Omega Quarterwave Reflex vs. Metronome

wrenchone · 20th August 2009, 05:37 AM

I have a pair of Tang Band W6-789S 6.5 in. mid-woofs looking for gainful employment. I was thinking of using them in some largish bass reflex wooden bowl speakers, but got intrigued by the article on the Omega Quarterwave Reflex in the Oct 03 issue of AudioXpress. I was thinking of using these drivers either in the Omega or a Metronome with single order crossover to a tweeter at, say, 10k or so. Comments on the pros and cons between the two speaker types? Not really full range, but almost there...

planet10 · 20th August 2009, 06:22 AM

Omegas are a blanket approach to stuffing a driver into a box, each metronome is tuned for the specific driver.

IMO, a Met is prettier too.

dave

Note: i helped Rick with that article (graphics, proofing, suggestions), there some things in it i objected to, do read the follow up letters to the editor

wrenchone · 20th August 2009, 07:22 AM

Do you have any idea when the comments appeared? It would help with sorting through old magazines. Aesthetic issues aside, is there a big difference in sound between the two approaches?

planet10 · 20th August 2009, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wrenchone

Do you have any idea when the comments appeared?

Very shortly after the article, probably in the 3 or 4 months following. They were mostly "political" not technical, ie claims to have invented things that had been around for some time.

Quote:

Aesthetic issues aside, is there a big difference in sound between the two approaches?

Omega is a generalized approach that will work OK with any driver as opposed to a specific solution that will get the most out of a specific driver.

Note for instance the driver offset....

dave

sandyhooker · 20th August 2009, 04:08 PM

For what it's worth I built a pair of Omegas for Peerless 831882 5.5" and am pleased with the results. Selection of the speaker is critical in determining box size which can be huge (Tall)in many cases.Planet 10 is right in noting the furor that the article created although it doesnt lend any help in improving the design . I trust Rick .. He's been around for a while.

wrenchone · 20th August 2009, 05:25 PM

I ran through the numbers in a preliminary fahsion for an Omega using the Tang Band 6.5" woofers, and the inital results give me cabinets nearly 6ft tall and 130 in^2. This sounds plausible, but I may need to check to see if the equation a grabbed from the article is correcly parsed, as it has some ambiguity that could have been solved by a sprinkling of parentheses.

Scottmoose · 20th August 2009, 07:03 PM

Well, WRT an OQR: fiberglass damping = 62.22in long, pipe CSA 173.676in^2, vent CSA 17.368in^2, stuff 0.367lbs ft^3. Polyfill damping = 67.1in, pipe CSA 135.081in^2, vent CSA 13.508in^2, stuff 0.735lbs ft^3.

An MLTL (well, one way of doing it at any rate) would be 52in, CSA 102.26in^2, Zd 19in, Zp = 50.5in, vent = 3in diameter x 1.25in long. Line top, back & one diade to just below the driver with 1in acoustic fiberglass, wool carpet underlay or similar.

Metronome = 60in, Zd = 30in. St = 8in^2. Sl = 125in^2. Vent = 3in diameter x 1.25in long. Same damping as MLTL. See different attached plots. Adjust the vent & damping on all to tailor the response to suit.

OQR is just one set of alignment tables. Does the job; not ideal IMO.

wrenchone · 21st August 2009, 03:26 AM

My numbers for the OQR with polyester stuffing came out pretty similar to the ones cited above, so I must have interpreted the equation in the article the right way - quite a cabinet for a leetle 6.5" driver.The OQR seems to have a teensy bit more low end extension than the other two alternatives, but not enough to get me really hot and bothered. The big thing the OQR ha going for it is straight lines, suited to my rudimentary woodworking skills. I'll have another look at the Metronome, though, to see if I can figure out how to do one.
The Tang Band mid-woof reportedly has a really benign high-end roll-off well suited to a versatile tweeter and low order crossover. Is this for real?

planet10 · 21st August 2009, 05:36 AM

A comp for easier comparison. Red = omega, green = ml-tl, purple = met

dave

wrenchone · 21st August 2009, 06:12 AM

As I said, a teensy bit different. Why the Metronome, then? I have absolutely no WAF concerns. Don't get me wrong, I've heard a Metronome at BA1 using an 8" hemp driver that sounded very nice (I even got to play it with one of my amps). However, what would be the compelling difference between this and the OQR?

20th August 2009, 05:37 AM	#1
wrenchone diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Silicon Valley	Omega Quarterwave Reflex vs. Metronome I have a pair of Tang Band W6-789S 6.5 in. mid-woofs looking for gainful employment. I was thinking of using them in some largish bass reflex wooden bowl speakers, but got intrigued by the article on the Omega Quarterwave Reflex in the Oct 03 issue of AudioXpress. I was thinking of using these drivers either in the Omega or a Metronome with single order crossover to a tweeter at, say, 10k or so. Comments on the pros and cons between the two speaker types? Not really full range, but almost there...

20th August 2009, 06:22 AM	#2
planet10 frugal-phile(tm) diyAudio Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III Blog Entries: 4	Omegas are a blanket approach to stuffing a driver into a box, each metronome is tuned for the specific driver. IMO, a Met is prettier too. dave Note: i helped Rick with that article (graphics, proofing, suggestions), there some things in it i objected to, do read the follow up letters to the editor __________________ community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS: Eminence Omega Pro-15A	truenorth	Swap Meet	0	29th April 2009 12:53 AM
PA subs using Omega Pro 18's	soulfinger	Subwoofers	4	28th July 2007 02:03 AM
Omega Grand 6 and which amp?	kenscott30	Tubes / Valves	0	20th October 2004 09:46 PM
Best Tweeter for OMEGA PRO 15	ganzonimx	Multi-Way	2	29th January 2004 09:46 PM
Eminence Omega p-12A	Duo	Multi-Way	9	9th January 2003 05:02 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

20th August 2009, 07:22 AM	#3
wrenchone diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Silicon Valley	Do you have any idea when the comments appeared? It would help with sorting through old magazines. Aesthetic issues aside, is there a big difference in sound between the two approaches?

20th August 2009, 04:08 PM	#5
sandyhooker diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Arizona	For what it's worth I built a pair of Omegas for Peerless 831882 5.5" and am pleased with the results. Selection of the speaker is critical in determining box size which can be huge (Tall)in many cases.Planet 10 is right in noting the furor that the article created although it doesnt lend any help in improving the design . I trust Rick .. He's been around for a while.

20th August 2009, 05:25 PM	#6
wrenchone diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Silicon Valley	I ran through the numbers in a preliminary fahsion for an Omega using the Tang Band 6.5" woofers, and the inital results give me cabinets nearly 6ft tall and 130 in^2. This sounds plausible, but I may need to check to see if the equation a grabbed from the article is correcly parsed, as it has some ambiguity that could have been solved by a sprinkling of parentheses.

21st August 2009, 03:26 AM	#8
wrenchone diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Silicon Valley	My numbers for the OQR with polyester stuffing came out pretty similar to the ones cited above, so I must have interpreted the equation in the article the right way - quite a cabinet for a leetle 6.5" driver.The OQR seems to have a teensy bit more low end extension than the other two alternatives, but not enough to get me really hot and bothered. The big thing the OQR ha going for it is straight lines, suited to my rudimentary woodworking skills. I'll have another look at the Metronome, though, to see if I can figure out how to do one. The Tang Band mid-woof reportedly has a really benign high-end roll-off well suited to a versatile tweeter and low order crossover. Is this for real?

21st August 2009, 06:12 AM	#10
wrenchone diyAudio Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Silicon Valley	As I said, a teensy bit different. Why the Metronome, then? I have absolutely no WAF concerns. Don't get me wrong, I've heard a Metronome at BA1 using an 8" hemp driver that sounded very nice (I even got to play it with one of my amps). However, what would be the compelling difference between this and the OQR?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)