which B&W model is it?

@@randycochones5965 DM303. 20 years old.

B&W is hit and miss these days, I’m not really surprised, sorry to say that.

How about you share the model #...tks! 😊

@@IronMan-tx6mt DM303

Indeed ... forsaking output by choosing small and deep.

Watts are fairly cheap these days....power is readily available to drive these speakers if you need more SPL. 1 watt is just a standard for measurement purposes.

​@@dmark2639agreed You can get some good deals on a TPA3255 based amplifier that would take these to either excursion or the thermal limit for a couple of hundred dollars

​@@dmark2639 You're right, but compression would obscure bass tone and detail, and just be a lossy overlay atop everything. Once it's experienced, it's quite easy to hear the onset of that type of compression.

Agreed. Poor driver selection. They don't complement each other very well.

10DB says it all

News on that one is coming soon. Spooler, it is incredible.

Exactly

True, but even if you are willing to make that tradeoff, you still want a smooth frequency response.

You could get vintage Infinity's or Cerwin-Vega's that are 20 dB more sensitive.

​​@@1mctous minus the low frequency extension plus much larger volume. If you consider efficiency, cabinet size and bass extension, you can pick only two.

Nice, have fun. Carver high power amps ... very cool. One thing is for sure, they look killer. I'd recommend sorbothane iso-pucks between them and whatever they're placed upon. Dirt cheap and superior to anything else.

I think the PRs had a lot to do with that.

@@alrio8102 think you missed the joke. but seriously speaking, you might be right, PRs often help with bass port resonances and waterfall performance.

They think ppl buy with their eyes^^.

Matt Philips is the designer. Erin from Erin's Audio Corner posted an email from him in the comments section of his recent video about the design concept.

@@spoiler9112 I watched Erin's review a while back. Danny's measurements are pretty close to Erin's. Matt explains the concept in the email however, Dayton make some really good drivers, why choose these drivers, come up with this design and then decide this is a flagship product? Makes no sense to me.

It's the surrounds, look at those amazing, badass surrounds, ... they gotta sound good.

Well, they have an uneven response and a fairly dipped out area on the vocal region. Also just above the cross over point the drivers are not in phase very well. Those are audible issues. Plus the sensitivity is so low that it will be a problem for most people. Those are the facts.

is not dynamic range just howe loud it can play? then ytou have dynamic range, just need power to get the highest peaks of power

​@@sudd3660yes I am curious about why and how it's the case that higher sensitivity speakers sound more dynamic, because I accept that they do, but I just don't know why a low efficiency speaker couldn't sound the same just with scaled up output power. Any takers for a scientific description? Could be that low sensitivity speakers simply aren't doing much of anything until a certain threshold of power overcomes their impedance and drivers moving mass, such that on a linear scale they would trend more towards the "all or nothing" side of power input vs SPL output, whereas efficient speakers trend toward the linear side, where output matches input even at lower power levels - not just absolute power levels, but RELATIVE power levels. So they're just more true to the source in that they can respond linearly to .1w and 10w, whereas the less efficient speaker does not equally respond to 1w as it does 100w... Same ratio, but different relative outputs. That's a theory.

Lower sensitivity helps when the woofer is smaller. Mine are 6 inch and are pretty flat to 40htz, but only 81 dB sensitivity. Pump 100 watts through them, and the bass is fast, tight & deep without being overpowering. That is my experience.

@@jaycoleman8062 why do you say it "helps"? It's not the lower sensitivity itself that helps, but rather if you want more bass extension naturally (i.e. without EQ) then it is a necessary side effect that simply goes with a crossover (and/or driver) design that lowers sensitivity at higher frequencies. Drivers do not have one sensitivity measurement across their frequency range, the stated sensitivity is typically at 1khz or averaged over a limited frequency range. Low bass is ALWAYS less efficient and would measure as a lower sensitivity than higher frequencies in woofers, to a point. So if your woofer with no crossover is 93db sensitive at 200hz, it may be 89db at 80hz, 84db at 60, 78 at 50, and 71db at 40hz, for example. In order to design a speaker that's only -3db at 50hz and -10 at 40hz, you cannot boost those lows, you can only cut the higher frequencies, so your x-over would pull down the sensitivity over 200hz by 12db, resulting in a sensitivity rating of 81db in this example. This isn't a benefit or "help" to be lower sensitivity, it's just physics and the fact that if you want usable bass extension in a small speaker to 40 or 50hz, your crossover HAS to pull down the higher frequencies to bring it down to the natural (maximum) sensitivity level of the low bass frequency you're targeting. You're throwing away free efficiency of the driver higher up, as a necessary evil, to get that extension. This is why active crossovers and EQ is superior, you don't have to throw away any efficiency passively, you can merely boost the lows to get the same the result, but maintain the higher inherent efficiency of the driver higher up. The amp will end up only needing to produce a very small amount of current where the driver is very efficient, and perhaps 8x the power at 40hz to get you that extension. That part is true whether active or passive, but without a passive crossover you'd require less power higher up to produce the same SPL, and get the sonic benefits of the higher sensitivity and lack of passive attenuation. A 15" pro driver can be around 100db sensitive... But not at 30-50hz. Even a very sensitive large pro woofer, if it's passively crossed and designed to play down to 30hz at -3db, is going to have a final sensitivity rating WAY under it's marketed 100db, down in the 80s like a bookshelf would be. It's just the nature of low bass. But I'd prefer to use EQ and active crossovers to boost the low bass, and not waste any energy but maintain the high sensitivity (it's natural/inherent sensitivity) of the driver sans passive crossover attenuation.

Bigger cabinet wouldnt hurt.

@@davidstevens7809 Maybe - but not by much, and that's a lotta' work.

@@NeilBlanchard oh. I agree with danny .theres a mismatch of drivers for sure

@@davidstevens7809 Right - the woofer is almost always the lowest sensitivity driver used in a given speaker, and the other driver(s) have to have their output lowers to bring it into balance.

A direct reply from Parts Express said they are 78.5db, and they recommended the Dayton A400 amp, that is $630, to drive them.

Not really, 10watts will suffice

It is actually much lower, about 75dB average and dropping to 73dB at 55Hz. You can't just throw a bunch of power at them either, their is significant woofer compression above 96dB of output.

"To boldly go where no one has gone before." Those are sometimes the thoughts of a first time designer who is not hampered by previous experience.

@@hugobloemers4425Hundo pee pee

You don't get a clean spectral decay anywhere close to that if you don't know what you're doing. He said they went for bass, that's the prob.

There is a good explanation of how the Opal 1 came to be in the pinned comment on Erin's Audio Corner video of the Opal 1.

Probably meant to be a near-field desk monitor, where you don't need a ton of output. Also, wattage is fairly cheap today...you could easily find an amp with plenty of power without breaking the bank. Sure, it has other issues, but it's supposed to be a budget speaker, not high-end.

I've heard them. Look inside.

@@dannyrichie9743 thx Danny, will do. actually the ones i have are the Sierra LX , not the v2 version, but prob same deal and will check out the inners

It would knock out all of the bottom end.

The tweeters might be the only drivers that can be salvaged for another build

@@charlespablo1414 the woofers can be reused, but for bass only, I would pick a different driver altogether for the mid crossing between the woofers and tweeter.

They are great little woofers if used for low bass, but it is a huge compromise to use them in ranges above that.

Sure, tell that to my lead sheet lined, steel rods tensioned, machined bronze reinforced composite/mdf/birch ply monstrosity.

Cud be. Maybe problem is the sub driver they used.

@@jondonnelly4831 not very subtle

Keep in mind that PE is a parts warehouse. They aren't speaker designers.

If you want a flat response. That drop around 3 k is there because our ears are about 6 to 10 db more sensitive there so the drop counteract this. I use equalizers to match my ears as close as possible. So I drop frequencies that my ears pickup and boost the ones my ears suck at.

Nope. Looks like both drivers have low sensitivity. I would just recomment ppl buying at tweeter that plays lower into 800-1400Hz and use an L pad to bring the tweeter level down and match the impedance of the old tweeter if one wants to use the stock filter. L pad online calculators are easy to use. Adjusting the 2 resistors can give better phase rotation even with the stock filter so the dip would be completely gone. Dayton have several awesome tweeters for cheap that sound excellent. One just have to except the fact that is doesnt play very loud without a ton of power. But it will play loud enough for nearfield use. Atleast this way you would have a good sounding speaker that doesnt need a sub. What killed this speaker is the dip at 3kHz which is in the middle of female vocal range, and voices will sound weird and too laid back in the soundstage.

Yes, what speaker is that?

Oh that is something new. The vocal range and imaging is among the best speakers in the world. It is over the top good. You'll hear more on it soon.

fantastic! looking forward to it. thx for the Video

@@dannyrichie9743 Thanks for the scoop!

That is an area where there is baffle step loss.

FRA/ZMA is not the same when you mount a driver into an enclosure.

Brass is a more realistic option than copper and still worlds better than steel

It is a huge compromise when you have a small woofer covering midrange and at the same time is playing its guts out to try to play ow bass.

A polarity flip is not going to help. The woofers are not bad for ranges below 300Hz, and if four of them were used in series/parallel to get the output levels up. Useful drivers, just not in this configuration.

@@dannyrichie9743 i ment to fix the xover marriage between the woofer and tweeter dip.

@@dannyrichie9743 i agree its a mismatch in level.

Not really, the cabinet is designed for that woofer, so good luck trying to find another woofer to fit the same hole, Passive Radiators, and airspace requirements. Then changing the tweeter won't help either as the dip at 3KHz is a diffraction issue caused by the top/side edges all being the same distance from the tweeter.

3255 based monoblock should work an ab type 30 watt amp ,will struggle

It is actually in a box with an M-130. It has a second LGK driver on the rear. It sounds incredible. I'll shoot a video on it soon.

@@dannyrichie9743 Sweet!!!

Sweet!

Yes, decay rates get longer the louder they are played.

@@dannyrichie9743 Thanks.

The biggest problem with that one was that there was no room inside to put any real parts. It was also really hard to disassemble.

Emotiva might be a good option as well. 👍🏻

"not sounding very good"... Says it all really!

A lot easier / relatively cheaper to buy as much power as you could possibly need these days, but sooner or later the drivers will run out of clean excursion and/or thermal compression - if not first delaminating the voice coils. This could be considered a learning experience for the designer, but probably should never have made a commercial product.

The issue at ~3KHz with the tweeter is mainly a diffraction issue caused by the sharp edges of the sides/top all being equidistant to the tweeter, crossover slope can't really help with that. (It's also why the dip smooths out in the Horizontal axis measurements and gets worse with the grill.)

You're not saying as much useful and absolute truth as you think you are and have accepted as true. Don't make an excuse for what is simply a matter of terrible decisions made for driver selection. Anyone who opts for low sensitivity drivers whether in regards to more low end capabilities or not doesn't have a clue about what truly makes a speaker sound coherent or dynamic or even truly low distortion playback. The best sounding speakers in the world aside from panel electrostatic speakers are all truly great because they understand that the less a driver has to physically move and use excursion, the lower distortion the presentation will be and the more dynamics that will be rendered correctly which is ultimately what makes something sound REAL. Only subwoofers need high excursion for simple output energy required to move those frequencies in the same level manner of high frequency signals. Physics doesn't bend. Adding DSP has its many tradeoffs as well that basically involve kissing macro detail goodbye for an "even response." Like it or not including feelings about his company left behind from his legacy, Paul W Klipsch understood the bigger picture and knew damn well that perfectly even frequency response was not to be number one or even number 2 on the list of designing & judging truly realistic sound. It's of course extremely important but not as much as time domain factors as well as truly low distortion in the midband, at least not on its own but as a combined effort with those other absolutes.

@HiFiWright Klipsch horns are not anywhere in the equation! Not only are they not accurate in frequency response, but they are missing almost 3khz of high frequency response. I guess that may be what is considered a live presentation by a small minority. DSP removes detail?' That is pure USDA choice, Bull Manure! Remove all those resistors, inductors & capacitors out of the signal path. Add a 4th order active filter. Now you have the ability to crossover in phase several octaves above and below the crossover point (something a passive network can never achieve). Plus, you can control the output of each driver with its own amplifier instead of a handful of resistors. Now, this speaker could have been designed better, with no argument in that regard. I am simply stating that part of the problem with efficiency, phase issues, and impedance is because of the passive networks used. Since frequencies have size. Bigger drivers will put out longer frequencies. So tweeters and woofers do not disperse sound in the same manner. What we experience is that sound moves at the same speed, regardless of how long or length the frequency is at the time of arrival at our ears. Tweeters present diffraction problems on the face of the baffle. Woofer problems are just the opposite. They wrap frequencies around the baffle when the frequency is larger than the baffle. So, in that regard, they are not the same. These audio systems are basicly illusions. Miles Davis blows through a horn, not a 1.25" Dome tweeter. So, duplication of a live performance has not happened in audio. At least not in my 40 years in this hobby. But sounding " like" a live performance, some systems can almost get close.

Just above the crossover point the drivers are not in phase very well.

Actually no. Sum of the drivers are 3dB higher than the tweeter dip level, even though the woofer is 7dB lower in level. They sum pretty much in phase in this region. It’s the tweeter that has an on axis dip on the baffle. It Matters because it needs to be considered for the power response of the speaker. This is not fixable in the crossover. It’s a geometric issue.

@@martinenstrom8206 If you check out the vertical off axis in each direction (up and down) you can see and watch the phase rotation. They are not out of phase, but not completely in phase either. The tweeters response is also easily fixed with the crossover.

You'd have to series/parallel four of them to match the sensitivity of the LGK 2.0 driver, but it could be made to work.

Not without redesigning the cabinet/speaker/crossover altogether. The LGK needs a separate airspace, and you will ideally need 2 woofers in parallel to better match the sensitivity of the LGK.

I could but it would be expensive. That's two servo amps and custom servo woofers plus everything else, and all of those woofers need their own air space.... The results will be far better and it will be a lot cheaper to add a single 12" servo sub to a pair of X-LS Encores.

These will play fairly low.

Erin's Audio Corner has measurements you can see for what's below 200Hz, they are tuned low when placed near the front wall.

@@hoth2112 I has forgotten about that. Thanks.

Baffle step loss.

How about one with a 12" woofer?

Beefy air core inductors will make a little difference of around 1db gain which is not worth the cost

Well, that is kind of true. I do have high standards that to some might seem a little snobbish. There are sometimes issues that I can't fix. What I consider an issue is a clear audible problem. Some might can live with it, but it is still a problem. A new video launches tomorrow covering a vintage JBL that has a LOT of woofer break up. I can't notch it out. It is a problem and it is audible. Watch the video to see where it goes. On the contrary though, most of the upgrades that I offer requires spending only a little bit of money to get significant improvements, and most of our customers consider them bargains.

@@dannyrichie9743 I completely agree with you Danny I think it’s disgusting that speaker brands play some self in a price bracket that smells of quality yet a lot of the time they use substandard off the shelf parts but they still charge you for the extra and I think in today’s times 2024, you’ve got to really be not caring and don’t give a damn as a manufacturer to produce a really crap sounding speaker because technology is got to the point where a very good product can be made. It can be tuned to sound very good. There are very good parts available on the market at sensible prices considering manufacturers would be buying in bulk they would get a better deal on the price of the parts yeah they still managed to come in short a lot of the time but at the end of the day hi-fi products are just the same as any other product. A manufacturer will have an entry point item a midpriced item and a top price item and the only way they can get around charging what they do is by overcharging for the top end charging about correct for the bottom end and then basically picking a price out there for the midpriced item but not really doing any extra with the internals compared to the base spec item and to be honest, I think a lot of times speakers are like fashion jewellery and people buy it on its looks rather than on its sound and at the end of the day it is all about the sound which is where I agree 100% with your philosophy but sadly people like magpies you know the black-and-white birds that like shiny thingsthey tend to go for the bling and the sales crap and forget about how it sounds and then try to get it to sound good after they brought it. You wouldn’t do that with any other product.

By passive membranes are you referring to passive radiators? These were tuned by those PR's to 35Hz. Ports large enough to allow proper tuning (to that same range) would have to be so big in diameter and so long that they wouldn't even fit in the box. They would take up more air space than there is in the box. These woofers can move a LOT of air. So a 2" port would cause significant port noise. It might need to be nearly 3" in diameter to avoid port noise, and to tune a box that small to 35Hz would be really long. I would guess about 32 to 36 inches long.

@@dannyrichie9743 I guess so