# "Wideband" drivers and you - A discussion



## Frank Drebin (May 30, 2011)

Taking the discussion of wideband drivers from my build thread and hopefully continuing it on over here, where it could be easier to find in a simple search.

Some points of discussion:


Wideband drivers, noteably the Audible Physics XR3M/AR3K being used in MS8 systems without tweeters
Wideband drivers being used as mid/tweeter in high quality (car) audio systems

I'm very very new to car audio, and have very limited listening time on my speakers, but am curious to hear the varying opinions on the subject of these drivers.

Do you/would you use them? Are they junk? Are they great standalone speakers? Are they great speakers that need a tweeter?

Thanks!


----------



## myhikingboots (Oct 28, 2010)

I would also like input on other so called widebanders. A complete list would be nice. Thanks!


----------



## mtnbkr (Sep 21, 2011)

:snacks:


----------



## fish (Jun 30, 2007)

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...3560-audible-physics-ar3k.html?highlight=ar3k

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...r3k-vs-tangband-w3-1878-a.html?highlight=ar3k

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...sics-xr3m-le-ar3k-drivers.html?highlight=ar3k

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ysics-ar3k-initial-review.html?highlight=ar3k

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...udible-physics-xr3m-le.html?highlight=audible

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...-xr3m-wideband-drivers.html?highlight=audible

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...uo-initial-impressions.html?highlight=audible


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

The systems I've heard with widebanders were all missing that sparkle that the tweeter gives. Some did very well and sounded fine but there was just something missing in all of them. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that many people don't hear past 12-14khz so maybe they don't miss that sparkle of the tweeter.


----------



## audioanamoly (Oct 19, 2011)

mtnbkr said:


> :snacks:


LOL..X2


----------



## bmiller1 (Mar 7, 2010)

Well, I've read most the links posted by fish and I will read the rest. I guess my (certainly simplistic) question is: Will the full range play as well as dedicated tweeters in the upper end? I've read things about full ranges becoming weak around 10K. Will a good mid bass and a full range provide the same dynamics as a good 2-way comp set? I understand the AP stuff is the cream of the crop but what about the full range drivers that are more reasonably priced? Thanks for the input and thanks for starting this thread, Mr. Nielson.

Edit: BuickGN, you posted while I was typing so, sorry to repeat questions and whatnot.


----------



## myhikingboots (Oct 28, 2010)

BuickGN said:


> I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that many people don't hear past 12-14khz so maybe they don't miss that sparkle of the tweeter.


Hey I one of those people. Damn I hate that!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Will a full range driver play treble as well as tweeters?

Maybe directly on axis and if they are small...like 2"ers. the little Jordan and Aura 2s are pretty nice up there...they would be the only ones I would use without tweeters anywhere past 10 degrees off axis. And there is nothing you can do to "fix" the off axis HF drop in speakers. EQing it back flat isn't the same.

The thing about dynamics is these little full range speakers are pretty inefficient...like around 80 dB.


----------



## BuickGN (May 29, 2009)

bmiller1 said:


> Well, I've read most the links posted by fish and I will read the rest. I guess my (certainly simplistic) question is: Will the full range play as well as dedicated tweeters in the upper end? I've read things about full ranges becoming weak around 10K. Will a good mid bass and a full range provide the same dynamics as a good 2-way comp set? I understand the AP stuff is the cream of the crop but what about the full range drivers that are more reasonably priced? Thanks for the input and thanks for starting this thread, Mr. Nielson.
> 
> Edit: BuickGN, you posted while I was typing so, sorry to repeat questions and whatnot.


I've never owned a wideband setup so I'm the wrong person to ask. From my limited listening experience I would say you lose that top, top end. I'm sure a lot of it can depend on how on axis they are as well. So maybe I should say *in the setups I've heard* you lose that top end sparkle.


----------



## bmiller1 (Mar 7, 2010)

thehatedguy and BuickGN, thanks. That kind of solved a little debate I had going on in my head. There was a test on here for freqs you can hear and I'm coming in at about 13k. With something that sketchy at 10 deg. off axis, it's probably not for me.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

thehatedguy said:


> Will a full range driver play treble as well as tweeters?
> 
> Maybe directly on axis and if they are small...like 2"ers. the little Jordan and Aura 2s are pretty nice up there...they would be the only ones I would use without tweeters anywhere past 10 degrees off axis. And there is nothing you can do to "fix" the off axis HF drop in speakers. EQing it back flat isn't the same.
> 
> The thing about dynamics is these little full range speakers are pretty inefficient...like around 80 dB.



Pretty much in full agreeance.


----------



## Frank Drebin (May 30, 2011)

What kind of scenario would you use a 2" driver? Seems to be the worst of both worlds?


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I have ran the Aura 2s in my car without tweeters and with tweeters. And they are very very nice little drivers. They did treble pretty well. I just wanted more efficient speakers. Linkwitz uses them in one of his speakers if that says something about how good they are. And they are pretty cheap new if you wanted to play around with them...I would just to see what the whole wide band thing is about. You might find yourself liking them a lot and willing to trade some HF extension for a very smooth power response.

And the Jordans...Jordan is doing the damn thing right. That little JX-6 sounds so much bigger than it actually is. Little fragile and you need a real enclosure for them since they (like the Aura) have no spider in the suspension.

There are other wideband drivers on the market that are supposed to be excellent like the Mark Audio drivers, but I have not heard those. But they are probably too big to put them where you would want them to go.

Like I said, give the Aura Whispers a try...give them 800-1k and up. The enclosures can be pretty much as large as what would hold the speaker. And they are small enough they can go where you would normally put your tweeters.



bmiller1 said:


> thehatedguy and BuickGN, thanks. That kind of solved a little debate I had going on in my head. There was a test on here for freqs you can hear and I'm coming in at about 13k. With something that sketchy at 10 deg. off axis, it's probably not for me.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Upper midrange/treble. Though some can play pretty low.

IMO it's the best size in terms of compromises in wideband drivers for use in the car.



Frank Drebin said:


> What kind of scenario would you use a 2" driver? Seems to be the worst of both worlds?


----------



## Ultimateherts (Nov 13, 2006)

Here's my take on the subject as I have run Mark Audio Alpair 5g widebanders. When I ran them I tried to keep them as on axis as I could. I had them in their own enclosures (you can see my build log for the look of the enclosures) and to me they sounded great. I could play them down to around 200hz and the top end was fine to me after eqing them some. 

I orginally came from H-audio ribbon tweeters so that was certainly a change. I always liked my tweeters more laid back so if you like that kind of sound then you should be fine. 

However, there are many people on here that like their tweeters more foward and loud... It's all up to how you like it to sound though!


----------



## mtnbkr (Sep 21, 2011)

I have a set of XR Duos due to arrive sometime soon I hope. Can anyone tell me the difference between the XRs and the ARs? Just a real quick "in a nutshell" kinda explanation would be much appreciated.

Thanks.


----------



## bmiller1 (Mar 7, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> I have ran the Aura 2s in my car without tweeters and with tweeters. And they are very very nice little drivers. They did treble pretty well. I just wanted more efficient speakers. Linkwitz uses them in one of his speakers if that says something about how good they are. And they are pretty cheap new if you wanted to play around with them...I would just to see what the whole wide band thing is about. You might find yourself liking them a lot and willing to trade some HF extension for a very smooth power response.
> 
> And the Jordans...Jordan is doing the damn thing right. That little JX-6 sounds so much bigger than it actually is. Little fragile and you need a real enclosure for them since they (like the Aura) have no spider in the suspension.
> 
> ...


Thanks man. That does give me a few options to mess around with. When you speak about efficiency, what power were you running with them? And, I have looked at the Jordans and they seem well-respected but, are they really a better option than good 2-way comps? I stay interested in the wide banders because I'm a mid bass guy and having a dedicated mid bass intrigues me. But, the loss of 10k+ is not an acceptable casualty. If you put in the same money/time into a midbass/fullrange, can it hang with a 2 way?


----------



## 60ndown (Feb 8, 2007)

i like a well designed/behaved full range/wide band driver 

it takes all the guesswork and signal degradation (x-overs) out of the equation.

2 drivers and a sub gets you great sound.


----------



## finbar (Feb 1, 2009)

thehatedguy said:


> And there is nothing you can do to "fix" the off axis HF drop in speakers.


Would beaming help with early reflections?


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

^ that's a tradeoff. some like the notion of great polars while some like using a driver even above the point where it becomes directional. I think this is something that really needs to be considered when planning the system. There are tradeoffs, indeed.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

My Auras were each on a channel of a JL Audio 600/4.


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

BuickGN said:


> *The systems I've heard with widebanders were all missing that sparkle that the tweeter gives.* Some did very well and sounded fine but there was just something missing in all of them. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that many people don't hear past 12-14khz so maybe they don't miss that sparkle of the tweeter.


Heck, even Mark says it: 
http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/1303673-post40.html 

Kelvin


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

Frank Drebin said:


> What kind of scenario would you use a 2" driver? Seems to be the worst of both worlds?


You can use it if you can control the axis of the driver (eg. A-pillar) and using a bigger driver than a 1" tweeter in order to control the dispersion helping in minimizing early reflections... 

2 ways of setting a good soundstage: 
Controlling dispersion (horns are good for that) or as Andy calls it: "spread the chaos". 

Kelvin


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

bmiller1 said:


> thehatedguy and BuickGN, thanks. That kind of solved a little debate I had going on in my head. There was a test on here for freqs you can hear and I'm coming in at about 13k. With something that sketchy at 10 deg. off axis, it's probably not for me.


If you tested yourself online are you sure your speakers actually produced the tones? Most PC speakers are widebanders....


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

I had the pleasure of hearing the BeWith demo car at Car and Sound in Germany a couple of years back-they use a 2 or 3" wideband, with a non-concentric cone to throw sound away from windows etc, and the system sparkled with detail and is definitely amongst the best I've heard-though it was £30K + install, so it bloody well should be!

BEWITH�@Speaker�@A-50Ⅱ

One caveat: I much prefer a smooth system, bright and forward tweeters I find painful! Had I stumbled on this site before buying all mykit I would be experimenting with the widebanders...


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

Great thread!


----------



## bmiller1 (Mar 7, 2010)

The Baron Groog said:


> If you tested yourself online are you sure your speakers actually produced the tones? Most PC speakers are widebanders....


Fair enough. I didn't consider that. 

I've been a drummer and avid concert goer all my life with a particular disdain for ear plugs so, I was pretty happy I heard above 10.


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

bmiller1 said:


> Fair enough. I didn't consider that.
> 
> I've been a drummer and avid concert goer all my life with a particular disdain for ear plugs so, I was pretty happy I heard above 10.


lol, if I'd known you were a drummer I'd not have needed to ask the question I've been the sole car audio nut amongst friends for years and used to run a very bass heavy system-still was the only one who'd hear phones ringing out of the room-abuse doesn't defo mean you've issues, try a proper test!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Bewith is some seriously nice stuff. Expensive as all hell, but nice.


----------



## Frank Drebin (May 30, 2011)

Reading the reviews (again, I think I've read them all at least a couple times before) on the AR3K and XR3M a member commented how he liked how the highs sounded "thicker". This is a perfect way of describing how the highs on my XR3M's sound, I actually can't think of any other way to describe it.

I've found running these firing up into the dash, I have to boost on the MS8 eq quite a bit over 8-10k to get it to how I like the highs to sound. I know that boosting the eq is a fix, not a solution, so I've decided to add tweeters in the A pillars as close as I can to the wideband drivers. I ran briefly with the XR3Ms and tweeters taking over at 7khz (as a 3 way front stage on the MS8)and the difference was definitely not a night and day type of thing, but it did sound a little more sparkly and "airy", if I even know what airy sounds like.


----------



## The Baron Groog (Mar 15, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> Bewith is some seriously nice stuff. Expensive as all hell, but nice.


Yup, I near shat when I saw the pricelist, must dig it out. 5speakers, 5mono amps, an SD card reader and processor for £30K and you still need to install it!


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> Bewith is some seriously nice stuff. Expensive as all hell, but nice.


On the Aura's you mentioned, you were running two per channel correct? Two for center, left, and right and each "array" was bridged off a channel on the 600/4? If so, with a doubling of the driver, how much was the output improved? Since they are playing "mono" information per output, I would think the gain would be around 6db which would give them output that's nearly the same as many of the popular 3-4" widebanders but with better top-end response.


----------



## metanium (Feb 2, 2007)

I am currently running widebanders in the dash loactions of my Tundra. I have Fontek FR-88k playing 250Hz and up. They're paired with Seas 7's in the doors at 80-250Hz. Previously I had the TB ceramics in place of the Founteks. I can honestly say I'm much happier with the widebanders than tweeters. I'm sure some of it has to do with reflections off the windshield, but I also believe getting my door-to-dash x-over point down to 250Hz from 2.5kHz has helped the soundstage tremendously.

The Founteks and Seas are both 8 ohm drivers, seeing a whopping 37.5Wrms from the front 4 channels of a XD700/5. I am about to up the ante on the widebanders during the next couple of weeks. I purchased a pair of Dayton PS-180-8's to replace the Seas and Founteks. These will allow me to bridge the front 4 channels into 200Wrms per driver. I'm also going to lose my fiberglass virginity and put these on-axis in kicks. Pray for me.


----------



## mtnbkr (Sep 21, 2011)

Frank Drebin said:


> I've found running these firing up into the dash, I have to boost on the MS8 eq quite a bit over 8-10k to get it to how I like the highs to sound. I know that boosting the eq is a fix, not a solution, so I've decided to add tweeters in the A pillars as close as I can to the wideband drivers.


What's the downside to eq'ing it?


----------



## Frank Drebin (May 30, 2011)

mtnbkr said:


> What's the downside to eq'ing it?


You are exposing my ignorance, and "parrot talk" of what I've heard or read on here before.

A little help here? Someone who actually knows what they are talking about?


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

Frank Drebin said:


> You are exposing my ignorance, and "parrot talk" of what I've heard or read on here before.
> 
> A little help here? Someone who actually knows what they are talking about?


This may be parrot talk as well but...

I believe when you boost EQ you run the risk of clipping your signal at those frequencies, assuming your running your gains at max and set them properly. Also if your already using a driver at the extreme end of it's range and ask a bit more from it at those frequencies by boosting EQ, distortion increases. A simple fact about speakers is if they move they distort, so the more you can get out of them with less linear motion the higher quality the sound will be. Not really sure if and how that applies to driver in the upper frequencies ranges where excursion is tiny if not negligible. Now someone smarter than me can chime in....


----------



## quietfly (Mar 23, 2011)

So if you run Widebanders in passband configuration, say from 65 to 6500 and run tweets from there you should in theory pick back up the "sparkle" and move the xover point to a place where it does "less" damage ( ala 6.5k @ 24db is less harsh to the soundstage)
does that make sense?


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

quietfly said:


> So if you run Widebanders in passband configuration, say from 65 to 6500 and run tweets from there you should in theory pick back up the "sparkle" and move the xover point to a place where it does "less" damage ( ala 6.5k @ 24db is less harsh to the soundstage)
> does that make sense?


May I ask what "widebanders" you are using that run down to 65hz? I know there are larger "fullrange" drivers out there, but this thread was created more around 2-4" speakers playing from 250-700hz and up.

Knowing this will also help with advice on your question. I would say if you're using a 7-8" fullrange driver, it will be beaming beyond 1.5khz (or so), and therefore crossing anywhere over that point will likely need to be on-axis or have the speaker cleverly located so the primary reflection is on-axis.

Just my .02 without having any idea what speaker you're thinking of using from 65-6500hz.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Dispersion...it can't be EQed back in.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

thehatedguy said:


> Dispersion...it can't be EQed back in.


This ^^ is the reason for fruitless boosting on the top end. The comments Fricasseekid made are true too.

Did you see my questions on the NS2's by chance? Also, are you still running them or did you go to something else (it's hard to tell from your comments on the Jordans).


----------



## quietfly (Mar 23, 2011)

pionkej said:


> May I ask what "widebanders" you are using that run down to 65hz? I know there are larger "fullrange" drivers out there, but this thread was created more around 2-4" speakers playing from 250-700hz and up.
> 
> Knowing this will also help with advice on your question. I would say if you're using a 7-8" fullrange driver, it will be beaming beyond 1.5khz (or so), and therefore crossing anywhere over that point will likely need to be on-axis or have the speaker cleverly located so the primary reflection is on-axis.
> 
> Just my .02 without having any idea what speaker you're thinking of using from 65-6500hz.


Hat L6SE's supposed to be some of the best of the best widebanders....
Actually if your thinking of 4" class speakers the L4SE's are suppose to be golden to about 14k every set up i've heard with them has been pretty much money....


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

Here's a question: What about cone material? Wouldn't a smaller widebander, 2" or so, with a metal cone have a bit more "sparkle" than a widebander made of different materials? 

Maybe one could even take the leap and say that a small format wide bander with a metal cone could be just as bright as a tweeter made from some softer textile materials? 

I have little experience in this arena, but am I on to something here?


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

quietfly said:


> Hat L6SE's supposed to be some of the best of the best widebanders....
> Actually if your thinking of 4" class speakers the L4SE's are suppose to be golden to about 14k every set up i've heard with them has been pretty much money....


Best of the best? I think "intelligently designed" is more accurate since they still beam...just like ANY speaker. The L6SE's have a rising response starting around 2khz up to around 8khz. This is so they can be mounted around 30degrees off-axis (likely in the kicks), and have a nice flat response up to around 6khz. They can also be installed on-axis and the rising response can be EQ'ed down to flat. IF you do that, you could probably cross at 4khz to a tweeter OR let them roll-off naturally and have the tweeter take over around your 6.5khz point (you don't really want a 6.6khz crossover cascading with the natural roll-off).

If you put these in the doors and expect miracles, good luck. They drop like a brick above 2khz at 60degrees off-axis (which they should being a 6" speaker).

For 4" wideband speakers, the 4SE does about the same as the rest of them. I personally didn't like it without a tweeter at 30degrees off-axis (I DO have listening time with them), but that is personal preference. If you can get it somewhere between 0-30degrees off-axis, they may be fine (depending on your tastes). Any more and they also drop like a brick too (at 60degrees they start dropping at 3khz).

I can't say that I don't like all "wideband" speakers because I have been pleased with how the Aura Whispers perform, but they are a 2" speaker and therefore shouldn't start beaming until around 6khz. They are tiny and much easier to get on-axis (so beaming is less of a concern). The issue with them is output (which I why I asked thehatedguy about his experience using pairs of them). 

If you want to read more, here are some links:

HAT L6/L6SE:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/bikinpunks-product-review-forum/106244-hybrid-audio-l6-l6se.html

HAT L4/L4SE:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/bikinpunks-product-review-forum/106303-hybrid-audio-l4-l4se.html

Aura NSW2(on-axis only from Zaph's "tidbits"):

http://www.zaphaudio.com/tidbits/AURA-NSW2-FR.gif

Good chart for beaming:

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-sq-forum-technical-advanced/29124-power-beaming.html


----------



## subwoofery (Nov 9, 2008)

mtnbkr said:


> What's the downside to eq'ing it?


Decay... The XR3M and the AR3K have a natural boost in the top end (above 10kHz) - would have used the HAT L3SE as an example but the pics have been deleted... 










As you can see, the peak above 10kHz happens at pretty much all axis (0° to 30°) and at a lessen degree around 60°. That in my opinion means ringing or resonance = which translate into more time for the cone to stop making sound. 

Here's a pic to further explain/show what I'm saying: 








^ on the second plot, you can see a line going all the way down to 3msec @ 15kHz 

That resonance can translate to the listener as having a thicker sound/more weight or being less light, delicate and airy... 

Back to boosting, you'll emphasis the resonance even more and therefore it won't sound like if a tweeter is playing the very top end - and more like a speaker where its top end have been boosted. DUH!!! 

Kelvin


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

I've heard it said many times and I do agree:

"If you want things to sound better, make cuts in the EQ. If you want things to sound *different* then boost the EQ."


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Boostedrex said:


> I've heard it said many times and I do agree:
> 
> "If you want things to sound better, make cuts in the EQ. If you want things to sound *different* then boost the EQ."


True, but it's also important for "new" people to know a few things:

--You can't boost what isn't there. That includes a falling off-axis response and nulls from comb-filtering/cancellation.

--You can boost a signal into clipping or a driver into distortion. A 3db increase requires twice the power and (I believe) for a driver to extend flat 1 octave lower it needs 4 times the excursion.


----------



## SSSnake (Mar 8, 2007)

The discussion of rising response is interesting as I typically think it represents ringing as well. Does it provide usable response? Yes But at what cost? IME it typically comes with reduced clarity. I can't say that this is true of all designs but I am not sure how else it would be achieved. Maybe one of the designers of this type of speaker could provide some additional insight on the subject.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

SSSnake said:


> The discussion of rising response is interesting as I typically think it represents ringing as well. Does it provide usable response? Yes But at what cost? IME it typically comes with reduced clarity. I can't say that this is true of all designs but I am not sure how else it would be achieved. Maybe one of the designers of this type of speaker could provide some additional insight on the subject.


I agree entirely. I was going to say the same thing when I gr to a computer and not on the iPhone.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

3rd. 

What's funny is that Erin and I discussed this the other day. It's also why I said "intelligently designed". There are always tradeoffs and there is no magic formula that beats beaming. If the response rises, something must be going on to do it...driver inductance alone should cause a slow fall on all speakers.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

pionkej said:


> True, but it's also important for "new" people to know a few things:
> 
> --You can't boost what isn't there. That includes a falling off-axis response and nulls from comb-filtering/cancellation.
> 
> --You can boost a signal into clipping or a driver into distortion. A 3db increase requires twice the power and (I believe) for a driver to extend flat 1 octave lower it needs 4 times the excursion.


I'm with you 100% John. Just thought that quote was a nice fit after all of the more techincal comments in this thread. Sometimes a simple summation can be quite helpful.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

pionkej said:


> 3rd.
> 
> What's funny is that Erin and I discussed this the other day. It's also why I said "intelligently designed". There are always tradeoffs and there is no magic formula that beats beaming. If the response rises, something must be going on to do it...driver inductance alone should cause a slow fall on all speakers.



Of course, you bring up a good point in inductance. It would be nice to compare this (the whole impedance) solely against the FR for numerous drivers and see how it affects the top end response.


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Boostedrex said:


> I'm with you 100% John. Just thought that quote was a nice fit after all of the more techincal comments in this thread. Sometimes a simple summation can be quite helpful.


I'm with you 100% too.  I actually love that statement, because it's so simple and to the point. The problem is that many people don't get that "different" is generally a negative and can quickly become "dangerous" when pushing an amp or speaker beyond it's limits.

I'll never forget selling a pair of Kappa Perfects in a ported box and a JL 500/1 to a guy who worked at a place next door to me in college. I helped him install it and set the amp up. Over the weekend he decided he wanted more output, so he turned off the infrasonic and bumped the bass boost (EQ) up to +15...subs were dead by the time I saw him that next week.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

pionkej said:


> I'm with you 100% too.  I actually love that statement, because it's so simple and to the point. *The problem is that many people don't get that "different" is generally a negative* and can quickly become "dangerous" when pushing an amp or speaker beyond it's limits.


I'm very glad you said that. I hadn't even given it a 2nd thought that people wouldn't get the reference. To me, I knew as soon as I heard that quote said for the first time that different was a negative. One of the reasons I love this forum. Always a different view to see things from.


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

Forget simple! I wanna know more about the rise in response these guys are talking about. This is new info to me and I'm not really sure what they are talking about. I want more info so I can soak it up!


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

Fricasseekid said:


> Forget simple! I wanna know more about the rise in response these guys are talking about. This is new info to me and I'm not really sure what they are talking about. I want more info so I can soak it up!


Ok, this will get way long if I explain the "why" behind everything, so you'll just have to take some things at face value. If you want to know more, you're gonna need to search.

So let's start with beaming. Beaming is the point where a speakers off-axis response begins to drop in relation to it's on-axis response (this is a face value statement, if you want to know what causes beaming...you'll need to search). Anything below the point of beaming and a speakers output should be omni-directional (that means it should have the same frequency response if you are on-axis or 90degrees off-axis). This happens to ALL speakers and it occurs in relation to the speakers diameter. 

Step outside of audio and we'll use some visualization. Pick up one of those big flashlights powered by a 9v battery. If you stand one foot away from the wall and turn it on, you should get a big "beam". Something that is larger than the flashlight itself. At one foot, the flashlight (speaker) is omni-directional. Now stand twenty feet away and repeat. You should end up with a much smaller "spotlight". At twenty feet, the flashlight (speaker) is beaming and you need to aim it right at whatever you want to illuminate (on-axis).

I provided a link to beaming in relation to driver size earlier, open up that link. Now open a tab and go to Madisound. Look at some different size speakers (woofers are preferred since they aren't trying to "beat" beaming) that have 0/30/60 degree response plots. Based on the chart I linked, you should see that the 30/60 degree plots start dropping in response in relation to the 0 degree plot...that is beaming.

Now, while you are looking at those charts, notice how ALL speakers start to roll off as frequency increases. If you look at the impedance plot, you should see that it is starting to rise approximately at the same rate as the driver response drops. This impedance rise is also known as inductance rise (it is Le in the T/S Parameters). Inductance rise causes response to slowly fall. This is also natural and expected.

Now look at the AP and HAT wideband plots linked in this thread. They all have a RISE towards the top end. If you take the two points above into consideration, this SHOULDN'T BE HAPPENING. This has led several of us to speculate (ahem...ONLY SPECULATE) that the rise in response is some sort of resonance or cone breakup. If we are correct, it is "intelligently designed" by placing it in a spot where the frequency response should be dropping. It appears to work well for speakers that can be placed between 0 and 30 degrees off-axis as a wideband "solution", but if it is a resonance or breakup...it also isn't an accurate reproduction.

NOTE: Before we see a mass of people selling these speakers, I'm not saying wideband speakers are bad. I/we could be wrong about what is going on (though I'm doubtful). If we're right, it may sound pleasing to you. If it doesn't and you already own the speakers, the good news is that this design has likely pushed these breakups and resonances outside of the vocal range and into territory where a $10 tweeter and a cap could take over anyway. So, in closing, it isn't bad, it isn't good, but it IS one of the many compromises we face in car audio.


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

pionkej said:


> Ok, this will get way long if I explain the "why" behind everything, so you'll just have to take some things at face value. If you want to know more, you're gonna need to search.
> 
> So let's start with beaming. Beaming is the point where a speakers off-axis response begins to drop in relation to it's on-axis response (this is a face value statement, if you want to know what causes beaming...you'll need to search). Anything below the point of beaming and a speakers output should be omni-directional (that means it should have the same frequency response if you are on-axis or 90degrees off-axis). This happens to ALL speakers and it occurs in relation to the speakers diameter.
> 
> ...


Wow! Thanks for the write up. That's very informative. 

So to recap, manufacturers could be engineering a cone resonance (any links to help me understand cone break up?) at the same point a speaker would normally roll off due to inductance and beaming. So the theory is that some speakers are trying to "fake it till they make it" so to speak? 

The part I don't understand is why y'all wouldn't consider this a true part of the speakers response? Is it because the output would be distorted at those frequencies? 

Also, is this the usually the case accross the board with wide band drivers or just certain ones?


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

pionkej said:


> Ok, this will get way long if I explain the "why" behind everything, so you'll just have to take some things at face value. If you want to know more, you're gonna need to search.
> 
> So let's start with beaming. Beaming is the point where a speakers off-axis response begins to drop in relation to it's on-axis response (this is a face value statement, if you want to know what causes beaming...you'll need to search). Anything below the point of beaming and a speakers output should be omni-directional (that means it should have the same frequency response if you are on-axis or 90degrees off-axis). This happens to ALL speakers and it occurs in relation to the speakers diameter.
> 
> ...


Appreciate that response very much, thank you!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Well it's not speculation that it is resonance or cone break up. That is a pure fact. There is an art to controlling the breakup to make it pleasing sounding. But it is all breakup and resonances.

When a speaker is in it's piston range (not beaming) cone material makes no difference in sound.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

As far as the Auras I used, I used a single, used in a 1.5 configuration, 2 playing full range, and 2 acting as midranges.

The 1.5 and the pair as midranges were my favorites.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Maybe marketed towards the car audio community.

There is a whole world of large widebanders out there- Voxactiv (which was in Stereophile's Speaker of the Year), Jordan, Mark Audio, Fostex, Feastrex, Lowther, etc that would say otherwise.




quietfly said:


> Hat L6SE's supposed to be some of the best of the best widebanders....


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

thehatedguy said:


> When a speaker is in it's piston range (not beaming) cone material makes no difference in sound.


Care to elaborate on this? Why do many audiophiles prefer paper cones then and I've read much discussion on different tweeter materials sounding different.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Well think about it. when a speaker is acting as a piston, all it is doing is moving back and forth there are no breakups or cone resonances going on. Just an air pump like a subwoofer. It's when you get outside that pure piston range that cone material choice becomes audible.

As far as the "paper" sound. I love it too. But know what causes it- paper has great internal damping so breakups aren't going to go through the roof like a stiff lightweight material such as magnesium and kevlar. Also notice many of the great paper speakers have a higher even order distortion profile than odd order. Odd order can present itself as false detail., and even order as "warmth."

Also keep in mind the FR of a driver shows the linear distortion of the driver. All of those bumps and peaks are stored energy...and is form of linear distortion.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I'm not sure I agree, Jason. I understand your rationale, but I also think that the level at which you push the driver, combined with the material can dictate how the driver will sound. IOW, I think the cone material could very possibly have an affect on non-linear distortion.


Beyond that you have Fs and qts being affected.


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

bikinpunk said:


> I'm not sure I agree, Jason. I understand your rationale, but I also think that the level at which you push the driver, combined with the material can dictate how the driver will sound. IOW, I think the cone material could very possibly have an affect on non-linear distortion.


So how do think cone material affects the range of these small wide range drivers? For instance, I've heard good things about the Tang Band bamboo drivers.


----------



## quietfly (Mar 23, 2011)

I have to say this is one of the most, if not the most interesting/informative thread on DIYMA, that has stayed on topic and has not degenerated into name calling. I'm very happy to have found it!!!


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

No, in the piston range the cone material won't have an effect on the sound.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...ssible-make-identical-sounding-woofers-2.html


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

I'm not saying that what you've linked Jeff as saying is wrong. However, I have to wonder if there is more to it than what is seemingly of focus in the linked thread (which was good to go back and read, because I still agree with what the subject was at the time): Linear Distortion.

I don't believe nonlinear was discussed other than discussing how mass might affect the results of the klippel; which is something I was alluding to with my fs/Qts comment. 
That's where I have the heartache, based on my own testing and what Zaph has done. Nonlinear results are not always the same, well within the pistonic range (under a wavelength, just for other's edification) for drivers of varying cone material. My testing of the AP 3" drivers shows this between the poly xr3 and the kevlar ar3. Zaph's testing shows this between the vifa dome tweeters he tested. 
Now, the real question is, are the differences ever enough to notice? That's pretty much a thread in and of itself. 
So, I agree that linear distortion differences are probably negligible at best; the only area where I'm giving any leeway is in the mass addition and because I haven't really tried to think about it. Otherwise, the driver is just a force moving air up until the beaming point where other crap starts to happen; not necessarily because of the driver diameter.




I wish Jeff was still around to have this discussion with. Going back through his old posts isn't the same.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I think I am going to side with Dr. Geddes regarding the non-linear distortion thing...being it's not audible IF the driver is not stressed. But yeah that's another story for another day.


----------



## ErinH (Feb 14, 2007)

Yea. That's something I've really been pursuing an answer for. Geddes' opinion makes perfect sense, but the question is how do you define stressed? It seems to me that you'd need to give it a metric (hey, doesn't he have his own?) and if you're doing that, then you're acknowledging an issue. There are many camps on the subject. I've spent a lot of time lately looking over the topic and did my own testing with Klippel's listening test. 
http://www.klippel.de/listeningtest/lt/

I found my personal threshold to be around -30dB and for the most part, that seems to be where about 94% of the results lie within (the majority being from - 12-18dB). Beyond that, it's golden ear territory, it seems. 

I hate to say the N-L Distortion isn't something to be concerned about because I do believe it is audible... to some extent. The problem is that it varies from person to person and even with source material. 
Then there's the whole masking discussion. The stuff makes my brain hurt. I don't know if I've seen any 'big wigs' come to any real agreement on the matter.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

The only views I have seen on it is camp Geddes vs. all of the other internet testing sites.

I have his book here, when I get a chance I will look through it again and see what it says. It's been a while since I've had Linear Algebra and this book is hard to follow if you aren't really into matrices.

That's the thing with Dr. Geddes's speakers...he has designed them in such a way that they will never be stressed in any domestic environment, even running that compression driver to 900 hertz won't stress it in the house. You take speakers designed to be used on a daily basis at or near their ragged edge and put them in the house being tickled by a couple of watts...you'll never reach a point of nonlinear behavior. And that's why (I think) he says it isn't important- it's not to him because he has designed around the problem. I mean I used to listen to compression drivers in my apartment on my 2 watt SET amp with NO crossover on them at moderate output levels.

Consumer grade stuff...yeah it might not fair as well as pro stuff when pushed really hard.


----------



## EricP72 (Mar 23, 2008)

Subscribed. Just wanted to chime in. I currently run the peerless 3" widebander in my car paired with the SMS 8" midbass driver. I like my highs smooth and airy. I don't prefer the shrill sound of tweeters ie metal dome drivers. I prefer the sound of silk tweeters. With that being said I owned a set of Alpine spx pro tweeters and ran a 3 way active setup. I was in heaven until I reviewed the tang band and the ar3k. The ar3k was the driver that made selling my tweeters easy. If your install lends towards your widebander being on axis you will have no need for a tweeter at all with ar3k. With that being said the tang band definitely should be run with a small tweeter as the top end just isn't there. Now what really has me smiling is after removing the tweeters I'm running my peerless 3" as a fullrange and I'm enjoying a nice detailed highend. I did have to make some cuts via equal, but for right now I'm happy. Of course though it helps that my widebanders are on axis. I have had a few people recently sit only car and loves the details. So basically to the open if your install is on axis an your using the ar3k no tweeter is needed. If you off axis a small tweeter maybe needed. Hope this helps


----------



## pionkej (Feb 29, 2008)

manish said:


> Subscribed. Just wanted to chime in. I currently run the peerless 3" widebander in my car paired with the SMS 8" midbass driver. I like my highs smooth and airy. I don't prefer the shrill sound of tweeters ie metal dome drivers. I prefer the sound of silk tweeters. With that being said I owned a set of Alpine spx pro tweeters and ran a 3 way active setup. I was in heaven until I reviewed the tang band and the ar3k. The ar3k was the driver that made selling my tweeters easy. If your install lends towards your widebander being on axis you will have no need for a tweeter at all with ar3k. With that being said the tang band definitely should be run with a small tweeter as the top end just isn't there. Now what really has me smiling is after removing the tweeters I'm running my peerless 3" as a fullrange and I'm enjoying a nice detailed highend. I did have to make some cuts via equal, but for right now I'm happy. Of course though it helps that my widebanders are on axis. I have had a few people recently sit only car and loves the details. So basically to the open if your install is on axis an your using the ar3k no tweeter is needed. If you off axis a small tweeter maybe needed. Hope this helps


That is great that you are happy with your setup, I'm glad you brought it up too. We had been discussing that just because the extended response of some of the wideband drivers is likely a cleverly implemented resonance or breakup, it doesn't mean it's bad sound (just not completely accurate). My concern was after pointing that out people would start thinking what they had wasn't any good and that wasn't my intention. 

Look at tube amps, they create "warmth" through soft-clipping and even-order harmonics. People love them and that's great. Does that make them accurate...not in the least.


----------



## ecbmxer (Dec 1, 2010)

I run the H-Audio Trinity widebander and the Ebony midbass currently. It sounds very good to me, and I really don't like very bright tweets in general. I will say that I recently made new a-pillars for my Trinity drivers that ended up being a bit more off axis than before. It definitely changed the sound, although on the RTA it doesn't seem like the top end is terribly lacking (or from my ear). I'm not really sure if it's better or worse than before right now, it just sounds different. I just recently got a H701, so now that I have better EQ control I am think I will be able to improve things considerably. I will say that I plan on either swapping the Trinity for the AR3 widebanders that should be better off axis or add an Enigma tweeter to the set. I'm currently trying to weigh my options and see which direction I want to go. It's kind of a wash I think as far as cost. The ARs will be maybe $350 used, or the Enigmas might by $100 used but then I need to buy another amp. Before doing either option I may just buy a cheap tweeter and cap to add to the mix on the same channel as the Trinity to get an idea of what the 3way option would be like and what tweeter mounting positions I should consider.


----------



## cobra93 (Dec 22, 2009)

My system is in my sig.
I like to have a good top end as well, but not screaming at you.
At times I believe there is something missing and may try a tweeter in the future, however I believe it also depends on the recording.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is quite possibly the best reason(s) for using a wideband/midbass setup.
Simplicity. Having the majority of the frequency spectrum coming from 2 drivers instead of 4 can be a very good thing, but everything in life is a tradeoff.


If you have the ~$75.00 to spare there are quite a few drivers available to try that won't break the bank, but will allow you to see if this is a feasible option for you.

I also tested the TangBand W-3 1364a back and forth with the FR88ex.
The W3 seemed to have a better top end, but became harsh with less volume.
The FR88EX has more excursion, but even crossed at 250hz. I'm not using it.
It just sounds smoother to me.

I hope this helps.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

Nevermind


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

I have not, but Mark Fenton seems to be an up and up guy who really cars about the end user feedback.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> I have not, but Mark Fenton seems to be an up and up guy who really cars about the end user feedback.


Thanks... Doing a little searching, and they were mentioned in this very thread.... I can be so dense. 

I'm just really wanting to try out some various fullrange units. Trying to narrow down the 2-3 I want to look at. Lol


----------



## Lorin (May 5, 2011)

I am fairly happy thus far with my ebony \ trinity arrangement, most of my "playing" is just experimenting with crossovers, etc., via the ms-8. I go back and forth with tweeters and the jury is still out as to whether they stay or go? I may just put a pair in crossed over fairly high via a passive network or just a capacitor. Whether or not a widebander is a good thing seems somewhat moot after a point. It seems that we have speakers these days that are capable of playing a larger range of frequencies before experiencing issues. Regardless of whether or not we choose to add tweeters, it is nice to have a choice and\or option. Back in the day, crossover points seemed to be fairly standard and "written in stone" to a point. Now we have more flexibility, although that may incur a tradeoff past a certain point. Sometimes, it is a huge learning curve to actually EXPERIENCE the difference and see how it can affect the end result. I think Andy said it best: "I wont argue whether or not a tweeter is needed, but I have yet to see a system that didnt benefit from having one." The aforementioned quote was shared with me via PM, but has been expressed in other fashions throughout many posts. Your mileage may vary, but in car audio, sometimes the journey is more important than the destination. At the very least, the journey certainly helps re-define the destination, and that isnt always a bad thing.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

He (Mark Audio) has a subsection on DIY Audio, might cruise over there and read there and in the full range forum about them.


----------



## jcollin76 (Oct 26, 2010)

thehatedguy said:


> He (Mark Audio) has a subsection on DIY Audio, might cruise over there and read there and in the full range forum about them.


Thanks, I'll check it out.


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

thehatedguy said:


> He (Mark Audio) has a subsection on DIY Audio, might cruise over there and read there and in the full range forum about them.


Can you share a link?


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

I run the AR3K with no tweeters in my car. I don't feel that anything is missing. I can play a 20-20K sine sweep and hear it all they way up. (I'm not saying this means they're good, just saying that the top end IS there). I also think most people would have a hard time telling the difference between a pure tone and a tone distorted due to controlled breakup at 16KHz.

For the kind of music I listen to, I think they're perfect. When was the last time you went to a rock concert and enjoyed the 'air' or 'sparkle' of the high frequencies? If you listen to live music, there really isn't much of the airyness or sparkle that people seem to say they miss with tweeters. But live music is dynamic, and a 1 inch dome can't match a 3 inch cone in dynamic impact in the upper frequencies.

For what it's worth, "high frequencies" are consistently my highest score in competition.

I also wonder if the people who say they miss tweeters after using widebanders would feel the same way if they listened to a well tuned car running widebanders without knowing that there were no tweeters...

And for the guy who asked, the only difference between the AR3K and XR3M is cone and phase plug material. AR3K is kevlar cone with coated aluminum phase plug, and XR3M is magnesium cone with rosewood or ironwood phase plug.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Cone material when dealing with a speaker designed to break up to produce treble is pretty significant.


----------



## thehatedguy (May 4, 2007)

Markaudio - diyAudio


Full Range - diyAudio



Fricasseekid said:


> Can you share a link?


----------



## Fricasseekid (Apr 19, 2011)

Thanks!


----------



## mtnbkr (Sep 21, 2011)

@ Strakele...

http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum...19-audible-physics-transducer-info-specs.html


----------



## strakele (Mar 2, 2009)

Not sure what you're trying to say by linking me to that thread, but I have read it and basically all the threads on here regarding the AP wideband drivers.


----------



## Salami (Oct 10, 2007)

I think he is referring to how the different materials affect the sound of the R3's.


----------

