satelite mtm system.

[oon_the_kid]

Hi,

I am interested in building a speaker system to be mounted on the wall. Its meant to be a mtm d'appolito system but the drivers are in different enclosures. This will allow for bigger spacing between the m and the t. My thoughts are the m will be placed approximately 1 ~1.5 foot from the tweeter, giving a total distance of the 2~3 foot from m to m.

Planning on using a full ranger for the m (probably a markaudio alpair 6) and a DM-4 mark and daniels AMT for the tweeter. There will be no crossover, maybe a slight bandpass filter for the "m" speaker to reduce the sensitivity at higher frequency to compensate for the additional tweeter.

The idea of this is to create a pseudo line array, and hopefully with the bigger size and spacing between the speakers, will create a big sound source akin to a electrostats or line array and project a bigger sound.

I have tried to have impression of how the sound is like by putting 2 satelite speakers from a home theater unit in this manner and I quite like it.

The markaudio will handle up to about a bit below a 100hz. beyond that, it will be handled by a sub woofer.

I would like to hear your feedback, thoughts and comments on such a speaker arrangement.

Many thanks.

Oon

[bjorno]

Oon,
Very nice drivers but a picture is needed, it’s hard to understand what you want to achieve.

See my pictures 1(4) to 4(4).

b

1(4)

[bjorno]

2(4)

[bjorno]

3(4)

[bjorno]

4(4)

[HK26147]

My thoughts are the m will be placed approximately 1 ~1.5 foot from the tweeter, giving a total distance of the 2~3 foot from m to m.

I have MTM's mounted in my wall.
You have to take the driver spacings into consideration with the diameter of the drivers and the xover point to the tweeter.
See The Loudspeaker Design CookBook ( section 6.3 ).
Briefly you want to get the driver as close as possible to each other for a more cohesive source, otherwise you get uneven response and lobing and complex reinforcement and cancellation.

[oon_the_kid]

Dear Bjorno,

Thanks for all the effort. I am sure it took quite a lof of effort.



I should have made myself clearer by including more info on the drivers. The AMT I was talking about is this one.

http://www.mark-daniel.com/Dir_En.asp?Proid=13

And the mark audio is this one.

http://www.markaudio.com/alpair/6/round

The AMT tweeter can go down to 750Hz, and the markaudio is a full range driver.

The idea is to create sort of a cross between a full range line array and an MTM. The tweeter in the middle will handle 750Hz to 24KHz. The two 'm' will handle about 100 Hz to 20KHz.

Although they are semi full range, some are better than others in certain aspect. The AMT is sort of a ribbon tweeter and will handle treble with better detail. The full ranger will handle the upper bass to treble. There is actually no crossover between them, and for most of the music (750Hz-24KHz) the sound will emminate fom all 3.

The hope is I will be able to mmic a tall line array by putting the m-m further apart, since they also play treble and not just mid bass, I hope the sound will be coherent to sound as if they are line arrays or electro stats. The AMT will fill in the additional details that the two FR misses at the top and bottom.

Since the FR only requires a cabinet size of 3 litre I will house each of them individually and place them on the wall, making them adjustable in height and distance apart allowing more flexibility than a normal MTM in a single cabinet.


I will try and put up a drawing later.

Oon

[oon_the_kid]

Picture of the design

[HK26147]

The tweeter in the middle will handle 750Hz to 24KHz. The two 'm' will handle about 100 Hz to 20KHz.

IF I understand you correctly you have the tweeters and the Mids overlapping and both reproducing the range from 750Hz and up.
If that is so, and they are separated, there will be constructive and destructive interference in the overlaping frequencies.
Combing, lobing and uneven response.

[bjorno]

Hi Oon

I agree with HK26147, its not going to be a good idea but if you push all drivers together: I must admit that the dispersion performance (vertical) will be very good. See the rev. of picture 2-Oon M-T-M.GIF

b

Ps. IMO, the other posted pictures still holds.

1(1)