Anyone know a good application for the Parts-Express Clearance 2" Full Range Aluminum Cone Neodymium Drivers (http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=289-124).
At $3.80 each they are temping.
At $3.80 each they are temping.
Follow my formula for a build using a Tang Band 2"...
Use Horn Calc to come up with a tractrix with a 300 Hz cutoff. Build a square horn by the painfully slow process of laminating pieces of 1/4" MDF. Be terribly dissapointed upon first listen and terribly frustrated trying to get it sound like anything but a wharehouse PA horn. End up crossing it 2000Hz and realize you could do the same thing with a Dayton ND20 and round waveguide at far higher efficiency & sound quality. YMMV, as I used to drink a lot and I could have screwed up the 8-pound horns easily.
83dB 1W/1m and an Fs of 150Hz will get you into desktop computer, nearfield listenning range. For music in an average room, I suspect that these guys won't be able to get much louder than conversation levels, but for some that is all that is desired. Coupled with a cheap 10" or 12", it could be a good value, but by the time you add XO components and helper woofers, I see a lot of trouble for simply trying to keep cost down. But don't let me poo-poo your ideas; at less than $4 a piece, what have you got to lose by getting a pair to experiment with...
Use Horn Calc to come up with a tractrix with a 300 Hz cutoff. Build a square horn by the painfully slow process of laminating pieces of 1/4" MDF. Be terribly dissapointed upon first listen and terribly frustrated trying to get it sound like anything but a wharehouse PA horn. End up crossing it 2000Hz and realize you could do the same thing with a Dayton ND20 and round waveguide at far higher efficiency & sound quality. YMMV, as I used to drink a lot and I could have screwed up the 8-pound horns easily.
83dB 1W/1m and an Fs of 150Hz will get you into desktop computer, nearfield listenning range. For music in an average room, I suspect that these guys won't be able to get much louder than conversation levels, but for some that is all that is desired. Coupled with a cheap 10" or 12", it could be a good value, but by the time you add XO components and helper woofers, I see a lot of trouble for simply trying to keep cost down. But don't let me poo-poo your ideas; at less than $4 a piece, what have you got to lose by getting a pair to experiment with...
without listening to them, I'd recommend the peerless 830983 for either a 4 line array or a larger number in a focused array.
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=299-271
$7.80 in 4+ quantities
.13 ft3 (I think) for sealed f3 under 200hz, cross at 200hz.
Just an idea of a 4 driver
http://www.audiophonics.com/images/drawings/susan-line-array-enclosure+4xdrivers-persp-1.jpg
check out picture at the bottom
http://yu-ra.tripod.com/array.htm
Norman
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=299-271
$7.80 in 4+ quantities
.13 ft3 (I think) for sealed f3 under 200hz, cross at 200hz.
Just an idea of a 4 driver
http://www.audiophonics.com/images/drawings/susan-line-array-enclosure+4xdrivers-persp-1.jpg
check out picture at the bottom
http://yu-ra.tripod.com/array.htm
Norman
I wanted to use those for a line array exactly like this one:
http://www.parts-express.com/project.../Kuze3201.html
I posted on PE forums to see if its a good idea
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=211526
And i think they have convinced me not to bother.....
http://www.parts-express.com/project.../Kuze3201.html
I posted on PE forums to see if its a good idea
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=211526
And i think they have convinced me not to bother.....
"They have convinced me not to bother"
from the kuze array writeup
"Conclusion/Listening Impressions
Overall, the speakers are very good sounding, though it definitely sounds different than your standard 2-way bookshelf speaker. The sound is very large, with a good sense of soundstage width and height. I would say that they have a "live" sound, which is great for rock and similar music. They definitely can play loud and clean when mated with the appropriate subwoofer.
Because of the non-tapered line, they great in situations where listening is not occuring precisely in one location, particularly in the vertical plane. This makes them perfect "party speakers" or speakers for the person who listens to music while they do other things. For an audiophile-sort who likes to sit in his sweet spot and sip brandy, these probably aren't the best choice. It was described at DIY2002 Dayton that the imaging was a little loosey-goosey. However, I found from my experimentations that there was a solid image when seated precisely between the speakers, but the sweet spot is rather small.
Several people noted that the high-frequency reproduction lacked some "life" and "air". This could be attributed to the comb filtering problems that definitely were occuring. However, this also could be a result of the high-frequency capabilities of this particular driver, it is hard to say for sure. Whatever the reason, for pure audiophile use I would consider these lines to be slightly less "refined" and "articulate" than many standard speakers.
One of the other key aspects of this setup is the proper subwoofer integration. Because of the fairly high crossover point the proper crossover frequency on the sub and the relative level can make or break the sound. When everything is dialed-in correctly, the transition from sub to satellite can be quite good, however it does take some tweaking to achieve a good integration.
The results of this experiment definitely show the capability of using small and/or low excursion drivers successfully in a line array situation. However, it does illustrate the potential problems of center-to-center spacing in high-frequency performance. Comb filtering is a definitely a legitimate issue. With regards to power-tapering vs. not power-tapering, I am still somewhat up in the air. While tapering may help to solidify the image, it does take away from the "sound is coming from directly in front of you" effect."
If you want that type of sound then go for it.
Or you could run a line of them and a line of ribbon tweeters, but If you are doing that, I'd go up to 3" drivers..............
You evolve over time.
Your audio journey shifts gears........
What I thought was great years before is now intolerable.
Values change, priorities change, critical listening improves.
And hey, a bunch of 2" can never do bass.
It is cheaper to run a 12 or a 15 than to go from 8 to 24 2" drivers. You just don't have the cone area plus length of voice coil and xmax of a woofer.
Norman
from the kuze array writeup
"Conclusion/Listening Impressions
Overall, the speakers are very good sounding, though it definitely sounds different than your standard 2-way bookshelf speaker. The sound is very large, with a good sense of soundstage width and height. I would say that they have a "live" sound, which is great for rock and similar music. They definitely can play loud and clean when mated with the appropriate subwoofer.
Because of the non-tapered line, they great in situations where listening is not occuring precisely in one location, particularly in the vertical plane. This makes them perfect "party speakers" or speakers for the person who listens to music while they do other things. For an audiophile-sort who likes to sit in his sweet spot and sip brandy, these probably aren't the best choice. It was described at DIY2002 Dayton that the imaging was a little loosey-goosey. However, I found from my experimentations that there was a solid image when seated precisely between the speakers, but the sweet spot is rather small.
Several people noted that the high-frequency reproduction lacked some "life" and "air". This could be attributed to the comb filtering problems that definitely were occuring. However, this also could be a result of the high-frequency capabilities of this particular driver, it is hard to say for sure. Whatever the reason, for pure audiophile use I would consider these lines to be slightly less "refined" and "articulate" than many standard speakers.
One of the other key aspects of this setup is the proper subwoofer integration. Because of the fairly high crossover point the proper crossover frequency on the sub and the relative level can make or break the sound. When everything is dialed-in correctly, the transition from sub to satellite can be quite good, however it does take some tweaking to achieve a good integration.
The results of this experiment definitely show the capability of using small and/or low excursion drivers successfully in a line array situation. However, it does illustrate the potential problems of center-to-center spacing in high-frequency performance. Comb filtering is a definitely a legitimate issue. With regards to power-tapering vs. not power-tapering, I am still somewhat up in the air. While tapering may help to solidify the image, it does take away from the "sound is coming from directly in front of you" effect."
If you want that type of sound then go for it.
Or you could run a line of them and a line of ribbon tweeters, but If you are doing that, I'd go up to 3" drivers..............
You evolve over time.
Your audio journey shifts gears........
What I thought was great years before is now intolerable.
Values change, priorities change, critical listening improves.
And hey, a bunch of 2" can never do bass.
It is cheaper to run a 12 or a 15 than to go from 8 to 24 2" drivers. You just don't have the cone area plus length of voice coil and xmax of a woofer.
Norman
I think that line arrays aren't ideal hi-fi reproducers for one reason:
Your ears are not a line.
This is borne out by the impulse plots of line arrays, which are hardly clean. Line arrays are commonly constructed from small drivers that have wide, uncontrolled dispersion patterns on their own, and the combination of multiple vertically-arranged transducers into a single cylindrical wavefront at high frequencies is a myth. (There's a reason why Bose's MA12 is lowpassed at 12kHz, and it's not because the drivers can't go any higher.) Instead, the transducers simply behave like a line of point sources, interacting with each other to produce comb filtering and multiple arrival times at high frequencies, which generates transient smear and obscures detail. (This is why I've never heard a pro-audio line array - the likes of JBL VerTec, Meyer M3D - that sounded 'right' in the treble range, though I've heard some very nice-sounding point-source boxes.)
You can calculate the path length difference between the nearest and furthest driver in a line array like this:
(delta)=(sqrt((h^2)+(d^2))-d
where delta is the path length difference, h is the vertical distance between your listening height and the height of the highest driver in the array (usually the furthest away), and d is the distance from the listening position to the nearest point of the array (in the same horizontal plane as your ears). This path length difference can create the impression of enhanced spaciousness, but these unintended effects don't bring us any closer to the truth of the recording. One goal of single-driver loudspeakers is for all acoustic radiation to have the same apparent apex and proper phase alignment, but using full-range drivers in a line array negates that advantage.
Your ears are not a line.
This is borne out by the impulse plots of line arrays, which are hardly clean. Line arrays are commonly constructed from small drivers that have wide, uncontrolled dispersion patterns on their own, and the combination of multiple vertically-arranged transducers into a single cylindrical wavefront at high frequencies is a myth. (There's a reason why Bose's MA12 is lowpassed at 12kHz, and it's not because the drivers can't go any higher.) Instead, the transducers simply behave like a line of point sources, interacting with each other to produce comb filtering and multiple arrival times at high frequencies, which generates transient smear and obscures detail. (This is why I've never heard a pro-audio line array - the likes of JBL VerTec, Meyer M3D - that sounded 'right' in the treble range, though I've heard some very nice-sounding point-source boxes.)
You can calculate the path length difference between the nearest and furthest driver in a line array like this:
(delta)=(sqrt((h^2)+(d^2))-d
where delta is the path length difference, h is the vertical distance between your listening height and the height of the highest driver in the array (usually the furthest away), and d is the distance from the listening position to the nearest point of the array (in the same horizontal plane as your ears). This path length difference can create the impression of enhanced spaciousness, but these unintended effects don't bring us any closer to the truth of the recording. One goal of single-driver loudspeakers is for all acoustic radiation to have the same apparent apex and proper phase alignment, but using full-range drivers in a line array negates that advantage.
I built dipole array recently. there is no imaging at all, sound is more like mono. but it is the same in every part of the room. you can get very close to speakers or far away, perceived tone and SPL are the same. so arrays are great for parties.
I'm keeping mine for watching movies, sound reminds one that is heard in movie theaters.
I'm keeping mine for watching movies, sound reminds one that is heard in movie theaters.
peerless 830983 new review on parts express..............
"Monday, June 15, 2009
Bones from Coatesville, PA
Great little driver at a great price, here on PE. Nasty +10db spike at 2Khz, but that's easily dealt with."
True, that smear in a flat array can be quite objectionable when you know what it is.
Ignorance is bliss.................
Norman
"Monday, June 15, 2009
Bones from Coatesville, PA
Great little driver at a great price, here on PE. Nasty +10db spike at 2Khz, but that's easily dealt with."
True, that smear in a flat array can be quite objectionable when you know what it is.
Ignorance is bliss.................
Norman
Interesting, from what you two are saying, sounds like arrays are more suited for HT use than music? What about live performance? Where they use much bigger scale arrays?
If they are well suited to parties and movies more than conventional speakers, that might just convince me to try them out, I have a friend who is moving into a new house, with a huge big LCD TV but no sound system (what a waste!) Maybe I should build him something for cheap.
If they are well suited to parties and movies more than conventional speakers, that might just convince me to try them out, I have a friend who is moving into a new house, with a huge big LCD TV but no sound system (what a waste!) Maybe I should build him something for cheap.
Sorry I am abit confused of what you are trying to convey, can you elaborate?
I can see zaph's test for the 830970 which i believe is the same thing with an inverted surround. There is a dip and a peak around 2k but not exactly 10db! I just got mine in (4 of them) to go in my car to mate with the peerless buyout HDS 6.5" midbasses. Playing with them freeair I do feel there is a peak around that region but I don't have the measuring equipment. I never planned to put them in an array though - I only have enough money to build an array with the $2 drivers discussed here, for i am poor and cheap
http://www.zaphaudio.com/smalltest/compare.html
Taterworks,
You really, really need to spend some time listening to well designed line arrays to hear that your thoughts are not relevant for most listeners.
Nearfield line arrays (line arrays which are designed to operate primaily in their near field) don't have the path length difference that is mention as an issue. For nearfield arrays the sound front radiates outward from the speaker without impringing from the ceiling or floor. Essentially, the sound travels perpendicular to the speaker tower and parallel to the floor and ceiling with minimal overlap. You can see a graphic of that behavior in my white paper at:
http://audioroundtable.com/ArraySpeakers/messages/2226.html
The listener can squat or stand while the near field line array speaker radiates and his ears clearly detects unsmeared sound.
Your analysis also fails in the far field region as the sound travel distance from the center of the array is approximately the same as the distance from either end of the array.
Line arrays for home use should be designed to operate within their near field region. Pro sound line arrays (large halls and outdoor usage) are designed to operate in both their near and far fields.
Only in the transition range between near field and far field radiation would a listener be subjected to potential smearing. Pro sound arrays generally are articulated (convex curved in a J shape) to mitigate the transitional area for listeners between the front and rear of the hall for best sound.
You really, really need to spend some time listening to well designed line arrays to hear that your thoughts are not relevant for most listeners.
Nearfield line arrays (line arrays which are designed to operate primaily in their near field) don't have the path length difference that is mention as an issue. For nearfield arrays the sound front radiates outward from the speaker without impringing from the ceiling or floor. Essentially, the sound travels perpendicular to the speaker tower and parallel to the floor and ceiling with minimal overlap. You can see a graphic of that behavior in my white paper at:
http://audioroundtable.com/ArraySpeakers/messages/2226.html
The listener can squat or stand while the near field line array speaker radiates and his ears clearly detects unsmeared sound.
Your analysis also fails in the far field region as the sound travel distance from the center of the array is approximately the same as the distance from either end of the array.
Line arrays for home use should be designed to operate within their near field region. Pro sound line arrays (large halls and outdoor usage) are designed to operate in both their near and far fields.
Only in the transition range between near field and far field radiation would a listener be subjected to potential smearing. Pro sound arrays generally are articulated (convex curved in a J shape) to mitigate the transitional area for listeners between the front and rear of the hall for best sound.
Blamus, good to hear...............
like my 4" bamboo tang band, I can't hear the spike at 6khz, never been a problem to me..............
Arrays are fun, dynamic, making music sound more real than something that comes out of most speakers.
Sorry, but a like of dome to dome tweeters (.75" domes almost touching) wether 4' away or 30, still gave a tall sound.
Also someone on these forums covered the top and bottom ribbons of their 6' tall arrays and had an improvement in sound quality.
Time smear is real and measurable.
Some peoples ears it doesn't bother.
The same people probably don't hear an improvement in a time aligned speaker.
Here is a link to the step response in the kuze array..........
http://www.parts-express.com/projectshowcase/Kuze3201/Kuze3201step.jpg
Combing, plain and simple.
Doesn't matter where the crossover point is...............
You are hearing information smeared in time.
Line arrays are great for concerts, and I'd even recommend them for home theater.
But wether you sit 4' from it or 40', there is still smear.
I'm not good at arguing (or spelling for that matter).
kuze array
http://www.partsexpress.com/projectshowcase/Kuze3201/Kuze3201.html
If you want to stick to full range drivers, you will need to eq back in the highs. Also check the kuze array without eq graphs.
http://www.ids25.com/
Or you can do a 2 or 3 way array.
Norman
like my 4" bamboo tang band, I can't hear the spike at 6khz, never been a problem to me..............
Arrays are fun, dynamic, making music sound more real than something that comes out of most speakers.
Sorry, but a like of dome to dome tweeters (.75" domes almost touching) wether 4' away or 30, still gave a tall sound.
Also someone on these forums covered the top and bottom ribbons of their 6' tall arrays and had an improvement in sound quality.
Time smear is real and measurable.
Some peoples ears it doesn't bother.
The same people probably don't hear an improvement in a time aligned speaker.
Here is a link to the step response in the kuze array..........
http://www.parts-express.com/projectshowcase/Kuze3201/Kuze3201step.jpg
Combing, plain and simple.
Doesn't matter where the crossover point is...............
You are hearing information smeared in time.
Line arrays are great for concerts, and I'd even recommend them for home theater.
But wether you sit 4' from it or 40', there is still smear.
I'm not good at arguing (or spelling for that matter).
kuze array
http://www.partsexpress.com/projectshowcase/Kuze3201/Kuze3201.html
If you want to stick to full range drivers, you will need to eq back in the highs. Also check the kuze array without eq graphs.
http://www.ids25.com/
Or you can do a 2 or 3 way array.
Norman
Thank you Norman and everybody's encouragement. I am now motivated to go ahead and give it a try. But there is still one thing I am not sure about from my original question - do you approve of building the Kuze with these $2 2" buyout drivers (not the peerless ones) instead of the 4"TB? Or would it not work at all? I only plan on building fullrange 1-way arrays to mate with a subwoofer.
Anyone know what drivers the IDS arrays use?
Anyone know what drivers the IDS arrays use?
I've looked closely at the peerless tg9 (almost same as ids, now $20 at parts express) but there is something going on with ringing, some car audio guys detest this driver. In some graphs you can see a bunch of spikes 1-4khz, that may be what they are hearing.
I almost went for the tc9, similar driver but paper for $15 in 10+ quantities from madisound I think. It had f3 just over 100hz, a light 1.92g cone for the 36cm2 area (big cone for such a light mms), slight peak near 8khz and a peak to make some noise past 10khz. It has a copper cap on the pole piece which helps reduce distortion and keep Z manageable. And I metioned a notch to reduce some hash near 2.2khz.
But I chose a smaller lighter driver, the peerless 830983 on closeout for $7.80 at parts express. Madisound just got them back in stock for $20 each, ouch.
I've been looking for cheap drivers for a while now, if I didn't see the peerless, I'd have ordered nine of the tc9's................. I'd even thought of multiple of the $50 4" bamboo I have now. But a smaller driver has more detail, plain and simple.
But I'm doing a focused array and wanted to keep costs low.
Super low cost usually sounds super bad..................
I know the ribbon tweeter array has narrower dispersion than a dome.
I've seen where someone covered the top and bottom ribbon in their array and their sound improved. And I believe jim shultz (sp ?) went away from his huge arrays to the statements. He admitted that the arrays sounded a little tall. Fine for most, not for me.
For me, I am a full range driver fan.
No crossovers.
I am not against eq, but most equalizers add a haze and remove some transparancy compared to no eq.
I prefer a full range driver over time aligned loudspeakers.
But I need more volume than 1 driver can give me, then I opened the can of worms of arrays and now I carry the flag for focused arrays. To me they just make the most sence.
Many love arrays, and I think the tweeter in the middle of a bunch of full rangers is a great idea.............
In the end what makes you happy, makes you happy. If I had the arrays years ago, I'd have loved them and may have never strayed from them.
Norman
I almost went for the tc9, similar driver but paper for $15 in 10+ quantities from madisound I think. It had f3 just over 100hz, a light 1.92g cone for the 36cm2 area (big cone for such a light mms), slight peak near 8khz and a peak to make some noise past 10khz. It has a copper cap on the pole piece which helps reduce distortion and keep Z manageable. And I metioned a notch to reduce some hash near 2.2khz.
But I chose a smaller lighter driver, the peerless 830983 on closeout for $7.80 at parts express. Madisound just got them back in stock for $20 each, ouch.
I've been looking for cheap drivers for a while now, if I didn't see the peerless, I'd have ordered nine of the tc9's................. I'd even thought of multiple of the $50 4" bamboo I have now. But a smaller driver has more detail, plain and simple.
But I'm doing a focused array and wanted to keep costs low.
Super low cost usually sounds super bad..................
I know the ribbon tweeter array has narrower dispersion than a dome.
I've seen where someone covered the top and bottom ribbon in their array and their sound improved. And I believe jim shultz (sp ?) went away from his huge arrays to the statements. He admitted that the arrays sounded a little tall. Fine for most, not for me.
For me, I am a full range driver fan.
No crossovers.
I am not against eq, but most equalizers add a haze and remove some transparancy compared to no eq.
I prefer a full range driver over time aligned loudspeakers.
But I need more volume than 1 driver can give me, then I opened the can of worms of arrays and now I carry the flag for focused arrays. To me they just make the most sence.
Many love arrays, and I think the tweeter in the middle of a bunch of full rangers is a great idea.............
In the end what makes you happy, makes you happy. If I had the arrays years ago, I'd have loved them and may have never strayed from them.
Norman
Thx for the insight.
I actually got a few of those peerless 2" at the buyout price of 7.something and so far I am very happy with them. Your experience about super cheap builds being super bad is probably accurate, and that steers me away from using those $2 drivers.
I *would* build a 2 way array if only I know how to design the crossover. I have always wanted to use bigger woofers (5"-6"?) like the peerless HDS 5 1/4" on buyout at PE for $22,
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=299-126
an array of those with tweeters would be fantastic and not cost me much more because I'd not need a sub woofer then! I know I can fiddle on modeling programs for the most simplistic traditional speaker XO designs, but with arrays, I don't even know where to start. Having said that, do point the way if you know of any existing designs that I should look at. The big multi-way arrays on PE showcase is simply too expensive for me. I wonder if there are some more affordable designs out there well documented enough for me to follow.
I simply tried to avoid having to battle with designing my own XO, hence I ended up wanting to build fullrange, but turns out it has its own problems.
I actually got a few of those peerless 2" at the buyout price of 7.something and so far I am very happy with them. Your experience about super cheap builds being super bad is probably accurate, and that steers me away from using those $2 drivers.
I *would* build a 2 way array if only I know how to design the crossover. I have always wanted to use bigger woofers (5"-6"?) like the peerless HDS 5 1/4" on buyout at PE for $22,
http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=299-126
an array of those with tweeters would be fantastic and not cost me much more because I'd not need a sub woofer then! I know I can fiddle on modeling programs for the most simplistic traditional speaker XO designs, but with arrays, I don't even know where to start. Having said that, do point the way if you know of any existing designs that I should look at. The big multi-way arrays on PE showcase is simply too expensive for me. I wonder if there are some more affordable designs out there well documented enough for me to follow.
I simply tried to avoid having to battle with designing my own XO, hence I ended up wanting to build fullrange, but turns out it has its own problems.
apex jr has cerwin vega 6" midbass for $6
http://www.apexjr.com/speakerstuff.html
they also have mini tweets, here is a picture of an array
http://www.aespeakers.com/pics/mini-line/proto1.jpg
check out Jim's paper.
It will give you an idea of drivers and crossover points.
A flat array of full range drivers is usually a flop, but a line array of a bunch of hivi b3s ($10.80 in 10+ from madisound) with a robust tweeter.
How much is your budget ?
Designing a crossover is an art.
maybe it is time you invest in an active crossover............
Probably $100...........
Here is a link to discussion of b3s with fountek NeoCD3.0 3" Ribbon Tweeter.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=67989
or maybe the art array
http://www.lonestarbottleheads.org/gallery/albums/030307/Dsc_0403.jpg
I found this which may still be the instructions/price
"A friend of mine, Fred Thompson, has done a group build project over at Audioroundtable.com .
Total cost of drivers - $278
You need to contact:
Scott R Placke
OEM Business Development Mgr.
Parts Express Int'l Inc.
Phone: 1-866-366-4909 ext.108
Tell Scott you want to order the ART Array kit, and you'll only be charged the $278 vs the almost $400 for the cost of the parts. The kit is COMPLETE, right down to the wire, ports, crimp on connectors - EVERYTHING but the wood. Fred setup the discount, and there was no discussion about how long it would remain available - so I suggest if you are serious, you talk to Scott fairly soon. These load up in the mid to high 40's in room.
Project details here:
http://fredt300b.smugmug.com/gallery/2046580/24#112708539
from april 11th, 2007
If you are up for a focused array, check this out.
Looks like a bunch of aura speakers.
You could use any full range drivers you want from $8 peerless to $50 tang bands.
http://www.atssounds.com/ImageGalle...15e-c9d581199ef5&prefix=Fullscreen&cache=True
here is the company
http://www.atssounds.com/page1.aspx
Norman
http://www.apexjr.com/speakerstuff.html
they also have mini tweets, here is a picture of an array
http://www.aespeakers.com/pics/mini-line/proto1.jpg
check out Jim's paper.
It will give you an idea of drivers and crossover points.
A flat array of full range drivers is usually a flop, but a line array of a bunch of hivi b3s ($10.80 in 10+ from madisound) with a robust tweeter.
How much is your budget ?
Designing a crossover is an art.
maybe it is time you invest in an active crossover............
Probably $100...........
Here is a link to discussion of b3s with fountek NeoCD3.0 3" Ribbon Tweeter.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=67989
or maybe the art array
http://www.lonestarbottleheads.org/gallery/albums/030307/Dsc_0403.jpg
I found this which may still be the instructions/price
"A friend of mine, Fred Thompson, has done a group build project over at Audioroundtable.com .
Total cost of drivers - $278
You need to contact:
Scott R Placke
OEM Business Development Mgr.
Parts Express Int'l Inc.
Phone: 1-866-366-4909 ext.108
Tell Scott you want to order the ART Array kit, and you'll only be charged the $278 vs the almost $400 for the cost of the parts. The kit is COMPLETE, right down to the wire, ports, crimp on connectors - EVERYTHING but the wood. Fred setup the discount, and there was no discussion about how long it would remain available - so I suggest if you are serious, you talk to Scott fairly soon. These load up in the mid to high 40's in room.
Project details here:
http://fredt300b.smugmug.com/gallery/2046580/24#112708539
from april 11th, 2007
If you are up for a focused array, check this out.
Looks like a bunch of aura speakers.
You could use any full range drivers you want from $8 peerless to $50 tang bands.
http://www.atssounds.com/ImageGalle...15e-c9d581199ef5&prefix=Fullscreen&cache=True
here is the company
http://www.atssounds.com/page1.aspx
Norman
Thank you Norman that was very informative. I went away and studied the materials you provided and revisited Jim's paper, and these are the few thoughts I have right now:
1. Jim's paper details the benefits of continuous, finite length line arrays, but does not mention anything about arrays like the ART - which has a tweeter in the middle. What are the main differences between the 2 different configurations? I can see that the ART is more like a MTM. Where can I read up on the merits of this type of discontinuous array compared to the '2-line side by side' arrays that Jim's paper talks about?
2. Jim's paper gives a very good idea of how to - choose the length of arrays, the distance between drivers, and the cross over point. I think I have those parameters well understood. But what of
a. driver selection
What characteristics should one look for in a woofer for arrays? What parameters are important and why? The fact that Jim does not mention this conveys the idea that woofer selection can be very flexible, which is a plus. So I can just go pick up the cheapest low distortion woofer and line them up? Like the $6 woofer you suggested? Tweeter selection seem to be simply governed by the XO freq determined by the driver to driver spacing, assuming you have already chosen the type of tweeter in the first place - and I wont be able to use ribbons or horns due to cost (however i am looking into the small cheap planars on PE)
b. crossover type
Again, there is no mention of the XO slope, type, order or any additional circuitry required such as BSC, time alignment, phase issues etc. Is it true to say that for arrays the XO is much more simple than the conventional speaker? Can I use a simple commercially available 12db/oct universal 2-way XO and it'd be fine?
The deal on the ART is very tempting, and seem to be inline with my budget, I'll spend the next few hours reading about it.
Best regards
Bern
1. Jim's paper details the benefits of continuous, finite length line arrays, but does not mention anything about arrays like the ART - which has a tweeter in the middle. What are the main differences between the 2 different configurations? I can see that the ART is more like a MTM. Where can I read up on the merits of this type of discontinuous array compared to the '2-line side by side' arrays that Jim's paper talks about?
2. Jim's paper gives a very good idea of how to - choose the length of arrays, the distance between drivers, and the cross over point. I think I have those parameters well understood. But what of
a. driver selection
What characteristics should one look for in a woofer for arrays? What parameters are important and why? The fact that Jim does not mention this conveys the idea that woofer selection can be very flexible, which is a plus. So I can just go pick up the cheapest low distortion woofer and line them up? Like the $6 woofer you suggested? Tweeter selection seem to be simply governed by the XO freq determined by the driver to driver spacing, assuming you have already chosen the type of tweeter in the first place - and I wont be able to use ribbons or horns due to cost (however i am looking into the small cheap planars on PE)
b. crossover type
Again, there is no mention of the XO slope, type, order or any additional circuitry required such as BSC, time alignment, phase issues etc. Is it true to say that for arrays the XO is much more simple than the conventional speaker? Can I use a simple commercially available 12db/oct universal 2-way XO and it'd be fine?
The deal on the ART is very tempting, and seem to be inline with my budget, I'll spend the next few hours reading about it.
Best regards
Bern
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.