suggest a kit for me

[brownsauce]

Ok done some more reading.
Biro Technology
I feel like MTM is out after that. TMM is even worse in some aspects without going 2.5 way, which will drive up crossover costs too high for this project.
Essentially what I'm trying to find at this point is a good 2 way TM design that has some documented crossover work for use with a sub.

Just found this on Zaph's page here: http://www.zaphaudio.com/ZMV5.html
A subwoofer with a proper active crossover is recommend for home theater usage, or medium to high level 2 channel usage.
This is not encouraging for me in my search for a kit with a crossover, haha.

I guess that budgeting out $250 for 2x mini dsp and plugins will still leave $250 for whatever drivers I want. That is not a terrible driver budget.

 

[LineSource]

A well designed TMW 3-speaker 3-way can produce the best sound/$ in your room.
A two cabinet TM + W design is easier to move and has greater usage flexibility. BUT is not as volume efficient as one shared box.
Some Challenges: Time alignment. Baffle diffraction. Low phase shift. Cone breakup. Lobing.
Troel Gravesen website has very good coverage of all aspects of speaker construction. The ScanSpeak Illuminator monitor cabinet, plus two bottom woofers is an attractive "tall and lean".
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Diy_Loudspeaker_Projects.htm
SBAcoustics-61-NRXC
SBAcoustics-61-MFC
Illuminator-Monitor


For your cost goals, (#1 ) a physically time stepped TM baffle with low component count LR2/LR2 is a good solution for close-up listening, and (#2) asymetrical crossover slopes is a good choice for a simple flat baffle, and (#3) LR4/LR4 delivers crisp crossovers with constant power

Troels: There are several engineering ways to "overcome" the Mid-Tweet time-alignment problem:
#1. Machine a 2-height stepped baffle which physically time-aligns the tweeter to the midrange at the LR2/LR2 crossover frequency.
#2. Use an asymmetrical crossover usually consisting of 2nd order to the bass and 3rd order to the tweeter to make "proper" phase integration.
#3. Use 4th order filters to both drivers, e.g. LR4, and due to the large phase shift, the lack of alignment is negligible
#4. Tilt the front panel so that with a listening height somewhere between the bass and tweeter we more or less compensate for the time difference.
#5. Place the tweeter below the midbass. Having the midbass at ear height, the tweeter will - to some extent - be better aligned with the midbass driver.
#6. Use an all-pass filter to delay tweeter response.
#7. Ignore the problem and implement a simple 2nd order filter which produces a decent linear frequency response

 

[mordikai]

I read a bit more about the Bagby Continuum. While it looks good for simple vocals and small jazz, it has a lack of baffle step compensation that makes for less than ideal playback of more complex arrangements.
I'm looking for more of an all-rounder than that.

I think you're mistaken, the Continuum have bsc that's why the sensitivity is 83-84db. I have a pair and they are my favorite desktop monitor. Previous to the Continuums I've had the ls50's, jx92's, ff85wk, and many others. The bass from the 5" sealed woofer is good up to medium volumes but can't be expected to play loud, luckily they're crossover plans to add a woofer to make a 3 way if you need to play louder or lower. The Continuum are my favorite $300 speaker.

Btw my music ranges from chorale and chamber music to Vandermark 5 to electric wizard and more. The Continuum handle it all up to medium volume with no complaint.

 

[mordikai]

I read a bit more about the Bagby Continuum. While it looks good for simple vocals and small jazz, it has a lack of baffle step compensation that makes for less than ideal playback of more complex arrangements.
I'm looking for more of an all-rounder than that.

I think you're mistaken, the Continuum have bsc that's why the sensitivity is 83-84db. I have a pair and they are my favorite desktop monitor. Previous to the Continuums I've had the ls50's, jx92's, ff85wk, and many others. The bass from the 5" sealed woofer is good up to medium volumes but can't be expected to play loud, luckily they're crossover plans to add a woofer to make a 3 way if you need to play louder or lower. The Continuum are my favorite $300 speaker.

 

[Scottmoose]

I read a bit more about the Bagby Continuum. While it looks good for simple vocals and small jazz, it has a lack of baffle step compensation that makes for less than ideal playback of more complex arrangements.
I'm looking for more of an all-rounder than that.

Eh?

a/ As far as I can see it does have compensation for step loss, https://friedproducts.com/continuum - specifications-pricing.htm (see anechoic response graph)
b/ Who said a lack of compensation is only as issue for complex music, &
c/ Step loss issues vary depending on speaker position. Only a yoghurt would provide, say, a nearfield monitor with a full 6dB compensation if the cabinet is shallow & specifically intended to be rammed up against a wall. Context is necessary.

 

[brownsauce]

I was basically just quoting a listening impression I read on it. That it's based on an older design and the aim of the Continuum was to make it sound a little better in all aspects. As such, the flaws of an older design are still there in the Continuum.
I don't know. That's just what I read on audiocircle:
Bagby Continuum Impressions?
I'm not sure it matters either way, as the Continuum is a design for those that need a small speaker. That's definitely not me.

I found this link:http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/159852-bass-management-tm-subwoofer.html
I've read before, and it's here again, that passive crossovers in the 80hz range are large, expensive, and lossy.

I see two options at this point:
1.) Sealed speakers with a gentle roll off that can integrate well with sealed subs and no actual crossovers
or
2.) Fully active crossovers

With the second option probably producing better sound.
Thoughts?


I also did find this thread with sreten mentioning something that I'm not familiar with. I'll try and find more info on it now.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/129487-small-mtm-driver-combo.html
update: Looks like he was just describing a PLXXO. I think I've settled on buying 2x minidsp for this project.

 

[LineSource]

So...did you ever find a diy-kit with a sealed -F3 of 40Hz for $500?

$500 = TM+custom woofer....SB17NRXC35 + SB29RDC + One $80 Dayton 12" DS315-8 woofer will produce -F3 ~44Hz in a 3cuft SEALED volume, and -F3 ~30Hz in 3cuft PORTED volume. SO, build a 3cuft ported cabinet with a screw-in port plug for experiments. If you LATER bi-amp, you could close the port and only run an equalized deep bass sealed alignment.
==========
Passive crossovers for 100Hz woofers are modest cost ($20 per speaker) if you use Iron core inductors and Electrolytic Non-Polarized Crossover Capacitors. A very common design choice.
===============
Have you completed enough speaker research, and enough design/styling discussions with your wife to select a couple "desirable" cabinets?
These TM + W "tops and bottoms" might fit your style. Troels Gravesen's website is worth sharing with your wife.

That's all I got...

 

[brownsauce]

Thanks for all the help guys. I have decided to go full active with miniDSP+mic+REW and take the plunge designing my own baffle and enclosure. I'll copy the known good pairing of Satori drivers that Joachim Gerhard and others have used.
I know I have a bit of reading ahead of me, but that's half the fun, right?
I'll post up my project when I finish.

 

[Matt438]

Why not buy the kairos kit? I think it's barely more than the drivers you're looking at and you can make active/passive comparisons or just have a backup if mini dsp isn't a successful route.