Eton/Aurasound woofer A-B

[antivawt]

Built a set of David/Jerico Watt/Puppy clones several years ago. While moving the puppy's were damaged, smashed beyond use.

I picked up a couple Aurasound NS10-513's to replace the original dual 8's.

The NS10's arrived on Monday, I played pink noise thru them for 24hrs to loosen them up. Scabbed together a single 55 liter box, tuned to 28hz for one NS10. I also have a couple Eton 8-800's from center channel project. Built a single 42 Liter box tuned to 32hz for one of the Eton's.

Hooked them up thru a Marchand electronic x-over. Woofer to midrange x-over'd @ 280hz. I know this is probably not an ideal x-over point, but hey it's what I have and I'm having a time. Listen to each in mono thru an ancient Harmon Kardon integrated amp(pre amp only for mono function) and a Spectral Dma90 amp. Listening to Holly Cole "Temptation" This is a good way to compare center channels as well, hooking up two speakers in mono listening to a familiar cd vs explosions and car crashes.

NS10, no contest in low frequency extension and authority. No surprise there comparing a 8" to a 10". Pitch is a little loose and slow, timbre doesn't quite blend with the midrange, low frequencies stick out just a bit. These are MINOR complaints. Could I live with this woofer? Yes.

Eton, for the range it plays blends better with the midrange, better pitch and timbre. Could I live with this woofer? No, would have to add a sub woofer.

So what is the difference I'm hearing? The cone material? The Seas mid is coated paper. Is it better to use drivers with the same cone material?

Would be interesting to compare the Eton 11-581 to the NS10. At triple the cost, not gonna happen.

Kevin

[ThomasW]

You're comparing two completely different types of drivers. One is virtually a subwoofer, the other is a midwoofer, so you're comparing apples vs oranges.....

Also the lower tuned box will tend to sound "slower" given it's lower Fb.

BTW if you want to stop by I can loan you a Behringer crossover that offers completely variable crossover points. This would be handy for figuring out what Marchand modules you'll eventually want to make.

[Jed]

Thomas is exactly right. Use the NS10 below 200-150hz for better performance.

[antivawt]

I realize it wasn't a "fair" A-B, comparing a 8" to a 10". Some curious free time on my hands. Within the frequency range of the Eton, I did prefer it.

Should of thought of the low Fb of the NS10 box would yield "slow" bass. I'll try a slightly smaller box with a higher FB, to see how it effects the transient response, knowing I'm going to give up some lower fz's. Right now it's a tad slow for my taste.

Had a 4 Tempest IB sub in our previous home, that's part of the problem here, I miss that effortless bass of the IB, tough to get that out of a box!

Thomas, thanks for the offer. I'll be on the southside of Denver late tomorrow morning. I'll Give you a call in the morning.

Kevin

[antivawt]

Jed, it will be interesting to see how lowering the x-over fz effects things.

Kevin

[antivawt]

Thomas, thanks for the Behringer loan. Stopped by the Guitar Center on the way home and picked up some balance to rca adaptors. I'll mess around with the Behringer this weekend.

Per your suggestion, I stuffed some fill in the cabinet (robbed it from my center channel). It did make a difference, sounds a little tighter.

I'm a little confused on the original mid to woofer x-over point. From looking at a few charts on the net of 1st order designs, the 3.3mh inductor to the woofers and the 112uf cap to the mid don't jive to a specific x-over point?

Kevin

[Jed]

You can find a test of the aura here:

http://jedkunz.googlepages.com/harmonicdistortiontesting

[ThomasW]

From looking at a few charts on the net of 1st order designs, the 3.3mh inductor to the woofers and the 112uf cap to the mid don't jive to a specific x-over point?

He's using different points for each driver. Not all that unusual a situation

[ThomasW]

It was late when I replied last noc so here's more info....

Thoreston is a component minimalist and this projects reflects that philosophy. After this project he moved on to fullrange drivers with little to no crossover.

Using passive components is the easiest way to mix and match different XO topologies. Low to modestly priced active crossovers like the lower cost Behringers or Marchand XM9 aren't designed to do these things. They only do a fixed XO point with identical slopes. AFAIK, there are few exceptions to this, the Behringer DCX2496, the Marchand XM44, and the Nelson Pass active unit that costs as much as most people pay for a car....

For prototyping the obvious choice is the Behringer DCX2496. I have one of those you can borrow if you want to experiment. Understand it's not 'plug-n-play' like the 2310