Wife approved sub woofer enclosures. Never even suspect they are speakers.
...
Although man eyes as mine like the look of big powerfully Sd area woofers
The real problem with Ronald's arrays and adding subwoofers would be finding cone drivers that will go as low, 17hz, as his arrays. Not to many cone drivers have that low an fs, most large 15" or 18" don't get that low, perhaps 25hz moving lots of air, but 17hz, that's not going to be easy.
If I thought there would be a market for them I would make some seriously outrageous 3" drivers for arrays, but how many people will build them and what would they pay for a long excursion full range 3" driver? I could give Ronald a full 1/2" excursion or more and with that many drivers he would have all the bass he ever wanted and still have the top end. I keep thinking about this but I would have to invest some serious money to get this started. Cast frame driver with Neo magnets and a composite cone is what I am proposing.
If I thought there would be a market for them I would make some seriously outrageous 3" drivers for arrays, but how many people will build them and what would they pay for a long excursion full range 3" driver? I could give Ronald a full 1/2" excursion or more and with that many drivers he would have all the bass he ever wanted and still have the top end. I keep thinking about this but I would have to invest some serious money to get this started. Cast frame driver with Neo magnets and a composite cone is what I am proposing.
Let's entertain that idea...
Sometimes You got to create the market. Seriously, a lot of people have not heard arrays, let alone a really well executed one. (I am NOT speaking of my arrays in this case). I see a big market for Home Theater in dedicated rooms. Imagine 7 full-range channels, no sub-woofers needed. Besides, the arrays go lower then subs to boot. The challenge is finding an AVR with manually tweak-able DSP, for those that do not want to deal with PCs.
Also, what are your thoughts on the Pro audio market? For that application, one may not want to run them all the way down to 17 Hz, but with 1/2" Xmax, they would have plenty of headroom. I know You have worked with this market, so You would know better then me if there was potential.
As far as cost, I am sure You can design a unit for less then $120. The ScanSpeak 10F is $90 each and they would need additional subs. Do You have a ball park figure on price?
Sometimes You got to create the market. Seriously, a lot of people have not heard arrays, let alone a really well executed one. (I am NOT speaking of my arrays in this case). I see a big market for Home Theater in dedicated rooms. Imagine 7 full-range channels, no sub-woofers needed. Besides, the arrays go lower then subs to boot. The challenge is finding an AVR with manually tweak-able DSP, for those that do not want to deal with PCs.
Also, what are your thoughts on the Pro audio market? For that application, one may not want to run them all the way down to 17 Hz, but with 1/2" Xmax, they would have plenty of headroom. I know You have worked with this market, so You would know better then me if there was potential.
As far as cost, I am sure You can design a unit for less then $120. The ScanSpeak 10F is $90 each and they would need additional subs. Do You have a ball park figure on price?
Artsy,
I'm sure I could do something in the range of the ScanSpeak driver. I would be using the best Neo material, MgOe 55H or there about, with a cast frame and American made voice-coils. I would make the composite cone myself and get a special surround made for that kind of excursion. I'll have to play with the cone to get it just right for this application.
I keep thinking if you designed the driver correctly you could make the center dust cap into a 1" dome tweeter so it would be a tiny coaxial driver, just an idea. If I did this I wouldn't do it without Ronald, no way. First thing would be to send Ronald a set of drivers for his cabinets and see what he thinks. If I can't improve on what he has now I wouldn't continue the project.
I'm sure I could do something in the range of the ScanSpeak driver. I would be using the best Neo material, MgOe 55H or there about, with a cast frame and American made voice-coils. I would make the composite cone myself and get a special surround made for that kind of excursion. I'll have to play with the cone to get it just right for this application.
I keep thinking if you designed the driver correctly you could make the center dust cap into a 1" dome tweeter so it would be a tiny coaxial driver, just an idea. If I did this I wouldn't do it without Ronald, no way. First thing would be to send Ronald a set of drivers for his cabinets and see what he thinks. If I can't improve on what he has now I wouldn't continue the project.
The beauty of the TC9s is, besides its very nice frequency response, the low price of $12 each... When building arrays on other budgets than "money is no object" , that's something to consider.
I'm sure that a cast frame, neodymium magnets with extended Xmax will come closer to the price of a 10F rather than the TC9.
Look at the Nola Brios. They use four TC9s, and a cheap sub to sell at $5,000.
Using the 10F or similar in arrays would make the price hit the stratosphere.
On another note, when using DSP. I use gmad's 4-cycle preset as the benchmark to anything I want to change or try. If it sounds slightly better, I know I'm on the right path. If it's worse, I'm going the wrong way.
I'm sure that a cast frame, neodymium magnets with extended Xmax will come closer to the price of a 10F rather than the TC9.
Look at the Nola Brios. They use four TC9s, and a cheap sub to sell at $5,000.
Using the 10F or similar in arrays would make the price hit the stratosphere.
On another note, when using DSP. I use gmad's 4-cycle preset as the benchmark to anything I want to change or try. If it sounds slightly better, I know I'm on the right path. If it's worse, I'm going the wrong way.
STEP graphs
I figured I was doing something wrong. Actually, there is more then one "wrong" going on here. It looks like I definitely need to address my back wall... I have not been able to focus on this as much as I like, but it at least gives me a direction. So after all the Christmas Art is done, wall treatments can be my present. We will slowly work on DRC, as I would like to see if it can bring more then my manual tweaks.
Here are my... ugh... STEP graphs. I show these in hope that they will encourage others to fail forward to success on their journeys also.
I figured I was doing something wrong. Actually, there is more then one "wrong" going on here. It looks like I definitely need to address my back wall... I have not been able to focus on this as much as I like, but it at least gives me a direction. So after all the Christmas Art is done, wall treatments can be my present. We will slowly work on DRC, as I would like to see if it can bring more then my manual tweaks.
Here are my... ugh... STEP graphs. I show these in hope that they will encourage others to fail forward to success on their journeys also.
Attachments
Also, the trouble for Wesayso and finding subs will be the integration.
All those little drivers hitting 17Hz are working together and provide a very quick reaction time.
A big 15" or 18" driver will sound sluggish and won't be able to keep up with the arrays.
I think his only option might be a line array, or two, for subs. Something like ten or twelve 6" drivers would be better suited to the task, but would probably have the lowest WAF possible, unless integrated into a wall with fabric to cover the drivers... Sorry BYRTT.
All those little drivers hitting 17Hz are working together and provide a very quick reaction time.
A big 15" or 18" driver will sound sluggish and won't be able to keep up with the arrays.
I think his only option might be a line array, or two, for subs. Something like ten or twelve 6" drivers would be better suited to the task, but would probably have the lowest WAF possible, unless integrated into a wall with fabric to cover the drivers... Sorry BYRTT.
I am with You 100% on that one...
Hear that, Ronald, You have set the bar!
More fuel for the fire to get the Vifa build going (after Christmas and back wall treatments).
If I recall, Wesayso mentioned that his amp was holding him back hitting the full Xmax with his arrays on movies. So I would be curious to know what more, say a First One Large, would squeeze out of the Vifas.
The bummer is, if a bigger amp is needed, it would more then likely mean I would need to get the bigger First One amp.
The only drawback I see to the Vifa performance wise over the other drivers I have considered for arrays (10F, F83wk and 2 1/2 tectonics), is the lower sensitivity. 3 dB difference between the Vifa and Fostex is the difference between the 160 watts/channel I have (built and paid for) verses the 320 watts/channel of the larger amp (not built and paid for). Of course this is all in theory.
Last edited:
You could always wire your arrays to give to a 4 Ohm load or similar, then you can get up to 250W out of the First One M. 160W is at 8Ohms. You might be pushing the heatsink but you can always try it before upping the power on the amp at 8 ohms which will not be cheap.
May i give my version before Ronald
probably not at all with microphone close to dust cap the so called true high pass knee for woofer cone that omit reflections and baffle step, but its final IRR roll off at sweet spot area for all 48x TC9's summed including line array algebra/DSP correction/room and Ronald's own receipt to measure front of wave in situation. Think I'm okay 17Hz sounds a true data after had the audition into couch, one can hear and feel realism lows (great slams probably because of good timing) but its very different to most speakers because distortion is very low and even at high spl standing beside array it seems not to look as cone is moving at all. I had a request for Peter Green long ago times of "Fleetwood Mac" track "Albatross" which think is track with clues for DC thumbs and they performed perfect, nearly same clean lows as BeoLab 90 which think have 3 times 15 incher a side but these can most probably also play louder than Ronald's with his present power amp. Also the many acoustic guitar tracks we listened had clue of DC thumbs from time to time and sound very real, and we have to remember these TC9 arrays are not corrected with false phase as some do to get a LF square wave going or impressive step response in a data sheet even amplitude isn't really there, arrays are corrected with all means of IRR and FIR but at sweet spot area final acoustic target curve amplitude follows phase as math for IRR domain.
Last edited:
That auditioning Friday did someone
talk about maybe any of the FO types in balanced/bridge mode.That think makes a lot sense to improve further a high quality amp stage because his DAC has balanced output. If one wires it up in spirit of below schematic which a Dutch member did with VSSA amp there seems so many reasons to get bit for bit small improvements. If you look close PSU ground is a floating point compared to amp modules where ground reference is virtual point and also in speaker is not wired with dirty current returns to ground point but sits floating between two hot wires this principle really improve on common modes. Only drawback seems is dampening for load seems double up but actual Ronald runs "resonance impedance correction" for TC9 drivers in situation, so have some good dampening established. The FO in small version should be on its way soon and will bridged at 8 ohm speaker load be good for 240 watt as each module sees half the load, also FO M can be bridged and more power full but in they run some hot even music is not streaming then one big serious heat sink can make better environment for bridged S verse M modules. Also if executed as pure mono block and then placed close to speaker gives situation to have a very short wire connected that in my experience the few times tried it out gives performance audio able kick
.ArtsyAllen,
If you have balanced pre signal or do some other trick that ESP site share for single ended signal then you not stock with paid FO M power wise, if you really wish FO L effect then seems possible upgrade with two more FO M and bridge them. In each amp module sees half the load then if speaker system is lower than 8 ohm it will have to be checked with LC if amp is in safe area.
Attachments
Last edited:
The only way to improve on the TC9 for a line array design would be to make it smaller without sacrificing low-end performance. Also, as good as a designer kindhornman is, it is a very tall order to improve or even duplicate the smooth frequency response of the TC9. All the power to kindhornman if he can do it; we would all be very thankful!
Also, the trouble for Wesayso and finding subs will be the integration.
All those little drivers hitting 17Hz are working together and provide a very quick reaction time.
A big 15" or 18" driver will sound sluggish and won't be able to keep up with the arrays.
I think his only option might be a line array, or two, for subs. Something like ten or twelve 6" drivers would be better suited to the task, but would probably have the lowest WAF possible, unless integrated into a wall with fabric to cover the drivers... Sorry BYRTT.
This is why I suggested the "fuzzy dice" sub woofers.
That auditioning Friday did someone
That think makes a lot sense to improve further a high quality amp stage because his DAC has balanced output. If one wires it up in spirit of below schematic which a Dutch member did with VSSA amp there seems so many reasons to get bit for bit small improvements. If you look close PSU ground is a floating point compared to amp modules where ground reference is virtual point and also in speaker is not wired with dirty current returns to ground point but sits floating between two hot wires this principle really improve on common modes. Only drawback seems is dampening for load seems double up but actual Ronald runs "resonance impedance correction" for TC9 drivers in situation, so have some good dampening established. The FO in small version should be on its way soon and will bridged at 8 ohm speaker load be good for 240 watt as each module sees half the load, also FO M can be bridged and more power full but in they run some hot even music is not streaming then one big serious heat sink can make better environment for bridged S verse M modules. Also if executed as pure mono block and then placed close to speaker gives situation to have a very short wire connected that in my experience the few times tried it out gives performance audio able kick
ArtsyAllen,
If you have balanced pre signal or do some other trick that ESP site share for single ended signal then you not stock with paid FO M power wise, if you really wish FO L effect then seems possible upgrade with two more FO M and bridge them. In each amp module sees half the load then if speaker system is lower than 8 ohm it will have to be checked with LC if amp is in safe area.
What you mention there is all true and good information but is not so easy as an upgrade path for Allen, as you need to double the heatsink which is basically a new chassis. Wiring the speakers to present a 4 ohm load will allow the maximum the amplifier can give and the existing heatsink should be enough as maximum power will only really be used for peaks.
I am not convinced that a balanced bridged amplifier is the best use as the modules themselves are not matched and even calibrating them to draw the same quiescent and bias current is a real pain unless you have three multimeters.
The L modules matches the MOSFET's which seems to me to be a better approach. Both a balanced bridged M and single L will need the same heatsink which will be pretty massive. The fairly high bias point really does produce a lot of heat unless you drop the voltage rails. I have a six channel First One amp that I am building at the moment and I needed to use a 5U 400mm deep chassis to get enough heatsink and 4 of the channels are running at a lower voltage (45V).
If you are building an amp from the ground up all options are open to choose the best, trying to re-use other parts might lead to different choices.
As Allen's amplifier is already built but the array's aren't I was just throwing the idea out that he could wire them for a lower impedance to allow maximum use of the amplifier he already has
I have built a stereo First One M amp which is going to power a 25 a side Vifa TC9 array. I have yet to decide myself if I will wire it for 4 or 8 ohms but it is now the next project to be started sometime in the new year so we will see
Fluid,
Good points and thanks info, look forward next year how your First One M amp and new TC9 array turns out.
Regarding massive heat for better AB quality amps verse family of better quality digital amps future will tell, have preferred AB family myself but after listening BeoLab 90 speaker then quality of amps was not a thought and in they sit inside speaker systems DSP corrected AC pass band they maybe end up as good as AB amps.
Good points and thanks info, look forward next year how your First One M amp and new TC9 array turns out.
Regarding massive heat for better AB quality amps verse family of better quality digital amps future will tell, have preferred AB family myself but after listening BeoLab 90 speaker then quality of amps was not a thought and in they sit inside speaker systems DSP corrected AC pass band they maybe end up as good as AB amps.
Use a horn sub, would be my solution. I will be working on that in the new year.Also, the trouble for Wesayso and finding subs will be the integration.
All those little drivers hitting 17Hz are working together and provide a very quick reaction time.
A big 15" or 18" driver will sound sluggish and won't be able to keep up with the arrays.
I think his only option might be a line array, or two, for subs. Something like ten or twelve 6" drivers would be better suited to the task, but would probably have the lowest WAF possible, unless integrated into a wall with fabric to cover the drivers... Sorry BYRTT.
Have tried isobarik - ELF - Ripol - with my arrays, but none of them worked satisfactory.
What a fun welcome to wake up to, an exploding discussion touching a lot of interesting points... now where do I start to react to this. Maybe a few data points?
First: Yes, I'd like to add some sealed subs to see what it can do. They would use some form of Linkwitz transform, which is basically what I do with the Arrays too to arrive at that 17 Hz F3.
Open for debate is the fact that my moving mass is 65 gram currently. With the SD area of a 15/16" woofer. Would a sub (or 2 or 3) be sluggish? Even if it only has to do 20 to 40 HZ?
One mayor reason I did not experiment with adding subs is a lack of funds. It's also the reason no amp build is started yet. I've had a big hiatus in my income and do not make a lot currently. So getting back on a level where I have some play money to throw at this again will take me quite a while. I'd also want to play with ambient tweeters but that too hangs on the no funds available. I financed this project by saving up while I still had a regular job, but knew I was being laid off for economical reasons.
I'd like to build a powerful amp from the ground up, once I do have the funds needed. With the Vifa's a minimum of 240 watt would bring me to x-max territory. I'd like to build in some headroom. I've been playing with that bridged idea (either with the Fo S or M) but also just going with the more regular Fo Large. I like the balanced/bridged idea to get the best noise reduction. Right now I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough on Amps to pull off something like that.
Kindhornman's idea for dedicated Array drivers would be a dream. But it won't be easy to get performance like that little (and cheap) Vifa with a lot more x-max.
The 10F would only need 70 watt to do what the Vifa does with 240 watt. The only driver I know off that was build for arrays and is about the same size is the Audience A3. It's not nearly as smooth in performance as the TC9/10F family. Still an impressive driver with an even more impressive price tag (when it was still available)
It has a less impressive frequency response and has higher distortion levels in measurements at fixed SPL levels than the TC9:
Even the 10F shows better distortion levels on all fronts except around 300 Hz where the TC9 is showing slightly lower figures. That's how good that cheap TV driver really is.
The Scan is a little better in everything else though.
It won't be a simple undertaking to build something along the lines of these two. Clearly the designers at Scan Speak were not holding back when they were designing these cheap TV drivers!
The fiberglass Vifa version is quite comparable but I wouldn't want to pick the winner between the TC and TG. The Kevlar coned family member was an interesting driver but from what I've seen it wasn't bettering the TC9. At least not in the measurements I have seen.
When Vifa was split up from Scan Speak the 10F was born.
Surely that PentaCut NRSC Cone technology is working on these Vifa drivers. Whatever that is. The 10F will be sporting something similar as it came from the same kitchen.
It does seem Home Line Arrays are making a huge come back, the first wave being around 1995 with the Pipe Dreams etc. Good to read so many people have a renewed interest in this concept. It made this thread the second most viewed thread in this "Full Range" part of the forum! And that, while my way of doing things has the least in common with the usual content that occupies this part of the forum. My thread surely would have been less out of place over in the "Multi Way" section.
Thanks to member OPC (Owen) for showing me a proof of concept before I even started building, that helped me seal the deal. It showed me I wasn't crazy for trying. Also thanks to BYRTT for his generosity of supplying me with the 10F's for my ambient experiment! But BYRTT, your count is off, I do use 50 TC9's, not 48, 25 drivers in each array.
First: Yes, I'd like to add some sealed subs to see what it can do. They would use some form of Linkwitz transform, which is basically what I do with the Arrays too to arrive at that 17 Hz F3.
Open for debate is the fact that my moving mass is 65 gram currently. With the SD area of a 15/16" woofer. Would a sub (or 2 or 3) be sluggish? Even if it only has to do 20 to 40 HZ?
One mayor reason I did not experiment with adding subs is a lack of funds. It's also the reason no amp build is started yet. I've had a big hiatus in my income and do not make a lot currently. So getting back on a level where I have some play money to throw at this again will take me quite a while. I'd also want to play with ambient tweeters but that too hangs on the no funds available. I financed this project by saving up while I still had a regular job, but knew I was being laid off for economical reasons.
I'd like to build a powerful amp from the ground up, once I do have the funds needed. With the Vifa's a minimum of 240 watt would bring me to x-max territory. I'd like to build in some headroom. I've been playing with that bridged idea (either with the Fo S or M) but also just going with the more regular Fo Large. I like the balanced/bridged idea to get the best noise reduction. Right now I'm not nearly knowledgeable enough on Amps to pull off something like that.
Kindhornman's idea for dedicated Array drivers would be a dream. But it won't be easy to get performance like that little (and cheap) Vifa with a lot more x-max.
The 10F would only need 70 watt to do what the Vifa does with 240 watt. The only driver I know off that was build for arrays and is about the same size is the Audience A3. It's not nearly as smooth in performance as the TC9/10F family. Still an impressive driver with an even more impressive price tag (when it was still available)
It has a less impressive frequency response and has higher distortion levels in measurements at fixed SPL levels than the TC9:
Even the 10F shows better distortion levels on all fronts except around 300 Hz where the TC9 is showing slightly lower figures. That's how good that cheap TV driver really is.
The Scan is a little better in everything else though.
It won't be a simple undertaking to build something along the lines of these two. Clearly the designers at Scan Speak were not holding back when they were designing these cheap TV drivers!
The fiberglass Vifa version is quite comparable but I wouldn't want to pick the winner between the TC and TG. The Kevlar coned family member was an interesting driver but from what I've seen it wasn't bettering the TC9. At least not in the measurements I have seen.
When Vifa was split up from Scan Speak the 10F was born.
Surely that PentaCut NRSC Cone technology is working on these Vifa drivers. Whatever that is. The 10F will be sporting something similar as it came from the same kitchen.
It does seem Home Line Arrays are making a huge come back, the first wave being around 1995 with the Pipe Dreams etc. Good to read so many people have a renewed interest in this concept. It made this thread the second most viewed thread in this "Full Range" part of the forum! And that, while my way of doing things has the least in common with the usual content that occupies this part of the forum. My thread surely would have been less out of place over in the "Multi Way" section.
Thanks to member OPC (Owen) for showing me a proof of concept before I even started building, that helped me seal the deal. It showed me I wasn't crazy for trying. Also thanks to BYRTT for his generosity of supplying me with the 10F's for my ambient experiment! But BYRTT, your count is off, I do use 50 TC9's, not 48
, 25 drivers in each array.
Last edited:
What you mention there is all true and good information but is not so easy as an upgrade path for Allen, as you need to double the heatsink which is basically a new chassis. Wiring the speakers to present a 4 ohm load will allow the maximum the amplifier can give and the existing heatsink should be enough as maximum power will only really be used for peaks.
I am not convinced that a balanced bridged amplifier is the best use as the modules themselves are not matched and even calibrating them to draw the same quiescent and bias current is a real pain unless you have three multimeters.
The L modules matches the MOSFET's which seems to me to be a better approach. Both a balanced bridged M and single L will need the same heatsink which will be pretty massive. The fairly high bias point really does produce a lot of heat unless you drop the voltage rails. I have a six channel First One amp that I am building at the moment and I needed to use a 5U 400mm deep chassis to get enough heatsink and 4 of the channels are running at a lower voltage (45V).
If you are building an amp from the ground up all options are open to choose the best, trying to re-use other parts might lead to different choices.
As Allen's amplifier is already built but the array's aren't I was just throwing the idea out that he could wire them for a lower impedance to allow maximum use of the amplifier he already has
I have built a stereo First One M amp which is going to power a 25 a side Vifa TC9 array. I have yet to decide myself if I will wire it for 4 or 8 ohms but it is now the next project to be started sometime in the new year so we will see
I recommend everybody to try the My-ref Fremen Edition amp for the towers.
Superior to the First One in my ears, but First One is among the very best.
I have tired First One - My_ref - Pass amps in many variations - amazing FET circlotron - Fetzilla - Roender's FC-100 - OTL 6c33 - Goldmund Telos clone among others..
Only problem with My_Ref is limited power out, but a bridged version would be more than enough. Haven't tried that yet.