Looking for new woofer: tweeter/woofer blending - brands and cone types
|
New member Username: Mvw2Post Number: 1 Registered: May-06 | I post I came across got me interested in thinking about woofer and tweeter blending, not only by usable frequency ranges but also by cone material type. I currently have the Phoenix Gold Ti Elite 6.5 component set, minus the tweeter, via Phoenix Gold Direct on Ebay. I've had this for around a half year. I initially ran a pair of Morel TW-1(from their Pulse set) with the woofer via a suggestion for a set of tweeters that would match well and were laid back as I'd like. I recently swapped them for a set of Scanspeak 2904/6000 tweeters(Alpine F#1 variant) to gain a more robust low end that could match the strong upper midrange of the Elite woofers. This actually worked out pretty well, although I lost some top end shine which I slightly worry about. I may run a secondary metal tweeter just to fill top end...not sure, but that's another story. While the PG Elite woofers(Morel) are lively and detailed, they aren't exactly to my liking. Being a guy who likes a warmer, richer tone, these are quite different than what I'm used to. They are amazing in their own right, but I have been considering swapping them out for something different for some time. My choice for a new woofer would be a Seas variant, CA/L/P18RNX. From the post I came across, there was mention of blending via cone material. One cone type was suited over another for reasons of tonal/sound qualities. This got me concerned over which cone type I should consider. I know the paper cone will sound the most natural and play the highest(not really an issue with the Scan tweeters). The Aluminum and Poly cone both provide better bottom end, the poly apparently winning out via Zaphaudio's speaker comparison. I assume the aluminum would offer a sharper feel as I think it would be a little stiffer, and I'm away of the cone break-up at higher frequencies(again not worried with the Scans and switch over to active) So, my question to you guys... Which cone material would blend best with my Scan tweeter and would provide the most similar flavor of sound? I would have assumed the paper would be the best choice if midbass wasn't an absolute concern, but I'm no longer certain, lol. Some audio specs: Car- 2002 Subaru Forester HU - JVC KD-AR8500 Front Speakers - PG Ti Elite Woofer, Scan D2904/6000 tweeter, PG Ti Elite passive xover Rear - NA Sub - TC Sounds TC2+ 12" DVC Front amp - Cadence Z4000 bridged at 300w rms x 2 @ 4 ohms Sub amp - Cadence Z1000 at 300w @ 2 ohms Front tweeter/woofer xover - 3kHz at -24dB/oct via passive xover Front woofer/sub xover - 100Hz at -18dB/oct. / 80Hz at -18dB/oct. HU woofer/tweeter xover capability - variable 1.6kHz on up, -6,-12,-18dB/oct slopes I've run active in the past, but the low frequency limit of the TW-1 tweeter basically kept me at around the 3kHz passive point, so there was no gain. As well, the Elite woofers like lots of power, so 75w rms isn't really enough, should be better for the Seas(not sure about 8ohm output). As well, I initially got the Ti Elites as they seemed to be the best shallow mount option available for a SQ oriented system, a mear 2.2". My Forester has a hard time fitting anything larger than 2.8" without fabrication, was looking at 2.5" or less for ease. However, I do plan to do some custom speaker mounting and depth should no longer be an issue, even with the +3" deep Seas. I am also open to other speaker suggestions, although I will state I am budget oriented. I know Dayton is good for bang for the buck. I'm looking at Seas as they are pretty much considered the best. $60-$70 a woofer isn't too bad either. However, I'm open other other brands like Peerless, Scanspeaker, Vifa, and others. My goal is a more natural, warmer sound as well as improved midbass authority. I still want SQ, so detail, clarity, transparity is desired. Ok, I think I've typed enough, lol |
|
Gold Member Username: Dustin3Tigard, Or U.S. Post Number: 1348 Registered: Oct-05 | its too late for me to read this. tomorow, lol |
|
New member Username: Mvw2Post Number: 2 Registered: May-06 | Haha. I'll wait, don't want to strain ya too much before bed. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassCork, Cork Ireland Post Number: 214 Registered: May-06 | Matt, Great thread. Yes Dayton is prob your best bet for the money: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-372 Go with the 2904/6000 recommended x-over point at 2700hz, play with different slopes. The passive x-over at 3000hz with 24db slope is too sharp I think. 6 or 12db slope would be better. 2904/6000 is a very nice driver, I was actually considering it and listened to it at partsexpress shop. But at the end I went with Hybrid Ovations  I wanted to stay passive Your amps could be better. Cadence don't bring out all the detail, but budget is budget For $60-$70 per woofer, you will not get anything better than Dayton. They should sound better than the Ti's. You could also look at Iridium mids, I think they sound very natural and your ScanSpeak tweet is prob better than the DLS tweet. I don't think you should get an extra metal tweets. Top end is not the thing they bring out, for example MBQ QTD tweets were OK (to me), but they were too agressive in about 2500 - 3500hz area. Morel MT22 tweeter opens up better highs than MBQ QTD. Another thing with metal tweets is that they will not hide anything, so a very good amp is needed (I tried my QTD's with PPI Art and Zapco C2K). Anyway, now I am a soft dome fan BUT I would love to try 2904/7000 just to see what it's all about. You should consider getting a new amp for your mids and highs. Please let us know how it sounds after you get it done |
|
New member Username: Mvw2Post Number: 3 Registered: May-06 | I've heard comments about the 2904/7000, some like, some don't. Hop over on www.diymobileaudio.com for some comments on them and others. The Iridiums are just Morel woofers again, so I'd assume a very similar sound as I have with my Morel based PGs. With the Seas being $60-$70 per on www.madisound.com, I think they are a great option. If I wanted to save some cash, yes, the Dayton Reference is a great bang for the buck option too. I'll need to relook at some test data/reviews to see if there are any issues with either. They are both well loved, so I can't really see going wrong with either. As far as tweets, I'd only accent the top end, so a small metal would purely run maybe 10 or 12k on up. I'm just kind of passively thinking about this as an option for top end. Although I am quite happy with the Scans, I do know what I gave up from the TW-1s in top end definition, even though those were just silks too. The cymbals and similar sounds really do lack in the Scans. I'd say faint is a very good word to decribe their reproduction with the 2904/6000s. So far, I like the Scans enough to not desire yet another new tweeter set. I'd assume the xover point would be a good bit lower with the Scans, given their very low Fs. I should have no problem running them sub 2kHz, maybe as low as 1.5kHz. If I can squeeze it, I may even consider an 8" woofer, but that may be pushing it given the size constraints of the door and the desire not to do any major hacking. I'm just not sure if I'd want to put that much duty on the tweeters alone. I may have to go round 2 with active and see what these new tweeters can really do before I can deside if I'd want to match that low. I know the Elite mids sound a lot more natural below 2kHz and the liveliness disappears. It's probably why Morel crosses all their higher end sets so low. Unlike my TW-1, this one should have no problem playing that low. Back to the original intent of the post, my main concern was the issue of cone material type and blending. I was considering the CA18RNX, but would that not blend well with a warm, full-bodied silk tweeter? Would one of the others blend better? |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics