a circle gets to set the guidelines. If he wants to, he can change them, or close the circle, or whatever. It has nothing to do with you.

JohnR · « **Reply #32 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 02:48 pm »

Quote from: rjbond3rd on 18 Nov 2010, 02:39 pm

JohnR, are you familiar with the whole "single driver" culture?

People who build multi-ways are not much interested in wideband drivers actually. The people who are interested in wideband drivers are the people who would come here, to the "Single Driver, Wide-Bandwidth Speakers" circle.

This circle's criteria are so bizarrely restrictive that most wideband designs are being (arbitrarily) excluded, which is why this circle is quiet. It seems a shame.

It doesn't make much sense to post "wideband" stuff in multi-way when there is a circle with "wideband" in its title (but is exclusive to an extremely narrow subset of wideband). Does this not seem strange?

Well, you can talk to Jim about changing them, or taking over, or else make your own proposal.

Mariusz · « **Reply #33 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 03:18 pm »

It is up to facilitator to enforce, change or implement new rules.
I like the circle as it is and voted yes when it was originally proposed.

Danny
It is not fair and it doesn't look that good spreading the love for your own designs. (no matter how good they are)
Even worst - ...... trying to demolish enjoyment from other/different designs then your own.

Personally
I enjoy various designs of speakers, gear etc. (including SD and horn loudspeakers)
And certainly could not care less what fellow audiophiles or experts think about it.

PS
SD/horn design rule!!!!!

Danny Richie · « **Reply #34 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 04:11 pm »

Quote

Danny
It is not fair and it doesn't look that good spreading the love for your own designs. (no matter how good they are)
Even worst - ...... trying to demolish enjoyment from other/different designs then your own.

Where the hell did that come from?

I came on here and shared a cool wiring trick that allowed the use of multiple full range drivers without the destructive interference effects of running them both full range. And I bet that 99% of the people out there had never seen it before. Plus one guy already tried it and it worked out great for him.

Regarding anything of my own: I used the frequency response plots of two of my drivers with XBL^ motors (not posted but a link used for them) only to illustrate how the XBL^ motor full range drivers like the FR-125 (again that I don't sell), do not require a compensation circuit. And the link was to a frequency response curve and NOT a page on my site where I sell them.

I didn't advertise ANYTHING or promote ANYTHING that I sell.

And I also responded here because the original poster mentioned some free advice regarding this stuff that I gave out here earlier that was regarding adding the super tweeter to the rear verses the front.... And it worked out great for him too!

You even got participation in this thread from another industry professional (Duke) and even more free how to tips. That was really good information!

Hey if you guys want to limit discussion to putting a wide band driver in a box period, that's fine. It's your circle. But don't tell me that I am "trying to demolish enjoyment from other/different designs then your own," when I am over here sharing free tips that you've never seen before and showing you guys how to have more fun with what you got. Especially with two people already posting here that the free tips worked out great for them.

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #35 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 04:13 pm »

Hi JohnR, actually I addressed both those points above

Mariusz, Danny merely chimed in that the criteria are restrictive. There is a lot of wideband action out there, yet this circle sees only a very narrow slice of it. I agree that SD/horns rock and that's what prompted me to chime in.

Interesting that this circle would be so quiet except when the point was raised about why it's so quiet

No worries though, this is all in the spirit of fun and the love of the hobby.

sts9fan · « **Reply #36 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 04:20 pm »

quiet is relative. Compared to many it ain't that quiet. If traffic was the #1 focus why not just make on giant circle?

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #37 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 04:42 pm »

Okay, I just wrote to Mr. Content regarding this. Sorry for all the OT.

sts9fan · « **Reply #38 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 04:45 pm »

Speaking of best sounding single drivers. I am in the process of building a few examples so I can do a comparo jammy. I have currently built a set using the CHR70 and FE103en. Now I am working on a pair of double mouthed horns based on the Mark Audio Alpair6. After that I will build a set of Frugal Horn 4s with the old Fe126. Then I still have a set of 1st Gen Alpair10 to play with which I think I will but in the MarKen cab.

Kris

rjbond3rd · « **Reply #39 on:** 18 Nov 2010, 05:02 pm »

Sweet! I really love the Mark Audio drivers. Alpair 10's are on my wish-list, and I'm eager to hear the new FH's. You will have a pretty spectacular collection right there, dude.