Before I start out, I need some direction

[doug20]

I guess I assume a true midrange really doesnt do much below 200Hz and as you posted none of them show a great response even close to the 5KHz range.

 

[PeteMcK]

the Scanspeak is likely to have the lowest distortion; I wouldn't cross it over any higher than 4Khz though (look at the peaks on the FR graph), and go 2nd order at least, the fibreglass cone won't be a smooth as paper at the top end

 

[buggsson]

Thats not a 2way with sub, but a regular 3way But I suppose you are in no hurry, and have plenty time to get it straight
I would choose a single 12" woofer, and go from there ... ehh, thats not true; it would be a 15" or 18"

Yes, a regular 3way it is, but terminology, well, I mix it up regularly and yes, I have plenty of time for this project. The only thing I have in huge supply actually.

Im curious, Why do you think any of your mid choices are great up to 5KHz? None of those look like true mid-range drivers to me.
Could you also explain why 5KHz, why not just XO in the 3KHz range?

For most of them I tried to look at the freq. response, and Visaton claim their driver is good up to 5000 Hz. For the SS, I asked the Swedish distributor who said it would be doable.

Why 5000 Hz? Well, I will try to stay out of the ears most sensitive frequencies. It's the sole reason, and if it doesn't work, my plan was to start crossing over lower and lower until it gets right.

I guess I assume a true midrange really doesnt do much below 200Hz and as you posted none of them show a great response even close to the 5KHz range.

And I who thought that I had found four good candidates

Could anyone please, show me to a real midrange that is good to cross at 5000 Hz so I can try to figure out what to look for? One of the 10"s I am planning to use has its first break up at around 1500 Hz, but would it be worse to cross even higher than say 300 Hz?

I think I will have to go back and start looking for mids again, but what to look for?

the Scanspeak is likely to have the lowest distortion; I wouldn't cross it over any higher than 4Khz though (look at the peaks on the FR graph), and go 2nd order at least, the fibreglass cone won't be a smooth as paper at the top end

I've not bothered that much with crossover issues, more than choosing arbitrary crossing over frequencies. Maybe I should. I planned to do 4th order, but that was me.

Someone mentioned Accuton, yes they are nice but they would be steep.

 

[buggsson]

So I thought I would try your patience with some of the drivers left on my short list as I had them ready.

Aurum Cantus AC-130F1
Aurum cantus
This driver I've read people used at at least up to 5000 Hz. Break up between 5000 - 5700 Hz depending on writer. Can be cured by notchfilter. 3rd order HD at 1800 Hz could be bothersome.
Good review by Zaph as I understood it.

Aurum Cantus AC-165
Aurum cantus
The european distributor told me this would do it.

Peerless 830860
830860 HDS PPB 5¼″ Midwoofer Peerless Datasheet
Was told by reseller this would do it. I've listened to it, not crossed at 5000 Hz, but it sounded OK to me.

Now I'll start my search anew, and hopefully, someday I will understand what to look for.

 

[tinitus]

I think I will have to go back and start looking for mids again, but what to look for?



I've not bothered that much with crossover issues, more than choosing arbitrary crossing over frequencies. Maybe I should. I planned to do 4th order, but that was me.

There are no general ideal xo points
Best xo frequency is where the drivers match up acousticly, when using less components

MSH-115 - Monacor high-quality hiFi midrange speaker 50Wmax 8Ω - Europe Audio

MSH-116/4 - Monacor HiFi midrange speaker 4Ω - Europe Audio

 

[doug20]

I think your focus on 5KHz isn't all that important.

Its all about the XO, some of the best speakers XO at 2500, 3000, 3500, 2000, etc. all this means is that 5K is far from the magic number and you should focus on finding great sounding drivers then matching them together finding the best XO for them.

 

[buggsson]

I think you are correct when saying that XO at 5000 Hz is no sonic nirvana. As I've seen quite frequently persons, that I believe have much more experience and knowledge state that you are not supposed, if you can help it, do XO between 300 - 5000 Hz because that is our hearings most sensitive region, I just thought I would try to avoid that area, so that when my system sounds horrible, I can rule that factor out. I try, with my very limited knowledge, to eliminate as many sources to failure as I can come up with, and then sometimes it feels much safer to hold on to some "stated fact" than to try something you don't really feel you know enough about.

However, those monacor really looked nice, I will take a closer look, and the price was nice as well. I tried to find some other drivers as well, I don't know how nice they are.

For mid drivers in general, when you try to pick nice ones, is the freq. response all to look for? I've seen so many drivers were the manufacturer claims they are flat to X Hz, and the freq. response curve look like the Rocky mountains.

 

[doug20]

You need to add the TD6H to your list. John at aespeakers.com just released them and if they are even close to the TD12 series performance they they are incredible drivers.

Quote from John...

The TD6H is my real favorite. Parameters will be up shortly. It has smooth response to 5KHz, efficiency around 90dB 1W, and tiny inductance of about .15mH. They compare to the Scan Speak Illuminator at over $300. The TD6H however has about 6dB more efficiency, 10mm Xmax vs 6mm, and 1/3 the inductance. You see the same with Seas Excel drivers. The other comparable drivers in terms of low distortion are from Audio Technology and ATC at upwards of $400 each. Even those have much higher and less linear inductance. For a 2way or MTM where you want to cross high to a dome or ribbon tweeter there are really no drivers that can compare.

John hand builds the best drivers I know of!! The measurements and specs kick the crap out of all other popular choices.

Acoustic Elegance • View topic - TD6M - the Lambda Series Little Brother

 

[Rojoh]

I've been using the Seas L26 as subwoofer in a sub + 2-way sattelite-system. 50-60L sealed works great with this driver. If you want to make things easy, I'd recommend building Mark K's ER18DXT and supplement with the L26-driver using an active XO-solution making the system a semi-active 3-way system. Should make a nice sounding system.

The Seas ER18DXT ported two way

-Johan

 

[buggsson]

You need to add the TD6H to your list. John at aespeakers.com just released them and if they are even close to the TD12 series performance they they are incredible drivers.

John hand builds the best drivers I know of!! The measurements and specs kick the crap out of all other popular choices.

Acoustic Elegance • View topic - TD6M - the Lambda Series Little Brother

Yes, the Lamda drivers are interesting. However, I don't know though, if that freq. response would really be considered smooth up to 5000 Hz? And if I choose to XO for a start at 5000 Hz, wouldn't the driver have to perform up to an octave higher than 5000 Hz even if I used a XO with 24 dB/octave as someone mentioned somewhere? And the Xmax is down from the quote, now it's given as 3.3mm, not 10mm.

I've found two other drivers, the TB W4-1337SD and the SEAS Prestige MCA12RC that both should be good to XO at over 5000 Hz according to Zaph and Gravesen respectively. But now I will stop looking for additional drivers because its time to do some simulations I think.

I am however, also awaiting some more info on AE's AV10H sub that looks very promising.

 

[buggsson]

I have finally decided that I will start with the Monacor MSH-116/4 as mid and the AE AV10H as subdriver x 2.

How do you go about when to place the drivers on the baffles, I'm primarily considering the vertical placement for now, and I think I'm gonna place them on the vertical center line.

Two 10" in the lower box and a 4" mid and a 1" tweeter in the top box. I've been trying to find the absolute shortest distance between drivers vertically. Is this approach OK?

What about beaming, is there a relationship between cone diameter and wavelength at crossover points and beaming?

 

[picowallspeaker]

How do you go about when to place the drivers on the baffles

That is the question ! it goes together with the other two assumptions, the distance between them and interferences between them.Just do not place the driver in the middle/center of the baffle . That's the worst condition . Tweeter positioned asymmetrically may help . Anything else , I don't know ...
Post some sketches before cutting wood (have you considered solid concrete box for the mid-hi ?? )

 

[tinitus]

If its of any help, Im doing it like this

 

[doug20]

Is that bracing just cardboard?

 

[buggsson]

That is the question ! it goes together with the other two assumptions, the distance between them and interferences between them.Just do not place the driver in the middle/center of the baffle . That's the worst condition . Tweeter positioned asymmetrically may help . Anything else , I don't know ...
Post some sketches before cutting wood (have you considered solid concrete box for the mid-hi ?? )

Yes, now that you mention it, I recall having seen something about the longest possible distance between different registers and also dealing with the interference issue, but where? However, I might not try to put them all as close together as possible as was my first thought. I'll have to try to find that info again. I will put the two subs as close together as I can, as I've heard that is the best approach when having two of the same drivers.

I have not considered solid concrete for the mid-hi. I've been thinking in the directions of an as stiff as possible outer box that will be quite large, I think in comparison to the one 4" (or two) I will use as mid. The mid will then get an as stiff as possible box of its own inside of the larger box. I think most tweeters are sealed at the back, and therefore does not need any cavity of its own? The plan is then to sand fill the large box to get some extra mass.

 

[buggsson]

If its of any help, Im doing it like this

Yes, thank you, every input is of great help as it is a way to broaden my knowledge of what can be done, and how things can be done. I have some ideas, roughly, of what I will likely be doing, but the details will have to wait some more until I know more about needed volume of the boxes and the like.

You don't seem to use very thick material for your box, is that because of your rather intense bracing?

 

[tinitus]

You don't seem to use very thick material for your box, is that because of your rather intense bracing?

The "bracing" you refer to isnt bracing, but a matrix structure
And its only for midrange chamber

Yes its cardboard
And its mostly for acoustic reason
And for fun
But man, that was a lot of work

The main box material is 19mm, "old style" particle board

The thinner baffle you see is 9mm marine plywood
Its only baffle for mid and tweet
Partly has the advantage of not blocking the air on mid driver backside

Its the seperate mid/tweet baffle Im suggesting
Cardboard matrix is just for the fun of it

 

[steph_tsf]

hello buggsson, what kind of enclosures are you using with the Monacor MSH-116/4 (sat ?) and the AE AV10H (sub) ? No tweeter ?
Have you seen my active filter simulation method (sub / sat), including the drivers + enclosures phase and amplitudes here ? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/167341-need-advice-about-monacor-drivers-2.html
If you want to put a tweeter, as an option, have a look http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/168099-full-range-drivers-question.html#post2208694 (post #7) : this is about 1st order filtering with a delay line in the tweeter for time-aligning the tweeter and the midrange.
If you want to get the tweeter and the midrange aligned, and time-aligned, and if you want the tweeter to be flush-mounted (for avoiding diffraction), the sole and only solution is to use a d'Appolito (MTM) plus a delay line in the tweeter.
Must say that the MSH-116 as medium driver is a very good choice, and it really deserves to be used in a high-quality MTM medium/tweeter satellite. You better try the d'Appolito MTM configuration first, measure it first, get used to it, and later on then, try making a non-d'Appolito satellite if you need to make a small econony.
A good match with the Monacor MSH-116/4 is a miniature tweeter like the Visaton CP13, or the more recent Monacor DT284. Filtered at around 3.5 kHz 1st order. For domestic listening levels, of course.

 

[buggsson]

hello buggsson, what kind of enclosures are you using with the Monacor MSH-116/4 (sat ?) and the AE AV10H (sub) ? No tweeter ?
Have you seen my active filter simulation method (sub / sat), including the drivers + enclosures phase and amplitudes here ? http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/167341-need-advice-about-monacor-drivers-2.html
If you want to put a tweeter, as an option, have a look http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/168099-full-range-drivers-question.html#post2208694 (post #7) : this is about 1st order filtering with a delay line in the tweeter for time-aligning the tweeter and the midrange.
If you want to get the tweeter and the midrange aligned, and time-aligned, and if you want the tweeter to be flush-mounted (for avoiding diffraction), the sole and only solution is to use a d'Appolito (MTM) plus a delay line in the tweeter.
Must say that the MSH-116 as medium driver is a very good choice, and it really deserves to be used in a high-quality MTM medium/tweeter satellite. You better try the d'Appolito MTM configuration first, measure it first, get used to it, and later on then, try making a non-d'Appolito satellite if you need to make a small econony.
A good match with the Monacor MSH-116/4 is a miniature tweeter like the Visaton CP13, or the more recent Monacor DT284. Filtered at around 3.5 kHz 1st order. For domestic listening levels, of course.

First, I'm planning to use a tweeter as well, it's just that I've chosen to let that choice come last, and I'm not there quite yet. So far, I'm only trying to collect tweeter candidates.

I'm planning to go sealed for both the MSH-116/4 and the AE AV10H but in separate boxes.

No, I have not looked in your thread as yet, but I will.

Could you please expand a bit on the subject why I need to do a MTM and not a MT for the mid box? I don't really grasp "aligned and time aligned" bit at all. The time alignment you could also fix by sculpting the baffle to vertically align the acoustic centers as I understand it? In the mean time, I'll look at some papers discussing the pro and cons of the MTM configuration, but I'm still perplexed when there are quite a few MT-boxes sitting atop the sub boxes out there in the commercial arena.

I'm in trouble anyway as I understand it, and that's just due to physical size of the drivers in question. That is, if it is the general consensus that driver center to center distance for mid and tweeter is not supposed to be larger than the wavelength in question. In my case that is 5000 Hz and wavelength is just 6.5 cm and if one goes down to a mere 4000 Hz the the length of the wave increases to a whopping 7,5 cm. That would be impossible for all tweeters combined with the MSH-116/4. In that respect, if paired with most of the Scan-Speak tweeters I might consider, they have a face plate of 104 mm. The MSH-116/4 have a face plate diameter of 124 mm. If the above shall be fulfilled the frequency cannot be higher than 3000 Hz. So I wonder, how important is this issue of driver separation between mid and tweeter?

My aim is to cross higher than 3500 Hz, but I guess your suggestion of 3500 is not given because of your tweeter suggestions?

And about filtering, the area of my least knowledge, that is, very close to totally blank, why 1st order between mid and tweeter? I've been thinking of 4th order all over, at least to start with.

 

[steph_tsf]

hi buggsson, sculpting the baffle for mechanicaly aligning the acoustic centres of the medium and the tweeter is quite complicated and will distort the polar diagram. From my experience, it is easier and more efficient to use a MTM configuration with a miniature tweeter (like Visaton CP13) with a 1st order crossover at 3.5 kHz, flush mounted (so no diffraction other than the loudspeaker edges) and time-aligned using a delay line in the tweeter. Try this and you will see for yourself, with a linear medium driver like the excellent Monacor MSH-116/4, how easy it is to get a very high quality MTM unit, for a budget cost. This setup enables you to get a 125 Hz to 17 kHz bandwith in a 3 dB corridor, with a perfect linear phase (no phase disruption at 3.5 kHz) and a perfect polar diagram. Try this first. And low-pass filter the MSH-116/4 at 3.5 kHz using a 1st order filter consisting on a coil. So easy. So effective !