• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Pure Audio Project Trio with Tangband 1808 experience anyone?

Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
57
Likes
56
#1
Hi,

Im interested in the Trio from Pure Audio Project with the Tangband 1808 full range driver. Is there anyone who own this speakers or any speaker from PAP? Anyone could tell something about possible advantages/disadvantages?

Best regards

Quo
 

milezone

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
57
Likes
8
#2
I heard a pair with either the Tangband driver or a low price range Voxativ driver and the sound was extremely congested/compressed/unable to render complex music well. I found them very bad to be honest. This was within the past year.

On an earlier occasion I heard a pair with compression drivers, not sure which model, and they sounded great. I like the design principle of these speakers quite a bit. That said there are few if any boutique speakers these days in this price range which I would spend money on over equivalently priced recording studio/mastering speakers, or something DIY. That said these kind of venture into the realm of DIY at a reasonable price point. I think it's worth it to try and hear multiple configurations so you can determine for yourself.
 

gene_stl

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 14, 2019
Messages
334
Likes
346
Location
St.Louis , Missouri , U.S.A.
#3
I always get into fights with audiophiles who think that it is possible to reproduce the full audio range with one driver , or that it is desireable to do so. There is a reason why a violin is smaller than a viola which is smaller than a cello which is smaller than a bass which is smaller than a double bass.
Full range systems usually totally lack the top octave and are beamy down to about 1 kHz. They also have no bottom two octaves. So if you don't mind missing three or four of the ten octaves and having limited dynamic range on what you do get, and also probably pretty high distortion, go ahead and do a full range. A three or four way is much better. Or a two way with a sub. (really a three way) or, or....

They are so wonderful for female vocals and nothing else.

Tang Band from Parts Express
 

milezone

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
57
Likes
8
#4
There are exceptions to the argument you’re presenting for example a TAD TD-2001 compression driver rated to 500hz has a ~2" voice coil/diaphragm. In addition, depending on the driver material and implementation, some paper cones have some of the best distortion characteristics of any driver.
 
Last edited:

gene_stl

Senior Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 14, 2019
Messages
334
Likes
346
Location
St.Louis , Missouri , U.S.A.
#5
I would love to have a system based on ANY TAD driver(especially the Be ones!;)). Those are not the ones I was talking about. I was talking about the Lowther , Voxativ, CubeAudio, TangBand themed systems which owe their existence to the famed JBL LE8T and before that the D208.(and I think there was a similar Altec Lansing 8" full range) You can make a nice pair of bookshelf speakers with any of the aforementioned but they all need a tweeter and better yet a sub, too! (Ewe, we're back to a three way again , aren't we?)
 
Last edited:

milezone

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 27, 2019
Messages
57
Likes
8
#6
I do think full range drivers have merit and are interesting. I quite like the simplicity, cost, and elegance of single driver speakers using a pair of sub $300 Fostex drivers for example. I lose interest in audio gear when products whether speakers, amplifiers or dacs feel unnecessarily complex or overbuilt.

I've achieved excellent sound from an FE206EN with a ribbon tweeter in a small BLH type enclosure. Though other speakers are perhaps more suited for complex music at medium volume as was my experience. I attribute this in part to the Fostex driver reaching its mechanical limit and compressing under said circumstances. The consensus seems to be that Alnico motors are better suited for single driver applications than ceramic magnets due to "smooth compression" of the voice coil. Here's an explanation a member from another forum posted:

"The whole 'Alnico mojo' is about smooth compression at high average levels, such as what you would have running the amp flat out. AlNiCo (Aluminum-Nickel-Cobalt) is an alloy magnet and all alloy magnets are easier to demagnetize than comparable Ceramic (Strontium Ferrite) magnets. What this means is that as the voice coil starts moving in response to the input signal, it generates a magnetic field of its own that tries to demagnetize the magnet. As its effect lowers the available magnetic field of the AlNiCo magnet, the speaker becomes less efficient, the voice coil moves less, etc. The physics of it is that the small magnets near the surface of the magnet poles (called 'domains') begin to change state, or flip directions. The result is smooth compression, the same kind of operating curve compression that occurs in a tube amplifier. The ceramic magnet, on the other hand, doesn't compress or demagnetize as easily, so the voice coil moves to its mechanical limit and won't go any farther. This is why some players say ceramics sound a little edgy at high average levels as opposed to AlNiCo. However, by properly designing the entire magnetic circuit, ceramics can be made to behave quite well for desireable guitar amp tone and dynamics. You might compare the two magnetic circuits to solid state amps versus tube amps, where the solid state amp gives it all its got then clips hard, while a tube amp compresses nice and smooth. The extension of this idea, then, is that with the AlNiCo, like the tube amp, you can seem to have a louder average volume since it gets compressed smoothly. By the way, the compressing or demagnetization that occurs with the AlNiCo is not permanent. It springs right back to its design operating point."

A voice coil is like an electric motor. The bigger the voice coil, the more wire used, the more torque or pulling power you have to move the cone. With the proper match of components, you can get more sensitivity, wider frequency response, and more power handling ability."

Hence the mega Alnico drivers by the likes of Voxativ, Feastrex, etc. In addition, I've heard much praise about, though never heard the Seas Exotic 8" Alnico driver. The most desirable of the aforementioned TAD drivers feature Alnico magnets.

I think full range (very low mass) drivers can be excellent in two or three way systems. Here's an example: http://lampizator.eu/SPEAKERS/PROJECTS/P24/P24_monster_speakers_raal_altec_lansing.html. The Lampizator guy has apparently DIY'd tons of speaker systems over the years, including a system with those mega magnet ATC midrange domes, and seemingly settled on this design, featuring some very lightweight SABA Greencone drivers with Alnico magnets, and large Alnico bass and subwoofer drivers. This seems like a nice and fairly cost effective setup.

Complex DSP, waveguide and coaxial implementations aside, dipolar speakers like the Pure Audio Project speakers with the right components, are the preferable speaker design in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#7
Hi folks, just joined.

I have the PAP Trio15 with Tangband W8-1808. It came with a biampable cross for use in MTM configuration with its 21” baffles.

I have very extensively studied and measured this system, tried dozens of dsp based crossovers, and come to some conclusions after much learning.

so if you have questions, I might have answers!

I need help selecting a DAC, which was what attracted me here. I currently use the minidsp 2x4 HD...will change to a better DAC, with an opamps three way cross for triampong the PAP.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
59
Likes
19
#8
I have a DIY open baffle with Tangband W8-1708 similar to PAP. The bass with open baffle speakers is highly disappointing. My Genelecs outperform them sonically.
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#9
I have a DIY open baffle with Tangband W8-1708 similar to PAP. The bass with open baffle speakers is highly disappointing. My Genelecs outperform them sonically.

Interesting,

IMO the exact opposite is true...the OB bass (although limited to about 45 hz) is quite widely superior to that of sealed boxes...and better interacts with the room by not exciting its modes as harshly. I do use dsp boost of 3 dB under 110 hz.

my comparison sealed bass are Paradigm Studio 100 v5. They are better at high end, OB lots better at low, IMO.

Low bass easily extended with a sealed sub, I like it best without.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
59
Likes
19
#10
Interesting,

IMO the exact opposite is true...the OB bass (although limited to about 45 hz) is quite widely superior to that of sealed boxes...and better interacts with the room by not exciting its modes as harshly. I do use dsp boost of 3 dB under 110 hz.

my comparison sealed bass are Paradigm Studio 100 v5. They are better at high end, OB lots better at low, IMO.

Low bass easily extended with a sealed sub, I like it best without.
This was a DIY I brought it on eBay. I haven't measured it through and I am not doing any EQ. I hear it from my PC -> steinberg DAC -> LD Systems XS700 amps. I am sure with subs and a minidsp to correct, it would be absolutely wonderful. The Tangband is superb though.
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#11
My woofers are made by Eminence, but are specials sold only by PAP. They have neodymium motors and larger xmax than the commonly used Eminence Alphas. They breakup at about 1300 hz, so can be crossed in anywhere up to about 750 hz.

As for the W8-1808, yes it’s a clean driver, but IMO that’s true only between about 3.5 kHz at top end and about 300 hz in open baffle at low end...it can cover that decade nicely. Beyond that, dispersion collapses. If you mount it atop the OB instead of in middle, you can tilt it back about 10 degrees and gain a bit wider dispersion...up to maybe 20 degrees.

After wrestling with it for years, I tried a 1” dome crossed in at 2.5 kHz. It’s much better. Very noticeable, especially off axis.

A picture of my experimental baffle Attached. I am in process of selecting a tweeter now. The one shown there ripped out of an old pair of Canton Fonum 200 bookshelf speakers from about 1980.

5288D44A-A9E4-42C2-9F93-F1C46A23C978.jpeg
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#12
And, I do not mount the Tangband to a baffle, I mount it by magnet to avoid baffle vibrations. Will laser cut a baffle 2mm larger than frame to fit the driver into.
6D3C208E-29D5-48A5-89C3-3AC0E6D4F64D.jpeg
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
53
Likes
16
Location
Northwest, USA
#13
For reference, I think the Tekton guys do the Lore series of speakers using full range on the 8" driver. I guess it is make-or-break at that point... almost everything depends on the behavior of that one driver...
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#14
For reference, I think the Tekton guys do the Lore series of speakers using full range on the 8" driver. I guess it is make-or-break at that point... almost everything depends on the behavior of that one driver...
There are many examples...some very extreme field coil fullrangers sell at $20,000/unit.

I am trying to navigate the bafflingly gigantic number of options for a tweeter. There must be a pretty big profit margin for driver manufacturers to be so plentiful.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Messages
53
Likes
16
Location
Northwest, USA
#15
There are many examples...some very extreme field coil fullrangers sell at $20,000/unit.

I am trying to navigate the bafflingly gigantic number of options for a tweeter. There must be a pretty big profit margin for driver manufacturers to be so plentiful.
Something in the Fountek ribbon family perhaps???
 

peanuts

Active Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2016
Messages
122
Likes
147
#16
if you want the real deal get the LX521. they are active 4-way with lots of EQ for a reason.
these PAP speakers look pretty aweful just looking at a picture of them.

8" fullrange drivers? going to 15" on the same baffle? no consideration for polar response, what about dipole peak, bafflestep, bass rolloff etc.
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2019
Messages
59
Likes
19
#17
My woofers are made by Eminence, but are specials sold only by PAP. They have neodymium motors and larger xmax than the commonly used Eminence Alphas. They breakup at about 1300 hz, so can be crossed in anywhere up to about 750 hz.

As for the W8-1808, yes it’s a clean driver, but IMO that’s true only between about 3.5 kHz at top end and about 300 hz in open baffle at low end...it can cover that decade nicely. Beyond that, dispersion collapses. If you mount it atop the OB instead of in middle, you can tilt it back about 10 degrees and gain a bit wider dispersion...up to maybe 20 degrees.

After wrestling with it for years, I tried a 1” dome crossed in at 2.5 kHz. It’s much better. Very noticeable, especially off axis.

A picture of my experimental baffle Attached. I am in process of selecting a tweeter now. The one shown there ripped out of an old pair of Canton Fonum 200 bookshelf speakers from about 1980.

View attachment 72303
Here are my pictures
 

Attachments

Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#18
In my experience they won’t sound correct until at least 3’ from wall, esp bass.

The post amp cross I got with mine is a 3.9 mh driving woofers in parallel, with the tangband using reverse connection polarity and a 2nd order cross, with ability to strap in your
C095B729-D8B1-4ABD-A543-E23B114E9526.jpeg
option of 4 different discrete resistors to attenuate.
It can be biamped (cross totally separated), or strapped for a single amp.
 
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
55
Likes
29
#19
if you want the real deal get the LX521. they are active 4-way with lots of EQ for a reason.
these PAP speakers look pretty aweful just looking at a picture of them.

8" fullrange drivers? going to 15" on the same baffle? no consideration for polar response, what about dipole peak, bafflestep, bass rolloff etc.
Yes there are lots of problems.

One of the very biggest ones with PAP is uncontrollable panel vibration...trust me it dominates.

The bass drivers with supplied cross rolloff gently at about 175 hz, (but drivers are capable of higher) and if instead used with a dsp Harsch cross at 350 hz it sounds great up to about 3 kHz, with the tangband atop on a narrow baffle.

From there up it needs a tweeter, which I am looking into now, https://audioxpress.com/article/test-bench-sb-acoustics-satori-tw29rn-high-end-tweeter is one candidate, and a ribbon must be considered so I'm looking at that. Choosing an appropriate cross, top baffle shape and tweeer will get the dispersion match I need.

FYI The wide (21”) baffle for the W8 fullrange can’t be narrowed without losing response from fullrange low end, and of course the 8” has about +/-10 degrees of usable horizontal dispersionimprovable a bit if you angle it back.

Boosting the tangband low end via dsp just doesn’t sound right. A curved rearward baffle solves those issues, and allows the tangband to be a great midrange driver in the 300 to 3 k decade...not below.

Then the lower 15” needs to be a separately crossed in h frame,

lots to do.
 
OP
Q
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
57
Likes
56
Thread Starter #20
Nice build Sprint.

Meanwhile I build my own version of the Trio TB and it sounds great.
Is there a owner who exactly know the crossover frequency of sub and fullrange?

I choose the 1772 and after a long time with Alpha 15 I switched to another brand that sound better in my ears.

And some time ago I build Fostex Fe206en enclosures with really great low end. They are called Vulcan. BTW much better that Kirishima. http://www.wodendesign.com/Vulcan.html
 

Attachments

Top Bottom