Two-way no compromise on size.. - Page 6 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14th February 2013, 08:25 AM   #51
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
AStroop has set exceptional outlines, really - big ones, 2-way, classic/acoustic, moderate bass and spl.

If we do a two-way that goes flat to 35 in a room and sounds good (minimal distortion) we need large drivers. Large midbass starts to boom early so we need a tweeter that can do from 800 up and with low distortion. We are facing a challenging task.

I am perfectly happy with my MarkK ER18DXT low-tuned. They have good output from 35Hz up and decent power response. But they are not big.

For a big 2-way I fancy Gedlee Summa and clones. Some of then have been presented here, and two more. The power response and horizontal radiaton are well controlled and the bass is 15"
- gainphile's S15 Gainphile: S15 - Econowave DSP (dsp)
- HM100 Hifitalo Verkkokauppa - HM-100dB/W (passive)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th February 2013, 10:05 PM   #52
diyAudio Member
 
LineSource's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SiliconValley
"I see no advantage to a horn at LFs. It’s a very poor use of space. Better is just a bunch of closed box monopoles placed about the room.

Horns to me are strictly for the control of directivity and have no real advantages besides that. So they don't make much sense until one reaches the frequency at which they can be effective at directivity control - this is strictly dependent on size you can live with.

Even Don Keele noted some decades ago that horns were a bad choice at LFs when volume and complexity of the enclosure were taken into account. Above 500-1k Hz waveguides are essential for directivity control, but below that they work poorly and are not a good choice. Below 200 Hz in a small room, multiple subs are just about the only choice." Earl Geddes GedLee LLC


A review of the SPL vs. Freq curve for the Jubilee Corner Horn Woofer helps support Dr. Geddes work on multiple sealed woofer room swarms. A sealed or ported woofer also gets the ~5db corner gain and 90 degree controlled directivity. Sealed woofers make sense if digital room equalization and/or digital Xovers are used. A Grand Piano’s low A 27.5Hz is easy to reproduce with low phase shift using a sealed woofer.

Personally, I favor the vocal weight and uniformity from using a 10" midbass over the 100-1200Hz vocal range before going to a 1" SEOS waveguide that reaches to 20Khz. JBL enjoyed decades of success with (18"+10"+horn) studio monitors. Even Mark Levinson's statement speaker the Daniel Hertz M1 uses a cone(12") midbass.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Klipsch Jubliee.jpg (95.3 KB, 183 views)
File Type: jpg CiornersGeddesSwarm.jpg (130.3 KB, 179 views)
File Type: jpg Rich Man.jpg (95.4 KB, 182 views)
File Type: jpg Poor Man.jpg (87.2 KB, 179 views)
File Type: jpg Daniel Hertz M1.jpg (100.3 KB, 178 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2013, 01:16 AM   #53
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Western Sydney
re: "ER18DXT low-tuned. They have good output from 35Hz" - hmmm, we must have a different definition of 'good output', I found my ER18s lacking when low tuned, The CA18RLYs are much better, even though they require a large box.
Part of the challenge here to me seems to be be to go for an older-school approach, where the box is large relative to the speaker size, 2x CA18RLYs would satisfy that...
__________________
Impedance varies with frequency, use impedance plots of your drivers and make crossover calculations using the actual impedance of the driver at the crossover frequency
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2013, 10:44 AM   #54
tomtom is offline tomtom  Slovakia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
just copy and maybe improve JBL Professional :: Recording & Broadcast :: M2 Master Reference Monitor. As improvement i would make it bigger so WG can go lower and there will be place for smooth WG to baffle transtion. This is current SOTA. You dont invent anything better. Also if possible use D2 driver, there isnt better compression driver. If you want big experiment you can make bass response cardiod /leaky enclosure/ and control response even lower. But it want be easy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2013, 11:03 AM   #55
AStroop is offline AStroop  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: OZ in Berlin
That M2 is a beautiful thing!

Indeed one of the original ideas I had was to do a couple of big sealed bass bins with an 18 in each or a couple of 12's and then have a couple of horns or seos 18's from 600Hz up.. the thing is I have a large room, multiple subs might more difficult to integrate.

Will keep it on the table and do some more searches, while looking over the Jubilee plans. A sealed cab or pretty much ANY cab is easier to build and I guess should be considered right up until I have done the buying....

I really appreciate the feedback and experience.

Cheers
A
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2013, 12:12 PM   #56
tomtom is offline tomtom  Slovakia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
I read whole thread just now. Beyond the Ariel is my system. I try to listen at realistic level /it is not all that loud/ - mainly classical and jazz. The room is 7,5x6,5x3m. Honestly with room as big as yours, the bass problem start so low that i dont see need for multisub. In my room any there isnt any problem til ca. 60hz. In yours it will be ca. 45hz. It is not worth to do multisub. Im rational man - no subjectivist at all but multisub solution has its own set of problems /and also EQ at bass/ and not many people talking about it. I believe that in smaler rooms its only way to do good bass but if you room is trouble free to ca. 60hz it is better to leave it conventional stereo and anechoic flat /no in room flat/. I try to EQ my system at listening position to about 100hz /to eq modes/ and it always mess up localization. I use very simple 2 mic double bass recording to evaluate this. The efect of eq was that sometimes there was bass sound right from speaker /IMO when recording hit EQ spot/ and not from fantom spot where it should be. My speaker are capable of rock solid fantom image and they are absolut indetectable as source of sound so i can clearly hear such effect. Nobody also talk about reasonable way to sum stereo to mono sub signal. What if bass signal on recording has oposite phase you end up with no bass at all. Do you think that same thing happend in room in acoustic domain?

I agree that we need extension to 20hz /and reasonable roll off after/
You dont hear it, is is more like feel something very physical - you feel when choir stand up just before FF as conductor prepare them. It add great deal of realism. Unfortunately not many recording has this subsonic info and many cardiod mikes hasnt subsonic extension /also they tend to use subsonic filter/

My humble suggestion:

Build something like M2 /when you cannot use D2 driver use BMS coax instead/ And make some nearfield stereo subs <50hz very steep XO.

Place everything symetricaly in room.

Also use digital XO. It is not possible to integrate such a system without DSP XO with delay etc...

Last edited by tomtom; 15th February 2013 at 12:17 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2013, 10:09 PM   #57
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Knoxville, TN
Quote:
Originally Posted by AStroop View Post
Will keep it on the table and do some more searches, while looking over the Jubilee plans.
Here's how they're currently building them. Roy (co-designer) wanted to make it an easier and stronger build. The box itself is essentially the same with the big difference being the "shelves" instead of braces on the inside of the bin.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSCN4847.JPG (246.2 KB, 57 views)
File Type: jpg DSCN4848.JPG (273.8 KB, 57 views)
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any acoustical compromise in such a designs? ad70 Construction Tips 0 5th June 2012 02:19 PM
How much compromise, small EQ'ed sub audiobomber Subwoofers 10 15th March 2007 09:46 PM
Considering a compromise mashaffer Full Range 7 14th May 2006 11:45 PM
OB subs: Best compromise? MtnBob Subwoofers 13 26th May 2004 02:19 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:21 AM.


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