Woofer-Assisted Wide Band

@erik_squires  i use assistant woofer and also assistant  supertweeter in all my models  bacheaudio to help wide band driver, Adding  subwoofer is not help to cover 150 -350  hz. All wide diver and  some  woofers also got poor ability to reproduce this freg,  I dont  understand  why so many audiophile like full range drivers , No punch, Thin sound

mijostyn4,935 posts08-20-2021 12:47pmMiddle C is 256 Hz. 400 Hz is smack in the middle of the midrange.
What you describe is a two way speaker. The only viable full range speaker that just needs a subwoofer is an ESL.

Mozartfan, I am left speachless.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We could discuss this subject for,,well til the end of time.\
I am aware the commiment audiophiles possess (are possessed) by the woofer/midrange/tweeter,,or really if you look at Troels designs, most are midwoofers + tweeter. 

This concept will not work for my classical music. 
I need rich, complex, details, with a  sensitivity greater than 91db
IMHO woofers should be dedicated to voice the 30hz-say,,,200 hz range, well lets go 300hz. 
Thats it. 
I am not looking for a  ~~midrange~ + woofer combination.
The db sens is too low to do justice to the 300hz-say, 2khz range. 
at 87db-say 90db, Its not ~~quality mids. The driver is attempting to perform 2 tasks, same cycle, bass+ midrange.

Seas and Scann speaks have made some incredible attempts at bridging these 2 feats all into 1 driver.
But when you place a  high quality wide band up next to a midwoofer,,,you will understand, as i understand the issues involved.

Then we have the ~~Midrange~~ tweeter, = midtweet.
Again, nice try, but no cigar.
The tiny 3/4 inch dome tweet is making attempts to voice both mids and highs,,but in the end,,No Cigar.


What everyone should do, is what I did,. 
Start buying wide  bands, take out your tweet, and listen to how the new rick detailed mids come through.

I am not looking for a  wide band to carry anything other thahn say 100hz- 10khz. 
I can find woofers and tweets to  voice the lows/highs.
The W18's will stay to give a  padding to kettle drums,  bouble bass, low cello notes. I have them xossing at 1200ish..??
At 87db, and  near field listening, you really dont get much bang.


Anyway.
I could never go back to midwofers/tweeter things.
That is history.

bache374 posts08-20-2021 3:39pm@erik_squires  i use assistant woofer and also assistant supertweeter in all my models bacheaudio to help wide band driver, Adding subwoofer is not help to cover 150 -350 hz. All wide diver and some woofers also got poor ability to reproduce this freg, I dont understand why so many audiophile like full range drivers , No punch, Thin sound


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have not heard the AER's which from what I;'ve read , are the finest wide bands in production...But wayyyyy out my budget, So I'll never owna  pair.
The Voxativ AC1A's. were a  **dud**. 
No bass, none, nada comming from the super thin papyrus paper cone. 
I wont even go into the midrange and highs comming from that driver.
This design employs a  series of neodymium magnets , like 8, placed along the motor.
Perhaps the origi9nal magnet design is superior,. I have no idea.
I am not interested.
Again at $2300+++ a  pair, I am not  interested.

I've found the DavidLouis  wide band  at very reasonable price and am quite happy what i am hearing
I have another pair arriving next week.
WE will see how that one performa snext to the 6.5 DL wide band.
I am planing to run both, stacked. 
My speaker system will be 
a  pair of 6.5's + 8's + The Thors.
I really believe this will give me a  classical orchestra experience that I've always been looking for.
Its all about experiementation. 
But to answer your Q, sure  the older designs, from Lowther, Fostex, had isssues.
With these DavidLouis, I think some of these issues are dealt with.
The lil 6.5 davidLouis (yellow cone) has OK bass, good clean mids, highs that do not roll off too early= a  success.
As I say I have the bass and highs already covered.

I can see what Wilson was up to in their designs, packing the cabinet with all sorts of drivers. 
Trying to make the thing sound huge dynamic, full bodied, = Best Bang.
Throwing a  bunch of drivers in a  cabinet is risky, somehwere there is going to be distortion, coloration which may result in  listeners fatigue.

I think Erik's OP  offers the best option for acheiving full range/wide band fq's. 
The speaker's main driver is the wide band.
With a  woofer padding the lows, and a  tweet padding the highs.
The main dominate voice is from the wide band at a  true 91+ db sensitivity. 

I am having spectacular results.
AS it is, makes this speaker a  winner.
But  there was   another DL wide band that caught my attention,  and we will see how this driver holds up against the 6.5's. 

Having owned and heard 2 of the worlds finest ever made tweeters
Seas Millennium
Seas Crescendo
and the worlds finest ever made midwoofer
Seas EXCEL W18E001
Based on this experience, I look at tweeters, midwoofers as ~~nothing more~~~ than helpers, supporters, offering augmentation for the wonder-full, incredible, fantastic, stunning ~~wide bands. 
That is to say, non-wide band drivers, really dont interest me in the least.
Thats is to say, I'd never buy a  Wilson, nor a  Vandersteen.
To me ears they all sound the same, fatiguing, when pushed to their limits. 

Listen to female vocals at 
5:45
Your speakers cant do that. Neither Wilsons nor Vandersteens can reproduce vocals as my speaker can

and this is YT compressed,  via your $20 computer speakers!!!!
Sounds exactly like the Seas Millennium's,  and Philips 1980's clear dome tweet, but ona  factor of 10 X's superior. 

Why?
Much higher sensitivity.

5:45

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57JLhOnjqck