Yes, that was the ME2. A simple bass-reflex minimonitor. Although I haven't ever heard a pair, several of my friends have built them. Many prefer it over the Ariel, as a matter of fact. Of course, they are intended to be used with subs.
I had two different pairs of Ariels. Neither sounded as good as Lynn's. I think that the ME2 is much easier to dial in.
The ME2 (and everything else) is described on Lynn's Ariel page, which (unsurprisingly) I strongly recommend you read.
The Ariels went through a number of iterations and there was (back in the day) a lot of discussion on various mailing lists as to the pros and cons of each as there really wasn't (isn't?) a viable model of how these complex systems work and interact with the room.
If I were starting from scratch today, I'd build an ME2-type speaker sitting on top of a subwoofer that matched the width dimension of the Ariel, with sub drivers on the left and right side of the sub cabinet. This is a popular format for home-theater speakers these days, with an MTM on the top of a narrow cabinet, and a self-powered pair of sub drivers on the left and right sides of the lower part of the cabinet.
Since Class AB or Class D plate amplifiers with built-in Linkwitz Transform equalization are pretty common now, the volume for the sub enclosure can be an arbitrary value, and putting drivers on the L and R sides of the cabinet cancels most of the reaction forces. Put an ME2-style enclosure on top and you're done.
Why don't I write about an Ariel successor now? Because I've already got Ariels that I've been listening to for the last 20 years, and contemporary audiophile-style drivers don't seem much better ... same efficiency, and only a few have flat response and a rapid impulse-decay characteristic, which are the key design aspects of the Ariel. If the drivers aren't significantly better, then there's no point in re-visiting the design. The drivers set the ultimate quality of any loudspeaker, and there's nothing I can do about that.
Now if somebody came out with a beryllium-diaphragm 5.5" midbass and a complementary 1" dome tweeter, and efficiency was the same or a bit higher, I would see the point of a Mark II version. In practice, it would be a revival of the Yamaha NS-1000 studio monitor, and would probably sound rather similar.
P.S. I define driver "quality" by a combination of: (A) absence of resonance in the time-decay characteristic (over 5 milliseconds) and (B) good subjective qualities with primarily classical-music sources. I mostly listen to things like Big Data, White Sea, Ulrich Schnauss, and other pop-flavored electronica, but they sound better with a classically-biased loudspeaker with flat response and low coloration.
Last edited:
Yamaha NS-5000 speakers now in store | Living Sound + Vision
There is the nylon now ! Ah sorry, the zylon...
We have still to wait a serious review about it !
Notice as they have not rounded the cabinet ! squared like a tatami !
There is the nylon now ! Ah sorry, the zylon...
We have still to wait a serious review about it !
Notice as they have not rounded the cabinet ! squared like a tatami !
Similar to what I look at. Designing drivers is a tricky and complicated task. I am having difficulty finding suppliers of parts that have know the performance of there parts, or appropriately measure them. Surrounds, spiders, voice coils, etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's expensive, but the price makes at least as much sense as that for the Harbeth Monitor 40.2, for example at $18,000-20,000 USD. The $20,000 price tag is Australian dollars, by the way, about $15,000 USD. The price is said to be ¥750,000 each, or $13,250 USD the pair.
The Yamaha has a lot of innovative acoustic trickery behind the MF and HF domes and in the box itself, for the bass driver. The materials used for the domes and bass cone are pretty exotic, too: here's an interview with Koji Okazaki, the NS-5000's chief engineer where he discusses this:
http://www.avhub.com.au/features/sound-image/yamaha-ns-5000---full-story-interview-429975
Last edited:
Russell thanks for the link. I suppose my reaction is just sour grapes over the ever escalating costs of high end audio. Relative to other things out there the price might seem "reasonable" for their "flagship" design. I'm sure Yamaha has put a lot into the design, and being the manufacture of fine pianos they should have a handle on what sounds real.
Zylon is a sort of aramid maybe ? I remember Onxyo made also a white plastic fiber which sounded very good in mini monitors (made more for livings rooms than Studios).
Wkipedia says to us than the first aramid was named ... Nomex (Du Pont de Nemours trademark). But often I saw in review a sort of peak at the end of such drivers, a little like the polypren drivers... not the sort of roll off Lynn O. likes.
Wkipedia says to us than the first aramid was named ... Nomex (Du Pont de Nemours trademark). But often I saw in review a sort of peak at the end of such drivers, a little like the polypren drivers... not the sort of roll off Lynn O. likes.
Last edited:
Hmm I read the link on the first page about how this all turned out and it says the 416 is in a vented cab, but I thought Gary was using them sealed in 3 cubic foot cabs?
I had an idea for dual 416's per cab that was mentioned as a future project perhaps.. Reading about another company that uses two drivers per cab of the same model gave me the idea.
How do you think it may work for duel 416's perched one on top of the other, with the bottom woofer being cut with a coil at approx 500HZ or less? Then have the upper woofer running full range to the limit where it's crossed over to the CD etc..
The idea came from this cab, I thought it may also work for duel 416's ?? The sensitivity would be killer!
DECWARE Omega Speaker Systems' Super 3 High Output XRS Loudspeaker
I had an idea for dual 416's per cab that was mentioned as a future project perhaps.. Reading about another company that uses two drivers per cab of the same model gave me the idea.
How do you think it may work for duel 416's perched one on top of the other, with the bottom woofer being cut with a coil at approx 500HZ or less? Then have the upper woofer running full range to the limit where it's crossed over to the CD etc..
The idea came from this cab, I thought it may also work for duel 416's ?? The sensitivity would be killer!
DECWARE Omega Speaker Systems' Super 3 High Output XRS Loudspeaker
Stacked 15" drivers is a reasonable idea, and is plenty common in high-end speakers that we see at the trade shows. As you suggest, it's common practice to run the upper woofer over the full working range, while the lower woofer has an additional inductor, or more complex lowpass filter, that limits HF response to 200~300 Hz, depending on how much baffle-step is expected.
The lowpass filter of the lower driver should be adjustable, since the only time 100% baffle-step correction is required is when the speaker is used outdoors. In listening rooms, the reflections off the rear wall, side wall, and floor starts to add LF energy when the phases of the first three reflections, and the direct output from the driver, start to sum together. This summing-together transition frequency is a function of the distances from the three closest adjacent surfaces, and how much loss those surfaces have in the 50~300 Hz region.
Unless the room is perfectly symmetric, it's entirely possible the Left and Right speakers will need (slightly) different settings for the adjustable lowpass filter for the lower driver.
The lowpass filter of the lower driver should be adjustable, since the only time 100% baffle-step correction is required is when the speaker is used outdoors. In listening rooms, the reflections off the rear wall, side wall, and floor starts to add LF energy when the phases of the first three reflections, and the direct output from the driver, start to sum together. This summing-together transition frequency is a function of the distances from the three closest adjacent surfaces, and how much loss those surfaces have in the 50~300 Hz region.
Unless the room is perfectly symmetric, it's entirely possible the Left and Right speakers will need (slightly) different settings for the adjustable lowpass filter for the lower driver.
Last edited:
That makes sense to have the lower driver adjustable via the lowpass filter then, I never thought of that and was thinking it could work like the Omega cab I linked.
On another note have you ever heard the Sanders Sound Systems ESL? They are in Colorado also, and although I could never afford them they really intrigue me..It seems like a breakthrough ESL that cannot be overpowered and also has a very good transmission line bass system. Reviews are good at least, same for his Magtech amplifier. Would be cool to hear them if you're not too far from each other etc..
Sanders Sound Systems - MODEL 10 Electrostatic Speaker
Sanders Sound Systems - Magtech Amp
The JBL Project Everest DD66000 (and now DD67000) is a wide speaker which uses two identical 15" side-side front facing woofers, one crossed at 700Hz and the other crossed at 150Hz. The also wide dual radial midrange horn has a low height which is ideal for this arrangement, plus to also support a short top dual radial horn tweeter.
DD67000 Crossover Frequencies: 150Hz (LF1 6dB/octave) 850Hz (LF2 24dB/octave) 20kHz (UHF 24dB/octave)
-------
BASS CANNON: Recent Push-Pull-Slot-Loaded bass reflex designs have proven enhanced front directed "impact" and also tigher room directivity control.
BASS SLOBs: A line array of slot loaded dipole W-baffle woofers generates both enhanced front "impact" plus reduced side wall room interaction producing a directivity closer to a horn.
BASS-PULSE: Side-Side push-pull woofers create a more omni-directional bass pulse, with reduced vibration from physically coupled side-side construction. For bass, Gary uses a front facing AES TD15H woofer coupled to a pair of side-side passive radiators instead of a port.
With a 15" midrange I would favor a side-side push-pull pair of 18" woofers in a sealed box driven by room-equalized high wattage amps. Both the GPA 416 and AES TD15M reach -3db at 80Hz in a sealed 3cuft cabinet with excellent transient response.
DD67000 Crossover Frequencies: 150Hz (LF1 6dB/octave) 850Hz (LF2 24dB/octave) 20kHz (UHF 24dB/octave)
-------
BASS CANNON: Recent Push-Pull-Slot-Loaded bass reflex designs have proven enhanced front directed "impact" and also tigher room directivity control.
BASS SLOBs: A line array of slot loaded dipole W-baffle woofers generates both enhanced front "impact" plus reduced side wall room interaction producing a directivity closer to a horn.
BASS-PULSE: Side-Side push-pull woofers create a more omni-directional bass pulse, with reduced vibration from physically coupled side-side construction. For bass, Gary uses a front facing AES TD15H woofer coupled to a pair of side-side passive radiators instead of a port.
With a 15" midrange I would favor a side-side push-pull pair of 18" woofers in a sealed box driven by room-equalized high wattage amps. Both the GPA 416 and AES TD15M reach -3db at 80Hz in a sealed 3cuft cabinet with excellent transient response.
Lynn's prototypes, described in that link, did indeed use the 416 in a vented cabinet. They were built by his friend in Texas, but didn't ever find their way to Lynn's home in Colorado. I designed my sealed upper cabinets for use with the AE TD15M's, but Lynn talked me into trying the 416's; the parameters were similar enough to make this plausible. I re-cut the driver openings for the Altec frames, and tried 416's as well as 515's. Much to my surprise, it was the 416's that really brought the music to life. And I preferred both to the TD15M's.
Certainly LineSource's suggested dual-18's in a sealed box with room-equalized high-powered amps would outperform mine, but that approach would also push the 416 and the horn a few inches higher. For some it would be a worthwhile tradeoff, but with my listening habits the additional bass capability would be wasted.
I have made a change in the bass system that I haven't yet mentioned, though. The plate amps have been replaced by a modified (Big Sky Audio) Parasound HCA-1500A. Low-pass filtering and room correction for the subwoofers are now handled by a DSPeaker Anti-Mode 8033SII. I have two of the Anti-Mode units, actually, and have been experimenting with dual-mono vs stereo bass. Surprisingly, DSPeaker recommends the dual-mono configuration in two-subwoofer systems. My results so far suggest that they have a point.
Gary Dahl
Indeed, this works. I used a solution of this type in a tri-amplified 5-way system that I put together for a friend, who uses it in a VERY large room:
Project | Homebuilt Hi-Fi - A user submitted image showcase of high quality home built hi-fi components.
Marco
Thanks Gary for the update and info on your system. The sealed idea for the 416 with added subs to bring things down to the depths sounds like a good way to go. Also thanks LineSource for all the info as well!
For planet10 and wife (Dave and Ruth)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5010547[B
For planet10 and wife (Dave and Ruth)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5010547[B
Last edited:
The Sanders I heard at the RMAF show didn't make much of an impression ... sorry. Maybe it's the near-Class B transistor amp I didn't warm up to, or just adverse show conditions.
I've been thinking about the comments I posted above. Although I like vertically stacked woofers in principle, I have to concede I've yet to hear a system at shows, or in the home, that doesn't sound blurred and indistinct compared to a single direct-radiator or bass horn. Tall arrays sound even worse ... big, blurred sound. Plenty loud but tone colors are just not right.
Maybe my grumble is the non-coincident arrival from the upper and lower woofer. The additional 1st-order lowpass filter for the lower woofer can add 4"/10 cm to 8"/20cm of electrical delay to the signal, and maybe the non-coincident arrival is audible (for some people who are sensitive to that kind of thing).
I found, to my surprise, that front-to-back movements as small as 1/2"/12mm on the MF horn were audible. A 1"/25mm movement was very clearly audible as blurring and lack of coherence between the 15" bass driver and the MF horn. This really shouldn't have happened: the crossover was well away from any kind of null condition, and the changes in frequency response were in the 0.5 dB or less range. A 1"/25mm shift is only 1/20th of a wavelength at 700 Hz, after all, and that really shouldn't be audible unless the crossover is so badly designed that a null is aimed at the listener.
I had to revert to looking at the impulse response to correlate a measurement with what I was hearing ... and yes, the risetime does look different, although not that much.
So maybe the same thing is going on in the 200 Hz range, just with larger distances. A 4"/10cm to 8"/20cm arrival-time discrepancy between the upper and lower woofers might be too much, and fall into the audible range.
If this is the case, there might be an advantage to sloping the front faces of the woofer cabinets, as well as providing an esthetically acceptable means of adjusting the front-to-back location of the upper cabinet.
Another thought was the additional 1st-order lowpass filter applied to the lower woofer. There might be a tuning advantage to providing a variable shunt resistor across the multi-tapped inductor, so it can vary from a classical 1st-order lowpass to an adjustable shelf filter. One half of an L-pad, ranging from 8 ohms to 50 ohms, might be a good starting point. The shunt/shelving resistor mostly adjusts the phase response of the lower woofer at the nominal 700 Hz crossover point. (Both upper and lower drivers share a common 2nd or 3rd LPF at 700~800 Hz.)
The shelving resistor, combined with adjustable front/back offset for the lower woofer, provides a flexible means for adjusting the arrival timing of the upper and lower woofers. I don't think I've seen this done on commercial systems, which usually have the upper and lower woofers on a common panel that is not adjustable (for obvious cost reasons, as well as esthetics).
As for measurement techniques, examining the appearance of the risetime of the impulse response should show the timing relationship between the woofers. The phase angle between the two woofers is of interest as well; by temporarily reversing the phase of one of them, and looking at the change in frequency response over the working range, possible null conditions can be examined and avoided.
Both the Ariel and the first prototypes I build in Dallas of the new system were quite sensitive to timing relationships between the drivers, as well as the phase angles at the crossover frequency. So it's quite possible that the trick to getting a stacked woofer to sound coherent ... like one big driver without any perceptual "phasiness" ... are trimming adjustments in the crossover combined with front-to-back offsets between the pair of drivers.