# Dan Wiggins 2" Widebander



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

First off, let me thank Dan Wiggins for sending me some demo's to play with. I'm not sure how I got lucky that he decided to send them to me when all I did was try to get more information about them. Thanks Dan.

Here was the small clip of information he stated about them:



> I will say that I did a 2" widerange driver that was +/- 2.5 dB from 100 Hz to 20 kHz, 25mm VC for 20W power handling, 4mm of one way XBL goodness, and measured THD+N below 2% at 92 dB SPL from 100 Hz and up (below 1% above 500 Hz). It's being used in a VOIP conferencing phone, so low THD is critical (echo cancellers hate THD+N), and there is 100% screening of all speakers so I've got historical data on a few tens of thousands... It's used in a 100cc sealed enclosure.


It's quite impressive for a 2" driver. Here is a picture of some of the samples he sent me. There is a Tang Band W2-852 for comparison on the left, the other three are his. It's a paper cone, rubber surround, stamped steel frame with a foam gasket attached to the mounting side and a Neo Magnet motor.










Ok first, it has the excursion to dig pretty low for a 2" driver, but don't expect lots of output in general from it. You can't have high excursion low end output, AND efficiency. Hoffman's Iron law.

It's pretty good sounding on vocals, which makes sense considering it's use is for VOIP. It loses higher midrange/lower high frequency response so you would need a tweeter. The problem would be that the tweeter will much more sensitive so consider using these in arrays.

It doesn't get very loud in comparison to the Tang Band and has a more mellow laidback characteristic. It does have a ton more output below 250Hz than the Tang band so it might mate well with a midass better, but again efficiency issues will arise.

my measurement system is not calibrated and the mic is not calibrated so take my measurements as a guideline and not absolute. I did my best to give you guys a decent measurement. I used a 2L test box (way too big considering it requires a 0.1L enclosure), but the baffle was small. It was done in my office as closest to middle of the room as I could get it. The mic was placed at about 0.5m away to try to avoid getting room measurements in it as well. Behringer ECM8000 mic and a mobile pre for hardware. Arta Swept sine measurements used.

Here you go IGNORE THE VALUE OF DB, SYSTEM IS NOT CALIBRATED-FOR REF ONLY: 










The midrange hump might be from my baffle (but keep in mind Dan's comments) and the high end peak in the upper end not sure what that might be from. Probably cone/surround breakup modes? My best guess is that MY frequency response measurements is somewhat off due to less than ideal testing/enclosure conditions.


----------



## Hispls (Mar 12, 2008)

Would be perfect for a surround center channel, where can I get a couple?


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

China. Get out your charge card because you would have to buy in bulk quantities of 1000. They are not available for the DIY world at the moment. Maybe Dan should see if PE, Creative Sound Solutions, or madisound wants to pick up the tab and sell them to the public/DIY'ers.


----------



## Hispls (Mar 12, 2008)

durwood said:


> China. Get out your charge card because you would have to buy in bulk quantities of 1000. They are not available for the DIY world at the moment. Maybe Dan should see if PE, Creative Sound Solutions, or madisound wants to pick up the tab and sell them to the public/DIY'ers.



Well that was a tease.... 

How much do you want for 2 of the ones in the picture? Would the Tang Band serve about the same job for center channel?


----------



## rsvchad (May 28, 2007)

Any comparison to the Peerless 2"? I've been toying with an array of two on each a-pillar.


----------

