Scans on sale!

[thadman]

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=927

Madisound is selling the Scanspeak Revelator 18S/8531G for $112 :E :E :E

I couldn't pass them up! I ordered a pair of them along with a pair of the Peerless Exclusive 5.5" 831882s and the Peerless HDS 810921s! I've got a lot of testing ahead of me!

Title edited by moderator to decrease the length and amount of hysteria.

[Jed]

http://www.madisound.com/catalog/pro...roducts_id=927

Madisound is selling the Scanspeak Revelator 18S/8531G for $112 :E :E :E

I couldn't pass them up! I ordered a pair of them along with a pair of the Peerless Exclusive 5.5" 831882s and the Peerless HDS 810921s! I've got a lot of testing ahead of me!

yeah I saw that too... would make a nice MTM with your HDS tweeter crossed at 1.5k. Maybe you could pick up another pair.

[thadman]

even on sale, an MTM with Revelators is a little rich for my blood The first pair was sort of an impulse buy lol

[thadman]

Get 'em while theyre hot, I dont know how many they have left in stock.

[SQdude]

Way too expensive for me, but just curious, doesn't that wiggle in the impedance curve @ ~850hz and corresponding rise in freq response concern anyone? Is it a break up node? I don't see how one would use this driver to 1.5k without a bit of work. Just trying to learn, so your comments are appreciated.

[capslock]

Its the classic cone edge reflection. The cone starts bending (being non pistonic) in that frequency range already, and the surround, being mismatched in terms of mechanical impedance, reflects the wave back. At 850 Hz, the geometric constraints for a standing wave are met, hence the resonance wiggle.

It does bother me. On the other hand, I have listened to some pretty good speakers that used those drivers.

[cotdt]

$112 is still too expensive. i would still pick the usher.

[TacoD]

112 dollar is a bargain for a sliced cone. For me Usher is not as good sounding as Scanspeak.

[tktran]

It's all relative. Some of you guys in North America pay US$30-50 for Dayton RS driver, with free shipping over $99, so of course drivers costing >$100 aren't that tasty.

Now if I get a $30 7" midwoofer from PE, shipped to Aus, you can be sure I have to pay almost double that for some archaic shipping method to Australia.

Apparently the Danish and Norweigans have to pay even MORE for their SS or SEAS drivers than North Americans, yet the products come from their home country...

[TacoD]

In the Netherlands we must pay >200 euro's a piece for a 18W. It seems that Americans don't see that's a bargain .

[cotdt]

letsee... a while ago i got my brand new Peerless Exclusive 5.5" for $30 each, Dayton RS225 for $20 each, and Vifa XT19 tweeters for $13 each. to me the scanspeaks better be way better to be worth $112. (at least to us Americans)

[thadman]

letsee... a while ago i got my brand new Peerless Exclusive 5.5" for $30 each, Dayton RS225 for $20 each, and Vifa XT19 tweeters for $13 each. to me the scanspeaks better be way better to be worth $112. (at least to us Americans)

Where'd you get the exclusives for $30?

[cotdt]

Where'd you get the exclusives for $30?

Madisound made a mistake and gave me two for the price of one. It was actually less than $30.

[JonMarsh]

letsee... a while ago i got my brand new Peerless Exclusive 5.5" for $30 each, Dayton RS225 for $20 each, and Vifa XT19 tweeters for $13 each. to me the scanspeaks better be way better to be worth $112. (at least to us Americans)

Well, that's the $64 questions- they're very good, now they're only moderately overpriced, instead of hideously overpriced.

Of coursel, look who's talking!

With care, one should be able to save money on the crossover. Could probably make a killer MTM with these and the 66000, though I'd probably be tempted to try the Seas T25CF-001 due to it's really clean CSD performance.

So who's going to pony up? (won't be me- too many unfinished things sitting around anyway! And I've got to see what I can get out of the D6.8 in the PE MTM cab, anyway).

[TacoD]

That seas tweeter is very old, I think the new Seas basic series tweeters are on par with these.

[Drew]

Maybe I'll use this thread as an opportunity to ask: what's the deal with the "new" Peerless 830883?

It has the same little bobble at about 850Hz as the Scan, right? The older 830883 didn't have this, if I remember correctly.

Is the new 830883 still the best mid for less than $100?

[cotdt]

Maybe I'll use this thread as an opportunity to ask: what's the deal with the "new" Peerless 830883?

It has the same little bobble at about 850Hz as the Scan, right? The older 830883 didn't have this, if I remember correctly.

Is the new 830883 still the best mid for less than $100?

the 831882 has always been a better midrange. Peerless castrated the 830883 so that it wouldn't compete against their flagship Scanspeaks

[JonMarsh]

the 831882 has always been a better midrange. Peerless castrated the 830883 so that it wouldn't compete against their flagship Scanspeaks

That's what I like to see, conspiracy theories.... might well be true, though.

~jon

[cotdt]

Hehe, I heard that from somewhere else, but it does make sense.

[Jonasz]

New and old 830883?? What's the difference between them and how do you know which one you have?

[thadman]

yeah I saw that too... would make a nice MTM with your HDS tweeter crossed at 1.5k. Maybe you could pick up another pair.

I did decide to splurge I bought some more. Either way, I dont know how often these deals come around, but I'm sure I won't be losing money on them down the road if I did decide to sell them.

Would that be ideal? The HDS tweeter is about >3dB down at 1.5khz

and there looks to be an energy storage ridge in the 1-2khz range (not sure how bad it is)


Also the maximum CTC spacing would be 11.26" or 1190hz

[JonMarsh]

I did decide to splurge I bought some more. Either way, I dont know how often these deals come around, but I'm sure I won't be losing money on them down the road if I did decide to sell them.

Would that be ideal? The HDS tweeter is about >3dB down at 1.5khz

and there looks to be an energy storage ridge in the 1-2khz range (not sure how bad it is)


Also the maximum CTC spacing would be 11.26" or 1190hz

Do you see why my own "optimized" 7" MTM designs use a 1200 Hz crossover and a somewhat limited selection of tweeters? :W

[thadman]

Whats the point of an MTM then? The sensitivity of the woofers increases, but a huge displacement burden is dropped on the tweeter . The crossover region (1200hz) would produce high 2nd harmonic products at 2400hz and high 3rd harmonic products at 3600hz...the region (~2000-5000hz) where our hearing is most sensitive would be saturated with offensive levels of distortion :cry:

Even a Seas Millenium (7cm^2, xmax=.5mm) which is a beast compared to most tweeters (<.1mm xmax) is displacement limited to 96dB at 1200hz.

[augerpro]

That's why most just use a higher more friendly XO and live with the combing...not that I'm suggesting you do that. To me an MTM really needs smaller drivers to work. Of course if you use two 4" drivers you have to wonder if you'd have been better off just making a TM with a 6.5". I'd like to try the 5.25" HDS Nomex and Vifa D26NC55 but I don't know if the Vifa can go low enough...or the 4" Nomex with something that can go lower...I dunno it's very hard to find the right combo if you want to do it correctly.

[Jed]

Thadman,

You could try an 2.5way TMM if you are concerned with comb filtering, but personally an MTM at about 1500-1600hz LR4 should work out rather nicely with the HDS tweeter. What is the point of MTM you ask? Greater dynamics, power handling, and a nice large soundstage- not that these descriptions are unobtainable in a TM etc, but you get the point.

Jed

[thadman]

Thadman,

You could try an 2.5way TMM if you are concerned with comb filtering, but personally an MTM at about 1500-1600hz LR4 should work out rather nicely with the HDS tweeter. What is the point of MTM you ask? Greater dynamics, power handling, and a nice large soundstage- not that these descriptions are unatainable in a TM etc, but you get the point.

Jed

How does soundstage increase with the addition of another driver in an MTM arrangement? All I see is a reduction in vertical dispersion.

Dynamics increase? Seems counterproductive to me, considering the tweeter will be stressed significantly and dynamically limited. Trading one evil for another maybe? How much xmax does the HDS have? A >2500hz crossover point makes more sense.

Wouldn't it be more beneficial to increase midrange dynamics by using a single midrange and highpassing it to a large displacement midbass/bass driver high (200-400hz) to alleviate the displacement demands off the midrange?

[Jed]

How does soundstage increase with the addition of another driver in an MTM arrangement? All I see is a reduction in vertical dispersion.

Dynamics increase? Seems counterproductive to me, considering the tweeter will be stressed significantly and dynamically limited. Trading one evil for another maybe? How much xmax does the HDS have? A >2500hz crossover point makes more sense.

Wouldn't it be more beneficial to increase midrange dynamics by using a single midrange and highpassing it to a large displacement midbass/bass driver high (200-400hz) to alleviate the displacement demands off the midrange?

Well, good questions but I noticed when I went to MTMW versus TMW, the sound was very expansive and the mids just very dynamic with lower distortion, but I didn't get up and move my head all over the place to see whether or not I noticed vertical dispersion issues. Then again, I used 4" etons crossed at 2KLR4, so I can't really compare to what you are doing.

That said, all this theory is nice, but you really need to start building and listening... that's what it's all about isn't it? Especially since you've already ordered the drivers. Might as well give them a whirl. You can't go wrong with an MTM (2-way) or TMM (2.5way). HDS should be very comfortable at 1.5K LR4 as I've mentioned before.

Jed

[cotdt]

How does soundstage increase with the addition of another driver in an MTM arrangement?

The greater soundstage comes from time-smear. The extra midrange source creates time-smear because sound from one midrange will arrive at a different time to your ears from the other. Even if you manage to put your ears equal distance from both midranges to the last milimeter, the room reflections will still create time-smear and thereby a larger soundstage.

[Dennis H]

The greater soundstage comes from time-smear. The extra midrange source creates time-smear because sound from one midrange will arrive at a different time to your ears from the other. Even if you manage to put your ears equal distance from both midranges to the last milimeter, the room reflections will still create time-smear and thereby a larger soundstage.

I'm not sure I agree 100% with any of that. Everyone knows you need to listen to an MTM on the tweeter axis so there is no 'time smear' for the direct sound. And room reflections affect all speakers. It's true that an MTM will have a different power response from an MT (more of a dip in the mids) and I suppose you could call that 'time smear' but I think talking about the frequency response is more useful than talking about the time domain. Otherwise we'd all be using first order crossovers or digital FIR filters to eliminate 'time smear' between the mid and tweeter.

One nice thing about an MTM on axis is the sound source doesn't appear to move up and down as it transitions from the mid(s) to the tweeter.

[Jay_WJ]

I'd like to try the 5.25" HDS Nomex and Vifa D26NC55 but I don't know if the Vifa can go low enough...

I think the new Seas 27TFANC/D and 27TFFNC/G neo tweeters are a good candidate for MTM application. They have a 0.9 mm xmax! Although the results of Zaph's harmonic distortion tests of them turned out not as good as other Seas standard tweeters, they still look better than average and attractive because of their small flange and large xmax.


And how good is the new HDS tweeter? Not many reviews of people around here who actually used it in their project especially for a low XO point application. Although John and Mark both agreed that it is an excellent tweeter, John's test result seems better than Mark's. According to Zaph, it's "finally a world-class tweeter from Peerless." But according to Mark's test, it's on par with the TBFCG above 2k but a bit worse below 2k. I also checked with Mark's RS28A tests. It seems that the RS28A is a better performer than the HDS on his test. But according to Zaph's, the RS28A is far worse than the HDS especially below 2k. Whose test should I trust? Which one (RS28A or HDS) is another real winner (other than the Seas standard) for people who don't want to spend hundreds of bucks on a tweeter?

[augerpro]

I agree SEAS's clone of the Vifa is interesting and may work better. THD is kinda high for design of this caliber though. And that hump between 1k-2k is scary. Usually I've only seen that on neos in those "cans" to lower fs or with super high Qts to get that lift. I don't care for either method. I already have the Peerless and Vifa drivers so I may mock up an enclosure and see if it's workable. If it is I think it will be *just* workable, whereas the SEAS would probably be easier to work with.

As far as the Markk vs Zaph I'll check into that. I'm starting to do my own driver testing so this makes me curious. Keep in mind though that exactly duplicating results is pretty tough, especially when they use different methods. Most of the time this isn't a problem but if two drivers test very closely in some way it's hard to say if the differences aren't just because of the method used. I'll look into those tests...

[cotdt]

MarkK vs Zaph

I like MarkK's testing method better because there is more information, but Zaph's tests are easier to read and is a good complement to MarkK's tests.

[Jay_WJ]

MarkK vs Zaph

I like MarkK's testing method better because there is more information, but Zaph's tests are easier to read and is a good complement to MarkK's tests.

I agree with your point.

BTW, I remember reading somewhere that the RS28A is now tested and labelled sort of 'passed.' Is this testing done by PE or the manufacturer? What kind of testing? Does this mean that we now don't have to worry at all about the serious consistency problem found by MarkK and Zaph?

- Jay

[Mazeroth]

Back to $228 :cry: