pink fish media

Go Back   pink fish media > discussion > audio

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 23-04-17, 12:41 AM
amazement amazement is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,140
I tried the concept 20 and found them really very good except on some vocals they displayed a shouty quality and weren't their best when the volume increased, I bought the Harbeth P3's which are a fabulous speaker in every way.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 23-04-17, 12:55 AM
drummerman drummerman is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by amazement View Post
I tried the concept 20 and found them really very good except on some vocals they displayed a shouty quality and weren't their best when the volume increased, I bought the Harbeth P3's which are a fabulous speaker in every way.
Mid/bass cone break up?

You have to wonder what this speaker could do with better drivers and a more elaborate Xover.

Problem is it would loose sensitivity and show room appeal. The kind of amplifiers this speaker is designed for (entry) would probably not cut it anymore. As is it is a clever 'middle of road' concept and why not? Likely to sell in Greater numbers that way.

The Harbeths are lovely, not quite in the same price class though
__________________
Cyrus, Usher, Thorens, CCA, HifimeDIY, Grado, Sennheiser
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 23-04-17, 01:05 AM
PerF PerF is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummerman View Post
The 'baffel' bit might be a little tricky

What I meant to say
Non ported closed cabinet
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 23-04-17, 02:04 AM
finkaudio finkaudio is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by drummerman View Post
Mid/bass cone break up?

You have to wonder what this speaker could do with better drivers and a more elaborate Xover.
...every speaker got break up cones. PP ones even earlier than paper cones. But that's nothing bad, if they are under control. In fact, without the break-up (or modes), no wide bandwidth driver would be possible.

The drivers are not that bad.....bit I agree, it is possible to do better, just not for the same money. I have a pair of Concept 20 in my office here at home and they play on the end of a NAP100 and a Naim 72 preamp. Maybe the speaker I use most all together....tells you how much I have to sit in my office

Best regards

KH
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 23-04-17, 03:24 AM
drummerman drummerman is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 873
I hope to hear a pair sometime.
__________________
Cyrus, Usher, Thorens, CCA, HifimeDIY, Grado, Sennheiser
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 23-04-17, 07:11 AM
finkaudio finkaudio is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerF View Post
Fink would you consider letting your team create a "non plus ultra" monitor, single wire please and infinite baffel.
Sure, if we can find the right compromise.

Woofer could be 8", cabinet volume around 25-30l. Tweeter 28mm.

Now the question is: what bandwidth? This has a significant influence on the final sensitivity (bandwidth against sensitivity against cabinet volume).

Cabinet should not be much bigger....if too big, we are loosing the air stiffness of the cabinet and stick with the suspension only. Making the resonance frequency of the driver too low is also dangerous, as we loose mechanical stability.

A total Q for the box of around 0.6 with a system resonance frequency of 35-40 Hz would be not too bad, but might be not the most sensitive speaker on this planet.

Even so 2-way with 8" are really nice, there is not a lot on the market in closed box. No idea why......maybe the low sensitivity.


Best regards

KH
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 23-04-17, 07:33 AM
PerF PerF is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by finkaudio View Post
Sure, if we can find the right compromise.

Woofer could be 8", cabinet volume around 25-30l. Tweeter 28mm.

Now the question is: what bandwidth? This has a significant influence on the final sensitivity (bandwidth against sensitivity against cabinet volume).

Cabinet should not be much bigger....if too big, we are loosing the air stiffness of the cabinet and stick with the suspension only. Making the resonance frequency of the driver too low is also dangerous, as we loose mechanical stability.

A total Q for the box of around 0.6 with a system resonance frequency of 35-40 Hz would be not too bad, but might be not the most sensitive speaker on this planet.

Even so 2-way with 8" are really nice, there is not a lot on the market in closed box. No idea why......maybe the low sensitivity.


Best regards

KH
Dear KH

Thank you for reflecting over my idea

By your description I am thinking something along the original Heybrook HB1's and maybe a bit smaller size.

My Nsats are working on most Naim amplication so guess their sensitivity could be a pointer, I'm sure the HB1 were quite an easier load, a mega seller back then, still a popular choice.

Looking at the interest for non ported loudspeakers such as Proac Tablette 10 amo, I trust there's a niche for such design priced affordable

Thanks again
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 23-04-17, 11:15 AM
drummerman drummerman is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 873
I believe PJ Comeau did, as part of World Audio Design, pencil some interesting self build speakers a few years ago which featured larger drivers. 8"? They were discussed in length in HifiWorld.

The standmount was based on a classic design, the name of which escapes me. New drivers and revised crossover/cabinets apparently made them superlative. If I remember correctly the top model used a Crescendo Tweeter. I thought it was an IB but might have been aperiodic.

I haven't heard anything about them since.
__________________
Cyrus, Usher, Thorens, CCA, HifimeDIY, Grado, Sennheiser

Last edited by drummerman; 23-04-17 at 11:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 23-04-17, 12:47 PM
JustJohn JustJohn is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,124
A quick update.

I've been paying with the position of the speakers and think I may have hit the sweet spot. With them just short of 30cm from the back wall (plasterboard with a ply covering – don't ask), toed in just so the drivers fire just past my ears, they have snapped into focus. The bass is cleaner, treble crisper, the imaging more vivid. Okay, they're not the last word in transparency, extension at either end, or in finesse, but they seem to put everything together in a completely convincing fashion. For the first time in a while I feel like I'm just listening to integrated pieces of music rather than the parts laid on top of one another.

Still want to try the 3010s though. Or maybe the 3020s for a slightly bigger sound.

Last edited by JustJohn; 23-04-17 at 01:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 23-04-17, 01:18 PM
Rana Rana is online now
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by finkaudio View Post
The Myryad was designed long before the Concept 20....but by the same team

ATB KHF
Thanks for clarifying! The A170 is a brilliant speaker for the mid-lowish volumes I have to listen to.

@ amazement: Agree the little Harbeth went louder, but for my type of listening it was just too dull. Great 3D soundstage though.
__________________
Saturn+Yamaha R-N602+Decware ERR; Caiman+Linx Nebula+EB ER1;MF V90+Myryad A170
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 23-04-17, 08:40 PM
finkaudio finkaudio is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerF View Post
Dear KH

Thank you for reflecting over my idea

By your description I am thinking something along the original Heybrook HB1's and maybe a bit smaller size.

My Nsats are working on most Naim amplication so guess their sensitivity could be a pointer, I'm sure the HB1 were quite an easier load, a mega seller back then, still a popular choice.

Looking at the interest for non ported loudspeakers such as Proac Tablette 10 amo, I trust there's a niche for such design priced affordable

Thanks again
Hi,

the HB1 got around 20l volume - but the system resonance frequency is about 80Hz with a fairly high total Q. Is that good enough?? I can do a quick hack, once I'm in the office to check if I remember correctly, but I would not call it a bass monster . However, the sensitivity is relatively high. BTW, the 90dB they quoted in the manual is only possible on a wall.

Here is a link to a data sheet of the woofer used in HB1:
https://www.lautsprechershop.de/pdf/...m21wg09_08.pdf

This driver is out of production, but I would do a more modern one anyway. In order to get more bottom end out of the cabinet size, one would need more mass and more BL for the driver. Means the coil diameter needs to go up and the magnet should be bigger as well. To balance the heavy coil, a rubber surround would make sense. To reduce distortion and IM, a compensation ring inside the magnet should be used.

ATB KH
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 23-04-17, 11:49 PM
davidsrsb davidsrsb is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 5,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by finkaudio View Post
Woofer could be 8", cabinet volume around 25-30l. Tweeter 28mm.
KH
A less extreme form of the Devore Orangutan then. Stereophile like big driver two ways
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 24-04-17, 11:46 AM
PerF PerF is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 682
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidsrsb View Post
A less extreme form of the Devore Orangutan then.
Maybe something along Snell K / AN-K and early JPW's
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
pink fish media