These are my bookshelf surround speakers that will be based on the Scanspeak 15w8530k-01 and (probably) Morel Supreme 110.
I've posted some design notes here http://www.gattiweb.com/leeloo_design.html
I haven't finalised things completely yet. Any input is appreciated before I start the woodwork.
Cheers
David
I've posted some design notes here http://www.gattiweb.com/leeloo_design.html
I haven't finalised things completely yet. Any input is appreciated before I start the woodwork.
Cheers
David
Attachments
They look promising David.
I'd have never have though of integrating storage into the stands. Ingenius!
Didn't you consider dipole or bipole driver arrangement?
I plan to look into it after I've (eventually) finished the Perceives. I was thinking about a direct radiating design on the front baffle, in much the same way you've got now. But also putting a couple of wide range drivers such WR125's and cutting the treble at around 3-4Khz and roll them off at around 300hz. The aim is just to provide a little more space to the sound without over doing the whole thing as some surrounds seem to do. These would be bipoles too.
I'd have never have though of integrating storage into the stands. Ingenius!
Didn't you consider dipole or bipole driver arrangement?
I plan to look into it after I've (eventually) finished the Perceives. I was thinking about a direct radiating design on the front baffle, in much the same way you've got now. But also putting a couple of wide range drivers such WR125's and cutting the treble at around 3-4Khz and roll them off at around 300hz. The aim is just to provide a little more space to the sound without over doing the whole thing as some surrounds seem to do. These would be bipoles too.
5th element said:
Hehe, yeah lets hope they sound a lot clearer than she did
Shin, yes I did consider bi/dipoles - from what Ive read, the jury's still out on which is best, but it seems that di/bipoles are better for movies but direct radiators better for multi-channel audio where localisation & imaging are more important. My preference would always be for music.
Also, dipoles don't quite fit in with my goals (will be close to corners), they'd be larger & more expensive, and designing their frequency response seems a bit too empirical for my liking.
I'm still a little concerned about low frequency power handling of the 15w8530, and wonder if a bigger driver like the 18w8531 would be a better choice. Any thoughts on this?
I'd better do some more reading on the low frequency requirements of surround speakers.
David Gatti said:
Hehe, yeah lets hope they sound a lot clearer than she did
Shin, yes I did consider bi/dipoles - from what Ive read, the jury's still out on which is best, but it seems that di/bipoles are better for movies but direct radiators better for multi-channel audio where localisation & imaging are more important. My preference would always be for music.
Also, dipoles don't quite fit in with my goals of a linear phase system, they don't suit my positioning requirements (may be in a corner), they'd be larger & more expensive, and designing their frequency response seems a bit too empirical for my liking.
I'm still a little concerned about low frequency power handling of the 15w8530, and wonder if a bigger driver like the 18w8531 would be a better choice. Any thoughts on this?
I'd better do some more reading on the low frequency requirements of surround speakers.
In a perfect world, and especially for music, the surrounds would be another pair of Delta's. Frequency/time charateristics matched being the benefits.
But it seems that small speakers are the only sensible option if you live in houses like most of us on here do. So they state that 80hz is a good cutoff point and then pass the rest of the non directional sound to the subs. This actually has advantages over running full rangers all around because the bass-room interaction is lessened. It can also be argued that if correctly setup multiple sources of bass smooth room modes, however, typical placement often means that room modes are actually excited more and you generally end up with more cancellation and bigger humps. Room treatments are pretty much futile below 80hz so the best bet is to use DRC. My advice would be to just make them sats and pass the bass onto the Samsons.
Regarding the larger bass driver - if you do only take them down to ~80hz then the smaller revelator is fine unless you think your going to need higher SPL's and or lower distortion?
I'm just concerned about how a 4th order rolloff to the surrounds would combine with the 2nd order rolloff of the mains (might try modelling it in LspCAD), hence I'd prefer to keep surrounds set to large. Their closer proximity to the listening position (about 2 metres)and less programme content should mean that power requirements is not an issue.
BTW, I just been loking at the products of my favourite manufacturers, Vandersteen, Duntech and Thiel - none of them use bi/dipole surrounds.
BTW, I just been loking at the products of my favourite manufacturers, Vandersteen, Duntech and Thiel - none of them use bi/dipole surrounds.
David Gatti said:
I wouldn't worry to much about the roll-off rates and phase related issues by doing so. From experience with measuring the Perceives I can tell you that by the time the room takes over, the phase of a modelled response vs. actual response inroom will be completely different and especially at such low frequencies. You can't design for such contingencies, at least not with current software, but you can give it a go and see which measures/sounds better once the speakers are working. It should be a quick task to add in the LFE filters for the surround on the amp. Be sure to let the surrounds roll off naturally as you don't want a 2nd order lowpass + 4th order lowpass when doing the cut at 80hz.
About the speakers you mentioned at the end of your post; the average buyer of those brands usually has a large listening room and doesn't use them in the near field (2m). They are the ideal solution but I can't help but think that bipoles may be worth a try also.
Bipole's have obvious advantages when used in such close proximity to the listening position. I've been into HT for a good while now and I very nearly always prefer bipoles to direct, in fact I can't ever remember preferring direct for surround on both music and HT. You mention that your placing them close to the wall? This can actually increase the ambience of the sound since its reflected off a boudary and back in to the listening position. Its not accurate per-se but it does sound more involving and generally better to me and that's what its all about. Designing for perfection is a good start but experience tell's me that in my room, bipoles work better. It a tough call and I can completely see where your comming from but have you confirmed that your room sounds better with direct or bipole?
I just ran a simulation on LspCAD - it seems that 2nd rolloff of mains + 4th order rolloff of the surrounds (sealed box + bass cut of AV amp) won't be an issue at all. So I can set my AV amp to "small" surrounds with no ill effects and much better power handling. Cool
Thanks for your input Shin which has helped clear things in my mind, I respect your opinion. You may be correct that bi/dipoles do indeed sound better, but I have a few other requirments to deal with in the overall scheme of things. They are - size/form factor, impedance, and the versatility of having another pair of general purpose small speakers that can be used as mains in the bedroom or any other location. Bipole surrounds have only 1 use - as surrounds.
Another thing to consider is the possibility of going 7-channel in the future, in which case I'd be building another pair of identical Leeloos.
Thanks for your input Shin which has helped clear things in my mind, I respect your opinion. You may be correct that bi/dipoles do indeed sound better, but I have a few other requirments to deal with in the overall scheme of things. They are - size/form factor, impedance, and the versatility of having another pair of general purpose small speakers that can be used as mains in the bedroom or any other location. Bipole surrounds have only 1 use - as surrounds.
Another thing to consider is the possibility of going 7-channel in the future, in which case I'd be building another pair of identical Leeloos.
David,
Speakers = beautiful, daily enjoyment
Books = ugly clutter, infrequent use
Build a perfectionist 3-way speaker in the LeeLoo volume, and stack the books in plastic crates on the closet floor
The Fifth Element is LOVE
Explain how you get love from staring at dusty books in the living room.
Speakers = beautiful, daily enjoyment
Books = ugly clutter, infrequent use
Build a perfectionist 3-way speaker in the LeeLoo volume, and stack the books in plastic crates on the closet floor
The Fifth Element is LOVE
Explain how you get love from staring at dusty books in the living room.
Actually, though I called them "bookshelves" they won't be for books, rather for CDs and DVDs. I think it's an ideal situation if the hardware and software exist in harmony with each other, and anyway, it satisfies my software storage problems.
I disagree that the look will be messy, but lets wait and see when they are finished. I could always put some sort of door on them if they are.
I disagree that the look will be messy, but lets wait and see when they are finished. I could always put some sort of door on them if they are.
David Gatti said:
I really like the idea my self. You can never have too much DVD and CD storage IMO. And integrated them into what would otherwise be wasted space with a regular speaker stand is ingenious.
I really don't think you need a door on them TBH - it could also vibrate if not done very carefully. I like the "look at all my DVD's" look personally - or maybe that's just a man thing?
Great idea David and I'm looking forward to seeing just how they look in the flesh. If I weren't mounting my surrounds up on the walls, I'd would have probably copied your idea
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.