# Peerless 3" wideband



## Rbsarve (Aug 26, 2005)

OK guys, finally smacked a couple of small test boxes together so that I could do some listening test.

First some words about construction:
Neo magnet system in a cup, plastic frame (very similar to TG9's) and a poly cone. Resonably well made and with really good excursion for the size.

Playing them right now on a petty crappy sharp compact stereo that at least plays pretty flat and full range. No tweeters, no filters, no sub. Placed on a shelf in the middle of a room so that the least amount of close proximity reflections are interfering.

The boxes are small as mentioned, about 0.5 litres. And that is somewhat too small, even with polyfill for them to properly resolve the lower bass range.

Listening to a favorite compiled dics I have now.

The bad:
That spike at 10k isn't very nice. Effectivly ruining the uppmost midrange/treble range making it sound fairly harsh and uneven. 
This makes upper end on voices sound a bit closed in.

The good:
If you like your speakers a bit on the "robust" side, the lower midrange is spot on. Really. I'm amazed! 
And since this is where all the fundamentals of the music comes this is the most important range. A pair of speakers at this cheap (probably less then the TG9) should not sound this good!
Both voices, snare drums and the tricky piano is really realistically rendered in a tonal way.
They are not perfect. But they are great at creating a sence of "presence", the music really releases well from these.

These would be a great starting point for a 3-way active front system. 
Actually these will be. Replacing the drivers in "the Family car" (installs)

Not recommended as a fullrange, they need a crossover and a tweet.
Would be a great slim MTM with the Vifa ringradiator next to the flatscreen.


----------



## Rbsarve (Aug 26, 2005)

Ok. An update. 

I had to try them on my real home rig. Loads of power and actively crossed over at 250 Hz. 

One word.

WOW!

They came to life. In a big way. The upper end sharpness is still there. But...

Let me put it this way. This range is normally handled by MTM's with custom built midranges and modified ScanSpeak 9700's. And I'm not sure which I like best... Upper end gets weary, but below that... damn!


----------



## ///MJay (Aug 22, 2006)

Rbsarve said:


> Ok. An update.
> 
> I had to try them on my real home rig. Loads of power and actively crossed over at 250 Hz.
> 
> ...


Wow this may be a good solution to all the bmw blown 2.5" mids out there. If it would fit in the stock door location it could most definately play lower than the dome mids I was planning to use. How low do you think they could go cleanly?


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

onyl thing enclosure needed for them is kinda big for the A-pillars   

needs about .14 cu ft...

there 2.5" looks a little nicer for a-pillars... only needs .04 cu ft.
http://www.tymphany.com/datasheet/printview.php?id=382
only problem is it cant be found....


----------



## Kuztimrodder (Jan 10, 2007)

bdubs767 said:


> onyl thing enclosure needed for them is kinda big for the A-pillars
> 
> needs about .14 cu ft...
> 
> ...


I can get .14 out of my A-Pillars All this week I have been psyched to do pillar pods with 3"ers. It's almost creepy that this review came up at the same time. So, Rbsarve, what would your opinion be on using these in A-Pillars band passed 300hz to 5 or 6khz with tweeters taking it from there? Do you think they will keep up with 8" midbass? How much power did you actually have feeding them? Would you also describe the sound as warm to go along with robust? Those are two charactoristics I prefer in pillar mids. It tends to lessen beaming and possible ear ringing at higher volume IMO. Thanks for the review bro

Oh, and how about a link...I'm assuming you got these from Madisound.


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

Kuztimrodder said:


> Oh, and how about a link...I'm assuming you got these from Madisound.


hes in euro, and owner of quite a big distribution company.


----------



## Kuztimrodder (Jan 10, 2007)

bdubs767 said:


> hes in euro, and owner of quite a big distribution company.


That's right, I forgot all about that, geez:blush: So are they available in the states?


----------



## Luke352 (Jul 24, 2006)

Sounds great, I may have to consider these, what are the dimensions, they don't seem to have them listed anywhere mainly depth and cutout size.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

Can you do a side by side comparison with the TG9? Do you think a larger enclosure would reduce the peaky nature?


----------



## Rbsarve (Aug 26, 2005)

Yup, warm they are.

I was thinking during my listening that they are just about the opposite of the TG9's, where the TG9 really shines is in it's very detailed "airy" upper midrange (once you've eq'd yout the peak) and this is where these feels a bit muffled. A matter of taste really. But I personally prefer these. 

A bigger box might give a little more air, but time is not on my side, so it won't be done this week.

Right now they are still on the home setup, they are feed with mono amps of about 120 W RMS. I stayed up until 3 this morning feeding it disc after disc. I have honestly not been this suprised by a speaker in several years! 

They do one thing really well. Dissappare. This is one of the best speakers I've ever heard in this aspect! 

Looking at the analysis and after hearing them I think you can push them down in the 200 Hz range without problem. They are currently keeping up with a pair of XLS10's feeded with 500 W RMS each. Bringing in a tweeter at around 6 k will be sweet.

Maybe something about my credentials. I do co-own a car audio distribution company here, but we are quite small since we focus only on upper end of the market. We distribute Seas and italian Tec speakers here and market our own line built by Tymphany. I have been competing in the sound-off's on and off since the mid 90's and is now a certified EMMA SQ judge.


----------



## durwood (Mar 7, 2007)

Kuztimrodder said:


> Oh, and how about a link...I'm assuming you got these from Madisound.





Kuztimrodder said:


> That's right, I forgot all about that, geez:blush: So are they available in the states?


New to Madisound - 830986 Peerless 3" Full Range 


Sweet! Thanks for the review. Going on my list.

Makes sense about the differences between the TG9 and this.

They look like they have decent excursion capablities for 3", similar to the Aura NS3's.

I wonder what they sound like in a larger enclosure and also what they would sound like if you listened to them at 30deg off-axis where the repsonse curve smooths out. I can't wait until they are available here.


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

bdubs767 said:


> onyl thing enclosure needed for them is kinda big for the A-pillars
> 
> needs about .14 cu ft...
> 
> ...


Waow, I never knew these existed. Thanks for pointing them out. I wonder when they will come to madisound.


----------



## Kuztimrodder (Jan 10, 2007)

durwood said:


> New to Madisound - 830986 Peerless 3" Full Range
> 
> 
> Sweet! Thanks for the review. Going on my list.
> ...


Thanks Durwood. Now I remember looking at these a few weeks ago. I love the price and think Imma give em a try. Guess I'll be selling the Ozzies


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Madisound will not have them till the end of the year. I placed an order for 4 this morning, $15 ea.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

I can't ind any phiscial dimensions, are these the same size or a little smaller than the TG9?


----------



## sqguy (Oct 19, 2005)

Hey fellas not trying to sound too much like a noob, but what are the correct measuremens to get net volume of .14 cu ft? i tried using fosgate's box wizard but the numbers seemed to big for getting this volume for a a-pillar. any info you guys can provide would be very helpful.


thanks,


Micheal


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

sqguy said:


> Hey fellas not trying to sound too much like a noob, but what are the correct measuremens to get net volume of .14 cu ft? i tried using fosgate's box wizard but the numbers seemed to big for getting this volume for a a-pillar. any info you guys can provide would be very helpful.
> 
> 
> thanks,
> ...


The madisound page recommends an 80 cubic inch (.046 cubic feet) enclosure for an F3 of 120hz. The test enclosure in this review was around .5 liters (.0176 cubic feet). I don't know where the .14 cf number in earlier post that you saw came from.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

You think these would be good for listening to Howard Stern and a few tunes here and there? I'd probably throw a cap on each to make a simple 6 db high pass filter.


----------



## Neil (Dec 9, 2005)

Sounds like yet another very good Peerless product. I don't think I need any more full range projects, though.

Thanks for the review.


----------



## dBassHz (Nov 2, 2005)

80 cubic inch = volume of a 4" 45 degree elbow.


----------



## bdubs767 (Apr 4, 2006)

t3sn4f2 said:


> The madisound page recommends an 80 cubic inch (.046 cubic feet) enclosure for an F3 of 120hz. The test enclosure in this review was around .5 liters (.0176 cubic feet). I don't know where the .14 cf number in earlier post that you saw came from.


 calculating for a Q of .707 via the manufacture specs...


----------



## t3sn4f2 (Jan 3, 2007)

bdubs767 said:


> calculating for a Q of .707 via the manufacture specs...


Can't see it being used that low realistically though. If I wanted a small computer speaker to put with a small sub maybe.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Madisound shipped my speakers Friday the 14th, they should be at my house now.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

mitchyz250f said:


> Madisound shipped my speakers Friday the 14th, they should be at my house now.


Blast them with some power and tell me if they're good enough for general talk radio with a little music thrown in the mix.


----------



## GlasSman (Nov 14, 2006)

Judging how impressed Rbsarve was with them I'm thinking they should be sufficient for non critical listening.


----------



## mitchyz250f (May 14, 2005)

Rbsarve- Uh oh, I just noticed that these are 8 ohm!!

I am planning on running these from 250 50 5-6k. My pillars are almost complete. I will be using a soundstream D100 amp which puts out about 50 watts/ch at 4 ohms at 12 volts. Do you think this will be enough? Would they beniffit from more power at that frequency range?


----------



## Rbsarve (Aug 26, 2005)

Well at 250 Hz they actually can handle a fair bit of power for the size, but I think that you will have to have very bold midbasses to outplay the 3's povered on that Soundstream amp. Should be a good match.


----------

