Exemplary bad in every aspect, but no way ever superseeds Wilson TuneTot. The Prince, still unrivaled contender for the throne.
Boy, these are rough. ...
- Extremely bad pair matching
Exemplary bad in every aspect, but no way ever superseeds Wilson TuneTot. The Prince, still unrivaled contender for the throne.
Boy, these are rough. ...
- Extremely bad pair matching
To be clear: I am not challenging the tests he performs, they are probably showing the correct information.I think you will find the answers to several of your points at Erin’s website. Also, Erin performs his tests using a Kippel, which measures the speaker in 360 degrees using industry standard methods ( hence results are directly comparable to other tests) and reports same per these industry standards. This way we can do apples to apples comparisons with other speakers.
To be clear: I am not challenging the tests he performs, they are probably showing the correct information.
However, what I am challenging is the validity of those tests when you're assessing the frequency response of a speaker in a medium sized room. ANY speaker in a medium sized room, but particularly a speaker that is by design energizing the room with reflections through the side passive radiators. If we were talking about, say, very directional horn speaker design, then I can see the on-axis anechoic response will be representative (to some degree) of the real life sound, but for speakers that are designed to interact with the room heavily like these, that is no longer true.
If a an speakers can reproduce this CD well they would also cope with large philharmonic orchestra ...and vise versa :I disagree with this notion - they're typically way denser harmonically and have much more low end than typical "audiophile music".
The typical sparse jazz and documentary style classical recordings are much more forgiving IME.
About 5 USD per driver? I didn't know they were quite that cheap. That makes GRS drivers seems downright fancy.But then the same person says:
Speakers probably won't be much better than the Kali LP-6v2 for that little money, even though there are a lot of alternatives on the market with similar performance. With woofers for about 5 USD per speaker, you have to put up with some distortion.
Ha, the 12PT actually is a near-perfect match. (But so would the 18PT be. Or a Visaton W300.) And managing to marry a 6.5" and 1" tweeter sans much of any waveguide with next to no warts deserves some accolades.That 6PT-8 as a midrange with, as you say, 15" woofer or equivalent, let's say a powerful one, plus some compression driver, there is the potential for a fun high SPL party speaker.Even a speaker with "nice" Hifi sound (good FR not just high SPL) if it is designed/constructed correctly.
Others have considered the 6PT-8 as a midrange, in a three-way design:
I want a cost effective passive 3-way xover to mate GRS 12PT to GRS 6PT plus "whatever" tweeter
the system would be a small (L100 size) reflex with woofer to midrange having good poer handling and hopefully a clear midrange, I'm having a lot of pain issues but wrose, sision issues so cannot see my monitor well (looks washed out to the point that light graphs in hornresp disappear). FWI I...www.diyaudio.com
It could be a typo. Even if Kali were to buy up large quantities in bulk to get a low unit price, so ... well, it still seems too low a price. Anyway, the person who wrote what I quoted is familiar with the speaker manufacturing industry.About 5 USD per driver? I didn't know they were quite that cheap. That makes GRS drivers seems downright fancy.
It seems like the potential for fun DIY speakers with a reasonable price.Ha, the 12PT actually is a near-perfect match. (But so would the 18PT be. Or a Visaton W300.) And managing to marry a 6.5" and 1" tweeter sans much of any waveguide with next to no warts deserves some accolades.
The 8PT-8 appears to be the only stinker with major unevenness in this line, I wonder what happened there. (BTW, they all seem to have Kapton voice coil formers. In a driver as cheap as the 6PT-8, that's remarkable. This also explains why it has higher power handling than the 6PR.)
Looks oldschool, but solid enough. Measurements confirm fairly solid distortion performance of this driver.If you want a good, inexpensive DIY speaker using the GRS PR-8, then build this...
Cabrini Redux
midwestaudio.club
8" woofer plus 28mm dome with a 2 kHz XO... hmm. Should work decently but I still wonder how it looks off-axis, and why he dropped the off-center tweeter.Or better yet, build the 2025 version using the newer GRS subwoofer at a stupidly low price that includes CNC'ed baffles...
![]()
We expect that from manufacturers, its the Stereophool review that is the sad part. I new these reviewers were full of BS and pretend to hear differences with cables but when there really is a large difference they still cant hear it.Strategically very - interesting - to praise the greateness of a product which is objectively not great at all.
This shows how untrustworthy Cheskies marketing claims are. Sad, but - lesson learned.
Offset tweeters are intended to reduce baffle diffraction effects by basically making the tweeter a different distance from every edge, thereby reducing severity. This is at least in theory not a bad design choice in that department but it does screw up your horizontal beam some vs a center mounted tweeter, and (more importantly in this case, I'd gather) it makes manufacturing more complicated - now you need two different baffles rather than one.8" woofer plus 28mm dome with a 2 kHz XO... hmm. Should work decently but I still wonder how it looks off-axis, and why he dropped the off-center tweeter.
well, they don't do nothing - they actually cause the screwed up response. Check this out. This is a WinISD simulation that matches up almost perfectly to the measured response. I don't have the exact internal dimensions so this is a guess at ~10.5L.Whats with the passive radiaters that do nothing?
There are enough overpriced sonic catastrophes out there that you can pretty much always say this, even if you don't bother to check.Compares favorably against competitors costing twice as much.”
... and why he dropped the off-center tweeter.
The first speaker I linked to is a VERY inexpensive DIY speaker so mfg costs didn't come into play. It was designed over a decade ago and had an offset tweeter. This reduces diffraction ON AXIS (as the Heissmann link shows) but can worsen things off axis and make stereo imaging worse. It is a still a good choice on wide-baffle speakers, like a classic monkey coffin.Offset tweeters are intended to reduce baffle diffraction effects by basically making the tweeter a different distance from every edge, thereby reducing severity. This is at least in theory not a bad design choice in that department but it does screw up your horizontal beam some vs a center mounted tweeter, and (more importantly in this case, I'd gather) it makes manufacturing more complicated - now you need two different baffles rather than one.
So true! You get this predicted change in output between the two in this box:Whats with the passive radiaters that do nothing?
I'm like, 90% convinced it has PRs because the designer thought they looked cool. No shade, he's literally a kid. A little bit of simulating with free software (VituixCAD is free, WinISD is free, etc etc) would pay off in spades.This is a sealed woofer being unfortunately shoehorned into a passive radiator application, in a small box, with the drones actually upsetting the resonant characteristics badly.![]()
Probably also because "PRs are free extra bass, just like a port except better!"I'm like, 90% convinced it has PRs because the designer thought they looked cool.
The concept strikes me as something better suited to an active speaker anyway. With a steep highpass below 40-50 Hz, excursion would actually remain quite reasonable.I guess the improvement is after you EQ the peak away save amp power...![]()
I have confirmation that the tweeter leads were not reversed in the units that were measured.The dip in the crossover region he measured indicates that THAT speaker has the tweeter leads reversed - it could have happen at the manufacturing stage, or more likely he inadvertently reversed them while reassembling the speaker.
Yes, the capacitor trick would help this quite a bit.The concept strikes me as something better suited to an active speaker anyway. With a steep highpass below 40-50 Hz, excursion would actually remain quite reasonable.
I guess the PRs could use some more mass?
I'd also give the old series capacitor trick a shot, it does tend to help the peaking with drivers shoehorned into small enclosures. Maybe 470µ?
Nah, the driver itself is not suited to bass reflex enclosures. I've modeled it out, it never really works except in a sealed box. Even then it isn't anything amazing. Ultimately we're looking at a driver more suited to use as a midrange than as a woofer.The concept strikes me as something better suited to an active speaker anyway. With a steep highpass below 40-50 Hz, excursion would actually remain quite reasonable.
I guess the PRs could use some more mass?
I'd also give the old series capacitor trick a shot, it does tend to help the peaking with drivers shoehorned into small enclosures. Maybe 470µ?