FWIW I had a pair of 55-1190 that I measured with my WT3 about a couple of years ago. Fs 39 Hz, Qts .5569, Qes .7619, Qms 2.053, Le .5979 mH, Vas 1.38 cu. ft.
And a pair of MCM 55-1455 One coil connected Fs 39 Hz, Qts .7241, Qes .9211, Qms 3.386, Le .5583 mH, Vas 1.3 cu. ft.
Two coils parallel Qes measured .4854. Coils in series Qes measured .4616. Not sure if the small difference is a WT3 anomaly or if it is real.
The DC200 measured different than specs. I had Zaph do it a few years ago. Qts. .58, Fs 35, Vas 35 ltrs. if I remember correctly. Not sure if new stock would be the same or not.
FWIW I had a pair of 55-1190 that I measured with my WT3 about a couple of years ago. Fs 39 Hz, Qts .5569, Qes .7619, Qms 2.053, Le .5979 mH, Vas 1.38 cu. ft.
And a pair of MCM 55-1455 One coil connected Fs 39 Hz, Qts .7241, Qes .9211, Qms 3.386, Le .5583 mH, Vas 1.3 cu. ft.
Two coils parallel Qes measured .4854. Coils in series Qes measured .4616. Not sure if the small difference is a WT3 anomaly or if it is real.
The DC200 measured different than specs. I had Zaph do it a few years ago. Qts. .58, Fs 35, Vas 35 ltrs. if I remember correctly. Not sure if new stock would be the same or not.
Johnny, I did a quick sweep of all 4 55-1190s i have. I did not do Vas yet, but the Qs andFs are all within 10% of MFG. I think this woofer is the winner for AS use.
Mike - Sweet news, because that is definitely AS territory.
Mitchell - I have a pair of the DC200, I will try and get them measured tonight. If they measure the same as yours, I think they are also a candidate. I thought Q was lower on those which is why I see them used in such huge vented alignments all the time.
Funny you mention the woofers in the 301's. I work at Bose now as the passive repair tech. I've probably replaced over 200 of those frickin woofers in the 4 months I've been there. That speaker is defiantly their bread and butter!
I would be interested in getting my hands on a pair and doing some spatially averaged measurements and polar measurements.
There are many Bose speakers that do not sound *all* that bad. You pay a huge premium for the name, but they have to be technically decent somewhere...
I'm not impressed with 301's, actually the 201's sound a bit better/ blended. Neither have real xovers, FR woofer/cap on the tweeter at best. Speaking of 201's, don't use outside! This scared me a bit when I popped the woofer out and found this....
I'm not impressed with 301's, actually the 201's sound a bit better/ blended. Neither have real xovers, FR woofer/cap on the tweeter at best. Speaking of 201's, don't use outside! This scared me a bit when I popped the woofer out and found this....
That speaker probably had a troublesome buzz that could get annoying as you cranked it up.:)
@jr@mac said:
So I am not sure the clear poly woofer will work for this application, and am looking at alternatives at the moment.
I really like the 80's look the poly woofer offered, but it is too high Q for where these are going to end up, which is on the wall in my dads shop. He don't need no 1.5 cubic foot boombox up there.
I digress.
What I really dig are those old timey untreated paper cones and foam surrounds. Drivers like the Bose 301 use are absolute eye candy to me sometimes, not too common to find affordable paper cone drivers without that cheap looking "poly" coating on them, though.
Visaton sells an 8" untreated paper cone, foam surround driver - but at the price point ($30) I can do better performance wise - it is only a couple bucks less than the 8" KB from MCM, that is ridiculous IMNSHO.
I continue in my quest.
Actually, the 8" KB would be just fine, the larger KB have an old timey look to them.
Do you have any measured T/S parameters saved for the 55-1240?
Or do you recall how the alignment worked out, ported/sealed, litres, F3, etc. perhaps?
Thank you,
David, who also loves the 1980's Infinity vibe of the clear 8" cone...
Comments
Fs 39 Hz, Qts .5569, Qes .7619, Qms 2.053, Le .5979 mH, Vas 1.38 cu. ft.
And a pair of MCM 55-1455
One coil connected Fs 39 Hz, Qts .7241, Qes .9211, Qms 3.386, Le .5583 mH, Vas 1.3 cu. ft.
Two coils parallel Qes measured .4854. Coils in series Qes measured .4616.
Not sure if the small difference is a WT3 anomaly or if it is real.
The DC200 measured different than specs. I had Zaph do it a few years ago.
Qts. .58, Fs 35, Vas 35 ltrs. if I remember correctly. Not sure if new stock would be the same or not.
I did a quick sweep of all 4 55-1190s i have. I did not do Vas yet, but the Qs andFs are all within 10% of MFG. I think this woofer is the winner for AS use.
Mitchell - I have a pair of the DC200, I will try and get them measured tonight. If they measure the same as yours, I think they are also a candidate. I thought Q was lower on those which is why I see them used in such huge vented alignments all the time.
There are many Bose speakers that do not sound *all* that bad. You pay a huge premium for the name, but they have to be technically decent somewhere...
Dunno,
The Hello Kitty tape seem to have removed a veil for these.
That speaker probably had a troublesome buzz that could get annoying as you cranked it up.:)
Do you have any measured T/S parameters saved for the 55-1240?
Or do you recall how the alignment worked out, ported/sealed, litres, F3, etc. perhaps?
Thank you,
David, who also loves the 1980's Infinity vibe of the clear 8" cone...
Definitely sealed, from what I remember. That design never went anywhere, unfortunately.
Here ya go for 55-1240 measured specs.
https://diy.midwestaudio.club/discussion/comment/2988#Comment_2988