diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Full Range (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/)
-   -   "M10-A10" vs. "Silbury" (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/227958-m10-a10-vs-silbury.html)

cogitech 16th January 2013 03:54 PM

"M10-A10" vs. "Silbury"
 
My friend has asked me to build him a pair of speakers. I have a pair of Alpair 10.2 on the way and I am having difficulty deciding what enclosure to build for them. It is pretty-much down to either Mr. Brines' "M10-A10" enclosure, or Woden "Silbury" enclosure. WAF is not an issue for my friend, but he does not want to supplement bass with a sub. He will be using an NAD 315BEE for the foreseeable future.

I have read Bob's listening notes on the "M10-A10", but I have not been able to find much of the same on the "Silbury".

My friend's goals are maximizing the bass potential of these excellent drivers, but quality, speed and cohesiveness of said bass must not suffer.

Has anyone heard the A10.2 in both of these enclosures?

Bob and Scott, what do you feel are the design highlights of your respective designs?

Does anyone think there is an even better enclosure for the 10.2 ?

Thanks in advance for any/all opinions!

chrisb 16th January 2013 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cogitech (Post 3328576)
My friend has asked me to build him a pair of speakers. I have a pair of Alpair 10.2 on the way and I am having difficulty deciding what enclosure to build for them. It is pretty-much down to either Mr. Brines' "M10-A10" enclosure, or Woden "Silbury" enclosure. WAF is not an issue for my friend, but he does not want to supplement bass with a sub. He will be using an NAD 315BEE for the foreseeable future.

I have read Bob's listening notes on the "M10-A10", but I have not been able to find much of the same on the "Silbury".

My friend's goals are maximizing the bass potential of these excellent drivers, but quality, speed and cohesiveness of said bass must not suffer.

Has anyone heard the A10.2 in both of these enclosures?

Bob and Scott, what do you feel are the design highlights of your respective designs?

Does anyone think there is an even better enclosure for the 10.2 ?

Thanks in advance for any/all opinions!


yikes!

cogitech 16th January 2013 04:51 PM

:confused:

Scottmoose 16th January 2013 05:49 PM

See this thread from post 65 onward and understanding will arrive with the subtlety of a bat in the bicuspids ;) http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-...-driver-3.html

I'm afraid I don't discuss the enclosure of mine that you mention on the forum since I'm here purely as a DIYer. However, FWIW:

Without knowing more about your friend's room, system, taste in material & acoustic presentation it's difficult to say anything especially profound. I suspect by 'quality, cohesiveness and speed' we're largely discussing group delay, in which case Bob's MLTL instantly has an advantage since the output from the rear is not expected to go down about 9ft of folded pathway. Since sound travels ~1.13ft / ms, the back-horn in this case has a delay in its functional BW of about 7.96ms. The audiblity depends on the operating BW of the design, the acoustic low-pass slope, and the individual. The lower in frequency you go, the more our hearing acuity drops off, and the less likely you are to hear it, particularly if you've got a steep acoustic low pass. I can say that Silbury is better than many back-horns in this regard, but some people are more sensitive to group delay than others, and either way, Bob's MLTL is inherently superior on this front, and since this is a major consideration, is the obvious choice.

As for any 'better' options; again, this depends on the exact requirements. Neither of the enclosures mentioned are going to be ideal if you're listening in a small box-room in a 1930s British semi-detached house for example in which case you'd likely be better off running it in something like a 10 litre sealed box or similar. Likewise if you're wanting to fill a ballroom, something the size of a Kleinhorn may be in order.

tuxedocivic 16th January 2013 06:11 PM

In my last place I had a very small room with a 1/3 octave wide suck out centered around 45hz. In my new place in a massive room I have a beautiful peak about a 1/2 octave wide nice and low q peak centered around 52hz and have no suck outs until output drops off below 13hz. Not sure the size of room is a good indicator. Really need to measure the speakers anechoic response and then response at the LP to know how the room responds to the speaker.

cogitech 16th January 2013 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scottmoose (Post 3328726)
See this thread from post 65 onward and understanding will arrive with the subtlety of a bat in the bicuspids ;) http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-...-driver-3.html

I'm afraid I don't discuss the enclosure of mine that you mention on the forum since I'm here purely as a DIYer. However, FWIW:

Without knowing more about your friend's room, system, taste in material & acoustic presentation it's difficult to say anything especially profound. I suspect by 'quality, cohesiveness and speed' we're largely discussing group delay, in which case Bob's MLTL instantly has an advantage since the output from the rear is not expected to go down about 9ft of folded pathway. Since sound travels ~1.13ft / ms, the back-horn in this case has a delay in its functional BW of about 7.96ms. The audiblity depends on the operating BW of the design, the acoustic low-pass slope, and the individual. The lower in frequency you go, the more our hearing acuity drops off, and the less likely you are to hear it, particularly if you've got a steep acoustic low pass. I can say that Silbury is better than many back-horns in this regard, but some people are more sensitive to group delay than others, and either way, Bob's MLTL is inherently superior on this front, and since this is a major consideration, is the obvious choice.

As for any 'better' options; again, this depends on the exact requirements. Neither of the enclosures mentioned are going to be ideal if you're listening in a small box-room in a 1930s British semi-detached house for example in which case you'd likely be better off running it in something like a 10 litre sealed box or similar. Likewise if you're wanting to fill a ballroom, something the size of a Kleinhorn may be in order.

Yes, I am following that thread. Bob's comment there about knowing the players and then deciding for oneself how much salt to consume along with the advice is bang on.

However, I think it is quite fair for both you and Bob to openly discuss these two (non-free) designs and what you feel are the pros and/or cons of each. I have directly asked you both, and it is no secret that one of you will be paid for whichever design is ultimately chosen. It is a level playing field.

While it might seem to break some sort of rules to discuss designs which you and Bob respectively profit from, it is certainly to my advantage as the potential customer to hear them discussed in an open forum (this is not to infer that I think either one of you would be less than honest in a one-on-one conversation).

Anyway, I appreciate your objective approach to the subject thus far.

cogitech 16th January 2013 06:23 PM

My buddy's room is about 15'x20', and he has the flexibility of moving things around if necessary, so his placement options are numerous. He did say he'd rather have the speakers within 6" or so of the back wall, as he doesn't like the idea of "wasting" a meter of his room just for better "imaging or whatever".

I'll have to talk to him more about his wants/needs, but in the meantime, is it right to assume that if the A10-M10 wins at bass timing, the Silbury wins at "sheer amount of bass", or do they both pretty much hit F3~40Hz and F10~30Hz? I look at that big Silbury cabinet and my gut tells me it goes lower than the MLTL... Is my gut wrong?

Scott, have you got simulated or measured FR curves of the 10.2 Silbury?

planet10 16th January 2013 06:36 PM

We have M10-A10 here. No Silbury thou. We have had Bernie's Victor here (broadly similar to Silbury with FE166). That produces more bass with greater ease than M10-A10. Given greater bass capability of A10.2 over FE166 my guess would be that Silbury would have more kick... only a guess based on an extrapolation.

dave

cogitech 16th January 2013 06:46 PM

Interesting, Dave. I don't mind the extrapolation factor. I do it all the time myself, as I find it a relatively reliable method of gaining insight into something if direct experience is not possible. Thanks.

Scottmoose 16th January 2013 09:16 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by tuxedocivic (Post 3328755)
In my last place I had a very small room with a 1/3 octave wide suck out centered around 45hz. In my new place in a massive room I have a beautiful peak about a 1/2 octave wide nice and low q peak centered around 52hz and have no suck outs until output drops off below 13hz. Not sure the size of room is a good indicator. Really need to measure the speakers anechoic response and then response at the LP to know how the room responds to the speaker.

Says it all about room acoustics. :rolleyes:


Quote:

Yes, I am following that thread. Bob's comment there about knowing the players and then deciding for oneself how much salt to consume along with the advice is bang on.

However, I think it is quite fair for both you and Bob to openly discuss these two (non-free) designs and what you feel are the pros and/or cons of each. I have directly asked you both, and it is no secret that one of you will be paid for whichever design is ultimately chosen. It is a level playing field.
I concur with Bob's remarks. Re the latter, I take your point, but there are two further considerations at play. Firstly, I have a basic stance, and I try to stick to it, without exception. Secondly, the site in question is not linked to by me, nor is it advertised. As far as I'm concerned, it sits quietly where it is, minding its own business. If people run across it, like what they see, and wish to buy something, that's very nice. If they don't, I'm honestly not fussed. It pays for the occasional tank of fuel for the car, perhaps a new CD / DVD or similar. That's it. I make no attempt to sell anything there at all.


Quote:

Scott, have you got simulated or measured FR curves of the 10.2 Silbury?

Indeed I have. My usual response though is 'what would you like them to look like?' This is the issue with in-room response curves; within certain broad trends, it's possible to make them look pretty much however you want them to look by changing the measurement / simulation conditions. FWIW though, here's an example. Box angled 45 degrees into the room; 1m distance, on-axis, carpeted floor, 8ft ceiling, edges of the front baffle 2ft from the front & side walls. As you can see, it's a high-gain design to allow greater placement fexibility since you can get rid of what you don't require. Once damped to ~flat, F10 will be similar to Bob's MLTL, but the overall sound will be very different on the bottom end given the respective radiating areas etc.

FWIW, I still suspect your friend will be better off with Bob's MLTL.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2