Interesting Drivers

[Oneminde]

http://www.sbacoustics.com/index.php/coming-soon/6-5-satori-mw16tx-8/

http://www.sbacoustics.com/index.php/coming-soon/6-5-satori-mw16tx-4/

[Oneminde]

Besides the MW16TX and the TW29TXN, these drivers are coming too: MW13TX, MW19TX and WO24TX.

[tktran]

@MW16TX-4

Has perfection arrived? That looks pretty amazing...

No dip ~1.2KHz and first breakup higher in frequency and lower amplitude than the MW16P, and less modes too!

Count me in!

[Oneminde]

There are many standing in line for these drivers. Its looks really good so far.

[Oneminde]

SB Acoustics Textreme VS Paper

[cotdt]

SB Acoustics Textreme VS Paper

Wow, such minimal cone breakup for a hard cone. It's like something in between soft paper and hard metal.

[5th element]

Yes these really do look nice. Marketing usually fluffs up cone materials to be something that they are not. Graphene coated magnesium anyone? But these appear to actually do what was hoped. Pistonic operation through the speakers useful passband and relatively mild breakup. I do wonder how that 5kHz breakup will manifest in the HD.

Trouble is they don't have a dust cap. So I can't turn them into a coaxial -.-

[Oneminde]

SATORI MW16TX-4 has an Le of just 0.15mH.... cone breakup is not a problem and should return excellent IMD. This is a woofer and not a midrange but it could be used as a midrange, and perhaps it is the new transient king. But lets wait for the MR series and see what they will offer.

[Jonasz]

Trouble is they don't have a dust cap. So I can't turn them into a coaxial -.-

Well, you just drill a hole, right? 8)

[5th element]

Well you know...I had considered it.

[tktran]

The 5Khz breakup looks very benign compared the fierce breakup of aluminium or magnesium cones.

I'd like to see third party data, but it is possible this is better than the metal Satori some have been asking about.

Any of our favourite dealers doing pre-orders?

[JonMarsh]

SATORI MW16TX-4 has an Le of just 0.15mH.... cone breakup is not a problem and should return excellent IMD. This is a woofer and not a midrange but it could be used as a midrange, and perhaps it is the new transient king. But lets wait for the MR series and see what they will offer.

well, that's definitely a significant improvement! A WO24 with this technology would be very interesting...

[Oneminde]

well, that's definitely a significant improvement! A WO24 with this technology would be very interesting...

That's the thing, its coming.

Satori TeXtreme tweeter to be released (next month).
TW29TXN

Satori TeXtreme Woofers to be launched
MW13TX, MW16TX, MW19TX and WO24TX.

Satori Midrange to be released
MR13 & MR16

The midrange and woofer series is expected to be available by summer 2020. Preliminary information. Ulrik also mentioned that he did work on a Satori 13.5" woofer as a prototype but was not released, I among a few others have expressed an interest in this so who knows. Maybe Ulrik investigate and do some R&D on it for the TX line. That would be awesome wouldn't it

[cotdt]

If you don't want to wait for the TeXtreme, there's the look-a-like Dayton Epique series, which appears to have the same motor and basket as the Accuton drivers but with a damped carbon fiber cone. Though breakup peak of the 5.5" driver is 10dB at 5kHz, which is not as good at the TeXtreme, it does offer very nice efficiency. I'm waiting for someone to try it.

[Oneminde]

If you don't want to wait for the TeXtreme, there's the look-a-like Dayton Epique series, which appears to have the same motor and basket as the Accuton drivers but with a damped carbon fiber cone. Though breakup peak of the 5.5" driver is 10dB at 5kHz, which is not as good at the TeXtreme, it does offer very nice efficiency. I'm waiting for someone to try it.

I am aware of does two drivers, they have been available for a while and quite expensive as well. When a series of drivers are released, I want to see them available in a range of sizes. Releasing just two sizes and nothing else for a long period of time makes it very difficult to seriously work with them in regards to designing a loudspeaker series in different sizes. For a series of 2 and 3-way loudspeakers, you want consistency, something Epique does not offer.

[Scottg]

..it's not like anyone cared, but:

https://www.audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-seas-excel-graphene-w16nx003-5-25-midbass-driver

[cotdt]

..it's not like anyone cared, but:

https://www.audioxpress.com/article/...midbass-driver

The distortion peak at 1kHz is likely from not chamfering the rear baffle. Otherwise the distortion numbers are amazing, so is the high power output and ~8mm linear xmax. This is a bass monster relative to its size. Should sound absolutely amazing in a small 2-way. Seas Excel puts Accuton to shame by the ear test.

[Pythagoras]

The distortion peak at 1kHz is likely from not chamfering the rear baffle. Otherwise the distortion numbers are amazing, so is the high power output and ~8mm linear xmax. This is a bass monster relative to its size. Should sound absolutely amazing in a small 2-way. Seas Excel puts Accuton to shame by the ear test.

"I set the SPL at 1 m for the W16NX003, mounted in free-air using a pink noise stimulus set to 94 dB (my standard for home audio devices), which required 4.55 V. With the microphone placed at 10 cm from the dust cap, the W16NX003 produced the distortion curves shown in Figure 10."
Other drivers measured in the same way don't show this distortion peak. Don't know the cause and if it's real or not.

[Jonasz]

I think it looks really good. No 3rd order distortion peak at all between 1 and 2kHz. 2nd order peak is a bit odd but probably hard to hear, noone ever complains about the Revelators 2nd order peaks...

[5th element]

The 3rd harmonic distortion is a clear improvement Vs SEAS old motor geometry but this was to be expected. It's now on a par with SBs standard line. Still with the diminishing 3rd order Vs rising frequency it pretty much hides the worst of the distortion amplification from the cones resonance. It is still there it's just before SEAS motor geometry caused a general rise in 3rd order that was then made much worse by having a distortion peak at the end of it. Now the 3rd order goes down with rising frequency with a peak at the end. This is a nice, much needed, improvement.

If that 2nd order isn't a measurement artefact, and we have no reason to believe that it is, then we've got a glaring fly in the ointment. This should not be there. Actually a hump appears in SEAS own measurements at 1kHz too, or something similar at least. How bizarre for their magnesium cones. What a shame the driver was looking nice but the hump, if Vance's measurements are accurate actually makes using this driver more of a pain too. Not that I was ever going to use them. Far too expensive for me. I am curious to see how the W18 will measure and eventually the W15.

No one complains about the 2nd order peaks with soft cones because 1) they are impossible to hear. 2) There isn't anything you can do about them. Soft cones are flawed by design in this respect and you accept this pitfall for the benefits they provide. You go to a stiff cone if you're looking to avoid the 2nd harmonic and frequency response wobbles that come with it. Metal cones should not show this behaviour so I am complaining about it. Why bother with the metal cone at all if it's got a similar, but different, problem Vs a soft cone.

Roll on textreme.

[cotdt]

"I set the SPL at 1 m for the W16NX003, mounted in free-air using a pink noise stimulus set to 94 dB (my standard for home audio devices), which required 4.55 V. With the microphone placed at 10 cm from the dust cap, the W16NX003 produced the distortion curves shown in Figure 10."
Other drivers measured in the same way don't show this distortion peak. Don't know the cause and if it's real or not.

For example, I noticed that Voice Coil's CF120 measurements show a lot of distortion below 1kHz, more than expected based on how linear the motor is:

https://www.audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-dayton-audio-cf120-4-4-1-2-woven-carbon-fiber-midwoofer

However, when I did the measurements using a thin front baffle, the distortion was well under 1% throughout the area:


This means that for some drivers, the rear chamfer is very important so that there is room for the rear air to breathe.

[Scottg]

..knew that carbon driver was a gem. (..just didn't know that it needed the right "setting".) :W

..still a minor problem at 900 hz though. ops:

[Oneminde]

Paradigm did away with their carbon woofers and are only using Be for their top range - I guess you can do that when you can spend the big $$$ on development

[fish fingers]

Waiting patiently for the 7.5" Textreme version. This range will be a good alternative to Accuton. Maybe SB shd develop a grill for car installs a la Morel

[fish fingers]

Noticed at a recent show that Revel are no longer using the SB ceramic drivers. No ribs on new cones. Guessing Harman Group have these made in house now?

[5th element]

I noticed this too then wondered if their ceramic line ever had ribs right from the start. The alu drivers did but I can't seem to find any ceramic revel that have ribs. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Jonasz]

Revel haven't used SB in a couple of years now, they use chinese made copies of the drivers.

[fish fingers]

The ceramic range def used the SB drivers at the outset and plenty of glowing reviews with these drivers. Then I'm guessing the (Samsung?) buyout meant a trimming of costs. Slightly worrying times in the hifi industry, with all these groups swallowing up famous names and dumbing them down

[Oneminde]

Did Samsung buy Revel ????

[Jonasz]

Did Samsung buy Revel ????

Samsung bought Harman.

[Oneminde]

Samsung bought Harman.

Oh no ... on the other hand, hasn't Harman slowly been downgraded for years. Checking some of Harman/Kardon's stuff and my impression is not good. Cheap consumer goods which is replaced within a few years. Oh well...

[Jonasz]

Oh no ... on the other hand, hasn't Harman slowly been downgraded for years. Checking some of Harman/Kardon's stuff and my impression is not good. Cheap consumer goods which is replaced within a few years. Oh well...

Well, Harman owns JBL, Revel, Mark Levinson and a bunch of other classic brands.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harman_International

[Oneminde]

Sure, but we all know its not the same just because the name is the same

[Scottg]

..better, but it still has virtually nothing to do with Graphene coating:

https://www.audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-seas-excel-graphene-w18ex003-6-5-midbass-driver

-and still a pointless driver considering the cost.

[5th element]

Agreed. Vance made a boo boo in the review as well it would seem. He says he tested it at 104dB for the distortion measurements, which is clearly incorrect when you compare it directly with the W16 which was tested at his usual 94dB. The bass distortion should be significant higher on the W18 if that was the case.

It's a decent driver (there's still some second order issue that the old W18 never had), but as you said, nothing to do with the graphene. And a prohibitive price where, if we are paying a significant premium for the graphene part, most of us are paying for something we don't want or need.

[Bear]

Oh no ... on the other hand, hasn't Harman slowly been downgraded for years. Checking some of Harman/Kardon's stuff and my impression is not good. Cheap consumer goods which is replaced within a few years. Oh well...

I believe that their corporate focus is largely on automotive infotainment systems. They may sell more Revel through Ford (Lincoln) than they do through traditional hifi dealers.

[cotdt]

The graphene is necessary to prevent corrosion resistance on the magnesium cone. I don't know if it makes any difference in sound, but I guess only subjective listening tests will give us a hint. I guess they probably could have just painted the cones.

I'm glad Seas updated the Excel motors because it was falling behind the competition. Now they look amazing.

[5th element]

The excel cones have always had some sort of coating applied. No idea what it is but it apparently wasn't enough. Yes the graphene coating is supposed to stop the cone from corroding but the vast majority of users don't need it. Hence paying for something that we don't need.

It's one thing to upgrade the coating on the cone as an incremental improvement for £1. And let's face it there are loads of inexpensive anti-corrosion agents formulated for cheap and effective protection. But it's another entirely for them to be charging, what looks like, a £200 premium for. If you live in a climate where corrosion isn't a problem that's a lot of money you're paying for nothing. To be honest in any other kind of industry the coating would have been upgraded as a basic manufacturing improvement at no extra cost years ago, but SEAS has gone down the audiophool avenue this time round.

My W15CYs are coming up to 20 years old and are as good as the day I bought them. I think they cost around £100 each back then too, including tax and shipping.

The motors were in dire need of improvement but in terms of material/manufacturing cost may even be cheaper than the old designs. In terms of the R&D costs and the FEA software simulation stuff. This is something SEAS had been way behind the times with already. This is not a new technology, FEA optimised motors have been common place for 10+ years. Then what they manage to produce are as good as SBs standard range.

So basically we're paying through the tooth for SEAS being late to the FEA party and a graphene coating most don't need. If anything FEA simulation should reduce R&D costs because it basically allows you to do almost all of your design work in software. Whereas before SEAS would have had to have built loads of actual prototypes. With metal tooling this is a pain staking, time consuming and expensive process. With FEA you alter a number/change a geometry, press a button and have your revised pole geometry answer in minutes, not days/weeks. How else do you think SB effectively eliminated cone resonance amplification in their NAC/CAC cones? FEA cone simulation.

Sure I sound like a negative ninny and sure these new excels are an improvement in most ways. But from an engineering standpoint these are not improvements that we should be paying much, if anything, for. The improvements being 1) fixing a faulty product (the cones should never have corroded in the first place) and 2) paying for SEAS FEA software which should only save them R&D money and increase their profit margins.

[cotdt]

The excel cones have always had some sort of coating applied. No idea what it is but it apparently wasn't enough. Yes the graphene coating is supposed to stop the cone from corroding but the vast majority of users don't need it. Hence paying for something that we don't need.

It's one thing to upgrade the coating on the cone as an incremental improvement for £1. And let's face it there are loads of inexpensive anti-corrosion agents formulated for cheap and effective protection. But it's another entirely for them to be charging, what looks like, a £200 premium for. If you live in a climate where corrosion isn't a problem that's a lot of money you're paying for nothing. To be honest in any other kind of industry the coating would have been upgraded as a basic manufacturing improvement at no extra cost years ago, but SEAS has gone down the audiophool avenue this time round.

My W15CYs are coming up to 20 years old and are as good as the day I bought them. I think they cost around £100 each back then too, including tax and shipping.

The motors were in dire need of improvement but in terms of material/manufacturing cost may even be cheaper than the old designs. In terms of the R&D costs and the FEA software simulation stuff. This is something SEAS had been way behind the times with already. This is not a new technology, FEA optimised motors have been common place for 10+ years. Then what they manage to produce are as good as SBs standard range.

So basically we're paying through the tooth for SEAS being late to the FEA party and a graphene coating most don't need. If anything FEA simulation should reduce R&D costs because it basically allows you to do almost all of your design work in software. Whereas before SEAS would have had to have built loads of actual prototypes. With metal tooling this is a pain staking, time consuming and expensive process. With FEA you alter a number/change a geometry, press a button and have your revised pole geometry answer in minutes, not days/weeks. How else do you think SB effectively eliminated cone resonance amplification in their NAC/CAC cones? FEA cone simulation.

Sure I sound like a negative ninny and sure these new excels are an improvement in most ways. But from an engineering standpoint these are not improvements that we should be paying much, if anything, for. The improvements being 1) fixing a faulty product (the cones should never have corroded in the first place) and 2) paying for SEAS FEA software which should only save them R&D money and increase their profit margins.

Yeah the graphene doesn't seem to make any difference and the change in frequency response of the W16NX-003 is probably due to the new motor. The graphene layer is very thin. Still the price increase is justified. The new W16 graphene has more than doubled the power handling of the older version. Joseph Audio updated their Pulsar speakers with the new W16 graphene unit and word is that the speakers are subjectively an improvement over the old version using the old W16. They are able to charge $8000 for a small 2-way monitor using these drivers.

So I have in my hands the new W16NX Graphene and SB15NBAC aluminum cone, and I will compare them as they are similar. The harmonic distortion profile of the SB15 is essentially just a straight line that increases in the lower frequencies based on increasing excursion alone. It's extremely clean, though I expect the Excel unit to beat it at higher output based on its excellent Klippel results and overall bigger beefier motor. I'm going to measure my W16NX units soon to comapre. You won't be able to charge $8000 if you make a small monitor using the SB15s though.

[5th element]

Power handling is rarely of any realistic concern in domestic loudspeakers and this does not justify the price hike in any which way.

I don't want to buy or sell $8000 speakers and they should be better than the outgoing model. The new Graphene drivers are an improvement over the old.

The point is that the pricing on the new excel line is based completely on the charge what you can, not what it's worth ethos. SB on the other hand balance their pricing far closer to the what it's worth end of the spectrum. This is to be greatly applauded.

A good engineer solves the problem he is tasked with.

A great engineer also solves the problem but does it for half the price.

We all know the audiophool sector tends to throw away good engineering for snake oil monikers and obscene price tags.

Ooo Graphene - let's charge 2x the price. Not to mention the pricing on the prestige range is absurd too when directly compared to SBs drivers.

This is not to say that the new SEAS drivers are bad, they aren't, they simply are not worth the price in terms of actual value for money. And I rate value for money very highly.

[tktran]

So I have in my hands the new W16NX Graphene and SB15NBAC aluminum cone, and I will compare them as they are similar. The harmonic distortion profile of the SB15 is essentially just a straight line that increases in the lower frequencies based on increasing excursion alone. It's extremely clean, though I expect the Excel unit to beat it at higher output based on its excellent Klippel results and overall bigger beefier motor. I'm going to measure my W16NX units soon to comapre.

Can you please run some intermodulation distortion tests?

[Bear]

[..]Still the price increase is justified. [..]

So I have in my hands the new W16NX Graphene and SB15NBAC aluminum cone, and I will compare them as they are similar. The harmonic distortion profile of the SB15 is essentially just a straight line that increases in the lower frequencies based on increasing excursion alone. It's extremely clean, though I expect the Excel unit to beat it at higher output based on its excellent Klippel results and overall bigger beefier motor. I'm going to measure my W16NX units soon to comapre. You won't be able to charge $8000 if you make a small monitor using the SB15s though.

Don't think about what you paid for the SB15 as you are conducting the test.

[tktran]

Putting aside retail costs, for the moment, does the W16NX003 or W18EX003 set any new benchmarks for a mid-woofer?

I mean H2 of ~2% and H3 ~1%, @40Hz with a drive level of 4.55V and 5.29 respectively, is this class leading or class beating?
For a 5.5-7" midwoofer?


Vance's standard is
"I set the SPL at 1 m for the (DUT) mounted in free-air using a pink noise stimulus set to 94 dB (my standard for home audio devices), which required x.xx V.
With the microphone placed at 10 cm from the dust cap, the DUT produced the distortion curves shown in...

[Bear]

Putting aside retail costs, for the moment, does the W16NX003 or W18EX003 set any new benchmarks for a mid-woofer?

I mean H2 of ~2% and H3 ~1%, @40Hz with a drive level of 4.55V and 5.29 respectively, is this class leading or class beating?
For a 5.5-7" midwoofer?


Vance's standard is
"I set the SPL at 1 m for the (DUT) mounted in free-air using a pink noise stimulus set to 94 dB (my standard for home audio devices), which required x.xx V.
With the microphone placed at 10 cm from the dust cap, the DUT produced the distortion curves shown in...

https://cdn.xingosoftware.com/audiox...4Midwoofer.png

Based on the 15cm Wavecor just tested, I'd say the answer is not really. Plus, SEAS isn't aiming for improvements in bass, typically, but in the upper midrange/treble. There are better drivers out in the wild for bass (e.g., Anarchy, Wavecor Balanced Drive).

[Oneminde]

https://hificompass.com/en/reviews/purifi-audio-ptt65w04-01a-midwoofer