NaO Note II RS

Yes . . . John did invite that comparison, didn't he . . .


but until there is a NAO Note II it is inevitable that much of the "talk" will be about the LX521 (which is the new "standard" to which others, including the older ORION, will be compared).

Yes I did and I have no objection to any comments or comparisons.

Well, there is a Note II sitting in my room. It is unlikely that anyone else will hear it unless they choose to build there own. I'm not inclined to go to audio shows to demo my speakers. I don't have any interest in that. It's noting but hype, spin and spam. I'm not part of the audio main stream and have no aspirations to be so. Speaker building is not so much a passion for me but a diversion from the winter. That is why the Note II has been in arrested development since last spring. Frankly, and I think I mentioned this before, it probably would have remained so had SL not introduced the LX521. But with that introduction I wasn't going to sit on my hands for another 3 to 6 mounts and have the usual suspects start making accusations of copying SL's design. No, the Note came first and the revision has been in the works almost since the introduction of the Note, 2 years ago. It amazes me how similar the Note II and the LX521 are since they were developed independently. SL's baffle may be considered to exhibit a more "artistic" flare while the Note II obviously follows the path laid down in the original Note. Along the path SL may have zigged where I sagged, but that is what makes things interesting.
 
Every time John K and SL are mentioned in the same thread, it ends up with John K telling us why SL's designs aren't as good as his. This "rivalry" goes back a long long long time and is a one sided affair at that.

Would it make sense for him to explain why his designs are not as good as SL's? No, of course not. So as long as he makes valid points, there's no problem, is there? People are then free to decide which design they prefer.
 
I've added something that should help see this.

Thanks. Definitely looks very good, my Neo3W still had some slight blooming around 7 kHz (which was worse with the PDR, by the way). Is the 6 kHz crossover in your design critical to prevent this? In other words, would there be blooming with a lower crossover?

I'm wondering, the slight bump off-axis, around 2 kHz, is this caused by diffraction? Or is this caused by the fact that a driver is no longer an acoustically small dipole?
 
Every time John K and SL are mentioned in the same thread, it ends up with John K telling us why SL's designs aren't as good as his. This "rivalry" goes back a long long long time and is a one sided affair at that.

Actually if you look back JohnK had always been the pioneer eg. Rear tweeter, variable baffle width. Linkwitzlab, though provided very nice and unique aesthetics like the Orions, Beethovens, etc.

For the latest iterations that is the variable baffle width, I am not a fan of both Nao Note and LX521 in terms of looks!

The dipoles at this point, I think, has been done to death (?)... let's see another approach :cool:
 
Looked at tweeter polar response this morning. I looks as if the tweeter x-o could be reduced to 4.5K while maintaining -3dB at 45 degrees, -6dB at 60 degrees, consistent with dipole radiation.

Just a shout out here. I live in CT about 30 miles from the shoreline. I did not have any damage from the storm but I did lost power and cable until yesterday. So I am just catching up on the news from NY and NJ. I grew up in Philly, Pa and spent many, many days at the Jersey shores from Cape May in the south to Point Pleasant in the north. Most of that area has been devastated by Sandy, as has been much of the cost of CT. And of course, the news has focused on NY.

Please take a moment and realize that all this speaker stuff and the banter back and fourth really plays little roll in our lives. My thoughts and prayers are with all the people affected by this continuing disaster. It will take years to recover and these places and the lives of those who live there will never be the same.
 
I'm wondering, the slight bump off-axis, around 2 kHz, is this caused by diffraction? Or is this caused by the fact that a driver is no longer an acoustically small dipole?

About the 2k bump. Please recognize that in the waterfall plot the response at each off axis location is normalized by the axial response. If you look at the axial response plot you will note a dip in the axial response at about 2k. Off axis this dip tends to smooth out somewhat with the result that the bump in the waterfall is somewhat exaggerated.
 
I've posted some updates. After experimenting with the system I decided to keep the tweeter x-o at 6k. I have changed the woofer system to an N frame dipole (this was an option in the original Note) and I will go with the SLS 10" woofers. XXLS woofer would increase the max SPL by only about 3dB and if greater max SPL and extended bass is desired it makes more sense to spend the additional money of one or two powered subs rather than on the XXLS woofer.

Note_II_RS_dipole_woofer-318x600.jpg