Peerless HDS exclusive 7" tested

[Mark K]

Hi all,

I had a chance to test a 7" Peerless HDS exclusive. The results are available from the "what's new" page on my site.

[JoshK]

From my understanding of your analysis, which is limited, it looks like this is a good driver, not a "great" driver. It does well in the midrange and gets high points for that but has mixed results in some of the linear and nonlinear results on a relative basis compared to the budget kings.

So is it safe to say that this didn't crush the budget kings? It does look like it might be easier to cross than the RS180 & L18, which might make it a better driver for some simpler budget designs.

[JonMarsh]

Hi all,

I had a chance to test a 7" Peerless HDS exclusive. The results are available from the "what's new" page on my site.

Thanks for the results, Mark. Looks like a solid performer in the midrange, but like most, I'd sugggest a or so 1400 Hz crossover. Not as good for a full range bookshelf, but I was thinking about these for an update to my X1 SLAMM modules, where they'd see duty between 150 and 1400 Hz.

I'll be curious to see what the 884 looks like, though like the 883, I don't think they'll match the RS225 on the bottom end. They may work well in the Arvo, though, which is what I got them for initially.

We just got Thomas's Arvo's re-tuned today, with some checkup on the electronics crossover and reconfiguration, and a "tune up" on the IB, they sound pretty nice on the Emily Remmler, Laurie Anderson, Keb Mo, and Tommy Emmanuel cuts I was using.

I'VE GOTTA GET SOME TIME OFF!

~Jon

[tktran]

JoshK,

I think Mark K's conclusion hits the nail on the head:
Of the 3, for linear distortion figures, it is approx. tied with the L18 (which is better than RS180) for top place, maybe a nose in front.
For mid range non-linear distortion, it is approx. tied with the RS180 (which is better than the L18 )
It MAY work with simpler crossovers, depending how the on-baffle measurements turn out.
Bass distortion is not as good as the two others.

"Good" or "great" is subjective. For starters, D-S-T has Great distribution network, which makes these things easily available outside the US. That's great to me. :-)

I'm still whinging about Parts Express International shipping method- it costs more to ship one of these RS woofers than it does to buy them.

The new Peerless HDS Exclusive series driver is a very well built, good looking (beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though) driver with a number of strong points. It is very linear, as good as the L18, or perhaps better. It would be nice to have these on a baffle though. It's hard to make much of my measurements at much above 1-2k. It's midrange distortion numbers are on par with the RS180, and better than the L18. If the Peerless on baffle FR looks anything like the published spec, it would make an excellent match for a second order alignment. It does not seem to have the brute force excursion of either the RS180 or L18, though, as demonstrated by the spectral distortion and 40 Hz HD tests.

[Andy_G]

it costs more to ship one of these RS woofers than it does to buy them.

would be far better if they arranged a supply over here... seems odd to send them all the way to US, when a slight detour and they would be here instead !!

[capslock]

Most of the tests are very low frequency or have a strong LF component. This is more about Bxl and suspension linearity than Faraday shielding. It is no surprise that the L18 comes out well, it has an unusually symmetrical field, owing to a machined pole piece with undercut and (also undercut) extension (see my old post over at diyaudio). I don't think anything is known about the RS180 motor geometry (extended cylinder vs. undercut disc vs. extended undercut disk) exept that it uses lots of copper. If the motor of the Peerless is similar to other current drivers I have taken apart, it uses a slightly extended cylindrical cold-rolled pole piece with minimal undercut. This is not the best way to get a symmetrical field, so the comparatively poorer LF performance does not come as a surprise.

As for midrange distortion, both the Peerless and the RS use heavy Faraday shielding, so the real surprise is that the L18, which has no shielding at all, does so well. On the other hand, the tests used here are not too revealing of inductance/field modulation induced midrange distortion. In tests of 2nd, 3rd and 5th distortion over frequency, such as done by HobbyHifi magazine, it can be seen that the L18 has about 3x higher midrange distortion than the W18 or RS180.

Most paper cone drivers have a floor of 2nd harmonic distortion from 500 to 1.5 kHz. It would be interesting to see if the Peerless with its Paper/Nomex cone and paper dust cap also glued to the VC former is plagued by the same problems.

In my eyes, the advantage of the Peerless over the metal coned competition is that it may allow use of a simpler LP filter. However, with its limited LF capability, it is not all that good for a 2-way. If one has to go 2-way + sub or 3-way anyway, why not look into the smaller HDS exclusive cousins?

As the 5 in. was out of stock at Madisound, I ordered the 4 in HDS exclusive, which happens to have the flattest looking FR of the lot, too. Can't say I am impressed with the build quality, though. The silver paint is not perfect round the edges, and the glue joints of the dustcap to cone and VC look a lot worse than on the Nomex 7 in. I already have.

Look out for a RS125 / L12 / W12 / Peerless shootout sometime this fall!

[TacoD]

and the scanspeak 12W revelator?

[capslock]

Have a look at the HH reviews. The 15W revs had low third and fifth order distortion, but were plagued by broadband 2nd harmonic distortion, probably due to cone flexing. The upper end FR and waterfall looks nice, but below 1 kHz, there are some resonances and way longer broadband decay than any metal cone. The 12M was essentially similar, but with more high order distortion (lack of Faraday shielding, incomplete saturation by Neo slugs?) and worse low end extension.

[capslock]

Oh, I now realize you were asking about my 12 cm shootout. Well, if you want to send me a 12M, I'll inlcude it, but there is no way I'll buy one of those overpriced suckers. I have a pair of 13M8640 which I can include, though.

[Mark K]

Most of the tests are very low frequency or have a strong LF component. This is more about Bxl and suspension linearity than Faraday shielding. It is no surprise that the L18 comes out well, it has an unusually symmetrical field, owing to a machined pole piece with undercut and (also undercut) extension (see my old post over at diyaudio). I don't think anything is known about the RS180 motor geometry (extended cylinder vs. undercut disc vs. extended undercut disk) exept that it uses lots of copper. If the motor of the Peerless is similar to other current drivers I have taken apart, it uses a slightly extended cylindrical cold-rolled pole piece with minimal undercut. This is not the best way to get a symmetrical field, so the comparatively poorer LF performance does not come as a surprise.

As for midrange distortion, both the Peerless and the RS use heavy Faraday shielding, so the real surprise is that the L18, which has no shielding at all, does so well. On the other hand, the tests used here are not too revealing of inductance/field modulation induced midrange distortion. In tests of 2nd, 3rd and 5th distortion over frequency, such as done by HobbyHifi magazine, it can be seen that the L18 has about 3x higher midrange distortion than the W18 or RS180.

Most paper cone drivers have a floor of 2nd harmonic distortion from 500 to 1.5 kHz. It would be interesting to see if the Peerless with its Paper/Nomex cone and paper dust cap also glued to the VC former is plagued by the same problems.

In my eyes, the advantage of the Peerless over the metal coned competition is that it may allow use of a simpler LP filter. However, with its limited LF capability, it is not all that good for a 2-way. If one has to go 2-way + sub or 3-way anyway, why not look into the smaller HDS exclusive cousins?

As the 5 in. was out of stock at Madisound, I ordered the 4 in HDS exclusive, which happens to have the flattest looking FR of the lot, too. Can't say I am impressed with the build quality, though. The silver paint is not perfect round the edges, and the glue joints of the dustcap to cone and VC look a lot worse than on the Nomex 7 in. I already have.

Look out for a RS125 / L12 / W12 / Peerless shootout sometime this fall!

Well, I think you're quite right overall. The spectral distortion, HD, and 3 tone burst below 100 tend to highlight displacement nonlinearities. But the 3 tone tests above 100 in general, tend to show nonlinearities that are a function of current as well as displacement. It's fairly clear from the 3 tone tests that the L18 is not as good as the RS180 or Peerless. Especially if you look at the number of distortion products and not just the level.

I agree that, perhaps the best use of this would be as a mid in an mtmW or similiar where one was targeting lower order slopes. This could be quite good. Pity the 4" had so-so build quality. The 7" looks very nicely put together and fit and finish is very good.

[dlr]

13m vs. 12m

Oh, I now realize you were asking about my 12 cm shootout. Well, if you want to send me a 12M, I'll inlcude it, but there is no way I'll buy one of those overpriced suckers. I have a pair of 13M8640 which I can include, though.

I'd like to see the 13m and if you get the chance, the 12m. I lived with the 13m for maybe 7 years in several incarnations. I now have the 12m and prefer it so far. I'm going to switch back to the 13m to see how much is just "being different". But I've got to say that the 12m setup seemed immediately better. Smoother, a bit more open, less distortion. I easily listen at higher volumes, longer and with less strain.

dlr

[TacoD]

Oh, I now realize you were asking about my 12 cm shootout. Well, if you want to send me a 12M, I'll inlcude it, but there is no way I'll buy one of those overpriced suckers. I have a pair of 13M8640 which I can include, though.

I do not have a 12M (only a 15W). For me it looks like that all Scanspeak units are designed for subjective parameters and that some irregularities are introduced by the designers. Right out of the box those units sound with minimal filtering very good. After some extensive filtering those magnesium cones sound even better. In the future I'll try those Dayton RS180 which are laying around somewhere.