In article ,
Keith G wrote:
"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
You should also know that the full-range driver is in fact a myth. They
are all dual cone devices with some sort of mechanical crossover
Hi Don - yes, the majority are as above, but I'm talking single cone
here.
I would also disagree with Don's statement, especially if you take the
umpteen million single cone/FR drivers that are used worldwide in
radios, TVs, cars &c.
These are 'full range', are they? I suppose it depends on what your range
is. But I can't think of any decent ICE setup that uses single drivers -
quite the reverse in fact. Nor of *any* TV set with a decent internal
speaker setup.
- I certainly have single cone Visaton drivers on
the go here myself...
As you can see, you can just about coax enough bass from these
aluminium units and the highs are there. The Monacor isn't as peaky as
the fr suggests. I have a friend with the Jordans and in my opinion
they sound better with no tweeter. He's endlessly working on the
crossover - I think it's better without. Maybe it's a cop-out to not
use a crossover, but crossovers do alter the sound, and I'm not sure
it's worth it in the end.
Hah!
It never fails to amaze me that, given the extremely low rate of traffic
here, just how *topical* the group continually manages to be! Only
yesterday I finally consigned my Jerichos to the garage for all
eternity* having decided that they will never be any good without
correction networks to contain the peakiness that has remained constant
with summat like 4 different drivers being tried!
I found these pages to be very informative:
http://www.termpro.com/articles/xover.html
http://www.termpro.com/articles/xover2.html
but still don't understand the technology/science well enough to
consider efforts made *trying* various networks to be likely worth the
risk/time/energy/expense - too much likelihood of a 'near miss' and
endless, ongoing experimentation...!! (As your friend seems to be
discovering!)
In any case, at best, I see multiway speakers with complicated
crossovers (19 elements in the B&W TLs I had and a crossover bigger
than many amps in the Rogers Studio Monitors I had) as a costly fudge
to allow the use of drivers that will provide unnecessary frequency
extremes
Like over about 2 kHz? ;-)
at the cost of immediacy, speed, timbre and clarity
Ah. Those flowery expressions again. Wish I knew what they meant - or were
intended to mean. I'll try:-
Immediacy:- I've failed.
Speed:- A small unit can move faster than a large one.
Timb- Mostly provided by the cabinet.
Clarity:- Mostly provided with no cabinet.
- see:
http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/LS35a.JPG
for mention of a good example of a popular speaker (or type of speaker)
that is liked and used by many, despite not appearing to 'have it on
paper'...??
The 3/5a has a very involved crossover to allow for production tolerances
of the drive units. They also are poor at maintaining their performance
over the years.
As I do from time to time, I did a 'back to basics' SS amp/CD/2-way
speaker (Ruarks) comparison the other day and was quite surprised just
how muddy and blurry the sound was compared to my Lowthers - I had
forgotten that the setup that works brilliantly for TV/Movies (on a
daily basis) is quite useless for music! (So *boring* after the FR
units.....!!??)
A system which does well on all types of music will also be more than
suitable for TV/movies. Unless you think these things are balanced of some
strange exotic setups? Of course you *might* want more power for the jets
taking off on Top Gun etc...
*Unless anybody wants to take them on a swap 'em for summat
interesting...??
See the details he
http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/fostexfe206e/fostex.htm
- but expect the wording to be changed in the near future and don't
underestimate the size/weight of them!
Seems only yesterday they were impressing the milkman. ;-)
--
*He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
Dave Plowman
London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.