SB17NRXC35-8 + Peerless HDS 104DT2608

[pierre666]

Hi,

I have had this idea of doing a 2 way (in a +- 29L -BR) with SB17NRXC35-8 + Peerless HDS 104DT2608 for a while.

I have heard good things about theses drivers (reviews & testings) but, funny thing, I saw no projects done with these drivers !?!? Why is it so ?

Anybody done anything with either SB17NRXC35-8 + Peerless HDS 104DT2608?

Thanks

Pierre

God!!!!, 95 hits, no replies!!?!? Tought crowd...! Am I in Dayton country?

[alex108n]

Hi,

Last year I've built a speakers based on SB17 and 27TBCD-DXT.
In the attachment you can see the speaker's size. For my ears they sound great. Much better than speakers I built before on MW164 and MDT30.

Regards,
Alex.

[TacoD]

How many driver combinations do you think you can try? The reason you cannot find designs with these drivers is not an indication if it is a good or bad combination.

Please show some patience, you are asking for help, people reading this board do not have any incentive to help you if you are that impatient .

[NyxOne]

Pierre666,

The Peerless Tweeter have been used in too many project to name them all.

The SB17NRX is a whole other thing. This driver have not been used by a lot of DIYer... My guest is :

- The Breakup maybe to hard to tame for many of us.
- Plenty of other good driver in the same price range and quality.
- SB have not been around for long enough (when compared to Seas, SS, Vifa, Dayton).

I know there is a project on the PE board that use it but I don't really trust the guy(jKim) who did the crossover.

SB has a kit that use the SB17.

The SB15NRX seem be a bit more used than it's larger brother. I know Jed (clearwave loudspeaker) use it in at least three of his kit. If Jed use then it means it's clear winner!

A word of advice... people around here are not necessiraly on the same time zone that we are Pierre. Having an answer can take as much as week especially if it's not a hot topic.

Good luck,
Chuck

[Jed]

There are so many permutations of drivers that could produce good results. I agree the HDS with the SB 6" would be nice. Just because it hasn't been done doesn't really mean anything. It may very well be the next best thing.

DLR, (Dave) sent me some info about a really nice speaker he's designing that uses the SB6 -- again, it doesn't use the HDS tweeter though. Just another permutation along the lines of a similar theme.

[JoshJK]

SB has a kit that use the SB17.

It seems that the kit in the SBA site uses the 4 ohm version of SB17, which does not sell in North America yet.

[Jed]

It seems that the kit in the SBA site uses the 4 ohm version of SB17, which does not sell in North America yet.

Madisound has the 4ohm 6".

[NyxOne]

It seems that the kit in the SBA site uses the 4 ohm version of SB17, which does not sell in North America yet.

you've a good sens of observation JoshJK!

Solen doesn't have it stock (yet) but I guess it's only a question of time!

Chuck

[JoshJK]

Madisound has the 4ohm 6".

Thanks for the information. I didn't know it's in stock! Even so, don't you think that the primary inductor value of 0.6 mH in the SBA kit is too small for a proper amount of baffle step compensation?

[Jed]

Thanks for the information. I didn't know it's in stock! Even so, don't you think that the primary inductor value of 0.6 mH in the SBA kit is too small for a proper amount of baffle step compensation?

Given the low inductance of the woofer and the 4ohm rating .6mh might be okay. I didn't look it over though, where are they crossing to the tweeter?

[JonMarsh]

There are so many permutations of drivers that could produce good results. I agree the HDS with the SB 6" would be nice. Just because it hasn't been done doesn't really mean anything. It may very well be the next best thing.

DLR, (Dave) sent me some info about a really nice speaker he's designing that uses the SB6 -- again, it doesn't use the HDS tweeter though. Just another permutation along the lines of a similar theme.

even for the "enthusiasts" among us, there is at times the though that the world doesn't especially need another six inch two way- I think I recall MarkK saying something along those lines a coule of years ago. Of course, he has since recently designed a six inch two way.

I think for anyone yearning for a design with a particular woofer and tweeter, this is where the "Y" in DIY comes in. It's a rather personal and somewhat subjective choice selecting drivers for a project, and what is or isn't interesting to invest time and money in.

[Jed]

even for the "enthusiasts" among us, there is at times the though that the world doesn't especially need another six inch two way- I think I recall MarkK saying something along those lines a coule of years ago. Of course, he has since recently designed a six inch two way.

I think for anyone yearning for a design with a particular woofer and tweeter, this is where the "Y" in DIY comes in. It's a rather personal and somewhat subjective choice selecting drivers for a project, and what is or isn't interesting to invest time and money in.

Well said, Jon.

For every design that is created there are twice as many wanting something else. Speaker building is the never ending quest of finding that "what-if" moment, the endless pursuit of expression, and/or musical happiness.

[JoshJK]

Given the low inductance of the woofer and the 4ohm rating .6mh might be okay. I didn't look it over though, where are they crossing to the tweeter?

The document does not tell the xover point. But based on the tweeter schematic, it must be well above 2 kHz. My guess is 2.5 k to 3.0 kHz.

The SB17NRXC35-8 is nominal 8 ohm and 5.7 ohm DCR, and the SB17NRXC35-4 is nominal 4 ohm and 3.1 ohm DCR. So, 0.6 mH primary inductor must be equivalent to 1.1 to 1.2 mH if the 8 ohm version were used. Even with a Zobel used (to compensate the inductive rise; these SB drivers won't need it), I have never seen a crossover design with an 8 ohm midwoofer in a hi-fi 2-way for in-room use (not in-wall or on-wall), in which a 1.2 mH primary inductor is used. If there is a notch filter to suppress upper mids, that's another story. But this design does not have such a thing. I might be wrong, but that's my thought.

[Jed]

use (not in-wall or on-wall), in which a 1.2 mH primary inductor is used. If there is a notch filter to suppress upper mids, that's another story. But this design does not have such a thing. I might be wrong, but that's my thought.

Your thoughts seem reasonable enough to me, but further investigation would be necessary to see how the woofer behaves in the enclosure and reaches the desired transfer function given the passive crossover components in the crossover model...eesh that's a long sentence!!! Just got back from a long bike ride. Well long for me.

[dlr]

There are so many permutations of drivers that could produce good results. I agree the HDS with the SB 6" would be nice. Just because it hasn't been done doesn't really mean anything. It may very well be the next best thing.

DLR, (Dave) sent me some info about a really nice speaker he's designing that uses the SB6 -- again, it doesn't use the HDS tweeter though. Just another permutation along the lines of a similar theme.

I haven't gotten a response back from zaph yet, so I don't know when he'll post everything. Until then, here are some of the crossover option results.





The last one is the one I've built and am using. I've listened to them all using the SoundEasy digital filter, but I want to listen to the LR4 1500 using my main power amp and eliminate the A/D stage and with a better power amp. The two crossovers are nearly identical topology and use identical inductors for the two large ones in the woofer circuit, so the change is rather easy.

I'm also playing around with an LR8 1500 with no tweeter trap. It pushes the tweeter a bit more just above the Fc (not pure LR8 ), but it takes fewer components (read less expensive).

To my surprise the breakup is not the issue that I expected. This probably has to do with the broader nature and the good motor. I also suspect that it's not really all classic breakup, it seems to be more of what happens in transition around the cone and dust cap radiation. Off axis it's more benign, a lot more so than hard cones. I had to disconnect the tweeter and listen to with the crossover on the woofer alone to accept that the woofer isn't doing anything as bad as the on-axis raw response would make one think it must be doing. The dip at 5.5K doesn't exist in my second driver. Maybe this is one reason I've always preferred softer diaphragms.

Consider as well that a broad peak such as this one in the woofer actually has a side benefit when it's not intrusive perceptually. It is effectively "relaxing" the slope to some degree and has an impact on the phase below it that actually helps with the acoustic offset of drivers not physically aligned. It's localized, of course, but in this case it's close enough to the crossover Fc that the impact is of significance. If you trap it (I tried that), you can get much closer to the target slope, but then you have to handle the offset delay by relaxing the resultant slope that pushes the trapped response higher, even for LR4. The trap does not eliminate any motor distortion amplification of the peak, so that aspect makes it no different than for hard cones. The broader peak, good motor and the softer diaphragm all work hand-in-hand, so it seems.

Dave

[dlr]

Hi,

I have had this idea of doing a 2 way (in a +- 29L -BR) with SB17NRXC35-8 + Peerless HDS 104DT2608 for a while.

I have heard good things about theses drivers (reviews & testings) but, funny thing, I saw no projects done with these drivers !?!? Why is it so ?

Anybody done anything with either SB17NRXC35-8 + Peerless HDS 104DT2608?

Thanks

Pierre

God!!!!, 95 hits, no replies!!?!? Tought crowd...! Am I in Dayton country?

If you're still interested in the SB17, my design and writeup have now been posted. There's a short synopsis and a link to the pages in this post:

SB 2-way post

It uses the SB25 tweeter with a small DIY tweak. I'm considering removing the tweeter tweak and adjusting one or two crossovers for it, but that won't be soon. I know that some won't consider tweaking a tweeter themselves. My intent was to get the maximum from these drivers. The tweeter tweak is a necessary part of it. It might not even take a lot of crossover changing for a stock tweeter. I had already added the tweak before I received the woofers.

Dave

[ThomasW]

If you're still interested in the SB17, my design and writeup have now been posted. There's a short synopsis and a link to the pages in this post:

He hasn't logged on to the forum in several weeks. You might send him a email..

[pierre666]

If you're still interested in the SB17, my design and writeup have now been posted. There's a short synopsis and a link to the pages in this post:

SB 2-way post

It uses the SB25 tweeter with a small DIY tweak. I'm considering removing the tweeter tweak and adjusting one or two crossovers for it, but that won't be soon. I know that some won't consider tweaking a tweeter themselves. My intent was to get the maximum from these drivers. The tweeter tweak is a necessary part of it. It might not even take a lot of crossover changing for a stock tweeter. I had already added the tweak before I received the woofers.

Dave

Hi gang,

I am thinking of something new, that looks a bit like Zaph's ZDT3.5...

a 3.5 way in a 56L tower in WWMT config with 2 x SB17 woofer+ for the mid a Scan Speak D7608/920010 and a the tweeter a Vifa XT25G3004.


Thoughts or comments please ;x( ??

Thanks

Pierre

[Mark K]

Hey, my ears have been buzzing for months!!!!

even for the "enthusiasts" among us, there is at times the though that the world doesn't especially need another six inch two way- I think I recall MarkK saying something along those lines a coule of years ago. Of course, he has since recently designed a six inch two way.

:sh: