scan speak, worth the money???

[vince]

Hello,
I have just finished an electronic x over network prodject for my HT room. It has two aux. x over boards and level controls not being used so I just got this bright idea to build a new center channel speaker. I currently have a dual five inch woofer conf. with a one inch fabric dome tweeter. All current drivers are Vifa middle of the road stuff.

My ultimate question is are these scan speak drivers really better than say Seas or Vifa or Peerless if you were to compare all of thier top of the line stuff? I keep reading about the motor structure of the scan speak drivers and how great they are! I will be using for my new design, a three way config. two eight inch woofers, one four inch mid, and one tweeter, all electronicly crossed over 24db per octave, with trim controls for the mid and tweeter with 12 position rotary switches. Drivers will be driven with Rotel amps.

So can anyone comment on these drivers as being the real deal or not. Or would I just be paying for alot of R and D??
Regards,
Vince

[cixelsid]

As with all products some ScanSpeak drivers are very good and some aren't so great.

You wouldn't want to use a generic active 24dB L/R crossover with their metal cone woofers, since the cone breakup modes require special attention.

[hdspeakerman]

Hi,
I have wanted to try the Scan Speak drivers for some time but my crossover skills and their price have made it prohibitive for now. I have recently bought some Usher drivers at a good price and have been working with them. They are only worth the extra money if you can get the extra performance out of them. Speakers can be like many other things in that everyone likes different things.
Howard

[denizen23]

I switched from some excellent Vifa drivers to Scan-Speak, and I can say the difference is not astonishing, but it is indeed perceptible. For 1/10th the price however, the Vifas were a much better value. Still, as the previous poster said, with a proper setup to get that extra performance out of them, they sure sound amazingly clean and natural.

[Xenith]

I got two of the new neodymium tweeters in used but excellent condition.

One of them is performing excellent in a test-cabinet for my 3-Way In-Wall System from 1,4kHz up to about 25kHz.
It is flat (+-0,5dB @3dB/oct smoothing) exept of a narrowband peak around 17kHz.
THD is <0,2% at 90dBSPL and only H2. H3....H6 are barely measurable in my room and seem to be < 0,02%
I really enjoy this driver - not just because it is capable of a low XO so that my 4"Woofer is perfectly 2Pi in it's operating range, but also because it has a clean sound wich stays smooth even under high angles.

Some further comments:
Midwoofer is Peerless HDS PPB (after they discontinued the Exclusive 4')
I am still serching for a Woofer capable of delivering clean undistorted (<0,2%THD) Sound from about 180 to 3kHz with also low H3 component...
For Midrange the small ScanSpeak seems to be not the best coice because of lacking shorting rings / faraday shielding. In HD it is outperformed by Peerless HDS Exclusive I think.
The 15W seems to be better and the 18W may be best in HD, but in my opinion has a too large cone so that the important upper midrange is surpressed in the room response.

In my opinion ScanSpeak is a little bit to expensive for what you get, but if you can get it used in nice condition it's worth a tought!
If not, have a look at the Peerless HDS-Tweeter or the new highend Vifa Tweeter which should have also nice sonic capabilities and pick a woofer by:
Usher, Peerless HDS (exclusive?), Vifa, Dayton Reference, Audax, etc...acording to your taste.
Measurements are available at ZaphAudio or diyaudio afaik

[drf]

cixelsid wrote:

You wouldn't want to use a generic active 24dB L/R crossover with their metal cone woofers, since the cone breakup modes require special attention.

This sentence intrigues me. Can you explain the difference between a generic L/R allignment and another? From a certain view point all crossovers are generic.

[MrPorterhouse]

Are there any good resources or shreadsheets that list a comparison of the drivers sound characteristics? Its easy enough to find the T/S parameters, but in order to find out how some of these drivers "sound", I've had to read many threads scattered all over the place. Its fun to read 'em, but its fairly time consuming. It would be nice to have a consolidated document of what the drivers characteristics are. Does that exist?

[drf]

I think the problem with a resource like that would be the fact that perception is subjective. Also there are a bucket load off factors that will dictate how different each driver is presented sonically.
For example would every who submits opinions to this resource be using the same method for appraisel for each driver? Some people might not have an adequate test enclosure, while others might not even use one, room environment would also play a major role inhow a speakers sounds. E.g what sounds good in my room might sound likke rubbish in yours, regardless of the enclosure.

It would be nice to think we could rate the sonic permance of drivers independant of scientifically measurable attributes, but unfortunately for the most part all descriptions of sonic characteristics could be summed up as either good, bad or indifferent.



Now I stand back and await correction

cheers
Dr F

[MrPorterhouse]

drf wrote:

I think the problem with a resource like that would be the fact that perception is subjective. Also there are a bucket load off factors that will dictate how different each driver is presented sonically.
For example would every who submits opinions to this resource be using the same method for appraisel for each driver? Some people might not have an adequate test enclosure, while others might not even use one, room environment would also play a major role inhow a speakers sounds. E.g what sounds good in my room might sound likke rubbish in yours, regardless of the enclosure.

It would be nice to think we could rate the sonic permance of drivers independant of scientifically measurable attributes, but unfortunately for the most part all descriptions of sonic characteristics could be summed up as either good, bad or indifferent.



Now I stand back and await correction

cheers
Dr F

I am a scientist by profession, so I completely understand the difference between quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Subjectivity is a problem, but can be understood if the variables are understood as a universal basis or under a controlled experiment. Point being that if the same person is doing the driver ratings and people understand how that person is rating and can interpret the data, then the results have some meaning. Then, if you have a group that is running the same experiement, and people tend to "agree" with each other, the validity of the results is increased.

At least it would be nice to have some sort of rough guide to compare what buying the more expensive drivers offer, or what the less expensive drivers compromise.

[ISLAND1000]

thylantyr wrote:

I solve this problem by buying driver samples, one of each, to audition.
This pretty much removes all the mystery, albiet it takes some extra cash and time to do the
evaluation but in the end you have the answers you seek

Thylantyr, how many drivers have you bought and auditioned for any one project? And then what do you do with the drivers you don't like?
What about all those response graphs shown in the Madisound catalog? Are they of any use in choosing a driver?

[drf]

MrPorterhouse wrote:

At least it would be nice to have some sort of rough guide to compare what buying the more expensive drivers offer, or what the less expensive drivers compromise.

That reminds me of a story I once heard about knowing/understanding the Author and how it changes your perception and the significance of a book.

On the topic of speaker quality and value for money, I personally believe that unless an enclosure is properly designed then driver selection will have little impact. Let me quantify because I can't explain it other than in a list:

best quality -> high end driver, properly implemented
good quality ->mediocre driver, properly implemented
better than average quality ->cheap driver properly implemented
average quality ->highend driver poorly implemented
below average quality -> any driver poorly implemented
worse quality -> Bose or AWA of the shelf <- joke

If that makes sense.

[JCD]

A couple of sites that give a decent "independent" representation of what the drivers characteristics are like..


LDSG
Zaph Audio

To get to the OP, my general "belief" is that the extra cost will be worth the $$ in some circumstances and sometimes it won't. Ultimately it will depend on how the drivers blend and the basic characteristics inheirant in a specific design. But regardless, it will be a perception thing -- regardless of how "perfect" a driver may be, you may prefer a "bright" tweeter or one that is more "laid back".


JCD

[Geoff St. Germain]

With most products you run into diminishing returns as price goes up. I have no doubt that this happens with Scan Speak as well. Looking at Zaph's driver comparisons you can see that there are drivers that cost a fraction of the price of the top end Scan Speaks and offer a similar level of performance. For example, the Seas ER series drivers seem to cost around 1/4 of a Revelator and offers a similar level of performance but offers much better value. It comes down to picking the right driver for the job. I'm sure there are some instances in which the Scan Speak would be better than another less expensive driver and at the same time there are instances when the less expensive driver could give you almost the same performance in the application and do it at a fraction of the cost.

[groundie]

thylantyr
you happened to mention QSC PLX amps.
is the fan noise an issue with these?
which model did you get?
i'm considering these also.