AVS Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi Guys,

I am in the middle of acquiring the parts (I'm from South Africa) one would need to build a DIYSG Fusion 12 Tempest and looking at DIY forums especially I can't help but wonder if I should try and pursue a build with a Tannoy driver, ultimately as I already have some of the parts and some on order I feel I won't go this route but to those who can compare a Tannoy build (one of their +12" dual concentrics) or something similar to a suitable Econwave style speaker like the Tempest how do you think they compare?

I know one's priorities and what you can live with/without determine which is better but I just wanted to get some opinions on how they compare.

Also worth mentioning I've heard neither design (at least not that I remember) so I am just taking a leap of faith on the Tempests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,033 Posts
I've owned all of the classic Tannoy drivers Reds and post and I'd go with my own (not DIYSG) WG design over all of them in a heartbeat. I heard a local design, AE TD15M + QSC WG with Beyma CP380M that sounded remarkably good. It was active though (DCX2496). Not heard most of the DIYSG stuff so no comment on it.

You'll not find a lot of Tannoy experience around here, more with pro coaxes which can either be great or sound like butt. I recently took a punt on some FP coaxes which looked good on paper, but have yet to be measured yet (8HX200, 6HX150).

Coaxes don't tend to pattern control as well for the HF driver and to get rid of any modulation of the HF, you have to ensure the MR cone moves as little as possible which can complicate the design. Add an active 18 below most of the large coaxes and there is an immediate and sometimes dramatic midrange improvement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the response, it is reassuring to hear that a WG design tends to be better. Only going by reputation and drooling over pics of large Tannoy's (which are often styled quite fantastically) I couldn't help but wonder.

"Coaxes don't tend to pattern control as well for the HF driver and to get rid of any modulation of the HF, you have to ensure the MR cone moves as little as possible which can complicate the design. Add an active 18 below most of the large coaxes and there is an immediate and sometimes dramatic midrange improvement."

I guess this is where larger drivers especially in some kind of transmission line cabinet come into play.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,033 Posts
Thanks for the response, it is reassuring to hear that a WG design tends to be better. Only going by reputation and drooling over pics of large Tannoy's (which are often styled quite fantastically) I couldn't help but wonder.
Old Tannoys are a cult.

I guess this is where larger drivers especially in some kind of transmission line cabinet come into play.
Keeping it as a two way by using a TL instead of ported doesn't gain you any benefit. TLs are oversized ported for those with a religious (vs engineering) predisposition against EQ and/or active xovers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Keeping it as a two way by using a TL instead of ported doesn't gain you any benefit. TLs are oversized ported for those with a religious (vs engineering) predisposition against EQ and/or active xovers.
Doesn't a TL gain you efficiency or sensitivity (I know I shouldn't confuse the two but the difference between the two eludes me right now) and consequently lower extension which means the mid-bass driver has to do less to achieve a certain output, which helps with the problem of the cone in that it moves less? Not trying to argue with you, I am just keen to learn.

Not having any first hand experience with a TL type speaker I have found them appealing on paper for the above reasons and was considering them for my upcoming build (the builder is much more competent and experienced than me especially with tapered quarter wave designs), of course at the expense of the cabinet being larger as mentioned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,165 Posts
I would disagree with A9X-308. A TL includes resonant effects caused by the dimensions of a bass reflex enclosure. Many boxes that are commonly modeled as "ported" should really be modeled as a TL to account for that. You can also design an enclosure to use those resonances for tailoring low-end response, which is what most TL designs intend. They don't have to be oversized, per say, but do tend to be long and skinny to get the quarter wave resonances low in frequency. Doesn't really have anything to do with crossovers, and takes more engineering with more complex tools to accomplish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,033 Posts
Doesn't a TL gain you efficiency or sensitivity (I know I shouldn't confuse the two but the difference between the two eludes me right now) and consequently lower extension which means the mid-bass driver has to do less to achieve a certain output, which helps with the problem of the cone in that it moves less? Not trying to argue with you, I am just keen to learn.

Not having any first hand experience with a TL type speaker I have found them appealing on paper for the above reasons and was considering them for my upcoming build (the builder is much more competent and experienced than me especially with tapered quarter wave designs), of course at the expense of the cabinet being larger as mentioned.
Not much it doesn't. I'm talking about using a dedicated driver to remove from 250Hz or so down (below Schroeder in most rooms). A TL might be slightly better around and below tune than a ported, but for the same SPL, excursion requirements increase by 4 per octave, my method removes considerably more excursion from the MR driver than a TL. For example: 40-80Hz, 4x, 80-160Hz, 4x, 160-320Hz, 4x. Total of 64 times. It's not that as the last octave isn't a whole octave and around tune excursions will be different, but my method works significantly better. TL is for hair shirt types that haven't moved to the 21st century. I've tried both, someone else's TL and mine. Mine won. However, go with whatever and enjoy. Berenak's law will always win.

I'm in hospital ATM so unable to do actual sims on this lappie.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,229 Posts
While the old "pepperpot" ones are as described, some of the newer ones with the "Tulip" phase plug design are excellent drivers. IMO the best of them are the 8"-12" poly cone models used in the DMT series studio monitors and 1990s D-series home speakers.

Unless you have a deaf wish or your listening room is a padded cell, bass augmentation is optional with the 12s. The 8's do sound better loud with an 80Hz high pass; limited personal experience with the 10s.

That said, why switch midstream? Build what you've planned, rather than treating what you've acquired as a sunk cost. Only move on if you don't like them or whist want a new project.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Thanks for the input rhodesj!

I'm in hospital ATM so unable to do actual sims on this lappie.
Don't worry about the sims, I would have a hard time wrapping my head around them anyway :)

As you say choose what you enjoy and can live with, all the best with your recovery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
While the old "pepperpot" ones are as described, some of the newer ones with the "Tulip" phase plug design are excellent drivers. IMO the best of them are the 8"-12" poly cone models used in the DMT series studio monitors and 1990s D-series home speakers.

Unless you have a deaf wish or your listening room is a padded cell, bass augmentation is optional with the 12s. The 8's do sound better loud with an 80Hz high pass; limited personal experience with the 10s.

That said, why switch midstream? Build what you've planned, rather than treating what you've acquired as a sunk cost. Only move on if you don't like them or whist want a new project.
Thanks for the info, it's just curiosity (or rather the insanity one picks up while browsing the web and letting the mind wonder) I will still be going ahead with the DIYSG build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,033 Posts
I will still be going ahead with the DIYSG build.
Big tip from an expert at it. Concentrate on one project at a time and try to limit aspects of bench racing to specific technical details so as not to cloud the issue. By all means keep asking questions and learning no matter what your actual current project is. I speak from experience.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top