# BG Neo 8 vs. BG Neo 8 PDR -to have or not to have better horiz. dispersion



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

I am aware of the differences in output and qualities between the two. The question here is more about vehicle acoustics and horizontal dispersion than the actual specifications. 

In one corner we have the Neo 8 -more dynamic (not only more sensitive, but also with better power handling)

In the second corner we have the Neo 8 PDR - less dynamic but with improved dispersion at tweeter frequencies. 

Mounted in kicks which is better? Are you better off with extended off axis response or a more narrow dispersion pattern. Having recently looked at horns and their advertised improved imaging due to a narrow dispersion pattern I can't quite understand why we should go for PDR technology or for shorter ribbon elements like the LCY.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Any general preferences for dispersion patterns?


----------



## Oliver (Jun 25, 2007)

I vote for improved dispersion!


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

I dont understand the difference between the neo 8 and the neo 8 PDr, can someone go into further in depth on it for me please 


side note: i might be planning to buy these and put them in my Apillars, pretty much off-axis. These ID horns are not working out for me at the moment, so i am contemplating my options out there. 

edit: did some more readin the pdr version is more suited for a mobile use due to the better dispersion pattern. I was looking at the neo 3 at first but I looked into the 8 because it can play 1k lower than the neo 3. I want it to play lower so i can use a more stout mid. the neo 8 pdr says it can play down to 700 but i figured 1k should be a good starting point. I will not be having a tweeter to assist this.


Is there a cheaper place than Parts Express?
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=264-713


----------



## bass_lover1 (Dec 10, 2005)

I have the Neo3 (non-pdr), and I can say that the off axis response is pretty horrid IMO, at least compared to the LPG 26NAs that they replaced.

I have both aimed directly at the driver's seat in my Passat, the stage width and depth is amazing and it's pretty well centered. For ****s and giggles I decide to see what it sounded like sitting in the passenger seat, and I can tell you that it was sub-par to say the least. But then again, it doesn't bother me because I don't sit in that seat.

Also I couldn't find anywhere that sells them other than PE.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

maybe i will find a way to make them on axis. but you said you werent using the pdr versions so that _kinda_ explains why. but i dont think the pdr will make a night and day difference.


----------



## dbiegel (Oct 15, 2006)

I am selling a set of slightly used, like new Neo8-PDR's for cheap if anyone is interested. See my FS thread or just PM me.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

ygpm man


----------



## DonovanM (Nov 1, 2006)

I wouldn't have backed myself into such a corner in the first place by being so attached to a specific driver. Either way you slice it you're deciding between two very important factors in designing an audio system.

You've been told this before, and hopefully someday it will stick - you're using too many of the wrong drivers to pursue some twisted notion of good sound you have ingrained in your head. Simplify, and you won't have to make the huge number of compromises you are now.

I'm not saying my stereo is better than yours in any way - just trying to provide a reference. I have 6 total drivers I'll be using - you have what, a dozen? Twice that many, without even using rear fill or a center channel. 2 subs, 2 mids, 2 highs. _Simple._


----------



## Soundsaround (Apr 22, 2006)

Megalomaniac said:


> I dont understand the difference between the neo 8 and the neo 8 PDr, can someone go into further in depth on it for me please
> 
> 
> side note: i might be planning to buy these and put them in my Apillars, pretty much off-axis. These ID horns are not working out for me at the moment, so i am contemplating my options out there.
> ...


I found that without an enclosure, the Neo8 was pretty good to about 750hz, but 900/1k was best. Mine are crossed at 1k, a-pillar cross-firing.
If your going to run these without a tweet, your going to need a decent eq. The bump at 12k is very nasty sounding, and in my opinion renders these unusable if not dealt with. Above that, they're not as airy as the Neo3.
The PDR does clearly sound brighter, and on the a-pillar, I found that made tuning a little trickier. Add in more window reflections from the wider dispersion, and your going to need some patience getting them aimed and eq'd properly. Small changes in their aiming makes surprisingly big changes in their sound.
These drivers aren't for the "instant results" type.
I really think the Neo8 is best when paired with the Neo3PDR or other airy tweet. They sound awesome when you get it right.


----------



## Soundsaround (Apr 22, 2006)

DonovanM said:


> you're using too many of the wrong drivers to pursue some twisted notion of good sound you have ingrained in your head. Simplify, and you won't have to make the huge number of compromises you are now._Simple._


For most folks I think your right. 
But the whole fun in this hobby to me and a lot of the other obsessed guys here is in the challenges of using unconventional drivers in such a hostile environment.
I dread the day that I'm 100% happy and have no more tuning/fiddling to do. Plus, it's so satisfying to get great results when the odds are against you.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

DonovanM said:


> I wouldn't have backed myself into such a corner in the first place by being so attached to a specific driver. Either way you slice it you're deciding between two very important factors in designing an audio system.
> 
> You've been told this before, and hopefully someday it will stick - you're using too many of the wrong drivers to pursue some twisted notion of good sound you have ingrained in your head. Simplify, and you won't have to make the huge number of compromises you are now.
> 
> I'm not saying my stereo is better than yours in any way - just trying to provide a reference. I have 6 total drivers I'll be using - you have what, a dozen? Twice that many, without even using rear fill or a center channel. 2 subs, 2 mids, 2 highs. _Simple._


Very interesting. This debate wasn't about using multiple drivers. Actually I am very happy with my 5 way stage. I have tried numerous 2ways and 3 ways and none satisfy like my new setup. 

The only one pursuing a twisted notion of good sound is you. I have bought a whole variety of drivers, tested almost any location in my car and based on objective and subjective references I've decided on this 5 way. Nobody is holding a gun to my head to keep this setup. What makes you think it doesn't work?


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Soundsaround said:


> I found that without an enclosure, the Neo8 was pretty good to about 750hz, but 900/1k was best. Mine are crossed at 1k, a-pillar cross-firing.
> If your going to run these without a tweet, your going to need a decent eq. The bump at 12k is very nasty sounding, and in my opinion renders these unusable if not dealt with. Above that, they're not as airy as the Neo3.
> The PDR does clearly sound brighter, and on the a-pillar, I found that made tuning a little trickier. Add in more window reflections from the wider dispersion, and your going to need some patience getting them aimed and eq'd properly. Small changes in their aiming makes surprisingly big changes in their sound.
> These drivers aren't for the "instant results" type.
> I really think the Neo8 is best when paired with the Neo3PDR or other airy tweet. They sound awesome when you get it right.


thank you. so your suggestiong would be to try to get them on axis as much as possible so i dont have to tinker with the eq _as much_


edit: side note, do you have a picture of yours installed?


----------



## Soundsaround (Apr 22, 2006)

Megalomaniac said:


> thank you. so your suggestiong would be to try to get them on axis as much as possible so i dont have to tinker with the eq _as much_
> edit: side note, do you have a picture of yours installed?


Not necessarily, but the more I angled them towards the windshield, the uglier it got in my car. I wanted the 1-5k range out of my face, which is why I added these mids in the first place, so I found a happy medium-
Mids cross firing, so about 90degrees off axis. The Neo3s are more on axis but tilted down on the driver's side to reduce side bias.
I need to take some new pictures.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

I played with them some more today after I read this thread, listen to them bells, they sound very real in the car, camera doesnt do justice but whatever. 






Then I turned them sideways and really found their sweetspot in my car, strange enough huh. lol. staging was soo much better and tonally better, it got of the separation I was having(before i could hear left and right but nothing in between).











these are the pdr w/ backcup version btw


----------



## pwnt by pat (Mar 13, 2006)

If the drivers are on-axis then you don't have to worry about dispersion patterns. 

I would bet the reason they responded better sideways was because you get fewer reflections off of the a-pillar (and possibly side windows) by limiting dispersion, and more proper loading to the windshield, using it as a proper wave-guide. I believe the phrase is reducing acoustical impedance mismatch.


----------



## pwnt by pat (Mar 13, 2006)

diyma auto-dupe


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

pwnt by pat said:


> If the drivers are on-axis then you don't have to worry about dispersion patterns.
> 
> I would bet the reason they responded better sideways was because you get fewer reflections off of the a-pillar (and possibly side windows) by limiting dispersion, and more proper loading to the windshield, using it as a proper wave-guide. I believe the phrase is reducing acoustical impedance mismatch.


yea I think it was less reflections on the sides but used the dash as a wave guide which helped imo


----------



## npdang (Jul 29, 2005)

It really depends on the listening space and personal preferences. In very general terms, I find that a narrow dispersion sounds "shut in", too "in your face", and lacking in top end air. However, controlled dispersion generally (and especially in a car) can sound significantly more focused in terms of imaging.

If the LCY's are on the table though, I think the short ribbons with better vertical dispersion are the way to go.


----------



## Babs (Jul 6, 2007)

ok I've done a little snooping but what do these things (either Neo 3 or 8) need behind them as far as an enclosure?? Do they require a fairly sophisticated chamber behind them? I did searchy but no findy.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Babs said:


> ok I've done a little snooping but what do these things (either Neo 3 or 8) need behind them as far as an enclosure?? Do they require a fairly sophisticated chamber behind them? I did searchy but no findy.


the neo3 have a version with the backcups. the other version just needs a dipole


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

Babs said:


> ok I've done a little snooping but what do these things (either Neo 3 or 8) need behind them as far as an enclosure?? Do they require a fairly sophisticated chamber behind them? I did searchy but no findy.


I used an electrical pendant box as an enclosure for my Neo 8. lined with polyfill to about 1/2 inch below the Neo. So that was about 3 1/2 inches deep. It really helped the driver get into the 600-700 hertz range.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

npdang said:


> It really depends on the listening space and personal preferences. In very general terms, I find that a narrow dispersion sounds "shut in", too "in your face", and lacking in top end air. However, controlled dispersion generally (and especially in a car) can sound significantly more focused in terms of imaging.
> 
> If the LCY's are on the table though, I think the short ribbons with better vertical dispersion are the way to go.


I switched to the non PDR version lately and have gotten better results, but that's simply due to dynamics. I LP them at 4khz so I don't really used them as a tweeter. The Lcy takes over from there.

It's an interesting topic I think. I've been thinking of getting the ring radiator as a tweeter next, I think it's limited dispersion might actually pay off in a pillar mount where there can be a lot of early reflections. I just hope I can get them flat to 20khz at the listening position. 



Babs said:


> ok I've done a little snooping but what do these things (either Neo 3 or 8) need behind them as far as an enclosure?? Do they require a fairly sophisticated chamber behind them? I did searchy but no findy.


They work well dipole in a HT setup due to lack of restrictions on the back but that's not doable in a car. You would need the proper rear delay and our dash is a mess. I used them sealed, probably with a very high Q since my enclosure is only 1 inch deep. I forget what BG recommended, I think it was 3 inches to get them down low.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Megalomaniac said:


> I played with them some more today after I read this thread, listen to them bells, they sound very real in the car, camera doesnt do justice but whatever.
> 
> 
> Then I turned them sideways and really found their sweetspot in my car, strange enough huh. lol. staging was soo much better and tonally better, it got of the separation I was having(before i could hear left and right but nothing in between).
> ...


Noice, now get them glassed!


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

Yea not happening. Theses things suck for mobile use. I cant imagine glassing them, too big and every time I turn/move/shift my head the sound changes drastically. I wont allow that kind of behavior in my car.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

Megalomaniac said:


> Yea not happening. Theses things suck for mobile use. I cant imagine glassing them, too big and every time I turn/move/shift my head the sound changes drastically. I wont allow that kind of behavior in my car.


Are you referring to the 3's or 8's?

I have to admit that right now they are mounted in the factory locations in the dash (neo 3's). They sound best facing me out of the dash. I had hope that in dash mounting, I would be able to with the help of T/A, I would get around the shortcomings of the speaker.And it was a fail. i do like the sound of the 3's and yes there is a lack of upper end "airiness" and shimmer. right now I will live with it myself. I also noticed the change in staging with head movement.

Still I like them better than most of the domes I have listened to. I don't have any ribbons so no experience to draw from.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Megalomaniac said:


> Yea not happening. Theses things suck for mobile use. I cant imagine glassing them, too big and every time I turn/move/shift my head the sound changes drastically. I wont allow that kind of behavior in my car.


Yep, even on axis I tested my friends' neo 3 and they start a smooth rolloff very early at like 6-8000hz and then a sharp drop at 12000hz. It's not the best dispersion driver.



cubdenno said:


> Are you referring to the 3's or 8's?
> 
> I have to admit that right now they are mounted in the factory locations in the dash (neo 3's). They sound best facing me out of the dash. I had hope that in dash mounting, I would be able to with the help of T/A, I would get around the shortcomings of the speaker.And it was a fail. i do like the sound of the 3's and yes there is a lack of upper end "airiness" and shimmer. right now I will live with it myself. I also noticed the change in staging with head movement.
> 
> Still I like them better than most of the domes I have listened to. I don't have any ribbons so no experience to draw from.


I also like the sound of them a lot, it's very low distortion and soft on your ears. I don't know if I could live with the limited dispersion of the 3 which is why I always used ribbons for that task but the 8 served me very well.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

i will have to look at the lcy ribbon. I love the 8's. they are such a fragile thing though. They really make a difference min my set up.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

There are two ribbons I know of that have good dispersion characteristics to be used as a tweeter/supertweeter: the Raal and the LCY. The first uses foam inserts, similar to the PDR versions of BG and the LCY uses a split small lenght foil. Don't expect them to be as soft as the BG planars.


----------



## Megalomaniac (Feb 12, 2007)

cubdenno said:


> Are you referring to the 3's or 8's?
> 
> I have to admit that right now they are mounted in the factory locations in the dash (neo 3's). They sound best facing me out of the dash. I had hope that in dash mounting, I would be able to with the help of T/A, I would get around the shortcomings of the speaker.And it was a fail. i do like the sound of the 3's and yes there is a lack of upper end "airiness" and shimmer. right now I will live with it myself. I also noticed the change in staging with head movement.
> 
> Still I like them better than most of the domes I have listened to. I don't have any ribbons so no experience to draw from.


its the Neo3 PDRs.

Airiness seems to be there, but the shimmer is not as edgy as I would like them to be. I dont want "Focal" edgy either. However if there is a way I could get them to disperse wider without having trying pull some PLD out of my ass I would use them. :laugh:


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

I'm surprised more people don't try these:










The Tech Zone Monsoon MM-700 PC Speaker Review

They're designed by Bruce Thigpen, same guy that sells this:

HTGuide Forum - Hold on to your hats people, the Thigpen Rotary Subwoofer!

I was there for the demo, have some pics around somewhere.

Nonetheless, they're the best cheap full range planars I've heard. I'm not about to give up on my waveguides, but the Monsoons are amazing for the money. I paid $60 for mine. I ditched the sub, and used the planar satellites with a Jamo HTIB. Sounds a lot better than the satellites that the Jamo came with.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

Oh and one other thing -

Why are people putting the BG planars in a box?

That's just odd. Planars should be run dipole. It's six db more efficient than monopole, sounds more natural, takes up less space...

I can't think of a single good reason to run them monopole, unless you absolutely need to play them low.

And in that case you should just run conventional speakers, they have more xmax.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Patrick Bateman said:


> Oh and one other thing -
> 
> Why are people putting the BG planars in a box?
> 
> ...


What happens to that rear wave that you are not controlling?


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

I did try them out of a box. My Neo 8's are the non PDR version. granted they do not play low at all. The reflections were counter productive to what I was trying to achieve sound quality-wise. I thought they sounded pretty good down in the 800 hertz range.

I have said it before on some forum, I love the snap that snares have with the planars. it does the most realistic reproduction I have heard of the snare.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> What happens to that rear wave that you are not controlling?


The rear wave will increase the overall efficiency by a lot - SIX db if you use a carefully designed baffle. There's also a big fat null to the left and the right, which reduces reflections off the side of the car, and widens the sound stage in the process.

Seriously, go try it, dipoles sound wonderful.

If I wasn't running waveguides I'd be running dipoles. Oh wait, I *am* running dipoles, until my waveguides are finished 

This link has gone around a bit, but in case anyone hasn't seen it...

Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Patrick Bateman said:


> The rear wave will increase the overall efficiency by a lot - SIX db if you use a carefully designed baffle. There's also a big fat null to the left and the right, which reduces reflections off the side of the car, and widens the sound stage in the process.
> 
> Seriously, go try it, dipoles sound wonderful.
> 
> ...


With vacuum theory...sure. In the close to vacuum environment -HT-...sure, I've heard a few and they sound impressive. In a car, not so much. I originally played with the Neo 8 in dipole, that includes kicks, upper door location, even a-pillar. I've had these for years. It's a mess with open back to say the least, early reflections, diffuse soundstage, and very wild FR. I'm sure some frequencies are amplified in this arrangement but it's not worth it.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Yeah when I had my Neo3s...dipole was not the way to go. I did prefer the Neo3s to the PDR counterparts though. Wasn't a bad little speaker, especially for the money. But was it a real ***** to get it sounding right. I had it right once, and never could duplicate it.


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

After reading this topic, I am considering "trying", just to see how it sounds, running my diamond dome tweets around 8000 and up or so. I will play around with the crossover points. One of the things that I don't like about the neo 3's is that cymbals do not sound "metallic" enough. really the only thing I don't like about them that bothers me fairly continually when I listen. mainly because I listen to rock predominately. 

Any advice? Insight?


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> With vacuum theory...sure. In the close to vacuum environment -HT-...sure, I've heard a few and they sound impressive. In a car, not so much. I originally played with the Neo 8 in dipole, that includes kicks, upper door location, even a-pillar. I've had these for years. It's a mess with open back to say the least, early reflections, diffuse soundstage, and very wild FR. I'm sure some frequencies are amplified in this arrangement but it's not worth it.


What was the crossover frequency and slope?

If you're going to go dipole, you want the lower limit to be equal to the baffle width.

For example, if you have the planars in an 8" wide baffle, you'd want the lower crossover frequency to be be 1688hz. (speed of sound / baffle width.)

With no baffle, cross them over at 3500hz, etc...

Done properly, you get a nice "figure eight" polar pattern, minimizing reflections to the left and to the right. I wouldn't put any speaker near the windshield that didn't have some kind of a waveguide, so putting dipoles near the dash or the A-Pillars is a no-no.

But down low, in the kick panels? I've had great success with them.

U-Frames work pretty nice too. I did some U-Frame midranges using Audax woofers. It's basically a dipole that wraps around, like a very short transmission line. The same formulas apply there; you're lower limit will be dictated by your crossover frequency, and it's going to be a lot higher than where you would cross a monopole over.

If you couldn't tell, I spend a lot of time obsessing over polar response:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diy-mobile-audio/60146-creating-perfect-soundstage.html


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

cubdenno said:


> After reading this topic, I am considering "trying", just to see how it sounds, running my diamond dome tweets around 8000 and up or so. I will play around with the crossover points. One of the things that I don't like about the neo 3's is that cymbals do not sound "metallic" enough. really the only thing I don't like about them that bothers me fairly continually when I listen. mainly because I listen to rock predominately.
> 
> Any advice? Insight?


I actually love the fact that they are on the neutral side of things, not many speakers are like that. Even the best metal speakers, which imo are the Seas Lotus rf25 discontinued tweeters and the magnesium drivers still have a very cold and shrill presentation. If you like that then the change to a metal dome will be a good change. 



Patrick Bateman said:


> What was the crossover frequency and slope?
> 
> If you're going to go dipole, you want the lower limit to be equal to the baffle width.
> 
> ...


I know, I've been responding in that thread. :laugh:

The answer here is an obvious one, everyone that has used a Neo 8 used it to cross lower than a standard tweeter. Why else would we bother with a cumbersome large planar? I'm actually probably the only one that has used it primarily 1000hz and up, most users go down to at least 800hz. 

I'm not sure exactly how you got it to work. You used it from 4000hz up, with an 8 inch baffle? That still doesn't explain what happens to the rear wave. Why didn't u use the Neo 3?


----------



## cubdenno (Nov 10, 2007)

sorry I wasn't clear earlier, the diamond audio tweets are soft domes. I was just hoping they would add what I feel is missing from the planar. Of course I could try eq. Anyway, it won't happen soon. To many other projects on my plate.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Sep 11, 2006)

cvjoint said:


> The answer here is an obvious one, everyone that has used a Neo 8 used it to cross lower than a standard tweeter. Why else would we bother with a cumbersome large planar? I'm actually probably the only one that has used it primarily 1000hz and up, most users go down to at least 800hz.
> 
> I'm not sure exactly how you got it to work. You used it from 4000hz up, with an 8 inch baffle? That still doesn't explain what happens to the rear wave. Why didn't u use the Neo 3?


As I see it, the only way to get good imaging is to control directivity. Especially in the car.

So why did I use a cumbersome large planar?

To control directivity.

It's one of the few speakers that size that can play that high. And to control directivty, you must use large speakers. Small speakers always have wide directivity, due to their size.


----------



## cvjoint (Mar 10, 2006)

Patrick Bateman said:


> As I see it, the only way to get good imaging is to control directivity. Especially in the car.
> 
> So why did I use a cumbersome large planar?
> 
> ...


Great! I finally get to the meat of the debate. U see there are just as many if not more users advocating for a wider dispersion pattern in the car. 

There are two schools of thought form what I can tell:
*Wide dispersion*
Benefits:
-large sweet spot, stage does not move as much with body/head position
-extended FR off axis as well as on axis (very likely)
Drawbacks:
-early reflections

*Restricted directivity:*
Benefits:
-prevent early reflections if used properly
-controlled directivity - such as the waveguide ideas you have - better off axis behavior?
Drawbacks:
-wild FR behavior
-limited FR extension - Neo 8 case
-limited stage sweet spot without a waveguide/baffle work

Now you seem to be one of the few that are interested in this subject so I'm going to try to poke holes in your theory if I may.
How do you intend to implement a waveguide/baffle to work down to 200hz with a reasonably flat FR?
Why not use more drivers rather than waveguides? Several 2 inch drivers, or increasing the channel distribution, such as 5-way will give you very good off axis response for each individual driver. In the small speaker case FR is not the problem, output is so you can triple or double the drivers. In the second case a 7 inch midrange can be crossed at 1000hz with no odd behavior, a 2 inch driver can take over up to 4khz with virtually no beaming and then you can terminate in a 3/4 tweeter which will easily give you 16000hz without odd off axis behavior. Sure it would take space but so do the waveguides.


----------



## p928gts1 (Oct 5, 2009)

Pat did you use planars or ribbons in your car?


----------

