I purchased a set of DNA horn plans from Steve about a month ago. I finally have some time and plan to start them soon.

I was wondering what the difference(s) is/are between the Alpair 10p version 1, 10p version 3, and the 10m are?

They are all available on Amazon for $116.50 per.

Thanks.

I'm a bit late to the party here, but if still of any interest I can offer a couple of observations re the Alpair drivers in particular, as well as on the DNA horn.

Over the past 5 or 6 years, I've experimented with just about every model in the Mark Audio line up since the EL70 ( OEM for Bob Reimer at CSS), in a very wide range of enclosure designs from vented bookshelf to floorstanding MLTL and several back loaded horn and Olson/ Nagaoka  labyrinth designs.    

To the question at hand, probably the most pertinent differences between the A10.3 (metal) and A10P  (paper) are:

A10.3
Fo- 38.Hz
SPLo= 87.998
Qts = .316

A10P
Fo=42.4Hz
SPLo=89.645dB
Qts=.330

There's also a rather marked difference in the FR curve above 5K, with the paper showing a gentle rolloff, while the metal rises almost 10dB - cresting at approx 10K, then rolling off at approx the same rate as the paper .

In short, the metal will go lower in an appropriately tuned box, and has a more forward and dynamic delivery in the upper mids to top, while the paper is smoother overall and has almost 2dB more sensitivity.

I'm currently using an A10P as the center channel in a small 7.1 home theater, and am quite happy.

As for the DNA - I built a pair a few years ago with removable mounting plates to facilitate swapping of drivers.  So far I've tried  Tang BandW4-1879, Alpair7.3, and Fostex FE126E, FF126Wk.

Later this afternoon will be firing them up with some A10Ps, and perhaps even A10.3.
 

Well, funny how life gets in the way of your plans - "wanna hear the universe laugh?  just make a plan"

So I only managed to get a couple of hours listening in on the weekend,  and not around to swapping out between the paper and metal versions.

In short, the A10Ps develop a far more robust bottom end than the W4-1879s, and have just enough midrange presence and detail for me.  

The A10.3 metal is quite interesting as well, with a bit more forward and crisply detailed an upper midrange to top end than the papers, but not to the same degree as Fostex FE126 & 166, which I can't quite tolerate for extended sessions.

I've not visited here a lot over the past many years, during which time I've played with just about every model of full driver designed by Mark Fenlon and crew, in a wide array of enclosures.   This guy and his support team really know what they're doing, and there's probably only one or two models in the line I couldn't easily live with.  In fact I have a total of 7 different models between my upstairs "background" and downstairs small  7.1 TV rig.  

Steve- what exactly was the type of soft foam blocks used in the driver chamber that Bob posted me a link to last week?  I suspect my build still needs a bit of fine tuning to the damping fill levels.  

I may even need to break out my old 2A3 monoblocks (sorry, no Zens in my system for over a decade - something had to give) just to taste test what they'd sound like on less than the 80or so watts in my surround receiver or 4-channel bi-amp rig.  

I received an email from Madisound concerning the break in of the drivers. Simply stated, 'It is recommended that the drivers be played at reasonable levels. The sound will improve after a couple of weeks. Do not follow some of the crazy ideas out there for break in using single frequency tones, etc etc etc . These ideas will likely end up in overheating and possibly failure.'                       ...............Sounds right to me.