Print Page | Close Window

PD.186 / 186.2

Printed From: Speakerplans.com
Category: Plans
Forum Name: 1850 and 186 horns
Forum Description: Discussion / Questions about the 1850 and 186 horns
URL: https://forum.speakerplans.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=85601
Printed Date: 25 February 2024 at 9:36am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.06 - https://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: PD.186 / 186.2
Posted By: PandaG
Subject: PD.186 / 186.2
Date Posted: 03 March 2014 at 6:22pm
Hi all, 

Precision Devices have changed reference for the 186 to 186.2, technical data have some big evolution too... 

I contacted them to get more informations... 

"The PD.186/2 has caused some confusion for our customers along with publication of new data for our 2014 catalogue. Firstly allow us to explain the updates to the speaker data on our website and in our new 2014 catalogue. Along with many updates to our production processes and workflows, we have recently appointed a new technical engineer and part of his remit was to re-test and document all of our speakers technical data as they stand today, data we published in the past was inherited from the previous company owners and often used differing testing processes or equipment. Our 'new' data reflects all drivers being subjected to the exact same tests and conditions using the same test equipment and standards.  Unfortunately during this process we identified that some of the old speaker data was either incorrect or parameters had slightly shifted due to changes in component parts from our suppliers that we were not notified about and were beyond our control. After further investigation we have discovered that most of the changes occurred several years ago, therefore previously published data was not entirely accurate and the reality is that if you have a driver that is less than 5yrs old then the 'new' data will most likely apply. We can also confirm that we have tested all drivers in enclosures to ensure they perform correctly using the old and new data, which we are happy to report they do.  

Now for the PD.186 and the new PD.186/2…. We can confirm that the only difference between the PD.186 and PD.186/2 is the speaker chassis, the /2 uses our new 18" chassis design. The new chassis design increases the product depth by approx 10mm and also removes the 'hidden' inner fixing holes found on the original 186 under the gasket. Because of the increased depth re-cone kits are not interchangeable between the PD.186 and /2, however we are committed to still producing re-cone kits for the original PD.186 to support owners of these drivers. So in answer to your question, yes you can still use the PD.186/2 in a PD.186 enclosure design, you can also mix and match the two drivers, although we recommend balancing them out across enclosures to ensure best performance. I.e. If you have a 2x18 cab and  2x 186 and 2x186/2 put one of each driver into the cabs not 186 in one and 186/2 in the other."


Unfortunatly, we can't test our new boxes (with 186.2) for now...

Maybe someone have already check it with a good microphone..?

BR, 
Panda G



Replies:
Posted By: bee
Date Posted: 03 March 2014 at 7:48pm
cheers for the info, and is the same as other members have already pointed.Clap

-------------
https://www.elements-audio.com


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 16 March 2014 at 3:23pm
So basically any recently manufactured PD186 has the 'new' parameters.
That's quite bad, if you ask me.

Judging the 'old' datasheet, I would have considered PD186 a similar driver to L18P300 and 18LW1400. ~180 gramms of MMS, medium BL, Qts around 0.3.

Now all of a sudden it's got 190 gramms of MMS and a Qts over ½ ‼ Like a car speaker.
Who would have bougth any such speaker to use it in a horn or band-pass horn design, like many of us have?

Can anyone comment to the PD186-RCF-18sound comparison?

Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by stephan stephan wrote:

Hello,

i want to built some 186 horns but i only can get the newer pd.186/2 drivers with different TSP. Is it possible to use these for good results?
Thank you!

PD.186                           PD.186/2
Fs 27 Hz                         Fs 34 Hz
Re 5.5 Ohms                      Re 6.19 Ω
Qts 0.312                        Qts 0.52
Qms 7.75                         Qms 10.77
Qes 0.326                        Qes 0.55
Vas 353 Litres                   Vas 195 litres
Mms 184 g                        Mms 203 grams
Sd 1150 cm2                      Sd 1134 cm2
Cms 188 μm/N                     Cms 106 μmn
BL 22.94 T/m                     BL 22.2 T/m
Xmax 10.5 mm                     Xmax 10.5 mm
Vd 1.20 Litres                   Vd 1.20 litres
Reference Efficiency 2.05 %      Reference Efficiency 1.33%



Just corrected that for you.

http://www.mh-audio.nl/Reference.asp - http://www.mh-audio.nl/Reference.asp
Wink






Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 16 March 2014 at 3:46pm
Maybe we should wait for someone to try pd186-2 in 186 horn, then see what result is.


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: Aztor
Date Posted: 22 April 2014 at 9:16am
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Maybe we should wait for someone to try pd186-2 in 186 horn, then see what result is.

In the first post. Didn't he say that if you have a PD186 that is less than 5 years then it's the same as the v2, minus the chassis. It that is correct there is a lot of ppl with the v2 already. I can comfirm that the less than 5 year old works like a charm. 

The Qts of 0,52 is annoying. ConfusedShocked


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 22 April 2014 at 11:02am
Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

In the first post. Didn't he say that if you have a PD186 that is less than 5 years then it's the same as the v2, minus the chassis. 

Nothing beats seeing New driver tested in cab you are intending to use, before buying it.Wink



-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: Aztor
Date Posted: 22 April 2014 at 10:20pm
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

In the first post. Didn't he say that if you have a PD186 that is less than 5 years then it's the same as the v2, minus the chassis. 

Nothing beats seeing New driver tested in cab you are intending to use, before buying it.Wink


Sex Wink


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 26 April 2014 at 2:31pm
Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

The Qts of 0,52 is annoying. ConfusedShocked
why ?
for an intended reflex driver, high qts is fine...


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 12:27pm
Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

The Qts of 0,52 is annoying. ConfusedShocked
why ?
for an intended reflex driver, high qts is fine...

Many people used old PD186 in Folded horns, BPH cabs.


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 2:54pm
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

The Qts of 0,52 is annoying. ConfusedShocked
why ?
for an intended reflex driver, high qts is fine...

Many people used old PD186 in Folded horns, BPH cabs.
186 was always intended as a reflex driver and this where it sounds the best (I know a dozen of companies using it this way and the cabs sells very well). 
For horns and BPH, they are much better choices ...


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 4:45pm
Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

186 was always intended as a reflex driver and this where it sounds the best (I know a dozen of companies using it this way and the cabs sells very well). 
For horns and BPH, they are much better choices ...

You are of course entitled to your opinion, of where "you think it sounds best", and for "BHP" there are better choices.

However owners of newly built 186 Horns, would be very dismayed, to find newly bought drivers may not work in cabs, the previous version did.





-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 5:20pm
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

186 was always intended as a reflex driver and this where it sounds the best (I know a dozen of companies using it this way and the cabs sells very well). 
For horns and BPH, they are much better choices ...

You are of course entitled to your opinion, of where "you think it sounds best", and for "BHP" there are better choices.

However owners of newly built 186 Horns, would be very dismayed, to find newly bought drivers may not work in cabs, the previous version did.
My opinion is made of real testing and measurements in my laboratory, as any engineer doing his job. 
So I have no idea of what you are talking about. Original 186 and V2 are the same, only chassis change. From the start, this driver had a high qts (>0.45). Datasheet was wrong. 
The day you will truly measure parameters in real life, instead of believing on manufacturers marketing sheets, you will have an heart attack LOL


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 5:27pm
Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

Original 186 and V2 are the same, only chassis change. From the start, this driver had a high qts (>0.45). Datasheet was wrong. 

Excellent.

Any chance you could list the measured parameters of the V1 & V2 parameters side by side ?


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: MarjanM
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 5:31pm
Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

The day you will truly measure parameters in real life, instead of believing on manufacturers marketing sheets, you will have an heart attack LOL

Amen to than! :-)


-------------
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713


Posted By: Pasi
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 8:12pm
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

The day you will truly measure parameters in real life, instead of believing on manufacturers marketing sheets, you will have an heart attack LOL

Amen to than! :-)


Indeed.

And when you measure them under large signal behavior you'll be even more baffled :)


Posted By: bee
Date Posted: 28 April 2014 at 9:39pm
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

The day you will truly measure parameters in real life, instead of believing on manufacturers marketing sheets, you will have an heart attack LOL

Amen to than! :-)
 
2nd that, I even got shot down in another thread for saying the 186 is not a horn driver....


-------------
https://www.elements-audio.com


Posted By: MarjanM
Date Posted: 29 April 2014 at 12:38am
The moment when you get exited about the fact you got a pair of sparkling new 12 inches you want to test for the first time. Priceless.
Then you measure them. One has a Fs of 77Hz the other one is 115Hz.
Ooops.


-------------
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 29 April 2014 at 12:44am
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

The moment when you get exited about the fact you got a pair of sparkling new 12 inches you want to test for the first time. Priceless.
Then you measure them. One has a Fs of 77Hz the other one is 115Hz.
Ooops.



Surely legal action can be taken if manufacturer specifications wildly differ from actual ?

Do large audio firms tolerate this?


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: MarjanM
Date Posted: 29 April 2014 at 12:47am
That was P-audio SN12MB. Still have those two somewhere in some boxes. My first and last encounter with P-audio.

-------------
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713


Posted By: QSS
Date Posted: 29 April 2014 at 1:33pm
Get both drivers in question and measure them yourself, or get someone with the right equipment to do it for you. Even it's just to satisfy your curiousity, Wink

-------------
"Music is life"


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 02 May 2014 at 4:28pm
A speaker store in Praque measured the T/S:

good-old PD186: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1979/TS_PD186.pdf
PD 186 MARK II: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15605/PD186_2.pdf

Interesting site, they also have measurements of RCF LF18P400 and 'G400.

I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).








Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 05 May 2014 at 1:05pm
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:


I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).


Once you can accept, that "some" manufacturers (and distributors), will lie through their teeth, to get your hard earned into their pocket, you can accept most things in the sound world.

At least Celestion,  B&C,  RCF, Beyma, 18sound, still make decent 18" reflex drivers.

Waiting to see how long it takes for this thread to be locked or deleted.LOL


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 10:46am
LOL


Posted By: Tweeter_Box
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 10:46am
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

A speaker store in Praque measured the T/S:

good-old PD186: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1979/TS_PD186.pdf
PD 186 MARK II: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15605/PD186_2.pdf

Interesting site, they also have measurements of RCF LF18P400 and 'G400.

I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).








need to get these guys to measure old chassis pd1850 alongside new chassis Wink


Posted By: KidCreole
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 10:52am
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

That was P-audio SN12MB. Still have those two somewhere in some boxes. My first and last encounter with P-audio.
I was at the factory in Thailand years ago talking to their tech guy. He admitted to me that he sometimes draws the graphs has he sees suited with a pencilShocked


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 11:03am
Originally posted by Tweeter_Box Tweeter_Box wrote:

Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

A speaker store in Praque measured the T/S:

good-old PD186: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1979/TS_PD186.pdf
PD 186 MARK II: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15605/PD186_2.pdf

Interesting site, they also have measurements of RCF LF18P400 and 'G400.

I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).








need to get these guys to measure old chassis pd1850 alongside new chassis Wink

Make sure they take into consideration how PD measure first though aye? Power test for two hours / measure / power test for a further two hours / measure - then take a mean value of the two sets of figures. It gives figures that reflect how the driver will perform after it's loosened up a bit.


Posted By: Pasi
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 12:42pm
Why not just use the last set of figures as that would be the closest one to real life?


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 12:45pm
Originally posted by Pasi Pasi wrote:

Why not just use the last set of figures as that would be the closest one to real life?

Honestly not sure!! LOL


Posted By: ras i
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 1:27pm
Not sure what the deal is with PD at the moment, but what I know for sure is the new 186 is not the same as the old ones. I tested them myself and the new ones perform more like the fane sov 18 than the old 186. Whether or not the parameters where incorrect on the old ones, they certainly are different to the new ones which IMO is not good.

I was also present last week when the 1852s in question was tested in the lev scoops and the new chassis 1852 didn't sound as smooth as the proto ones used when the lev scoops where played in Golden Palace. Not only did they not sound as smooth they seemed to bottom out much ealier. And yes they did all have gaskets in place.

-------------
Sun Sun Sun


Posted By: Pasi
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 1:45pm
Comparing 2 things weeks apart and saying definite conclusions based on that? Yep yep...


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 1:50pm
Originally posted by ras i ras i wrote:


I was also present last week when the 1852s in question was tested in the lev scoops.

Well, in that case, i know who you are... finally.

And, one driver did have a gasket because I fitted it retrospectively and the other didn't so a comparison test could be done.


Posted By: ras i
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 2:44pm
Originally posted by PauliePaul PauliePaul wrote:

Originally posted by ras i ras i wrote:


I was also present last week when the 1852s in question was tested in the lev scoops.


Well, in that case, i know who you are... finally.

And, one driver did have a gasket because I fitted it retrospectively and the other didn't so a comparison test could be done.


Didn't know my Identity was a secret

The new chassis 1852 that was tested did have gasket fitted saw that personally and the cab also had gasket fitted around the cutout.

-------------
Sun Sun Sun


Posted By: Tweeter_Box
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 2:52pm
Originally posted by PauliePaul PauliePaul wrote:

Originally posted by Tweeter_Box Tweeter_Box wrote:

Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

A speaker store in Praque measured the T/S:

good-old PD186: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1979/TS_PD186.pdf
PD 186 MARK II: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15605/PD186_2.pdf

Interesting site, they also have measurements of RCF LF18P400 and 'G400.

I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).








need to get these guys to measure old chassis pd1850 alongside new chassis <img src="smileys/smiley2.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" />


Make sure they take into consideration how PD measure first though aye? Power test for two hours / measure / power test for a further two hours / measure - then take a mean value of the two sets of figures. It gives figures that reflect how the driver will perform after it's loosened up a bit.


Dunno bout all that, but ive personally done a side by side test with old chassis and new...


Posted By: MarjanM
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 4:20pm
I am not sure the lack of gasket can make any significant difference. If the paint is thick enough and drivers are tightened properly you do not need a gasket.

-------------
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 5:08pm
There you go, PD1850, PD1851 and PD1851.2.
These guys at prodance do quite a lot of measurements.

http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/721/PD_1850.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15604/PD_1851_2.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/722/TS_PD1851.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1958/pd.1851_2011_.pdf



Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 5:22pm
Some real ropey figures there.

Think he may have measurements for '50 & '50/2 reversed.




-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 5:45pm
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

There you go, PD1850, PD1851 and PD1851.2.
These guys at prodance do quite a lot of measurements.

http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/721/PD_1850.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15604/PD_1851_2.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/722/TS_PD1851.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1958/pd.1851_2011_.pdf


Yeah, they look interesting.... BL 42.67 and then 32.56 on the same drivers? (PD.1851 and PD.1851_2011)... Erm... I'm really not sure about any of them really, they may do lots of measurements, but how accurately? 

Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

I am not sure the lack of gasket can make any significant difference. If the paint is thick enough and drivers are tightened properly you do not need a gasket.

Oh, it can.... well, it depends on which way you want your argument to go... some people will even go to the lengths of using gaffa tape to cover up the hidden holes if they have been used on the old PD chassis to stop air leakage from the chamber. Paint thickness and baffle cutout size is dependent on the builder I imagine. The new chassis has a recess for the gasket which is around 2mm deep, this recess is in close proximity to the fixing holes - it will leak if there is no gasket.

Originally posted by Tweeter_Box Tweeter_Box wrote:

 
Dunno bout all that, but ive personally done a side by side test with old chassis and new...

Box fresh old chassis and box fresh new chassis or used old chassis and box fresh new chassis? Another unweighted conclusive test?! Pray tell of the details of this test!

Originally posted by ras i ras i wrote:



Didn't know my Identity was a secret  

The new chassis 1852 that was tested did have gasket fitted saw that personally and the cab also had gasket fitted around the cutout.

Did you notice the gaskets were not fitted at the first comparison test?

You usually post on here with a different name right? Why not this time?

There were only two people at the last test, one of them being my customer, the other one being a person who posts on here a lot... curiosity has me wondering why you post under a different user name if indeed that was you.


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 5:54pm
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

There you go, PD1850, PD1851 and PD1851.2.
These guys at prodance do quite a lot of measurements.

http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/721/PD_1850.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15604/PD_1851_2.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/722/TS_PD1851.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1958/pd.1851_2011_.pdf


Oh, and then there's the PD.1850 and PD.1850/2... again wildly differing BL figures for drivers which have identical motors and voice coils.


Posted By: toastyghost
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 6:06pm
Originally posted by PauliePaul PauliePaul wrote:

Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

There you go, PD1850, PD1851 and PD1851.2.
These guys at prodance do quite a lot of measurements.

http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/721/PD_1850.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15604/PD_1851_2.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/722/TS_PD1851.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1958/pd.1851_2011_.pdf



Oh, and then there's the PD.1850 and PD.1850/2... again wildly differing BL figures for drivers which have identical motors and voice coils.


From what I can tell though, every driver manufacturer has sometimes quite wild variance in production models and published specs even from driver to driver of the same model.


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 6:08pm
Originally posted by toastyghost toastyghost wrote:

Originally posted by PauliePaul PauliePaul wrote:

Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

There you go, PD1850, PD1851 and PD1851.2.
These guys at prodance do quite a lot of measurements.

http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/721/PD_1850.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15604/PD_1851_2.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/722/TS_PD1851.pdf
http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1958/pd.1851_2011_.pdf



Oh, and then there's the PD.1850 and PD.1850/2... again wildly differing BL figures for drivers which have identical motors and voice coils.


From what I can tell though, every driver manufacturer has sometimes quite wild variance in production models and published specs even from driver to driver of the same model.

Ever seen a driver with a BL of 40+ ?


Posted By: QSS
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 7:39pm
Originally posted by ras i ras i wrote:

Not sure what the deal is with PD at the moment, but what I know for sure is the new 186 is not the same as the old ones. I tested them myself and the new ones perform more like the fane sov 18 than the old 186. Whether or not the parameters where incorrect on the old ones, they certainly are different to the new ones which IMO is not good.

I was also present last week when the 1852s in question was tested in the lev scoops and the new chassis 1852 didn't sound as smooth as the proto ones used when the lev scoops where played in Golden Palace. Not only did they not sound as smooth they seemed to bottom out much ealier. And yes they did all have gaskets in place.


I was trying to keep away from this drama regarding the 1852s that were tested. But seeing that the test has now been made public let me shed a little light on what actually happened.
After the performance of the lev scoops and my prototype 1852s at GP last year a customer ordered 8 scoops and then bought 8 of the production 1852s. But after his first outing with them he was not pleased with the performance. So because I was the one that built the boxes I felt obligated to offer a solution.
The customer brought 4 boxes to my unit along with 2 production 1852s and 2 prototypes and I also had 2 of my own prototype/oem 1852s on the old chassis. We spent a few hours comparing the 3 different drivers in the lev scoops and it was clear that all 3 were different. The prototypes that the customer brought down were the least favoured with the production one's not far behind. My prototype/oem drivers were far superior to the others.
The test was done with the customer at the control with his pre amp and music selection. All I did was provide the space and the amps we used at GP along with a couple others just for compare with his amps to see if that made any difference.
I then had a call a week or so later from my customer saying that he was told that the drivers didn't work right because the rear gaskets were not used, which to me wouldn't make much difference seeing that even after undoing the bolts the driver was still sealed to the baffle by the 5 coats of paint but just to satisfy his curiosity I took them back and done the test again last week with gaskets on. Results was the same

There was 5 people present at the first test and 4 people at the second test.
Ras I uses 1851s in his hog scoops and is ordering some minis and was contemplating on going for 1852s which is why I invited him to the second test


-------------
"Music is life"


Posted By: ras i
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 8:22pm
@Paulie Paul

I don't know who you think I am but I think you're climbing up the wrong tree. I have no reason to hide my identity. I can pm you my phone number if you want to have a chat. I may also need to chat to you bout some business.

Bless
Ras I (The I stands for Isaiah by the way)


-------------
Sun Sun Sun


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 8:54pm
Originally posted by QSS QSS wrote:

Originally posted by ras i ras i wrote:

Not sure what the deal is with PD at the moment, but what I know for sure is the new 186 is not the same as the old ones. I tested them myself and the new ones perform more like the fane sov 18 than the old 186. Whether or not the parameters where incorrect on the old ones, they certainly are different to the new ones which IMO is not good.

I was also present last week when the 1852s in question was tested in the lev scoops and the new chassis 1852 didn't sound as smooth as the proto ones used when the lev scoops where played in Golden Palace. Not only did they not sound as smooth they seemed to bottom out much ealier. And yes they did all have gaskets in place.


I was trying to keep away from this drama regarding the 1852s that were tested. But seeing that the test has now been made public let me shed a little light on what actually happened.
After the performance of the lev scoops and my prototype 1852s at GP last year a customer ordered 8 scoops and then bought 8 of the production 1852s. But after his first outing with them he was not pleased with the performance. So because I was the one that built the boxes I felt obligated to offer a solution.
The customer brought 4 boxes to my unit along with 2 production 1852s and 2 prototypes and I also had 2 of my own prototype/oem 1852s on the old chassis. We spent a few hours comparing the 3 different drivers in the lev scoops and it was clear that all 3 were different. The prototypes that the customer brought down were the least favoured with the production one's not far behind. My prototype/oem drivers were far superior to the others.
The test was done with the customer at the control with his pre amp and music selection. All I did was provide the space and the amps we used at GP along with a couple others just for compare with his amps to see if that made any difference.
I then had a call a week or so later from my customer saying that he was told that the drivers didn't work right because the rear gaskets were not used, which to me wouldn't make much difference seeing that even after undoing the bolts the driver was still sealed to the baffle by the 5 coats of paint but just to satisfy his curiosity I took them back and done the test again last week with gaskets on. Results was the same

There was 5 people present at the first test and 4 people at the second test.
Ras I uses 1851s in his hog scoops and is ordering some minis and was contemplating on going for 1852s which is why I invited him to the second test

The spec of your protos is identical to the ones that were sent down, I know this because I spec'd them remember...? I had two sets of four, the first four were produced in May 2012 and were banded about during that summer and featured on the Kayak float at Notting Hill, your set of eight were made to the same spec as these in Sept 2012. I had a second set of four built in Nov 2012 with a slightly different spec, these failed due to an amp issue in Dec 2012 and were reconed to the May spec. I sent down one of the May drivers and one of the reconed Dec drivers.

Perhaps call the customer to confirm who he thinks were present at the second test...? He said to me (less than 5 minutes ago, as I had to double check before I wrote this) that there were four people present to start with, two left (business partner and brother) and only two were there during the actual testing of the drivers.






Posted By: QSS
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 9:33pm
Check your pm the reason for the ans from your customer regarding who was at the test will be cleared up

-------------
"Music is life"


Posted By: QSS
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 9:39pm
If what you say is correct regarding my prototypes being the same as yours which I doubt very much if we go by the test results then I think PD must have done something wrong or right by accident when they made mine

-------------
"Music is life"


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 9:56pm
Originally posted by QSS QSS wrote:

If what you say is correct regarding my prototypes being the same as yours which I doubt very much if we go by the test results then I think PD must have done something wrong or right by accident when they made mine


Don't blow them then… parts are obsolete.


Posted By: QSS
Date Posted: 06 May 2014 at 10:04pm
Funny thing is 4 was out on loan and 1 got blown or failed for whatever reason I'm not sure. But got sorted by PD

-------------
"Music is life"


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 07 May 2014 at 5:29am
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Originally posted by ArthurG ArthurG wrote:

Original 186 and V2 are the same, only chassis change. From the start, this driver had a high qts (>0.45). Datasheet was wrong. 

Excellent.

Any chance you could list the measured parameters of the V1 & V2 parameters side by side ?
unfortunately, 5 years ago, I've lost 10 years of measurements when, the same day, my HD laptop died the same time as my USB drive backup Dead
But I remember very clearly that original 186 has a QTS around 0.5 and low BL around 20

Now regarding the new 186, I have a friend engineer who compared the 2 drivers earl this year and except some minimal production consistency, he told me they are basically the same. I will check if he can send me the test report.

--Arthur

PS: out for a week and this topic went crazy Shocked 



Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 07 May 2014 at 5:32am
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

The moment when you get exited about the fact you got a pair of sparkling new 12 inches you want to test for the first time. Priceless.
Then you measure them. One has a Fs of 77Hz the other one is 115Hz.
Ooops.
Originally posted by KidCreole KidCreole wrote:

I was at the factory in Thailand years ago talking to their tech guy. He admitted to me that he sometimes draws the graphs has he sees suited with a pencilShocked
ahah more P.Audio horror stories. Why I'm not surprised ? LOL Dead
I could also tell a lot about how rubbish P.Audio is but I have no time now. PM me if you want to be disgusted about this company...


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 07 May 2014 at 5:52am
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:

A speaker store in Praque measured the T/S:

good-old PD186: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/1/1979/TS_PD186.pdf
PD 186 MARK II: http://www.prodance.cz/files/dl/8/15605/PD186_2.pdf

Interesting site, they also have measurements of RCF LF18P400 and 'G400.

I'm not sure if I'm yet ready to accept that the reincarnation of what I thought to be the greatest mid-BL 18" driver available has a Qts between 0,52 (published) and 0,67 (measured).
hmm these measurements have some problems. I've looked at other files from the same website, well it seems that this guys lacks methodology and has no clue on what he does...
First, we don't know the pre-conditioning for these measurements,  ie are all drivers new, out of the box  or used ? Does he perform soft parts break-in (for example 30Hz free air for 2 hours at defined power) ? we don't know...
Second, why did he change the added mass for these 2 tests (100g for PD186 and 140g for v2). If you change measurements conditions, you can't get correct data and comparison between drivers of the same category can't be done...
Third, this added mass is way too low for a driver like PD186. Usually, it is recommended to use an added mass close to the driver mms. For an 18", I personally use 200g
Fourth, consequence of point 3, to find a mms of 124g on a driver with a beefy 25mm tall / 5" copper voice coil is impossible ! Voice coil alone is close to this mass...
I found other problems but they are minimal.

All in one, it's 200% sure that this measurement on PD186 v1 is completely wrong and very questionable on V2.

Sorry guys, but don't trust the files on this amateurish website...

--Arthur


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 07 May 2014 at 11:31pm
Thanks Arthur!
I'm on the guesswork side and I do like an answer from someone with experience in measurement. I did see the different weights used for testing, but could not extract any info out of that. Of course I really really don't like to believe that the PD186.2 has a 0.67 Qts. Fact is, MK1 works like a dream, both low and quite puncy, up to 180 Hz in my bins. If it does so having a 0,5 Qts... fine, I'll just learn more about T/S. Regarding my PD186/Nd9300 problem from the other thread (the Nd9300 with 'useful' T/S bottoms out whereas the 'funny-T/S' PD186 does not) user Corel and I had an interesting discussion, which made me care more for suspension stiffnes. One thing that PD186 has, compared to other drivers, is a stiff suspension. A real double voice coil as well. So in the end, maybe we've just got to (I've just got to) get used to the fact that proper bass drivers can have a Qts over 0,39.
Robert.


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 07 May 2014 at 11:34pm
I meant double suspension where I wrote double voice coil. ...must have been the high Qts...


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 08 May 2014 at 1:58am
Robert,

so many times I said that T&S parameters only tell half story. So many times I had to argue that a high qts is not a problem, even when used in a scoop. I hope that this discussion will finally become pointless.

In the case of your PD186 vs ND9300 observation, I need to look at the drivers to give a definitive answer but suspension (surround + spider) geometry vs xmech (absolute maximum mechanical excursion) is a very important factor at high power behavior. Translating to our case, maybe (it's a guess so maybe is the important word), ND9300, due its deeper and larger spiders + triple roll surround, allows the voice coil former to hit more easily the back plate than PD186 and its much more limited excursion ability (M-roll surround and small spiders). Suspension mechanical limit makes far less noise than a former hitting the back plate...


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 08 May 2014 at 10:20pm
That's what I've been thinking too. From pushing the cones by hand, I think the Nd9300 has more excursion capability than the PD186, but it's too loose to protect itself.

It's obvious that suspension braking the cone's movement at high excursion is hardly noticable in a bass driver if you don't do a direct comparison to a more potent driver.

I compared two different top bins the other day by turning up the volume. From a certain point onwards, the cheaper one just would not go louder when turning up the volume. At lower volume, both had comparable sound quality, but when turning up, the better one would go louder and louder whereas the cheaper one would remain at medium volume and eventually start to distort. (that's where most pubs go wrong in having a cheap system 'because it we don't want it too loud')

Next thing on my list is a direct comparison between said bass drivers (and maybe some others) in identical stacks. I'll share my findings. In the meanwhile, I'll be studying how suspension stiffness influences all other T/S parameters.



Posted By: Aztor
Date Posted: 09 May 2014 at 5:31pm
The problem is when you sim with the old specs and you are expecting a certain result ( Ts-para of 186 ). But in reality you should have been simming them with 186.2 ts-para.And getting a different result. 

Its like buying an apple and getting a banana. You might like the banana and be happy, but it's not the fruit you expected. 


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 09 May 2014 at 8:01pm
Originally posted by Aztor Aztor wrote:

Its like buying an apple and getting a banana. You might like the banana and be happy, but it's not the fruit you expected. 

+1 Clap


Fail to believe Large Audio firms accept drivers with wild tolerances, and excuses why they are so.

Maybe they get the quality drivers, and the private/small buyers get the ...



-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: ArthurG
Date Posted: 10 May 2014 at 2:12am
Originally posted by levyte357- levyte357- wrote:

Maybe they get the quality drivers, and the private/small buyers get the ...

good Lev, you start to understand...

BTW retail is the end of the chain in pro audio drivers business. OEM is where volume and money are. And of course during R&D stage, its a talk between engineers with all proper equipment to test and approve a driver ; not the hobby folk that has no clue of what he's buying...


Posted By: MarjanM
Date Posted: 10 May 2014 at 9:52am
I knew this was inevitable at the moment Eminence got their hands on PD.
Too bad. Another legend goes to the history.


-------------
Marjan Milosevic
MM-Acoustics
www.mm-acoustics.com
https://www.facebook.com/pages/MM-Acoustics/608901282527713


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 10 May 2014 at 6:05pm
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

I knew this was inevitable at the moment Eminence got their hands on PD.
Too bad. Another legend goes to the history.


I despair, I really do.

Nice bull cartoon though…


Posted By: JR.junior
Date Posted: 10 May 2014 at 8:35pm
Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

I knew this was inevitable at the moment Eminence got their hands on PD.
Too bad. Another legend goes to the history.


Broken Heart


-------------
Support the scoop technology, larger mouth plays louder!


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 16 May 2014 at 11:40am
Originally posted by JR.junior JR.junior wrote:

Originally posted by MarjanM MarjanM wrote:

I knew this was inevitable at the moment Eminence got their hands on PD.
Too bad. Another legend goes to the history.


Broken Heart


I'm finding RCF have plenty of drivers, that could quite possibly be used, where old PD186 might have been spec'd. LOL

Testing commences next week.


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: fourway hornloaded
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 12:37pm
I got a PD186/2. It's indeed very similar to the old one, except it looks better. I would not be surprised if it performs just as good.

The only thing is - right at the moment I wanted to put it into a box, I discovered with great surprise that it doesn't have the proper hole pattern. I can't use it.

I did design my bins for PD186 but because I wanted to have the option to test other drivers, I used the normal hole pattern. Which worked out because the 18sound driver does a very similar job in that box. (thanks for the reactions on here - 'hitting sound' problem turned out to be lack of gasket).

You know PD186 used to have both the PD proprietary hole pattern and the normal one, that every other manufacture uses? That last one is not there anymore.



Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 12:44pm
Originally posted by fourway hornloaded fourway hornloaded wrote:


You know PD186 used to have both the PD proprietary hole pattern and the normal one, that every other manufacture uses? That last one is not there anymore.


Maybe PD are awaiting new stock of M6 holes for interior bolt pattern, and currently just sending drivers out, without them.


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: hmaudio
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 2:15pm
recently built some cabs using a mk1 chassis for bolt pattern then fitted mk2 chassis and had no problems 

-------------
Nottingham based cab builder. https://www.facebook.com/HMAudio-154352667920145/?ref=bookmarks
This account is used by 2 people.


Posted By: cravings
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 3:17pm
he's saying the 8 hidden holes are no longer there.


Posted By: hmaudio
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 3:31pm
ahh i get you sorry i miss read. 

-------------
Nottingham based cab builder. https://www.facebook.com/HMAudio-154352667920145/?ref=bookmarks
This account is used by 2 people.


Posted By: levyte357-
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 5:48pm
Originally posted by cravings cravings wrote:

he's saying the 8 hidden holes are no longer there.


Which is is fantastic again, if you have 186 Horn, or other folded horn, tnutted for interior PD holes, and cab is almost impossible to re-tnut.

So I guess old version PD186 will also be going up in price, as well as old version PD1850.

LOL


-------------
Global Depopulation - Alive and Killing.


Posted By: BASSHORSE
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 6:07pm
good ive got 4 waitin for the price booom LOL


Posted By: Adam_Iron_Horse
Date Posted: 08 June 2014 at 6:22pm
My pd 186/2 have both bolt patterns I believe...

-------------
Kryptonik Sound Kollective

www.facebook.com/kryptoniksoundkollective


Posted By: GwanStefani
Date Posted: 28 April 2015 at 10:31pm
Does anyone know if there is a definitive way to tell between the original 186 and the 186/2 just by looking ?


Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 28 April 2015 at 10:44pm
PD.186/2's have a rounded chassis flange and smoother lines, also the bottom plate on the motor has a chamfered edge. The badge will on the back will still say PD.186, but the sticker on the motor under the terminals will say PD.186/2. Also, any driver with a production date after say May 2013 will be a /2 model.

And finally, the PD.186/2 are 6mm deeper than the PD.186.


Posted By: GwanStefani
Date Posted: 29 April 2015 at 11:31am
Thanks Paul, will need to take them out and measure up but I think our's may actually be the older model


Posted By: GwanStefani
Date Posted: 29 April 2015 at 11:58pm
So, took the drivers out and they seem to be the older model, just thought I would post a couple of pictures up here and see if people are agreeing. We're trying to sell these on so I want to make sure I'm not lying to anyone






Posted By: PauliePaul
Date Posted: 30 April 2015 at 12:05am
Yes, that's a PD.186 and not a PD.186/2.

Just a side note, it's a 4ohm driver too, in case you didn't already know. See "PD.186.4" on sticker under terminals.


Posted By: GwanStefani
Date Posted: 30 April 2015 at 10:15am
Yeah, wish I'd known about the sticker before though, had to buy a multimeter to test the ohms. Cheers Paul



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2023 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net