2410 vs. 2460??

[GordonW]

Hey, I was checking out the horn drivers a friend of mine offered to me, and noticed he had one 2410 and one 2460 driver. Now, AFAIK, the only obvious difference is that the 2410 used an aluminum element, and the 2460 a phenolic element... I haven't had them apart to see if there's significant internal difference, and wasn't sure that it might all be visible readily, anyway...

So, my questions:

1) Is it possible to interchange elements?

2) Are the drivers the same otherwise?

3) Does anyone have experience with these, or other information/graphs/descriptions as to the difference in sound between the phenolic and aluminum element drivers?

Thanks!

Regards,
Gordon.

[Alex Lancaster]

My "goes into" list is the same, the 2460's are slightly before my time, but it looks like they are the same motor as the 2410/61's, except for the diaphs.

Alex.

[GordonW]

So... is it possible, at least, that a 2425 element should physically fit into either the 2410 or 2460? Reason I ask, is that the titanium element might, at least in theory, "compensate" for the rolloff in the top end, that the 2410 has compared to the 2420... might make it less necessary, to use a supertweeter...

Thanks!

Regards,
Gordon.

[Alex Lancaster]

I think the 2425 diaph will fit, but even so, I don´t think it will go high enough with the 2460 magnet, to avoid a tweeter, also, is it in need of remagnetizing?

Alex.

[GordonW]

Originally posted by Alex Lancaster
I think the 2425 diaph will fit, but even so, I don´t think it will go high enough with the 2460 magnet, to avoid a tweeter, also, is it in need of remagnetizing?

Alex.

According to the original catalog sheet Giskard referred to, the flux density on the 2460 and 2410 are the same (16000 gauss)... other than possible dimensional differences, I don't really see what could make them respond that different?

Don't know about remagnetizing... but what I can do, is try putting in a diaprhagm (my buddy has some there, we can try), and measuring the drivers using LMS and/or our computer RTA, and a small throat extension to simulate a short plane wave tube. I can probably get a good idea about the upper-end cut-off point that way, I would think... since I'm only worried about the top end (short wavelengths) a short tube should work OK, for this test, I'd think...

Regards,
Gordon.