I built a new box. 42.5L, tuned to about 38 Hz. It's 95 cm high and 21 cm wide. Very nice looking dimensions. 
Wife acceptance factor of these is much higher. Wife didn't like the stands and odd shape. She likes the new ones (not only puts up with them).
They sound slightly different. Bass doesn't extend as much, but little difference. They sound a little fuller, a bit more solid. I changed the tuning frequency for the driver. It can't handle as much power as the lower frequency would require.
They are more tolerant - they don't sound very different at different listening positions. This suits me well. I guess this is the reason for the biggest improvement: They have much better image! It's really good! They sound much more open and balanced.
Either design works well. I'll keep the floor-stander. I'm replacing the tweeters for something better, and I will only finish the speakers after that.
Wife acceptance factor of these is much higher. Wife didn't like the stands and odd shape. She likes the new ones (not only puts up with them).
They sound slightly different. Bass doesn't extend as much, but little difference. They sound a little fuller, a bit more solid. I changed the tuning frequency for the driver. It can't handle as much power as the lower frequency would require.
They are more tolerant - they don't sound very different at different listening positions. This suits me well. I guess this is the reason for the biggest improvement: They have much better image! It's really good! They sound much more open and balanced.
Either design works well. I'll keep the floor-stander. I'm replacing the tweeters for something better, and I will only finish the speakers after that.
Attachments
So now the upgrading will begin. I've waited 6 months, and finally the January USA visit for my brother has come and past. My stuff all arrived (except the white perforated crossover boards ). Otherwise, Parts Express, thank you for incredible service, and my bank - thank you for the fast wire transfer.
I've bought some components and two more W170S 8 ohm drivers. I found that the W170S distorts a little at the higher-mid frequencies, and they don't do the mids quite well enough. I have some drivers which will do midrange nicely, so we'll see how it comes together. I also bought all my inductors.
I have attached some things. I'm going to use the speakers as they are, close up where the mid drivers go, cut two extra holes in the baffle and move the port to the back. The baffle is screwed on, because I had a thought of possibly doing this mod, so it's going to be easy. I just need to find time when I'm not seeing to children, cooking, working, clearing up the house and garden, relaxing with my wife, and building two carports.
When the speakers have been modded, I can finally finish them off with the primers and paints which have been lying in my workshop for over 4 months.
Note I used a W170 in the simulation. It has a similar peak on the higher end as my mid drivers, but it's more lively in the lower than mine, and slightly more sensitive (I think). The crossover is designed to be compatible, so I'm holding thumbs.
). Otherwise, Parts Express, thank you for incredible service, and my bank - thank you for the fast wire transfer.I've bought some components and two more W170S 8 ohm drivers. I found that the W170S distorts a little at the higher-mid frequencies, and they don't do the mids quite well enough. I have some drivers which will do midrange nicely, so we'll see how it comes together. I also bought all my inductors.
I have attached some things. I'm going to use the speakers as they are, close up where the mid drivers go, cut two extra holes in the baffle and move the port to the back. The baffle is screwed on, because I had a thought of possibly doing this mod, so it's going to be easy. I just need to find time when I'm not seeing to children, cooking, working, clearing up the house and garden, relaxing with my wife, and building two carports.
When the speakers have been modded, I can finally finish them off with the primers and paints which have been lying in my workshop for over 4 months.
Note I used a W170 in the simulation. It has a similar peak on the higher end as my mid drivers, but it's more lively in the lower than mine, and slightly more sensitive (I think). The crossover is designed to be compatible, so I'm holding thumbs.
Attachments
Hi Marc. Somebody has to take an interest here, though I really haven't spent any time on your new proposal.
I was looking at your 6" plus 1" soft dome idea again.
We could see if the more conventional 6" circuit floats your boat. This would be easy enough to try with your two way. It's pretty good in most respects. Only your ears can say if it is OK. We've ditched the notch, which IMO is a double-edged sword. So you might hear more cone-breakup, but maybe a more effortless sound.
Tweeter level is always a bit select on test. I tend to go lower, to avoid that irritating brightness.
I was looking at your 6" plus 1" soft dome idea again.
We could see if the more conventional 6" circuit floats your boat. This would be easy enough to try with your two way. It's pretty good in most respects. Only your ears can say if it is OK. We've ditched the notch, which IMO is a double-edged sword. So you might hear more cone-breakup, but maybe a more effortless sound.
Tweeter level is always a bit select on test. I tend to go lower, to avoid that irritating brightness.
Attachments
Hi Steve. Thanks. I'm very happy with the 2-way, and I can recommend it to anyone who want to build something like it. The lows are very impressive, and the highs are perfect. It's the midrange where things could be a little better.
There are a few considerations. The W170S isn't a mid-bass, it's classified as a woofer. Sure, it works, but it does have a distortion peak at about 1.8kHz, which I can hear. The tweeter has fairly high resonance, so pushing the woofer higher than it should go (which I can hear causes cone break-up), and trying to push the tweeter lower than it should while using enough filtering to get enough attenuation at resonance is quite a task. So midrange suffers, and this is evident when listening to voice or rock/metal.
I put forward a few goals, considering how good these speakers already are.
1. Improve mid
2. Simplify the crossover
3. Add more power handling (prevents pushing the woofers too far, so that they remain within Xmax)
After a lot of thought and planning, I decided to go with a 3-way. The only loss is the baffle if it doesn't work out. The new W170S's can be used elsewhere, and I already had the midrange speakers. The new components I can also use somewhere else, if need be.
The only thing with the new design is that it simulates having bad off-axis response at the low-mid crossover point in the vertical, but I'll see how it works out.
Having said that, I took the speakers apart last night. The new crossovers will be built tonight, and hopefully I can cut the holes as well. This is going to be a quick mod.
There are a few considerations. The W170S isn't a mid-bass, it's classified as a woofer. Sure, it works, but it does have a distortion peak at about 1.8kHz, which I can hear. The tweeter has fairly high resonance, so pushing the woofer higher than it should go (which I can hear causes cone break-up), and trying to push the tweeter lower than it should while using enough filtering to get enough attenuation at resonance is quite a task. So midrange suffers, and this is evident when listening to voice or rock/metal.
I put forward a few goals, considering how good these speakers already are.
1. Improve mid
2. Simplify the crossover
3. Add more power handling (prevents pushing the woofers too far, so that they remain within Xmax)
After a lot of thought and planning, I decided to go with a 3-way. The only loss is the baffle if it doesn't work out. The new W170S's can be used elsewhere, and I already had the midrange speakers. The new components I can also use somewhere else, if need be.
The only thing with the new design is that it simulates having bad off-axis response at the low-mid crossover point in the vertical, but I'll see how it works out.
Having said that, I took the speakers apart last night.
The new crossovers will be built tonight, and hopefully I can cut the holes as well. This is going to be a quick mod.
Right, so they're done for now. Immediately huge difference noticeable. The midrange might be a little strong, but it's a bit late to test properly. Imaging is so much better! I decided to leave the boxes sealed. I'll see how that goes, but so far it's good. There seem to be a few of the highs missing, but it could be the bad quality mp3. I'll tinker tomorrow. Pics also to come.
The plan was to use the PP drivers (round chassis). They're a little sensitive, and their 2.5-3kHz peak is a little too strong. The dimpled paper drivers are pretty good! I'm impressed. I don't think they're incredibly well matched, but close enough.
I'm thinking about adding the ports... But I don't know, these thunder when called upon, but not quite as much as before. However, the bass is well controlled and accurate, where it used to be a touch boomy.
I think the only sure change will be to add a little more resistance to the tweeters. They're slightly too much, but not that noticeable.
I'm happy. This was a good change.
I'm thinking about adding the ports... But I don't know, these thunder when called upon, but not quite as much as before. However, the bass is well controlled and accurate, where it used to be a touch boomy.
I think the only sure change will be to add a little more resistance to the tweeters. They're slightly too much, but not that noticeable.
I'm happy. This was a good change.
Attachments
So I must add to my "progress" now. Learning has been great. I found that my driver spacing doesn't lend itself to my crossover points, and I have ended up with some comb filtering. So I'm about to redesign the baffle (that's why I made it removable ).
I'm going for something I've always fancied, but never properly understood. I mean, I've understood the theory, but not what it means practically. I'm going for MTM.
Now, I do like the idea of 5" or 5.5" M's, but I have 6.5" M's, and that's that. I've done very careful measuring for driver distances, and my only option is to space the drivers 1 wavelength apart - so that's 1 wavelength M-T and 1 wavelength T-M. I've chosen 2.3 kHz crossover point (about), which is 14.5 cm spacing, which means that the drivers are going to just about be touching. Quite nice-looking, IMO. I've also gone for (hopefully) steep crossovers (3rd order).
I've used a lot of Steve's teaching, some of Lojzek's, and applied these to what I've learned from implementing designs after many simulations. MTM suits me in many ways. I was hoping to have better vertical off-axis FR, but that's not necessary. A better vertical lobe is way more useful to me. My listening position for serious listening is also right on the level where the tweeter will be.
Problems with the previous 2-way were a bit of distortion just below crossover point, and a bit of cone break-up. However, these weren't much of an issue for normal listening. Mids were also not as good as I wanted them to be. I wasn't extremely excited about the 3-way, but I'm super excited about the MTM because I loved the 2-way I had (although the 3-way is louder and has stronger midrange). MTM should solve cone break-up at higher levels, and I should get some good loud capability. This is important because my room is big, so that capability is all that's needed; I usually listen quite soft.
That's too much writing. Here's the important stuff. I'm reinstating the vent. Sealed is great, but the vent will just level off the FR for < 300 Hz better. Box volume is 43 litres with a tuning frequency of 37 Hz (front). Crossover keeps a bit of complexity of the first design, but tries to be more simple (fewer inductors, fewer capacitor combinations).
All I need to do is get my baffles built, then the change will be quick.
).I'm going for something I've always fancied, but never properly understood. I mean, I've understood the theory, but not what it means practically. I'm going for MTM.
Now, I do like the idea of 5" or 5.5" M's, but I have 6.5" M's, and that's that. I've done very careful measuring for driver distances, and my only option is to space the drivers 1 wavelength apart - so that's 1 wavelength M-T and 1 wavelength T-M. I've chosen 2.3 kHz crossover point (about), which is 14.5 cm spacing, which means that the drivers are going to just about be touching.
Quite nice-looking, IMO. I've also gone for (hopefully) steep crossovers (3rd order).I've used a lot of Steve's teaching, some of Lojzek's, and applied these to what I've learned from implementing designs after many simulations. MTM suits me in many ways. I was hoping to have better vertical off-axis FR, but that's not necessary. A better vertical lobe is way more useful to me. My listening position for serious listening is also right on the level where the tweeter will be.
Problems with the previous 2-way were a bit of distortion just below crossover point, and a bit of cone break-up. However, these weren't much of an issue for normal listening. Mids were also not as good as I wanted them to be. I wasn't extremely excited about the 3-way, but I'm super excited about the MTM because I loved the 2-way I had (although the 3-way is louder and has stronger midrange). MTM should solve cone break-up at higher levels, and I should get some good loud capability. This is important because my room is big, so that capability is all that's needed; I usually listen quite soft.
That's too much writing. Here's the important stuff. I'm reinstating the vent. Sealed is great, but the vent will just level off the FR for < 300 Hz better. Box volume is 43 litres with a tuning frequency of 37 Hz (front). Crossover keeps a bit of complexity of the first design, but tries to be more simple (fewer inductors, fewer capacitor combinations).
All I need to do is get my baffles built, then the change will be quick.
Attachments
Done. Goodness. I need to fix in the stuffing, but they're basically done. MTM is definitely fantastic! Sounds better than it looks. Now I need to measure properly.
The initial gibbon 88 style layout was excellent. So is this layout. The 2-way I had in floor-stander guise is just about as good as the gibbon 88 layout. The 3-way is not recommended, but it does have some oomph. I choose the MTM over the gibbon 88 style simply because it fills a big room better.
The 2 ohm can be a 1 ohm, but otherwise it's quite balanced.
The initial gibbon 88 style layout was excellent. So is this layout. The 2-way I had in floor-stander guise is just about as good as the gibbon 88 layout. The 3-way is not recommended, but it does have some oomph. I choose the MTM over the gibbon 88 style simply because it fills a big room better.
The 2 ohm can be a 1 ohm, but otherwise it's quite balanced.
Attachments
Parts (per speaker):
Visaton W170S 8 ohm (2)
Visaton SC10N 8 ohm (1)
2.7uF polypropylene or similar (1)
10uF polypropylene or similar (2)
22uF NP electrolytic (1)
18uF NP electrolytic or 2x33uF electrolytic (1)
2 ohm 10 W (1)
4.7 ohm 10 W (1)
8.2 ohm 10 W (1)
0.15 mH air core (DSR about 0.2 ohm) (1)
0.33 mH air core (DSR about 0.28 ohm) (1)
Internal dimensions of enclosure (43 L):
18 cm (W) x 26 cm (D) x 92 cm (H)
Place the top edge of the first W170S where the internal volume begins (at the top), the SC10N below that with no space to spare, and similarly, the 2nd W170S below the tweeter. Image attachment 1 has more detail.
Cut a vent about 20 cm - 25 cm from the bottom of the enclosure. The vent dimensions and mounting is on image attachment 2.
The crossover (layout shown in image attachment 3) can be mounted close the the speaker connector on the rear of the enclosure. I placed my speaker connector about opposite the vent.
Line the box with damping material. I lined the left side, the rear side (not covering the crossover), and a double layer on the bottom.
Visaton W170S 8 ohm (2)
Visaton SC10N 8 ohm (1)
2.7uF polypropylene or similar (1)
10uF polypropylene or similar (2)
22uF NP electrolytic (1)
18uF NP electrolytic or 2x33uF electrolytic (1)
2 ohm 10 W (1)
4.7 ohm 10 W (1)
8.2 ohm 10 W (1)
0.15 mH air core (DSR about 0.2 ohm) (1)
0.33 mH air core (DSR about 0.28 ohm) (1)
Internal dimensions of enclosure (43 L):
18 cm (W) x 26 cm (D) x 92 cm (H)
Place the top edge of the first W170S where the internal volume begins (at the top), the SC10N below that with no space to spare, and similarly, the 2nd W170S below the tweeter. Image attachment 1 has more detail.
Cut a vent about 20 cm - 25 cm from the bottom of the enclosure. The vent dimensions and mounting is on image attachment 2.
The crossover (layout shown in image attachment 3) can be mounted close the the speaker connector on the rear of the enclosure. I placed my speaker connector about opposite the vent.
Line the box with damping material. I lined the left side, the rear side (not covering the crossover), and a double layer on the bottom.
Attachments
Not yet. I did sweep frequencies from about 25 Hz slowly (1 Hz steps) through to about 3 kHz, and then steps of about 1/10th octaves until 18 kHz. I didn't hear any noticeable drops in level (no combing), and the change over from woofers to tweeter was completely smooth; I couldn't hear where the crossover happened.
The only thing I noticed was a resonance at 27 Hz which caused a little 2nd order distortion. I don't have the means to measure properly yet, but it's something I do want to do. I want to measure the impedance and phase soon, because that I can do. But I'll post everything as I get to it.
I'll check that, thanks, but it's only evident at 27 Hz. It sounded like 2nd order (54 Hz). I wouldn't have expected chuffing at the level I was listening. I also want to measure this now because I put the stuffing in after listening.
I've been listening to a lot at very different volumes. Many different genres. Source is mostly FLAC or CD and via Creative Audigy X-Fi platinum. If not FLAC, then mostly >256kbps MP3. Amplifier is MAK300 (my design, 300W 4 ohms, <0.01% THD, 100dB SNR).
I'm very impressed. I haven't heard any break up, I've pushed them very very hard. I have no need for a sub woofer; 26Hz is very strong. Mids are smooth and not overpowering, yet strong to carry violin solos with authority. Imaging is really great - orchestral music is wide and well separated.
The MT struggled with metal, these are just awesome for metal. A friend if mine who really appreciates good sound said he doesn't think he's heard better (but he hasn't listened to B&W 802D3 yet).
I'd love to take these to the local hobby show happening soon to get some opinions, but they won't be finished in time and it's a bit pricey for now. Maybe next year. I'm very happy. I'll post pictures when they're finished.
I'm very impressed. I haven't heard any break up, I've pushed them very very hard. I have no need for a sub woofer; 26Hz is very strong. Mids are smooth and not overpowering, yet strong to carry violin solos with authority. Imaging is really great - orchestral music is wide and well separated.
The MT struggled with metal, these are just awesome for metal. A friend if mine who really appreciates good sound said he doesn't think he's heard better (but he hasn't listened to B&W 802D3 yet).
I'd love to take these to the local hobby show happening soon to get some opinions, but they won't be finished in time and it's a bit pricey for now. Maybe next year. I'm very happy. I'll post pictures when they're finished.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.