2. speakers
  3. 138577-1235

What you can say about lowbass and midbass perfomance for high end loudspeakers ?

i listen Egglestonworks Viginty  and find out the play increadable bass performance , especially punch bass
The company claim the two 10" woofer working as  passive sub with cross point 100Hz, and 2  6" midwoofer is
responsible for midbass get very good punch bass,  They say to produce good bass the need to split bass, becouse  
low base woofers get big moving mass cone , and work poor for punch work (too heavy )  Do anybody agree?
But this issue can be find in big speakers with 10"-12"woofer, For small floorstander is not applicable
128x128bache
12 responses Add your response
shadorne's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
shadorne
7,477 posts
 
The design looks excellent. The crossover at 2 KHz means the mid range will be excellent and the off on and off axis response looks excellent because of this.

Not sure why they inverted the polarity in the ULF. I find this can create a disconnect between bass and mid range (our hearing is phase sensitive especially to 180 degrees changes in those lower frequencies as any one with a subwoofer can attest to and why all subwoofers have a polarity switch - there are also science papers proving this).

Looks like the transmission line bass has the Achilles heal of most TL designs - it is letting far too much higher frequencies get out - this will reduce mid range clarity.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/egglestonworks-viginti-loudspeaker-measurements

I agree with the philosophy - a large 12 or 15” woofer is only useable to a max of 500Hz. JBL large woofers (with the folded cones) go to 700 or 900 but they would break up in a controlled manner. I like Eggleston’s crossover points - they are close to where physics says they should be for optimal driver performance.
erik_squires
16,041 posts
 
The idea of small woofers being "faster" is a myth.

What happens is more complicated and involves room acoustics as well.

Having said that, there are many speakers with dual 6" to 10" woofers which perform very very well in a room. See my threads on 2.5 way speakers.

IOW, I agree with the approach, but the explanation is an urban legend which hides a series of more complicated issues. 

Best,

E
twoleftears's avatar
twoleftears
5,318 posts
 
Designers started moving aggressively towards multiple smaller diameter woofers driven largely by a desire to make enclosures narrower, a desire driven in turn by a desire to make speakers more self-effacing in domestic rooms.  The faster small woofer idea is an ex post facto "justification" for a trend/change driven by other considerations, of a less purely acoustic nature.
bache's avatar
bache OP
520 posts
 
But smaller diameter woofers never get bottom low base compare to
big 10-12woofers., the reason a lot a top end designers still make
loudspeakers with big size woofers
twoleftears's avatar
twoleftears
5,318 posts
 
Yes!  A number of designers still using 10-12 inchers; Daedalus, for example, that was using 8", just came out with a couple of models using 10".
bache's avatar
bache OP
520 posts
 
Actually more important the cone moving mass , in pro line the using 
big size cone  like Eminence Omega Pro 15A  15" driver with 94 gram.
Some 8" woofer is using in High End get same cone weight. This is 
reason we always like good punch in club , in Pro audio. Nobody
care about listen double bass . I  think is the reason why a huge
amount of folk like Tektone. the using 10" Pro line drivers with low
moving mass and get good punch

audiokinesis
2,736 posts
 

@bache wrote:

"Actually more important the cone moving mass , in pro line the using
big size cone like Eminence Omega Pro 15A 15" driver with 94 gram."

The Omega Pro 15A is an excellent woofer, and as you point out its moving mass is not very high.

I’d like to use this woofer as an example to illustrate something about good prosound woofers that most audiophiles are unaware of.

Everybody knows that big cones are slow, right? Well in some cases that’s true, but not in this one. The specifics matter.

The Omega Pro 15A is arguably faster than a good 5" midwoofer, like the ScanSpeak Revelator! I’m not talking about top end extension - I’m talking about raw power-to-weight ratio ("weight" in this case being the moving mass of the cone).

We can use the formula BL^2/Re to see how much force a woofer’s motor applies to the cone for a given power input.

And we can divide that by the moving mass to get the power-to-weight ratio.

If we make this calculation, we find that the Omega Pro 15A’s power-to-weight ratio is about 30% higher than that of the 5" ScanSpeak revelator!

But that’s not the end of the story.

The Omega 15A also moves almost SEVEN TIMES as much air as the little ScanSpeak. This translates into about 16 dB more displacement-limited headroom (each doubling of displacement = +6 dB).

So the next time someone says that XYZ speaker can’t possibly be "fast" because it uses a big prosound woofer, don’t be so sure. That big prosound woofer may actually have a better power-to-weight ratio than the cute little midwoofer in your favorite mini-monitor.

Duke

prosound woofer advocate

bache's avatar
bache OP
520 posts
 
I agree,,  except one thing, like i say before,  To get  low  bass like 
30 -40 Hz using Omega Pro 15" woofer you need box very  big 5-6 
Cubic Feet . You can listen nice bass with smaller enclosure , but
never get really low bass 
prof
3,471 posts
 
erik,

IOW, I agree with the approach, but the explanation is an urban legend which hides a series of more complicated issues.


Wait! Are you saying the explanations audiophiles often believe on intuition are often inaccurate?

Say it ain't so ;-)
audiokinesis
2,736 posts
 

@bache wrote: "I agree,, except one thing, like i say before, To get low bass like 30 -40 Hz using Omega Pro 15" woofer you need box very big 5-6 Cubic Feet . You can listen nice bass with smaller enclosure , but never get really low bass."

Very true!! High efficiency + deep bass = HUGE box!

In my opinion one possible solution is to design the system with subwoofers in mind from the outset. Only about one cubic foot would be needed for the Omega 15 (and a protective high-pass filter would be optional unless you want to go north of about 118 dB). You could then tailor your subwoofer purchase to your budget and room and SPL needs.

Duke

bache's avatar
bache OP
520 posts
 
I start  my discussion with my feedback Egglestone work.
They do split bass job and achieve nice midbass -punch bass. 
Low bass also very good except one small issue. not enough control
bass is boomy in low octave . Why ?  My explanation is - they use
110 Hz  crossover point, to get this , they need to use a very huge
 coil  about 15 mh.  or more .  this coil get big resistance 0.5-0.8 ohm
100 times more them expensive speakers wire. The active low woofer
Module (subwoofer) is the good idea, But some company in marketing
purposes don t want to do this.
phusis's avatar
phusis
1,196 posts
 
In accordance to the above would like add my preference for pro-type woofers. Some designs like tapped horns require of the moving mass not to be too low, yet at the same time have a demand for very high motor force. My main speakers use a 15" "old-school" driver in a folded horn with a cone mass of just over 70 grams and relatively small voice coil of 2," whereas my upcoming pair of tapped horns will use a 15" B&C driver (15TBX100) each with a 4" voice coil and mms and BL factor of just over 160 grams and 25.5 Txm respectively. The force multiplier of the B&C unit in such a tapped horn is about ~2.2, but in actual performance sits near 4. They take up space, admittedly - about 20 cubic feet per cabinet.. 
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
Wilson Benesch Endeavor
80x80
Kharma Elegance dB9-S
80x80
Infinity Intermezzo Intermezzo 4.1t