2. speakers
  3. 1104133995

Single vs Multiple driver loudspeakers...

What are the pros and cons between Single Driver loudspeakers and multi-driver loudspeakers? The arguments with single driver loudspeakers are that their simplicity makes them easy to drive, plus the x-over-less setup improves dynamics, not to mention no phase problems. The thing I read is that no single driver can possibly produce the full range of sound, and most necessitate a subwoofer. On the other hand, multi-driver loudspeakers can offer a full range, but some say that more than one driver introduces phasing problems to some degree.

I have a multi-driver system that sounds great. How would a single driver setup improve my sound, if at all? And if single drivers are that much of an improvement, why are they harder to find(at least for me)?

I have also read that multi-driver loudspeaker more than often need to be paired with a high wattage amp because of the lower sensitivity, ranging from 89db and less, while single drivers loudspeakers are great for low powered tube amps because of their higher sensitivity.

Most of this, is what I have read, but never really heard.

Can someone educate me?
matchstikman
gmood1
1,251 posts
 
Initial impressions after a couple of hrs of listening to the Omegas. Man these speakers are excellent! They still have plenty of break in left. But the transparency and coherency of these speakers are unmatched by any speaker I have owned! This includes GMA Europas and my Magnepans. They have useable bass down to around 30 hz in my room. It's not an in your face bass. But you know it's there and it doesn't get in the way of the bass plucks or the drums.

The highs seem to have all the air I will ever need. These speakers aren't rolled off in any way.They project a huge sound field in front of you that wraps around the sides. I see why people like these speakers.No crossover sounds like a winner to me. They play at high volumes as well. Some of the negative things I've read are certainly myths. The midrange is going to be hard to embarass in this type of speaker.There's plenty of multi driver loudspeakers with more bass but not always better bass. I can't wait to hear these when they completely break in!
twl
3,251 posts
 
I have single driver speakers(Lowther) and I'm very happy with them. As reported above, the immediacy and transparency are truly amazing, as is the coherency. I don't think that I could easily return to the multi-driver type of speaker, unless it was something very out of the ordinary. This single driver stuff is really addicting, and it's hard to go back to multi driver after experiencing it. Of course, all speaker types have their strong points, and their weaknesses, but the strong points of single drivers are very strong and it makes you tend to not notice much of the weaknesses. It is worth a try to see how they sound.
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
I was curious enough to review the Fostex line of drivers (used in Gmood1's Omegas). They are not all that expensive (at least some of them) and I have been known to buy stuff just to fool around with. I would use models that do not have any whizzer cone. I would rather have response to only 14KHz than a rattle to 20KHz.

Of greatest note is the fact that "XMAX" (the linear range of cone motion) is tiny. One millimeter plus or minus for most models. The 8" driver FF225K (which I would select) is 0.3 mm peak! Now there is nothing wrong with such small motion (my Maggies move about this much) but unless there is a lot of cone area, as with Maggies, you won't get much volume at low frequency. What you do get may be fine, and suitable for some listeners.

Now what would be nice would be a line array of eight or more of these drivers. Alas that would set me back about $760 for one line array. That's a bit much just to play with, so I leave the experiment for someone else to do.
sean
6,231 posts
 
El: You should start studying Walsh "Bending Wave" technology. It doesn't suffer from all of the problems that most conventional dynamic drivers that you have described do. No whizzers yet you can get very reasonable high frequency extension, excellent horizontal dispersion, gobs of surface area for good low frequency extension, etc... Using this approach though, one is still limited in SPL range though.

As to more conventional designs, Nelson Pass' latest DIY speaker effort is published in AudioXpress this month. Making use of a Lowther DX55 in each HUGE and highly technical cabinet, the results are staggeringly non-linear and completely lacking in bass. After applying equalization circuitry and running a completely out of the ordinary amplifier design that is the reverse of what is commonly bought and used, the end response doesn't look bad at all. The fact that it took someone like Nelson Pass, a huge cabinet, custom built electronics and this much work to get the speakers to flatten out says gobs about where this type of driver is at in the grander scheme of things. Sean
>
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Sean...I did learn about the Walsh driver when the original Ohm speakers were introduced, and was very greatly impressed by the sound. I could not afford them then. Their ability to reproduce a squarewave, proven by scope photos, was remarkable, although some have said that a few other speakers can do this (but I never saw their scope photos).

I do have a soft spot for FR speakers, since that's what got me going in Hi Fi. I really wish that I still had that old Wharfedale 8" with cast frame, huge magnet, and floppy flannel cloth surround. I bet it would compete with the best there is today.

As to the N Pass effort...I agree that it seems that a great deal of effort went into making the driver do a task for which it is unsuited. There are forms of music where a little FR driver is ideal. Why not use it for that music, and give it a rest when you want to play a Sousa march?
More to discover