Jump to content

Mariusz_

Regulars
  • Posts

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mariusz_

  1. Try this for a Jamborette. I hope I made it well for the bifurcated profile: lenght of one path and areas of two paths summed.
  2. I modelled Jambo in Hornresp. I left the data file of it at my office PC, so wait until (European) Monday morning. And a few hours more for Jamborette as I need to recalculate its size.
  3. I have a set of spikes to mount under.
  4. KG 3.5. I wanted them to have a present-day look and this is the outcome.
  5. Mariusz_

    Quarter Pie

  6. Try to model this one: Precision Devices PD.153ER THIELE SMALL PARAMETERS Fs 40 Hz Re 5.87 Ω Qms 8.65 Qes 0.22 Qts 0.21 Le 0.48 mh L2 3.09 mh R2 7.17 Ω Vas 218.76 litres Mms 74.36 g Sd 855.3 cm2 Cms 179.67 µm/N BL 22.44 T/m Xmax 5.7 mm Vd 0.473 litres Pe 400W
  7. Have you ever considered other than miniDSP kit active crossovers? For example there is a kit available: Najda DSP by WAF with features which are not available in many OTC units. These extra features are: 1. 48, 96, 192 khz sampling rates. 2. I2S input (with help of addtional USB-I2S converter one can connect PC and and stream all what one wants, files, Spotify, Tidal etc.) 3. Integrated volume control of analog outputs, IR operated (no need for pre-amplifier, one can use Najda like an ordinary integrated amplifier with volume knob) 4. Several preset crossover setups assigned to IR remote controller (gentle slopes for low volumes, extreme slopes for loud listening for example), changed instantaneously. 5. Swapable opamps. Besides it has all kind of filters, delays, EQs, FIR. It accepts analog and diigital (SPDIF and optical) inputs, has 8 outputs, easy expandable to 10. Priced EUR300 ($330) without power supply. I am going to set it up soon and will share using experience. --- edited: 6. Digital outputs (10 channels by SPIDF) so one can use Najda as pure crossover and further process divided signals in external DACs.
  8. https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/56237-article-solving-the-klipschorn-throat-riddle-edgar/
  9. I think that better imaging of LSII comes from the new crossover network. I also have LSII and I noticed that changing crossover for simpler one (lower order filters) deteriorated imaging.
  10. La scala II back chamber comes insulated with foam out of factory.
  11. Moray's k-tubes intrigued me and I have tried a very very simple set with my spare HF200. Too soon for conclusions, but sound has seemed to have both (good) features of horns (quick, detail) and direct radiators (hi-fi softness as opposite to PA power). . .
  12. I have both HF200 and HF204 (HF140 and HF144 with 2" adaptor). They sound differently, for 2-way 204/144 is better, HF200/140 lacks some brightness.
  13. Bacek, try to model Monacor SP-38/300PA. Impedance (Z) 8 Ω Resonant frequency (fs) 48 Hz Music power 600 WMAX Power rating (P) 300 WRMS SPL (1 W/m) 99 dB Suspension compl. (Cms) 0.21 mm/N Moving mass (Mms) 78 g Mech. Q factor (Qms) 5.68 Electr. Q factor (Qes) 0.24 Total Q factor (Qts) 0.23 Equivalent volume (Vas) 213 l DC resistance (Re) 5.9 Ω Force factor (BxL) 22.0 Tm Voice coil induct. (Le) 1.2 mH Linear excursion (XMAX) ±4 mm Eff. cone area (Sd) 855 cm2 So we get Vb=60l and Fhm=417 Hz. Not bad. Black: Monacor Gray/Red: Peavey
  14. I have had a chance to check another driver with my Jabo 72 horn. Recently I tested Faital HF200, Beyma CP750Ti and Faital HF204. My objective was finding best configuration for 2-way system with passive crossover, no EQ playing on top of La Scala II bass bin. All the drivers are well suited for 2-way configuration and the final choice should be based only on listening preference’s. But I like to compare my subjective evaluation with objective measurements, that’s why I look at the charts background. It seems that measurements confirm my listening impressions. So: 1. Faital HF200 delivered soft, somewhat dim sound. It was most apparent at low and moderate volume. At loud listening this feature was less noticeable. At chart one can see that HF200 is quietest driver starting from 3000 cycles. 2. Beyma CP750Ti sounded very well balanced. But at moderate or loud volumes the sound was harder. I liked a lot of details I could listen to. 3. Faital HF204 had features of both above: more open sound, more highs than HF200 and also more pleasant sound than Beyma. At the moment it's my personal choice. It is good to know the basic differences between these drivers. HF 200: 2.91” titan diaphragm Beyma: 2.97” titan diaphragm with mylar surround HF204: 2.56” ketone polymer diaphragm HF204 is smallest and polymer one – high frequencies did sound best. HF200 delivered the best low frequencies, when cut at 500hz (in this case “best” in terms of THD because I could not notice any difference when listening). Beyma looked very well when measured. At the end I have to mention this again. I got very very good stereo imaging and resolution with LaScala II bass bin, Jabo 72 and tested drivers. From that moment on I never wanted to return to 3-way configuration. My conclusions refer to 2-way needs. (the level is not calibrated to show absolute SPL, but the relative values are comparable, bass bin disconnected)
  15. It is right discussion to ask about something. I am going to build a pair of La Scala bass bin. I have found a plan that is slightly different from LS 1 and LS 2. The most important difference is internal width dimension. It is 590mm instead of 565mm (23 1/4 instead of 22 1/4). Motorboard is also a bit wider (15 9/16 instead of 15 1/4). Will this changes be audible? I hope not because I want to get LS sound. The plan: http://www.mh-audio.nl/plans/other%20plans/La%20Scala%20Horn.pdf
  16. Actually I did and I was able to make Faital curve match the one of Beyma. So it seems pretty easy to have the same frequency response. Speaking of Be-diaphragmas I agree that their sound physics is amazing which results in superb performance. That's why I wonder how direct comparison of HF200 and HF204 in my 2-way system will be. The first has titanium, the latter polymer diaphragm. So sound of speed/density ratio should be twice as higher in HF204 than in HF200. (BTW this ratio for berylium is 6, for titanium 1, and about 2 for polymers).
  17. In this case flatter response didn't convince me. I can compromise on it for more pleasant sound of HF200. BTW, I also checked that Beyma had more THD and intermodular distorsions - maybe this is the reason of HF200 listening advantage. Soon I will compare Faital HF200 and HF204, stay tuned ;-)
  18. Recently I have put some horn - driver combinations on top of my La Scala II bass bin. Maybe someone will be interested in my experience with Faital HF200 and Beyma CP750Ti. I used them with big Jabo KH-72 horn. Actually I used HF200 and now I am testing Beyma. So: First, Jabo makes good 2-way configuration with La Scala. It sounds surprisingly good from 500hz to the high end. Second, stereo imaging is the best I ever heard, it's clearly 2-way-with-crossing-low advantage. Third, I can't tell at the moment which driver is better but they are different. Faital is more "soft" and better for long listening. Beyma sounds more clear due to being louder at mid highs and highs. The chart shows the difference, look the lines from 2 khz. (the level is not calibrated to show absolute SPL, but the relative values are comparable, bass bin disconnected) Mariusz
  19. I have Faital Pro HF200 16 ohm, which without the mouth adaptor is HF140 16 ohm. But I have made mistake above. I have meant bigger LTH142 horn which I used with Faital Pro HF140 (as it is 1.4' horn). Mariusz
×
×
  • Create New...