303 question for Ken

[Guest Bret]

Ken -

From a thread about the 303 archived here, let me quote you; "The results, I believe, are speakers that are audibly distinct, not clones, yet are clearly in the family, and likely to appreciated by those who like subscribe the original approach."

When I look at what I can about the 303 and I read what you have said about them in other threads I see that you used a more modern tweeter, a more modern woofer, a slick cabinet design with fewer refraction problems, etc.

The one thing that sticks-out as being very "the same" about the 303 and the 3a and others is that eyeball midrange driver.

Was that something you chose to do as "an echo," or was that the only way you found to get the even energy response and so the only/best/most practical way of making that speaker sound "clearly in the family?"

If I'm completely wrong in every important respect, please tell me why you chose to step back to an ADD driver for the midrange. Wasn't that midrange design abandoned in about 1978?

Bret

[kkantor]

I would say that the midrange on the 303 has just about the same relative delta to the original 3a driver as do the woofer and tweeter. Obviously, this is subjective. The motors of all three drivers were changed a great deal. Diaphragm materials much less so.

>Was that something you chose to do as "an echo," or was that the >only way you found to get the even energy response and so the >only/best/most practical way of making that speaker sound "clearly >in the family?"

The unusual construction of the midrange does contribute to its excellent behavior. To make such a transducer work well, in my opinion, requires extra measures beyond simply sticking a tweeter into the copy machine and hitting "enlarge." (Note that I have not generally used midrange domes in my other designs, even expensive ones.) The eyeball approach was a viable option. By providing the ability to tailor spatial behavior, frequency response and diaphragm damping somewhat independently of moving mass and material, a better driver can result.

I don't remember which team member coined the term "bee-butt," but it caught on....

[Guest Bret]

>The unusual construction of the midrange does contribute to its excellent behavior.<

Thank you, Ken. I noticed amongst its excellent behaviors you were able to cross it over very, very low.

I gotta hear a pair of these things. I'll bet they blow the doors off of, uh, a lot of other things.

Bret

[administrator]

Hey Bret .. if you're ever in Southern California, you can swing by my place. I have a small living room with a couch surrounded by four 303a's and the center channel from that series.

I picked up Thirteenth Step from A Perfect Circle recently and I found myself thanking Ken yet again ..

Mark

[Guest Bret]

>By providing the ability to tailor spatial behavior, frequency response and diaphragm damping somewhat independently of moving mass and material, a better driver can result. <

A disturbing thought occured to me this morning as I was laying in the bed trying to wake-up.

From your tests we're going to find-out something about how these old woofers age, but what of these midranges? No, that's not a thinly veiled request or suggestion, I was just thinking that the "foam" deteriorates on everything else and if it deteriorates in these midrange units we're going to have trouble because you can't get these anymore and repair would be tedious or expensive and probably not entirely satisfying.

I'm going to start another thread, something with AR-90 in the title. I'll tell how my concern got started and how age on these midrange drivers may be manifesting itself.

Bret