Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello!

WinISD wants to see a number for Re. That much is understood.

But McCauley provides this sort of spec for their cone drivers:

"4Ω DC Coil Resistance (Re/Dcr) 6Ω"

I hesitate simply to enter 6 ohms for the value of Re in WinISD. Am I wrong to hesitate? If not, maybe someone here can help me learn to derive the correct numbers for McCauley drivers.

Sorry but the system here will not let me post a link to the McCauley "components" page. :>(

Many thanks in advance!
Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Is there a driver in particular you trying to model?

Trying to see what T/S parameters they have on their site.
Many thanks to all for the kind responses!

After I posted, I thought it would have been better to title the post "Help interpreting McCauley specs?"

Anyhow, I have a bunch of 6244's and 6256's, all nominally 8 ohms. They are rather old (late '80s early '90s), and the original hard copy datasheets are filed away with other old papers deep in a box somewhere. :>(

I would love to compare those sheets with the data McCauley provides online these days. I just don't remember seeing that convoluted expression for Re in the past, and do not want it to cause confounds.

Cheers,
Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
The DCR is 6 ohms, enter the Re as 4 ohms.
But unless I am having an elder moment here, DC resistance *is* Re by definition. Why should there be two numbers for the same conceptual quantity? Very puzzling.

To further confuse the issue, someone else entered some McCauley drivers in page 4 of the sticky thread in this forum for WinISD driver files. In the file uploaded for the 6232, for example, that person used 5.9 ohms. Following your advice, the figure ought to be 4 ohms.

Thinking out loud here--I wonder if that number even matters a whole lot when addressing basic box volume & tuning questions.

Cheers,
Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Have thought some more about this little problem, and begin to believe more strongly that McCauley has simply goofed up a bit the way they present that spec on their web pages.

A 6 ohm (approx) Re for a nominal 8 ohm speaker sounds reasonable to me. The 4 ohm reference at the beginning of the expression is some sort of nonsense mistake, IMHO.

The "Re/Dcr" expression looks to me now like a confusing way to say "Re (DC resistance)" and should not be construed as one quantity divided by another.

With this interpretation, the driver files posted elsewhere in this forum are probably accurate.

I will try to call someone at McCauley to verify and will post back here with any relevant information.

Cheers,
Bob
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
19,397 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Here are the 6244 and 6256 specs as listed on the McAuley website in December of 1996:

http://web.archive.org/web/19961218205121/http://www.mccauley.com/lft.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/19961218205121/http://www.mccauley.com/lft.htm

Both spec sheets show the nominal 8 ohm version having a Re of 6 ohms.
Aha! What a good idea to sniff around in archive.org! You have saved me a phone call for sure. (That is a wonderful place for a web surfer to spend many hours researching all sorts of obscure topics.)

It is good to have more confidence in one's data & resulting models before one actually starts to spend valuable time cutting up valuable wood. Am hoping to set up a bench to do my own measurements, but that project always seems to drift off into the future. :>)

The confusing term probably got a little garbled during database merge/maintenance. Today's McCauley pages do not make it very clear that these speakers are available in 4 and 16 Ohm models as well as 8.

Again, thanks to all for responding!
Bob
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top