General concept for upgrading my system - input sought

[Racket Scientist]

I've been interested in the Linkwitz Orion system and considered trying to build a pair, but also fascinated by the full range speaker approach. I've also thought the Olsher BassZilla project was a cool approach. I'm thinking of blending the ideas by buying a Driverack PA (a pro audio device with active crossovers plus other tools), getting two Tang Band 1808s, selecting a tweeter that would work well with them crossed over at 10-12 Khz, and building 2 small sonotube subs to cover the lows from about 25 to 300 Hz. I currently have some nice tube amps for the full rangers, and would plan to use probably a Dayton T amp to drive the tweets, and a workhorse solid state amp for the subs. Any helpful thoughts or suggestions on this approach? Will this likely give me the incredible sound I crave on a reasonable budget?

[Racket Scientist]

Forgot to add this detail (probably obvious) - the mid/tweeter drivers would be on an open baffle. The sonotube subwoofers, um, not.

[ScottG]

If you are using a Driverack I'd personally look to better drivers. Full-range drivers are all about extending bandwidth, and that entails sacrifices to performance.

In particular a "whizer"/twin-cone design will always have some measure of added distortion that a non-whizer version won't. (..and this is coming from someone who has one of the most linear whizer cone drivers ever made: 166ESR.)

If you still want an efficient extended range type driver then look to the Supravox 165GMF. Considering the active configuration, I'd recomend the BG Neo3 planar tweeter (wide dispersion version) with the back chamber removed to operate as a dipole. Adjusting crossover freq. and "slope" until you find the most pleasing combination.

[human.bin]

i think i'm not the only one who would suggest you to leave the bass OB till under the dominant room modes, which will occur aroun 40hz, and only then insert the subs to get real advantage of the OB radiation pattern

[Racket Scientist]

My thought was to sacrifice a bit of measured perfection to obtain some of the reputed "seamlessness" of keeping almost all the spectrum in one fullrange speaker, but adding back some airiness and sparkle with a tweeter and supplementing the bass as in Dick Olsher's design - basically stealing that from him and stealing the active crossover part from Linkwitz. So you think I'd be better to go with a more Linkwitz like design with a traditional mid and forgo the full-range driver? Also, sounds like I should consider switching from the sonosub idea to a dipole mounted large bass driver, and go for 35 to 300 Hz with that? Part of the rationale in going with the Driverack is so that I can use it also with my band's PA setup, otherwise I'd probably consider just building the Orion with its dedicated electronics.

[ScottG]

Originally Posted by Racket Scientist

Part of the rationale in going with the Driverack is so that I can use it also with my band's PA setup, otherwise I'd probably consider just building the Orion with its dedicated electronics.

Have you heard the Orion? You might like it a lot, but you might not. (..and the Orion is not efficient.) Also, do you want the hassle of disconnecting the Driverack from your main speaker every time you have some PA work? ..some things to think about before moving forward.


As to the basic concept.. it's OK, but it has some problems. The largest problem IMO is in the range of 2-8 kHz. In that area the response needs to be pretty linear under a real load (music). Most full-range drivers have problems with that - particularly with driver matching, shifting freq. responses, and "beaming". (..and only the first of those 3 issues can be successfully "eq.ed" by the Driverack.) A *small* extended range driver (say 2 to 3 inches) can mitigate most of those issues, but at the expense of a lower freq. response and/or efficiency. (..in fact I don't know of a small diameter extended range driver that is particularly efficient.)


Don't forget that there are also other designs out there that may meet your needs better, most of which are passive and largely remove the issues with tonality and different amplifiers. This would be my suggestion: (passive in the upper freq.s for tonality, and active below).

OB9Copyright 2009 ©

It's efficient, and excepting the cost of the mid-bass drivers, not terribly expensive. It is large though..

[Racket Scientist]

Thanks for that link - I'll have to keep thinking it over, but that OB-9 looks like a strong contender for what I eventually do.

[Godzilla]

I have fun listening to this system! Regardless of the drivers, as long as they satisfy you, the sound from OB makes you question the need for a cabinet. Adding additional amps offers flexibility. The Orion has some heavy electronics behind it's design along with some expensive drivers. The Dayton amp is cool bc it's built to be useful... but i would not want it powering my tweeters bc it has a grainy solid state sound that will reveal itself. For bass duty, it's good.

In an effort to keep things simple things get complicated!

But cabinets are fun too!

Boomer Open Baffle Speaker Kit

[Godzilla]

I re read the original post and see you are considering the T-amp to power the tweeters... I think that amp is clean on top and week on bottom so scratch my comment about the 'dayton amp' above.