6in vs 8in woofers

[Joe_Carr]

What is the main difference when you go from a 6in to a 8in woofer? Like the HLS610 vs HLS810? Is it noticeable difference on the two?

[dakatabg]

the woofer is bigger when we have more inches on it! Do you mean for the sound quality or the size?

[Joe_Carr]

Well I was wondering that is both will not have a noticeable difference in sound. But does the 8inch just have more bass or is it not noticeable?

[JohnMichael]

The 8 inch woofer will move more air than the 6 inch. When a driver moves more air it can deliver deeper bass or similar bass with greater efficiency. In a two way a 6 inch woofer will not beam as much when it matches with the tweeter. As we always say listen and pick the best for your ears.

One other thought is in a small room a 6 inch woofer might have less problem being integrated in your room.

[RGA]

It will depend on the design of the speaker. All else being equal what John Michael says is correct. But there are a number of speakers using a two way design with an 8 inch woofer that integrate better than speakers using a 6 inch and also beam less. What we mean by beaming is becoming directional. What we mean by integration is cohesiveness. In theory a 6 inch woofer and a 1 inch tweeter "should" sound integrated or cohesive in that the drivers working together sound as close to being one single driver or point in space that is reproducing sound (not sounding like a separate tweeter and woofer doing their own thing). However this theory is blown to the weeds when speakers Like the Audio Note E,J and K and Trenner and Freidl, Harbeth, Tannoy come along which pretty much blow a big hole into the theory - practice is ultimately the only standard of relevance.

So it really comes down to the designer of the specific speakers and the end result. I personally have very little interest in the technology being used. I only really care about the end result. If the end result is better with a 4inch woofer in a 10 foot high 400lb box then great - if it is a 4 foot high speaker with 3 15 inch dual concentric drivers and a ribbon then that's great too. But size shape of the speaker and size and number of drivers means nothing - only the result means something.

[harley .guy07]

I agree its really about the design and overall sound not how big the driver is or the cabinet. I have heard small speakers that make some of the bigger speakers sound small as far as soundstage and dynamics go and they were more detailed to boot. I am more of a fan of smaller floorstanders mostly because they work in my small room better than bigger speakers and most of the time the bigger speakers sound bloated in a small room with some exceptions of course.

[Worf101]

I went from Platinum Audio Studio 3's which employ dual 6.5 in woofers to a pair of ADS 1290's that use dual 8's. While I loved the PAS 3's, they had to always be used in combination with a sub to achieve fully rounded bass in audio or HT playback. With the 1290's I get everything I can want or need WITHOUT the sub in 2 channel. Both are orphan speakers and I could be happy with either but to me dual 8's for woofers in a floorstanding are the sweet spot, deep, tight AND responsive. 8's also proviide a workable footprint that larger woofers might not accomodate.

Worf

[bfalls]

I've had a couple of situations where a larger woofer wasn't better. I had two pair of Klipsch KSB series bookshelf speakers the 2.1(6" woof) and the 3.1 (8" woof). To me the 2.1 with its 6" woofer had much better overall balance and didn't seem to suffer in the bass region. I eventually sold them both. I later bought a pair of the Klipsch B2's (6" woof) new on Amazon for $125/pr. They too are a pretty amazing 2-way bookshelf. Great imaging.

I have an all Klipsch system consisting of Kg4 mains, KV3 center and RS-3 surrounds. I bought a KLF-C7 center with 8" woofers thinking it would match my Kg4's 8" woofers better than the KV3's 6". Big mistake. The sound was not very cohesive. It sounded like the voices were always projecting over my head. The KV3 is a much better match for the Kg4s than anything else I've heard.

I have to say my tastes seems to favor the smaller woof/mids than the larger ones in a smaller speaker.

[E-Stat]

In a two way a 6 inch woofer will not beam as much when it matches with the tweeter. As we always say listen and pick the best for your ears.
And as Mr. AN says, it depends upon the specifics of a given design. Running an 8" driver to 2700 hz will create a weird "fun mirror" frequency selective image. That's the first thing I noticed with another JBL design, the L110. While it is a three way, the 5" midrange was pushed to 6 kHz. The apparent stage width of the top and bottom was quite wide - while the midrange was noticeably pinched.

Pass.

rw

[Feanor]

It will depend on the design of the speaker. All else being equal what John Michael says is correct. But there are a number of speakers using a two way design with an 8 inch woofer that integrate better than speakers using a 6 inch and also beam less. ....
Allowing that an 8" driver might have an effective diameter of, say 6", it beams above about 1100 Hz. A 6" speaker might have an effective diameter of say 4.5" which will beams above 1500 Hz. This the law of physics and nothing can be done to prevent it. If a speakers crossover frequency is 2000 Hz, than there will be some beaming in both cases but less in the case of the 6" speaker.

However there are at couple of other factors that pertain to woofer-tweeter integration, especially the phases of the respective drivers, and especially over the range of their overlap.

[RGA]

nah - you gotta factor in toe-in and corner loading and listening distance and audibility at that listening distance - where the measurement should and "only" ever be taken. I like the guessing though and trotting out the measurements - it's interesting. I love this stuff on forums. The theory vs real world listening.

[harley .guy07]

I agree and it is interesting that sometimes real world listening will upset or differ form what the theory's suggest that something will sound like. Just like every person has different aspects of their hearing that is either stronger or weaker in different frequencies and also have different tastes in what they want their systems to sound like.

[E-Stat]

The theory vs real world listening.
Listen to a JBL L110 and tell me what you hear.

rw

[Feanor]

nah - you gotta factor in toe-in and corner loading and listening distance and audibility at that listening distance - where the measurement should and "only" ever be taken. I like the guessing though and trotting out the measurements - it's interesting. I love this stuff on forums. The theory vs real world listening.
You're babbling, Rich. Beaming isn't "theory", it's fact.

Toe-in has something to do with it because on-axis you'll get the full response. Corner loading has nothing to do with frequences above 1100 Hz. Listening distance is relevant only in that you tend to get more reflected sound -- but you'll get less relected sound if the speaker is beaming.

Audio Note is an interesting case, seems to me. As I recall (and my brain is old and tired), AN suggests the speaker be placed in corners and angled 90 degrees with respect to each other. I.e. typically 45 degrees with respect to the walls; this will certainly tend to minimize reflections, especially if the woofer is beaming -- which it certainly is in the AN designs. The angle with respect to the listener isn't absolute; obviously depends on how far apart the cornors are and how far away the listener.

[GMichael]

It's threads like this one that got me to join this forum. Seems that everyone has a different view or angle of the same situation. Lots of great information here.

In Joe's case, I believe that he has two very specific speakers in mind. That makes what JohnMichael posted the most relevant to him IMO.

Joe, you should take notes on what the others are saying too. If you really want to improve the sound you are getting, you need to consider more than just the options you have on the table.

[RGA]

Listen to a JBL L110 and tell me what you hear.

rw

I have. What does this speaker have to do with the discussion? Incidentally people could do a lot worse than this as a used speaker if you like 70s rock an roll.

[RGA]

You're babbling, Rich. Beaming isn't "theory", it's fact.

Toe-in has something to do with it because on-axis you'll get the full response. Corner loading has nothing to do with frequences above 1100 Hz. Listening distance is relevant only in that you tend to get more reflected sound -- but you'll get less relected sound if the speaker is beaming.

Audio Note is an interesting case, seems to me. As I recall (and my brain is old and tired), AN suggests the speaker be placed in corners and angled 90 degrees with respect to each other. I.e. typically 45 degrees with respect to the walls; this will certainly tend to minimize reflections, especially if the woofer is beaming -- which it certainly is in the AN designs. The angle with respect to the listener isn't absolute; obviously depends on how far apart the cornors are and how far away the listener.

Yes - maybe actually listen to some speakers for a change and you'll get what they're about.

What the ear can hear at the listening chair is the "only" thing of relevance - not what the individual driver does. Yes it beams - but there are speakers that you HEAR beaming and those that measure beaming more that you hear less. If you can get that you will be better off. And then when you compare any typical two way heavy damped speaker using a 6 and come back scratching your head that a two way using an eight sounds like a single driver but with full range you might get why people like them so much.

The AN E has very noticeable measured box resonances (it was designed like that) - in the listening chair and with its sensitivity it is "clearer" in the midband than virtually any other boxed speaker utilizing high damping structures - A Totem for instance has far less box resonances on the graph but sounds incredibly "boxy," "shut in", "dynamically inept" and "echoey" in comparison. Same dealer carried Totem - you could hear this - very obvious closed in box sound - not as open or clear.

As Art Dudley noted being the huge classical music listener guru that he is - "the Audio Note AN-E/SPe HE offers the kind of performance that simply must be heard to be understood: more music than sound." http://www.stereophile.com/content/audio-note-e-lexus-signature-loudspeaker-audio-note-espe-he-august-2008
And sometimes I forget that too. I get the skepticism - it's the world we live in these days.

[E-Stat]

I have. What does this speaker have to do with the discussion?
Last time I checked, Spanky was asking advice about two JBL speakers - one using an 8" driver crossed over at too high a frequency (2700 hz) for good imaging. JBL has made that trade off before with poor audible results.


Incidentally people could do a lot worse than this as a used speaker if you like 70s rock an roll.
You're probably thinking about the L100 Century - not the 110. The Century was the one with the boosted mid bass and lower treble. The L110 is as neutral as an Advent.

rw

[RGA]

You're probably thinking about the L100 Century - not the 110. The Century was the one with the boosted mid bass and lower treble. The L110 is as neutral as an Advent.
rw

Sorry E-Stat you may be right - the model numbers are quite similar when I looked it up. Does the L stand for litres? The Wharfedale E70 for example the 70 stands for volume in internal liters.

[E-Stat]

... the model numbers are quite similar when I looked it up.
Easy to understand as they were very similar - except for their tonal flavor. Ironically, the highly colored L100/4310 considerably outsold the neutral sounding L110 for their entertaining *punch*. They shared, however, the same imaging weirdness unless you sat at a considerable distance from them. It was only about three years ago that I visited a friend who has both Advents and L110s. The comparison was interesting. The L110 was more extended up top, less so at the bottom and tonally is more like a British monitor. Great. But I find the funhouse mirror shaped stage downright strange. They likely crossed in the tweeter so high to maximize efficiency and power handling.


Does the L stand for litres? The Wharfedale E70 for example the 70 stands for volume in internal liters.
Got me. Century of what? Perhaps our resident JBL expert Filecat might know the answer.

rw