5-1/4 woofer VS 6-1/4 - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 39Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 76 Old 12-10-2018, 01:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
KEF is a good example of using the 5" UniQ drivers in their Reference and Blade series over the 6.5 version, you'd think in a money is no object design, they would go with the bigger drivers if there were benefits to doing so.
Coaxes are different story as are 3-way designs. But, I really like the Uni-Q. I'm a big fan. Even a 5 inch is a little big to use as a dedicated midwoofer in a 3-way where a 4 inch woofer would be better (for all the reason's you've already mentioned which I absolutely agree with, in general.)

I would not be surprised at all if Kef comes out with a bigger LS50 update in the near future. The number one and two complaints about the LS50 are weak midbass and midrange brightness. A bigger LS50 would fix both of those potentially at the expense of a potentially less smooth power response, of course.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-10-2018 at 02:52 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 76 Old 12-10-2018, 01:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklightning View Post
Yes, you are right 2-way studio monitors used in near-field do better with larger drivers. I guess I'm talking more about 2 channel bookshelf speakers. That is also way I always end saying for center channels I don't know what would be better. I have looking into this and I'm aware of great 8" driver 2-way monitors that are the standard for many but you will not see this for bookshelf speakers in a normal room.
As long as the bass isn't overpowering, they should be fine. If they sound good near-field, they should sound good at a longer distance. The reverse is not true though.

Listening to a PA system in the nearfield would be suicidal, lol. A good center channel should be no different than a good stereo pair. What makes one good, makes the other good as well. Toole will say a speaker in mono is the best way to test a speaker and that's essentially what a center is.

So if you usually prefer the larger center channel, logic and data says you will usually prefer the larger stereo pair.

Also, studio monitors can get away with using an 8 inch because they use active crossovers that can be manipulated much easier and with much more precision. For passive 2-ways, 6-7 inches is the usual upper limit these days.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-10-2018 at 03:07 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #33 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 12:28 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,781
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8768 Post(s)
Liked: 5959
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
In Revel's double blind tests they have a formula where about a 1/3 of the preference is due to bass response, so comparing 2 speakers full range you might prefer the one with deeper bass response, this is why I always compare speakers with a crossover in place around 80-100Hz, because I don't want to be influenced by the bass response. The Polks are probably the weakest of my examples because neither is a very well designed speaker in my opinion but the basic physics still hold true.

Mr Toole's quote on the 2 really sums it up quite well when he said you're basically choosing between timbral neutrality and output. So how loud you listen of course is a determining factor in all of this.
A good article here on why a smaller woofer in a 2 way makes sense, especially when using a sub.

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...-show-and-tell
l0nestar8 likes this.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 01:20 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Blacklightning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton,AB Canada
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 998 Post(s)
Liked: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
As long as the bass isn't overpowering, they should be fine. If they sound good near-field, they should sound good at a longer distance. The reverse is not true though.
The focus of my argument is not bass, it's dispersion


Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Listening to a PA system in the nearfield would be suicidal, lol. A good center channel should be no different than a good stereo pair. What makes one good, makes the other good as well. Toole will say a speaker in mono is the best way to test a speaker and that's essentially what a center is.

So if you usually prefer the larger center channel, logic and data says you will usually prefer the larger stereo pair.
Just turn the PA speaker down...
And yes you are correct, if you like one thing then you should like the other that is the same. I think of my friend that loved his Beats headphones.


Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Also, studio monitors can get away with using an 8 inch because they use active crossovers that can be manipulated much easier and with much more precision. For passive 2-ways, 6-7 inches is the usual upper limit these days.
Again a crossover does nothing for dispersion so using a studio monitor in a large room where you have the room setup to handle the off axis waves will sound "better" with a smaller driver.
But again I don't know how this plays out for centers.
Blacklightning is offline  
post #35 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 01:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
A good article here on why a smaller woofer in a 2 way makes sense, especially when using a sub.

https://www.soundandvision.com/conte...-show-and-tell
According to that article, as long as the crossover is correctly designed, even a 7 inch woofer can be easily integrated with a 1 inch tweeter. The article also fails to even mention the dramatic decrease in distortion/compression and increase in dynamics afforded by the larger woofer.

Anyone who has compared a 5 inch to even a 6 inch speaker can readily hear the differences in the overall size of the "sound." The article also spends a lot time talking about 3 and 4 inch woofers, which I never see anyone seriously tout as being superior to 5 inchers.

A nominal 6.5 inch woofer (frame width) will have a radiating diameter somewhere in the 5 - 5.5 inch range. That's an easy crossover point (~2.5kHz) for any competent tweeter nowadays.

5 inch woofers are great for those with limited space and budget. I have owned many and they can be quite good. A larger woofer (6-7 inches) can offer some very significant advantages in sound quality and *my only point* is that they shouldn't be immediately discounted as being inferior to <5 inch woofers.

I would be totally shocked if the (very, very tiny) increase in far off-axis dispersion would be able to be detected in a double-blind test.

Another thing to consider is that increased dispersion in the upper midrange around a typical crossover point isn't always desired in a highly reflective room. A more limited dispersion pattern can even be a benefit in those situations.

Again, I like and own many 5 inch bookshelves, but they are in no way superior, in every way, to their larger siblings. All things being equal (which they rarely are, of course), I'd wager that many people would prefer the larger presentation and increased dynamics (i.e. lower distortion and compression) of larger speakers even at moderate volumes in moderately-sized rooms with a sub.

That said, I can totally see unique situations where the extra midbass could be detrimental in very small rooms at very close distances. In those rare cases, a smaller bookshelf might indeed work much better. I also recognize that I have preferred smaller versions (Wharfedale 10.1 > 10.2 come to mind) of speakers from the same line, but it's certainly not because of their far off-axis dispersion pattern which is mostly inaudible IRL.

If I'm coming across as hating 5 inch monitors, I don't mean to, as they can offer tremendous value and versatility.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-11-2018 at 01:49 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #36 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 01:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklightning View Post
The focus of my argument is not bass, it's dispersion
I'm not entirely sure what your argument is, but disperson patterns usually only matter in the extremes. The difference between 5 and 6 inches at typical listening angles is almost entirely inaudible since the direct sound will totally dominate the room as Toole himself states.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklightning View Post
Just turn the PA speaker down...
The distance between drivers will be detrimental in the near-field as the drivers won't have the proper distance to integrate their phases. Turning the volume down will do nothing to change the geometry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklightning View Post
And yes you are correct, if you like one thing then you should like the other that is the same. I think of my friend that loved his Beats headphones.
There is no accounting for taste, lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blacklightning View Post
Again a crossover does nothing for dispersion so using a studio monitor in a large room where you have the room setup to handle the off axis waves will sound "better" with a smaller driver.
But again I don't know how this plays out for centers.
This is very wrong. A crossover does a great deal to determine dispersion and lobing patterns. A crossover is extremely important for how a speaker performs off-axis. Waveguides contribute significantly as well. Woofer size if just one of many factors and once you get to and above 8 inches, I agree that no amount of crossover or waveguide manipulation will make much of a difference.

At this point (>8 inch woofers in a 2-way) is where horns come into play to purposefully *decrease* dispersion and lower crossover points. Horns are a different topic entirely, however. See the JBL M2 for more information about how to properly integrate a 15 inch woofer which has a better power response than the 5 inch Revel M105 mentioned as an example, above, despite the three-fold increase in woofer diameter.
Blacklightning likes this.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-11-2018 at 02:31 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #37 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 02:31 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,781
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8768 Post(s)
Liked: 5959
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
According to that article, as long as the crossover is correctly designed, even a 7 inch woofer can be easily integrated with a 1 inch tweeter. The article also fails to even mention the dramatic decrease in distortion/compression and increase in dynamics afforded by the larger woofer.

Anyone who has compared a 5 inch to even a 6 inch speaker can readily hear the differences in the overall size of the "sound." The article also spends a lot time talking about 3 and 4 inch woofers, which I never see anyone seriously tout as being superior to 5 inchers.

A nominal 6.5 inch woofer (frame width) will have a radiating diameter somewhere in the 5 - 5.5 inch range. That's an easy crossover point (~2.5kHz) for any competent tweeter nowadays.

5 inch woofers are great for those with limited space and budget. I have owned many and they can be quite good. A larger woofer (6-7 inches) can offer some very significant advantages in sound quality and *my only point* is that they shouldn't be immediately discounted as being inferior to <5 inch woofers.

I would be totally shocked if the (very, very tiny) increase in far off-axis dispersion would be able to be detected in a double-blind test.

Another thing to consider is that increased dispersion in the upper midrange around a typical crossover point isn't always desired in a highly reflective room. A more limited dispersion pattern can even be a benefit in those situations.

Again, I like and own many 5 inch bookshelves, but they are in no way superior, in every way, to their larger siblings. All things being equal (which they rarely are, of course), I'd wager that many people would prefer the larger presentation and increased dynamics (i.e. lower distortion and compression) of larger speakers even at moderate volumes in moderately-sized rooms with a sub.

That said, I can totally see unique situations where the extra midbass could be detrimental in very small rooms at very close distances. In those rare cases, a smaller bookshelf might indeed work much better. I also recognize that I have preferred smaller versions (Wharfedale 10.1 > 10.2 come to mind) of speakers from the same line, but it's certainly not because of their far off-axis dispersion pattern which is mostly inaudible IRL.

If I'm coming across as hating 5 inch monitors, I don't mean to, as they can offer tremendous value and versatility.
The tower speakers in my main system have 7" woofers, (actually 6" outside surround to outside surround), and in my secondary system 5.25" (so closer to 4.25") and both give great results.

Both 2 ways but for music the smaller bookshelves MUST have subs while the towers do not.

In fact I prefer the towers without a sub for music despite the sub being a first rate 15" sealed servo design.
l0nestar8 likes this.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #38 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 02:38 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
The tower speakers in my main system have 7" woofers, (actually 6" outside surround to outside surround), and in my secondary system 5.25" (so closer to 4.25") and both give great results.

Both 2 ways but for music the smaller bookshelves MUST have subs while the towers do not.

In fact I prefer the towers without a sub for music despite the sub being a first rate 15" sealed servo design.
Yeah that makes a lot of sense to me. Overall design will always be the most important thing to consider.

I certainly can vouch for smaller bookshelves needing a sub many times, even though I don't use one myself in my secondary system. It's not for the lack of wanting though (wife won't allow 2 rooms with subs, haha. I am lucky enough to be allowed one!)

In fact, there are a handful of budget 5 inch bookshelves I'd be okay running without a sub. Namely the old Elac B5 (first gen) and wharfedale 10.1 are pretty satisfactory in that regard out of those I've tried. I also quite like the Kef Q100/Q150 bass although they don't have much punch but do have surprising depth for the size. I've heard LS50's in a store and even they sound pretty "small" to me compared to Kef's own budget offerings.

No, they can't compete with larger ones for pure scale of sound, but they don't *need* a sub the way most mini-monitors almost always do.

Right now I'm playing around with some Klipsch 600Ms and Wharfedale 225's and they really do sound much better balanced, especially in the mids, compared to their smaller versions which I've also heard. The 225's in particular.

Likewise, my old Phil AA's (waiting to upgrade to the AA+'s when they are back in stock, for those curious, and need something to tide me over in the meantime) sound better to me in the midrange than any other speaker at that price point. I don't think a Phil AA with a 5 inch would provide the same satisfaction but that's pure conjecture on my part.

Although, I'm also really liking what I hear from the aforementioned, so far.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-11-2018 at 02:54 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #39 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 02:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
Quote:
There has been a trend of calling any two-way woofer larger than 5 inches "flawed" and that simply is untrue
Like a lot of aspects of speaker design, there's more gray area than black or white. My only issue is with it is when when folks refer to it as a poor or flawed design instead of a design choice with certain trade-offs.

The entire sound quality of a speaker isn't defined by the radiation pattern of the drivers in the crossover region. It's an important consideration, to be sure, but depending on placement and the room, the off-axis response is of lesser concern because on-axis and early reflections dominate. With the right drivers and some extra crossover work, the response can be smoothed out to some degree making it a minor issue.

The upside of the trade-off for a larger woofer, as mentioned, is better bass response. Even set to small with a sub there is more flexibility in setting the system crossover. In some rooms that could be a big deal. Also, and I don't want to overstate the case here, but the larger woofer will be more linear through a wider variety of listening conditions, and be less likely for distortion, including IM distortion, to be noticeable and affect sound quality.

There's been a lot of good, level-headed discussion in this thread with different viewpoints which is what this forum is all about.

So what's the right answer? It depends
zeuspaul, l0nestar8 and Lp85253 like this.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #40 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:00 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,781
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8768 Post(s)
Liked: 5959
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
Yeah that makes a lot of sense to me. Overall design will always be the most important thing to consider.

I certainly can vouch for smaller bookshelves needing a sub many times, even though I don't use one myself in my secondary system. It's not for the lack of wanting though (wife won't allow 2 rooms with subs, haha. I am lucky enough to be allowed one!)

In fact, there are a handful of budget 5 inch bookshelves I'd be okay running without a sub. Namely the old Elac B5 (first gen) and wharfedale 10.1 are pretty satisfactory in that regard out of those I've tried. I also quite like the Kef Q100/Q150 bass although they don't have much punch but do have surprising depth for the size. I've heard LS50's in a store and even they sound pretty "small" to me compared to Kef's own budget offerings.

No, they can't compete with larger ones for pure scale of sound, but they don't *need* a sub the way most mini-monitors almost always do.

Right now I'm playing around with some Klipsch 600Ms and Wharfedale 225's and they really do sound much better balanced, especially in the mids, compared to their smaller versions which I've also heard. The 225's in particular.

Likewise, my old Phil AA's (waiting to upgrade to the AA+'s when they are back in stock, for those curious, and need something to tide me over in the meantime) sound better to me in the midrange than any other speaker at that price point. I don't think a Phil AA with a 5 inch would provide the same satisfaction but that's pure conjecture on my part.

Although, I'm also really liking what I hear from the aforementioned, so far.
My friend runs his Concept 20s full range for music only and despite the 5.25" woofer sound great to my ear.

So, as mentioned, "it depends" on a lot of factors.

My first two sets of speakers, which I dearly loved in the 60s and 70s likely had zero bass extension below 150hz!
l0nestar8 and Lp85253 like this.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #41 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:13 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by gajCA View Post
My friend runs his Concept 20s full range for music only and despite the 5.25" woofer sound great to my ear.

So, as mentioned, "it depends" on a lot of factors.

My first two sets of speakers, which I dearly loved in the 60s and 70s likely had zero bass extension below 150hz!
A lot of companies could learn a thing or two about how to make attractive cabinets at bargain prices from QA. Never heard any, but they sure look nice.

My dad's old Wharfedale W45's were sealed (acoustic suspension, actually) and didn't have much deep bass to speak of either, but man, those things sounded huge and sweet and .... "live" for lack of a better term. This was until the foam and paper rotted, lol.

I still miss them.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #42 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:16 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,781
Mentioned: 221 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8768 Post(s)
Liked: 5959
Quote:
Originally Posted by l0nestar8 View Post
A lot of companies could learn a thing or two about how to make attractive cabinets at bargain prices from QA. Never heard any, but they sure look nice.

My dad's old Wharfedale W45's were sealed (acoustic suspension, actually) and didn't have much deep bass to speak of either, but man, those things sounded huge and sweet and .... "live" for lack of a better term. This was until the foam rotted, lol.

I still miss them.
Same with my old man's Voice of the Theaters the size of desks driven by a massive 30 watt tube amp each side.

I kid you not, in Belgium as a teenager where our house had a wall of glass that opened up, I got a polite "complaint" from a guy living a 1/4 mile away if not further.

Emerson Lake and Palmer!

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is offline  
post #43 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
Quote:
Emerson Lake and Palmer
Oooooooh, what a lucky man, he was.

Sorry, couldn't resist
gajCA, Lp85253, WOKNROX and 1 others like this.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #44 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Blacklightning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton,AB Canada
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 998 Post(s)
Liked: 854
Guess this will be the new thing I learnt today

Thanks for the new info @l0nestar8 , @aarons915 , @gajCA , and @Vergiliusm

It's important to keep an open mind and to take in as much information as you can.
Blacklightning is offline  
post #45 of 76 Old 12-11-2018, 03:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
ratbuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,012
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 751 Post(s)
Liked: 1004
My Paradigm mains have 6.5" drivers, and the 'matching' center has 5.5" drivers, and they blend flawlessly. I think 6.5" in a center channel is fine, but you don't really need that extra extension they offer over 5" class drivers unless you don't have a sub or something.
ratbuddy is offline  
post #46 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 11:32 AM
Advanced Member
 
WOKNROX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: SoCal HiDez
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by dowop View Post
I have owned Klipsch,Paradigm & Polk. The larger speakers always sound better. Are there any 5-1/4 woofer center speakers that would sound as good or better?
I am considering a Emotiva C1. Currently am using a Polk Csi a6, I also have a Csi a4,S30 & S35 & they cannot match the larger Csi a6.
That is why I am concerned about the Emotiva C1. The C2 would not fit.
If you don't mind used.... then you might want to take a look at the Definitive Technology clr2500.
It's a great sounding cc.
WOKNROX is offline  
post #47 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 11:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
WOKNROX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: SoCal HiDez
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
Oooooooh, what a lucky man, he was.

Sorry, couldn't resist
Clever....
WOKNROX is offline  
post #48 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 12:01 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
Another factor for "it depends" that further muddies the water, are the actual drivers themselves. There's a variety of materials, motors, and suspensions that affect design choices and performance of the final product. Not all drivers are created equal or are designed for the same application, and will be subject to similar kinds of trade-offs as the speaker systems.

For example, the speakers I'm currently using for fronts, the Chane A1.4, are a small bookshelf speaker that use a 5.25" woofer and a 1.25" x 2.25" flat panel leaf tweeter. The tweeter is larger and has better power handling than your typical 1" dome tweeter, and the woofer has a motor structure and suspension(cone surround and spider)that has higher output capability(more excursion with less distortion)than your average underhung or overhung 5.25".

If Jon Lane would have used a dome and cone it would have been like a lot of $300ish bookshelves and the quality would have been determined by the other design choices he made. With these particular drivers he was able to use a smaller woofer with the advantages mentioned in this thread, and still get some of the advantages of a 6.5" driver with respect to bass handling.

Granted it is just one aspect(the one we are primarily discussing in this thread),and doesn't speak to the overall sound quality of the speaker, but its an example of how many choices and trade-offs a speaker designer has to consider when building even a basic 2-way bookshelf.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #49 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 12:05 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked: 37
IMO the m105s image way better and sound much more consistent across sitting locations than the m106.

In fact even the m126be which has a 6.5" crossed at 1.7khz does not match the dispersion of the m105.

Theres a reason why DIYers often cross over very low with a large 2 way, with something like a 6.5 or 7" it's not uncommon to see high end diy designs incorporate something like a 1400hz crossover to get a smooth polar response. Of course this requires a tweeter capable of very high power handling. Retail designs have to consider warranty cost (blown tweeters are a common issue) as well as BOM (corporations have to make a profit, whose gonna source $500 tweeters in a retail product?), whereas a diyer basically is only limited by their budget.

Last edited by driedmango; 12-12-2018 at 12:11 PM.
driedmango is online now  
post #50 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 12:24 PM
Senior Member
 
bjaurelio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 268
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 84
There are a lot of factors that affect sound, so as many have said, you cannot automatically declare one speaker better than another based on using 5" or 6" driver on a two-way. If we assume two woofers with the same cone material and same motor, but one is a 5" and the other is a 6" there will be trade-offs to each. The smaller driver is cheaper and provides a smoother power response at the crossover with minimal "mushroom" effect. The 6" will be more expensive due to more material required for a larger cone and provide lower distortion in the 80-300Hz region due to the increased displacement. There are ways to compensate for each of these such as waveguides to better match off-axis response to larger woofers and reduced baffle step on a small driver with close to wall placement for boundary reinforcement.
bjaurelio is offline  
post #51 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 12:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 662 Post(s)
Liked: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by driedmango View Post
IMO the m105s image way better and sound much more consistent across sitting locations than the m106.

In fact even the m126be which has a 6.5" crossed at 1.7khz does not match the dispersion of the m105.

Theres a reason why DIYers often cross over very low with a large 2 way, with something like a 6.5 or 7" it's not uncommon to see high end diy designs incorporate something like a 1400hz crossover. Of course this requires a tweeter capable of very high power handling. Retail designs have to consider warranty cost (blown tweeters are a common issue) as well as BOM (corporations have to make a profit, whose gonna source $500 tweeters in a retail product?), whereas a diyer basically is only limited by their budget.
This was my point initially, driver integration is what separates the good from the great speakers, in my opinion. Imaging is a good way to tell this difference, it's why coaxials and full range drivers image so well. The main reason why I usually choose the smaller midwoofer over larger is because you can always supplement the bass with a subwoofer but you can't get back any holes in the midrange due to reduced dispersion of a larger midwoofer.

If anyone has Toole's latest sound reproduction 3rd edition, on page 174 he talks a bit about loudspeaker directivity, one of the examples is the Rega 3, which is a 2 way design with an 8" woofer, it shows the problems it creates from the uneven off-axis drop of the woofer.

I am kind of surprised more of the mainstream companies don't make any 2-ways with a tweeter that can cross down lower than 1500Hz or so, because then we could get the higher output and deeper extension of a larger woofer and not lose any of the midrange, maybe it is just a cost issue though.
aarons915 is offline  
post #52 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 01:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
Quote:
If anyone has Toole's latest sound reproduction 3rd edition, on page 174 he talks a bit about loudspeaker directivity, one of the examples is the Rega 3, which is a 2 way design with an 8" woofer, it shows the problems it creates from the uneven off-axis drop of the woofer.
I haven't got there yet; I'm still on Chapter 1. An 8" is really pushing it without some kind of modification like a waveguide. I think most of us in this thread are referring to a 6.5" max. I have seen some 7 inchers out there, from Paradigm, I think, but even that is pushing it, imo.

Driedmango's point about DIY is well taken and the flexibility is one big advantage. There doesn't seem to be a plethora of tweeters that can get crossed below 2k in a more traditional design, so some DIY'ers go a different route like some of those kits at DIY Sound Group that use 8, 10, and 12" woofers with compression drivers and huge waveguides. They are getting sensitivities in the high 90s. For mass producers, I think it does come down to cost, as you suggested.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan

Last edited by Vergiliusm; 12-12-2018 at 01:53 PM.
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #53 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 02:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
aarons915's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,041
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 662 Post(s)
Liked: 598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
I haven't got there yet; I'm still on Chapter 1. An 8" is really pushing it without some kind of modification like a waveguide. I think most of us in this thread are referring to a 6.5" max. I have seen some 7 inchers out there, from Paradigm, I think, but even that is pushing it, imo.
I agree, it is pushing it but even in the case of a 6.5 vs 5.25 in the M106 vs M105 case, there is evidence of a directivity mismatch between the woofer and tweeter and that is with a waveguide.
aarons915 is offline  
post #54 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 04:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
Vergiliusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Land of Enchantment
Posts: 630
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 234 Post(s)
Liked: 448
Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but there's nothing in those graphs that give me pause about the M106s. I haven't heard them side by side and compared them, but I remember Rex Anderson, who has compared them and sells them addressed it. I tried to find the quote, but from what I remember, he said most of his customers preferred the M106.

I really don't disagree with anything you've said. It's rather a difference in the emphasis placed on that one factor is where we slightly diverge.

And that's OK.
l0nestar8 likes this.

"Rock and roll is alive and alright" Sloan
Vergiliusm is offline  
post #55 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 04:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Blacklightning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton,AB Canada
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 998 Post(s)
Liked: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but there's nothing in those graphs that give me pause about the M106s. I haven't heard them side by side and compared them, but I remember Rex Anderson, who has compared them and sells them addressed it. I tried to find the quote, but from what I remember, he said most of his customers preferred the M106.

I really don't disagree with anything you've said. It's rather a difference in the emphasis placed on that one factor is where we slightly diverge.

And that's OK.
This reminds me of the Elac Debut models. Andrew Jones designed the B5 first and made the B6 after because that is what bigger companies do. At launch Andrew had access to both but he picked the B5 for every demo he did and the B5 is what he had at home. He is even quoted saying buy the B5 in almost every case even larger rooms. The B6 was a little more expensive so in people’s minds “better”. Since both versions are cheap the B6 out sold the B5 (the better speaker). Now with version 2 the B6.2 is the one Elac is pushing. I see this as Elac giving people what they want. Andrew was so against doing a front port for the Debut model but I guess too many people complained that they could not put a great speaker inside a cabinet so the new version is now front ported.

So what is better does not matter if the masses do not want it.
aarons915 likes this.
Blacklightning is offline  
post #56 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 04:50 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
zieglj01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 18,235
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2997 Post(s)
Liked: 2904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
There's been a lot of good, level-headed discussion in this thread with different viewpoints which is what this forum is all about.

So what's the right answer? It depends
Bingo!
l0nestar8 likes this.

----------------
Who AM I
zieglj01 is offline  
post #57 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 07:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
I agree, it is pushing it but even in the case of a 6.5 vs 5.25 in the M106 vs M105 case, there is evidence of a directivity mismatch between the woofer and tweeter and that is with a waveguide.
This is a good debate and I hope my tone isn't combative to anyone.

I do agree that the M105 is smoother far off-axis than the M106. The graphs make that obvious. The importance of that smoothness, I'm willing to say is up for debate. Although, I will personally side with Toole in thinking it's a minimal concern at best.

However, this thread is again turning into a Revel thread for some reason. Comparing Revel against itself is pointless. Other brands make 6 inch 2-ways that perform better off-axis than the M106. Look at the Focal Aria 906. It's the same exact size and yet has no mushroom cloud despite being half as expensive.

The Revel M106 is not the epitome of what can be accomplished with a 6.5 inch 2-way and many speakers beat it in that one area (Focal, Kef, et al.)

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-12-2018 at 07:21 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #58 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 07:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vergiliusm View Post
I haven't got there yet; I'm still on Chapter 1. An 8" is really pushing it without some kind of modification like a waveguide. I think most of us in this thread are referring to a 6.5" max. I have seen some 7 inchers out there, from Paradigm, I think, but even that is pushing it, imo.
I will also concede that a passive 8 inch 2-way is a little beyond the scope of this discussion. That's a rather extreme case.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #59 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 07:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by aarons915 View Post
I am kind of surprised more of the mainstream companies don't make any 2-ways with a tweeter that can cross down lower than 1500Hz or so, because then we could get the higher output and deeper extension of a larger woofer and not lose any of the midrange, maybe it is just a cost issue though.
Things seem to be changing slowly.

Every speaker in the budget Klipsch RP-series crossover at 1500Hz. They took all the modern DIY concepts into consideration with their new lines with their waveguide and crossovers. They have no directivity mismatch whatsoever even in their 6.5 inch passive monitor and very likely outperform even Revel off-axis.

Just FYI...

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-12-2018 at 07:22 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
post #60 of 76 Old 12-12-2018, 07:18 PM
Advanced Member
 
l0nestar8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 957
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 588 Post(s)
Liked: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by driedmango View Post
IMO the m105s image way better and sound much more consistent across sitting locations than the m106.
A better comparison would be the M105 against a competitor's 6.5 inch, don't you think? Maybe Revel botched the M106 since many other brands offer better off-axis dispersion at cheaper price points. I'm joking, of course, about the botched part. But you get the idea.

The Revels I'm sure sound amazing and they measure fantastic. But this really isn't a "Revel M105 vs M106 proves the theory" thread since that's rather myopic when better examples of 6.5 inch driver integration can be easily found.

Last edited by l0nestar8; 12-12-2018 at 07:25 PM.
l0nestar8 is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Speakers

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off