At P.E., Dayton has finally come out with 4 ohm versions of the 6" and 7" Reference midbasses. This one has been a long waited one for me for I planned to go all Dayton in my auto.
Now that they are unshielded, the mounting depths are much better than before. The frames seem a little different but are still cast. Xmax still looks good and shorting rings are still present as well. The 6" has a very workable mounting depth of 2.75" while the 7" with it's "6mm xmax" is still somewhat deep (3"). Still a hard toss up. Just wish they plotted some response graphs like the 8 ohms. Maybe later they will... Still sporting a 5 year warranty makes them almost a no-brainer. CLAP
Anyway, the long awaited is here and I'm definitely going to order one of the two sizes when I figure how much space I can give up.
Check em' out:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-372
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-374
Replies (15)
swez on 03/1/2006 19:26:00
These do have promise Ash. It would be good if these speakers had plots so one knows the general characteristics of each driver. May wish to call PE and see if they have these plots from ther Mfg.
Note the "B" diameter and Fs of each woofer. The usable cone diameter is very close on both products. (5-3/4"; 5-15/16") The 7" has a Vas of 0.81 ft^3. The Vas on the 6" model is 0.41 ft^3. (interesting to note)
The power ratings are fair on both drivers, but the high efficiency ratings on both speakers make up for low wattage handling nicely.
Good luck,
Swez
Ash on 03/1/2006 20:32:52
Not sure if you read the B spec right, though I must admit the 6" leaves a little to desired on cone area and power. It doesn't seem that much bigger than a 5.25". With only a 55hz Fs, a higher than wanted hi-pass point might be needed.
The 7" is what I really would like to audition with it's longer xmax and lower Fs. It's con is the depth and limited upper range. 2200hz doesn't leave much room for tweeter blending, especially if it is peakish around that point. Could cause for a steep order cutoff or possibly a MR accompanient. It will most definitely need a plot for assurance. Not sure if the large Vas will be a problem since the door is quite lossy and driver Q is somewhat low (.40).
Whatcha think?
swez on 03/1/2006 22:06:34
Agreed... but a tweeter that can do frequencies where the MR is going out of linearity can overcome that issue. But, w/o plots at the upper MR frequencies of the MR of choice, it's a hit and miss proposition.
The crossover points are key here, as are MR/TW overlaps. If you can design/find a passive filter network that nets minimal peaks or dips at a 12dB/oct Butterworth slope, and tweeter power/eff is up to the task at say 1.5KHz,. (+.3KHz.) you might pull it off. A good tweeter at that power range may be hard to find in a 4 ohm coil. An 8 ohm coil may be fine, but remember the -3dB loss there. The price of many quality dome tweeters that handle adequate power and below 2,000 Hz., can be expensive. Some Parametric EQ features, may be your friend here as well.
Are you thinking door or panel mounted install for the MR driver? If yes, a little poly fill here, may help. If a kick panel design is your intent, one needs to determine optimal sealed airspace for the kick panel or sealed pod design.
As for depth issues, a collar ring can be used to not only give adequate depth to the install location, but also provide aiming/staging/imaging benefits.
What say you now?
Swez
Ash on 03/2/2006 18:26:36
Funny you mentioned a 8 ohm tweet as I have a pair of the Dayton silk 1-1/8's in storage. Still in the box and never used, I've been waiting patiently for about a couple of years to implement them in a good, simple design. I still have the USB-4065 so they can have their own power feed and attenuation if need be.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-070
For the MR, definitely door mount is going to be almost the only route, as you remember the "Paul Bunyon"size 14"'s are on the floor. The tweeter mounting area is of question. Their depth isn't a problem if dash, kick, or adjacent to MR, mounted. The diameter can be if adjacent, plus angling will take up some room as well. IF separated (dash or kick) I don't think it will present too much of a problem since I have tweets in the sails now and imaging is decent. Off axis response from the now used metal domes isn't great. I knew they was of lower quality when I received them, so I can't complain. The silks are definately going to be a major upgrade.
swez on 03/2/2006 20:13:06
That'll work fine as these are about the same sensitivity rating as the MR drivers w/ 2.83 volts input.
That tweeter is pretty darn flat from 2KHz - 8KHz. The off axis plot looks OK too for such a low price. I'd say try em out and see what ya get. They calim it stacked up well against Morels. Can't be all bad.
Size 14 boot... hummm, about right for a man your size. If you had a size 9-1/2 shoe, you might fall over... hehe
Swez
PS Looks very similar to Peerless tweets that I have in my Polk 7a's. About the same power rating, appearance and dimensions. If they are the same one, you are in for a real treat. Gotta love the old Polks.
Ash on 03/3/2006 18:55:19
From looking at the response curves on the 7" 8 ohm, it shows a slight rise around 650hz to about 1500-2000hz. The 30 degree off axis response is somewhat smoother, so I imagine in a car it is possible to be a little flatter with the cabin gain on the low end.
If the 4 ohm is anything comparable, it should make for a good match with that tweeter. I doubt that Dayton will make a harsh speaker as the other lines are quite performance minded for the dollar. This weekend I will take some measurements and see exactly what is possible. At worst, I will have to settle for the 6", but it still should be far better than the current 5.25's I'm using now.
swez on 03/3/2006 22:56:37
Keep us posted there A.J. from P.C. FLA
Since you have a sub installed, (yes?) the MB/MR/TW balancing act is your larger focus. Most guys cross the subs between 60-100 Hz. (80 Hz., is most common in car audio)
Do you have an idea where your crossover point will be with the MR/TW functions? That tweeter looks like it can do very well between 1.8-2.5KHz. This is key to having and "OK" sounding system VS a "Hey, this is a very well matched system."
This is where Active Variable Crossovers and Bi-amping can really shine. Add a good multi-band EQ or Parametric EQ to the signal chain, now we have more control over even the most stubborn peaks and dips.
Good luck and keep us updated OK?
Swez
Ash on 03/4/2006 06:17:22
Does that mean that you are suggesting a 4-way? If the 6" or 7" is used in the door as MB, a smaller MR would have to go in the kicks or dash. If not, I planned on using a set of these in the sails with a high crossover point (6khz) HU powered.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-030
If you remember, I'm currently running the Dayton 12 DVC in a Qtc=.85 enclosure. I'm still experimenting with the positioning and crossover points. I found that to the most rear, facing backwards, reversed polarity sounds best. This setup makes the sub disappear and brings more midbass out of the fronts. A lower crossover point and some damping material on the tailgate is next in order.
swez on 03/4/2006 15:38:19
Not suggesting a full blown 4-way system here. But, a solid 3-way employing a Sub, MB/MR & tweeter. The MB/MR is one speaker with a nice, broads spectrum in the flat range of operation.
As for your tweeter crossover point, that will depend primarily on the frequency extension ability of the the 6" MB/MR driver. If the midrange gets a bit peaky/lossy above 2.5 KHz., then you can run the tweeter to a tad under 2.0 KHz.
The tweeter noted above, has merit. It's low power handling may lead you to power it off the HU and a good 2nd or 3rd order HPF passive crossover. This tweeter is designed for applications where an array (2 or more in a curve) when wide angle dispersion is desired.
Not a bad plan... but 2 tweeters per side and an amp that can handle 3 ohm loads well, are needed here. (the USB-4065 can do this in 3/4 channel modes.
Swez
Ash on 03/5/2006 09:35:40
I see your point. But I think I might have confused you in all my jabber.
What my goal is to have a amp powered 2-way comp set located in the doors/kick with active filters. A HU powered image enchancing tweeter higher up (sails). The "IE/TW" will need to be crossed over higher (6khz+) so as not to interfere with the comp, just to extend the ambience/image up on the dash. I will only want to use HU power on the sails so attenuation is more usuable and not overpower the comps.
The sails will use 2nd order passives. The sub and comps will be active, if I can find a wide range 2-way crossover. The sub amp (USB-2150) has a filter that takes care of the sub. The USB-4065 has sufficient high pass for the MB/MR (65hz-240hz), but not high enough for the comp tweet. Likewise, not enough low pass for the MB/MR to blend with the tweet. Is this making any sense?
My HU has dual (f/r) preouts so there will be no problem with sub integration. The USB-2150 will feed straight from the HU rear preout. Just need a good 2 way with a decent khz overlap and use the USB-4065 high pass to bandpass the MB/MR. The comp tweets will have their own separate power from the front of the amp and will soley filtered from the active crossover.
In this way attenuation and frquency matching is at best.
I know this sounds confusing, but if you can map it out, it is very simple.
swez on 03/5/2006 10:30:51
I get the picture well now. It makes sense and after all the tweaking and such, this will be one killer SQL install.
I like the idea of the 2nd pair of "ambient" tweets in the sail panels too. You may wish to experiment with the crossover slope and cutoff frequencies, (on these) to get the best blending possible for your front stage system.
The active crossover network will be the biggest challenge here. For your Comps and the 4065 amp, you'll use the MB/MR on HPF set to match the sub cross point. In addition, you'll need a LPF to block them at TW crossing point.
As for the TW crossover portion, similar deal... only need a HPF at whatever frequency/slope the mids are cutoff at.
The sail tweets can be used at lower than 6.0KHz., if you wish. Just aim them in such as way so the extend the off axis coverage of your main Comp TW's. Otherwise, this sail tweet will act more like a "suoer tweeter" and only give minimal output to cymbals and upper harmonics of HF music signal content.
Sounds like a plan to me,
Swez
Ash on 03/5/2006 12:41:29
Ok, I think I have found a viable unit that will work:
http://www.onlinecarstereo.com/CarAudio/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=14848
It's measurements are on the large size, but I think I might have a space where it may fit. If anyone can find another of comparable quality, use, and price, please post. There are others that have a bandpass MB/MR output as well as sub. Yet, the Sub+ MB is not needed and their quality is of question.
swez on 03/5/2006 19:10:22
I think you might be looking more for the 3-way version it has Mids, HPF & LPF's and a TW HPF from 40 - 8.0KHz. It alosi had MR phase shift controls and a line driver as well.
http://www.onlinecarstereo.com/CarAudio/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=14849
Looked at stuff like this some time ago as well. The part I found odd, is many of the brands that support this type of crossover system, were all from brands we normally would frown on. Pyle, Lanzar, Pyramid, Boss and Legacy. (Go figure huh?)
If you cannot find such critters from brands we most often choose here, it may be worth a try, as long as you can return the product if you find it unsuitable.
What say you?
Swez
Ash on 03/6/2006 18:11:32
The 2-way is more suited to what I need for I plan on using the USB-2150's 24db octave low-pass. Usually its the low-pass 12db slope that I don't like on the cheaper brands.
The sub output on the 2-way has a x10 frequency multiplier so if the x1 output sweep is 40hz to 800hz, x10 should be 400hz to 8000hz. That should be perfect coupled with the 4065's high pass 65hz-240hz, thus creating the bandpass needed for the MB/MR.
Still what confuses me is why would you need a phase shift on the MR unless you use it in a tweeter mode. I only thought that would mainly apply to subs or tweets. Perhaps you can enlighten me on that one. I'm not familiar.
swez on 03/6/2006 22:31:36
Have you looked closely at the phase angle shifts (plots) that occur on typical MR speakers? That is part of the issue. As the frequency changes, the voice coil (an inductor) will change phase polarity too.
The other part is the order (1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th order) of crossovers used throughout the entire system. Each order has a phase shift of +/-90 degrees from one step to the next, depending on combinations of caps and coils. (Caps lead by 90 degees; Coils lag by 90 degress) Speakers have voice coils, (inductive lag) which lag by up to 90 degrees at certain frequencies.
It gets pretty complex and I am not sure I understand enough of this to give you a cogent summary. The best test one can use, is to either vary the phase angle control or swap polarities. The configuration that gives the most accurate sound, (not too much cancellations noted) is what we want.
Sorry I cannot give you a better answer than that,
Swez
Now that they are unshielded, the mounting depths are much better than before. The frames seem a little different but are still cast. Xmax still looks good and shorting rings are still present as well. The 6" has a very workable mounting depth of 2.75" while the 7" with it's "6mm xmax" is still somewhat deep (3"). Still a hard toss up. Just wish they plotted some response graphs like the 8 ohms. Maybe later they will... Still sporting a 5 year warranty makes them almost a no-brainer. CLAP
Anyway, the long awaited is here and I'm definitely going to order one of the two sizes when I figure how much space I can give up.
Check em' out:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-372
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=295-374
Replies (15)
swez on 03/1/2006 19:26:00
These do have promise Ash. It would be good if these speakers had plots so one knows the general characteristics of each driver. May wish to call PE and see if they have these plots from ther Mfg.
Note the "B" diameter and Fs of each woofer. The usable cone diameter is very close on both products. (5-3/4"; 5-15/16") The 7" has a Vas of 0.81 ft^3. The Vas on the 6" model is 0.41 ft^3. (interesting to note)
The power ratings are fair on both drivers, but the high efficiency ratings on both speakers make up for low wattage handling nicely.
Good luck,
Swez
Ash on 03/1/2006 20:32:52
Not sure if you read the B spec right, though I must admit the 6" leaves a little to desired on cone area and power. It doesn't seem that much bigger than a 5.25". With only a 55hz Fs, a higher than wanted hi-pass point might be needed.
The 7" is what I really would like to audition with it's longer xmax and lower Fs. It's con is the depth and limited upper range. 2200hz doesn't leave much room for tweeter blending, especially if it is peakish around that point. Could cause for a steep order cutoff or possibly a MR accompanient. It will most definitely need a plot for assurance. Not sure if the large Vas will be a problem since the door is quite lossy and driver Q is somewhat low (.40).
Whatcha think?
swez on 03/1/2006 22:06:34
Agreed... but a tweeter that can do frequencies where the MR is going out of linearity can overcome that issue. But, w/o plots at the upper MR frequencies of the MR of choice, it's a hit and miss proposition.
The crossover points are key here, as are MR/TW overlaps. If you can design/find a passive filter network that nets minimal peaks or dips at a 12dB/oct Butterworth slope, and tweeter power/eff is up to the task at say 1.5KHz,. (+.3KHz.) you might pull it off. A good tweeter at that power range may be hard to find in a 4 ohm coil. An 8 ohm coil may be fine, but remember the -3dB loss there. The price of many quality dome tweeters that handle adequate power and below 2,000 Hz., can be expensive. Some Parametric EQ features, may be your friend here as well.
Are you thinking door or panel mounted install for the MR driver? If yes, a little poly fill here, may help. If a kick panel design is your intent, one needs to determine optimal sealed airspace for the kick panel or sealed pod design.
As for depth issues, a collar ring can be used to not only give adequate depth to the install location, but also provide aiming/staging/imaging benefits.
What say you now?
Swez
Ash on 03/2/2006 18:26:36
Funny you mentioned a 8 ohm tweet as I have a pair of the Dayton silk 1-1/8's in storage. Still in the box and never used, I've been waiting patiently for about a couple of years to implement them in a good, simple design. I still have the USB-4065 so they can have their own power feed and attenuation if need be.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-070
For the MR, definitely door mount is going to be almost the only route, as you remember the "Paul Bunyon"size 14"'s are on the floor. The tweeter mounting area is of question. Their depth isn't a problem if dash, kick, or adjacent to MR, mounted. The diameter can be if adjacent, plus angling will take up some room as well. IF separated (dash or kick) I don't think it will present too much of a problem since I have tweets in the sails now and imaging is decent. Off axis response from the now used metal domes isn't great. I knew they was of lower quality when I received them, so I can't complain. The silks are definately going to be a major upgrade.
swez on 03/2/2006 20:13:06
That'll work fine as these are about the same sensitivity rating as the MR drivers w/ 2.83 volts input.
That tweeter is pretty darn flat from 2KHz - 8KHz. The off axis plot looks OK too for such a low price. I'd say try em out and see what ya get. They calim it stacked up well against Morels. Can't be all bad.
Size 14 boot... hummm, about right for a man your size. If you had a size 9-1/2 shoe, you might fall over... hehe
Swez
PS Looks very similar to Peerless tweets that I have in my Polk 7a's. About the same power rating, appearance and dimensions. If they are the same one, you are in for a real treat. Gotta love the old Polks.
Ash on 03/3/2006 18:55:19
From looking at the response curves on the 7" 8 ohm, it shows a slight rise around 650hz to about 1500-2000hz. The 30 degree off axis response is somewhat smoother, so I imagine in a car it is possible to be a little flatter with the cabin gain on the low end.
If the 4 ohm is anything comparable, it should make for a good match with that tweeter. I doubt that Dayton will make a harsh speaker as the other lines are quite performance minded for the dollar. This weekend I will take some measurements and see exactly what is possible. At worst, I will have to settle for the 6", but it still should be far better than the current 5.25's I'm using now.
swez on 03/3/2006 22:56:37
Keep us posted there A.J. from P.C. FLA
Since you have a sub installed, (yes?) the MB/MR/TW balancing act is your larger focus. Most guys cross the subs between 60-100 Hz. (80 Hz., is most common in car audio)
Do you have an idea where your crossover point will be with the MR/TW functions? That tweeter looks like it can do very well between 1.8-2.5KHz. This is key to having and "OK" sounding system VS a "Hey, this is a very well matched system."
This is where Active Variable Crossovers and Bi-amping can really shine. Add a good multi-band EQ or Parametric EQ to the signal chain, now we have more control over even the most stubborn peaks and dips.
Good luck and keep us updated OK?
Swez
Ash on 03/4/2006 06:17:22
Does that mean that you are suggesting a 4-way? If the 6" or 7" is used in the door as MB, a smaller MR would have to go in the kicks or dash. If not, I planned on using a set of these in the sails with a high crossover point (6khz) HU powered.
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-030
If you remember, I'm currently running the Dayton 12 DVC in a Qtc=.85 enclosure. I'm still experimenting with the positioning and crossover points. I found that to the most rear, facing backwards, reversed polarity sounds best. This setup makes the sub disappear and brings more midbass out of the fronts. A lower crossover point and some damping material on the tailgate is next in order.
swez on 03/4/2006 15:38:19
Not suggesting a full blown 4-way system here. But, a solid 3-way employing a Sub, MB/MR & tweeter. The MB/MR is one speaker with a nice, broads spectrum in the flat range of operation.
As for your tweeter crossover point, that will depend primarily on the frequency extension ability of the the 6" MB/MR driver. If the midrange gets a bit peaky/lossy above 2.5 KHz., then you can run the tweeter to a tad under 2.0 KHz.
The tweeter noted above, has merit. It's low power handling may lead you to power it off the HU and a good 2nd or 3rd order HPF passive crossover. This tweeter is designed for applications where an array (2 or more in a curve) when wide angle dispersion is desired.
Not a bad plan... but 2 tweeters per side and an amp that can handle 3 ohm loads well, are needed here. (the USB-4065 can do this in 3/4 channel modes.
Swez
Ash on 03/5/2006 09:35:40
I see your point. But I think I might have confused you in all my jabber.
What my goal is to have a amp powered 2-way comp set located in the doors/kick with active filters. A HU powered image enchancing tweeter higher up (sails). The "IE/TW" will need to be crossed over higher (6khz+) so as not to interfere with the comp, just to extend the ambience/image up on the dash. I will only want to use HU power on the sails so attenuation is more usuable and not overpower the comps.
The sails will use 2nd order passives. The sub and comps will be active, if I can find a wide range 2-way crossover. The sub amp (USB-2150) has a filter that takes care of the sub. The USB-4065 has sufficient high pass for the MB/MR (65hz-240hz), but not high enough for the comp tweet. Likewise, not enough low pass for the MB/MR to blend with the tweet. Is this making any sense?
My HU has dual (f/r) preouts so there will be no problem with sub integration. The USB-2150 will feed straight from the HU rear preout. Just need a good 2 way with a decent khz overlap and use the USB-4065 high pass to bandpass the MB/MR. The comp tweets will have their own separate power from the front of the amp and will soley filtered from the active crossover.
In this way attenuation and frquency matching is at best.
I know this sounds confusing, but if you can map it out, it is very simple.
swez on 03/5/2006 10:30:51
I get the picture well now. It makes sense and after all the tweaking and such, this will be one killer SQL install.
I like the idea of the 2nd pair of "ambient" tweets in the sail panels too. You may wish to experiment with the crossover slope and cutoff frequencies, (on these) to get the best blending possible for your front stage system.
The active crossover network will be the biggest challenge here. For your Comps and the 4065 amp, you'll use the MB/MR on HPF set to match the sub cross point. In addition, you'll need a LPF to block them at TW crossing point.
As for the TW crossover portion, similar deal... only need a HPF at whatever frequency/slope the mids are cutoff at.
The sail tweets can be used at lower than 6.0KHz., if you wish. Just aim them in such as way so the extend the off axis coverage of your main Comp TW's. Otherwise, this sail tweet will act more like a "suoer tweeter" and only give minimal output to cymbals and upper harmonics of HF music signal content.
Sounds like a plan to me,
Swez
Ash on 03/5/2006 12:41:29
Ok, I think I have found a viable unit that will work:
http://www.onlinecarstereo.com/CarAudio/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=14848
It's measurements are on the large size, but I think I might have a space where it may fit. If anyone can find another of comparable quality, use, and price, please post. There are others that have a bandpass MB/MR output as well as sub. Yet, the Sub+ MB is not needed and their quality is of question.
swez on 03/5/2006 19:10:22
I think you might be looking more for the 3-way version it has Mids, HPF & LPF's and a TW HPF from 40 - 8.0KHz. It alosi had MR phase shift controls and a line driver as well.
http://www.onlinecarstereo.com/CarAudio/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=14849
Looked at stuff like this some time ago as well. The part I found odd, is many of the brands that support this type of crossover system, were all from brands we normally would frown on. Pyle, Lanzar, Pyramid, Boss and Legacy. (Go figure huh?)
If you cannot find such critters from brands we most often choose here, it may be worth a try, as long as you can return the product if you find it unsuitable.
What say you?
Swez
Ash on 03/6/2006 18:11:32
The 2-way is more suited to what I need for I plan on using the USB-2150's 24db octave low-pass. Usually its the low-pass 12db slope that I don't like on the cheaper brands.
The sub output on the 2-way has a x10 frequency multiplier so if the x1 output sweep is 40hz to 800hz, x10 should be 400hz to 8000hz. That should be perfect coupled with the 4065's high pass 65hz-240hz, thus creating the bandpass needed for the MB/MR.
Still what confuses me is why would you need a phase shift on the MR unless you use it in a tweeter mode. I only thought that would mainly apply to subs or tweets. Perhaps you can enlighten me on that one. I'm not familiar.
swez on 03/6/2006 22:31:36
Have you looked closely at the phase angle shifts (plots) that occur on typical MR speakers? That is part of the issue. As the frequency changes, the voice coil (an inductor) will change phase polarity too.
The other part is the order (1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th order) of crossovers used throughout the entire system. Each order has a phase shift of +/-90 degrees from one step to the next, depending on combinations of caps and coils. (Caps lead by 90 degees; Coils lag by 90 degress) Speakers have voice coils, (inductive lag) which lag by up to 90 degrees at certain frequencies.
It gets pretty complex and I am not sure I understand enough of this to give you a cogent summary. The best test one can use, is to either vary the phase angle control or swap polarities. The configuration that gives the most accurate sound, (not too much cancellations noted) is what we want.
Sorry I cannot give you a better answer than that,
Swez
Copyright ClubKnowledge 2009 * All Rights Reserved
