Guest Lorin Posted August 10, 2007 Report Share Posted August 10, 2007 Does the AR9 use the same midrange as the AR91. If not, what is the difference. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lorin Posted August 11, 2007 Report Share Posted August 11, 2007 I thougth this was a pretty straight forward question. I own the 9s and am familiar with the 90 and 91s. Yes, the crossover pts I believe are all the same. But, the power handling of each is very different. Is such due to the crossover and overall design or are the drivers also speced differently? I have also obseverd that they seem to have different part numbers accross the models. I often see the mids and tweeters for sale from a 90 or 91 on ebay, and have often consider acquiring an extra set just in case. I have gone through the search but nothing specific so far. Thus, the reason for asking.Thanks, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingus Posted August 11, 2007 Report Share Posted August 11, 2007 i found this info by doing a search for '91'.from the thread 'Is The AR-91 A "Sleeper"?', this is an excerpt from a post by Tom Tyson, 7/28/05;>The AR-91 tweeter was identical to that used in the AR-9 and AR-90, but the midrange unit was modified. This unit has a different part number as well. The 1-1/2-inch midrange unit used in the AR-9 and 90 used Ferro Fluid on *both* sides of the voice coil, and sealed off the cavity under the dome, thus raising the resonance frequency of the dome; but in the AR-9 and 90, the crossover was set quite high and this was not an issue. In the AR-91 the crossover was 700Hz, so the voice coil in the midrange used Ferro Fluid on the *inside* of the voice coil only, and thus the cavity beneath the dome was larger, lowering the resonance frequency of the dome. It could then operate within the 700Hz crossover range more effectively. The small “semi-horn” appendage on the front did not affect the lower cutoff frequency of the dome, as it was designed to help maintain efficiency in the upper level of the operating range. It did nothing below 3kHz according to Tim Holl.> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lorin Posted August 11, 2007 Report Share Posted August 11, 2007 dingus,Much appreciated! Thank you,Lorin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingus Posted August 12, 2007 Report Share Posted August 12, 2007 glad to be of help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.