-EDIT: YUP!
-just use these two drivers for ALL CHANNELS. (..the morel has wide dispersion beyond 2 kHz and the aurum cantus driver is good a bit below 2 kHz.)
-if that's to expensive for your ceiling speakers, then choose another cone driver with similarly wide-dispersion as high as 2 kHz with an fs below 90 Hz
In-keeping with the Carbon Fiber look at a lower price (which would be more than suitable for your ceiling speakers):
SB Acoustics SB17CRC35
SB Acoustics SB17CRC35
Last edited:
It could have been a number of factors, but I've heard both the TSCW636 and 17CRC35 at the same location on the same equipment, and they do not sound similar at all.
If you are going 2-way, the 636 is the overhung woofer, and the 634 is the underhung midrange.
I really like my TSCW636 midbasses.
Later,
Wolf
If you are going 2-way, the 636 is the overhung woofer, and the 634 is the underhung midrange.
I really like my TSCW636 midbasses.
Later,
Wolf
-yeah, I've heard the Morel and really like it. I've NOT heard the SB carbon fiber.
Still, we are talking about ceiling speakers here (for the SB drivers), AND dsp corrected at that. (..and of course the Morel drivers for the front channels are also dsp corrected).
My only real concern here is the orientation of the Aurum Cantus AMT tweeters in the ceiling in relation to the listeners to avoid the driver's vertical dispersion loss.
Still, we are talking about ceiling speakers here (for the SB drivers), AND dsp corrected at that. (..and of course the Morel drivers for the front channels are also dsp corrected).
My only real concern here is the orientation of the Aurum Cantus AMT tweeters in the ceiling in relation to the listeners to avoid the driver's vertical dispersion loss.
A representation of what should work for both pairs of ceiling speakers:
Atmos (over-head of listeners in-ceiling):
Left: tweeter-midbass * Left Listener Right Listener * Right: midbass-tweeter
Rear (behind listeners in-ceiling) about in-line with Atmos speakers:
midbass ***************************************** midbass
tweeter ****************************************** tweeter
-note that in neither case is the tweeter "above" the midbass driver as would be with your Left Center and Right channels (in a typical stand-mount design). Instead the tweeter is "opposed"/parallel to the driver and shifts position depending on Atmos vs. Rear channels.
Atmos (over-head of listeners in-ceiling):
Left: tweeter-midbass * Left Listener Right Listener * Right: midbass-tweeter
Rear (behind listeners in-ceiling) about in-line with Atmos speakers:
midbass ***************************************** midbass
tweeter ****************************************** tweeter
-note that in neither case is the tweeter "above" the midbass driver as would be with your Left Center and Right channels (in a typical stand-mount design). Instead the tweeter is "opposed"/parallel to the driver and shifts position depending on Atmos vs. Rear channels.
Last edited:
Ex.
Here is Greg's opposed raal tweeter and Neo 8 relative to the woofer (middle pic):
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ically-arranged-mids-tweeter.html#post5005382
Here is Greg's opposed raal tweeter and Neo 8 relative to the woofer (middle pic):
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ically-arranged-mids-tweeter.html#post5005382
5.51" seems to be your tolerance for width.
If the beams are 6" on center it's not going to be enough unless you cut into them slightly near the front of the beam (for the driver's frame). (..a plunge router can do this easily.) This is assuming neither beam is a support beam.
Driver depth should be fine though..
If the beams are 6" on center it's not going to be enough unless you cut into them slightly near the front of the beam (for the driver's frame). (..a plunge router can do this easily.) This is assuming neither beam is a support beam.
Driver depth should be fine though..
@scottg here’s a pic. As you can see I have limited vertical space underneath the TV where there’s suppose to be a center channel which is why i was initially thinking of going with the two 4” focal woofers here. I could do that and maybe mount the tweeters on the left and right side of the TV directly into the wood, or mount them horizontal. Let me know what you think and I can post specs on those. I can go with the Morels for the left and right speaker as I plan on making room for those as I want those to be my primary speakers used when playing vinyl.
-why not just make it a black "sound bar" that spans the width of the cabinet top (or the TV)? (..and presumably the depth of the cabinet face.)
With that you can either adjust the height of the TV up a bit, or make the baffle slant backward enough so that the height is OK. With a slant baffle you can "frame-it-out" with black foam (driver's appearing "in-set") so that the front is NOT slanted, but rather is flush with the cabinet face.
Note: I'd do 2 Morels (8 ohm wired in parallel) for the center channel with the tweeter in between: M-T-M.
With that you can either adjust the height of the TV up a bit, or make the baffle slant backward enough so that the height is OK. With a slant baffle you can "frame-it-out" with black foam (driver's appearing "in-set") so that the front is NOT slanted, but rather is flush with the cabinet face.
Note: I'd do 2 Morels (8 ohm wired in parallel) for the center channel with the tweeter in between: M-T-M.
Last edited:
Good ideas. But I’m not sure what you mean by slant. You wouldn’t the speakers face up at like a 45 degree angle if that was the case? Maybe you can link me to an example?
What about this woofer? I could most likely squeeze this in somehow
Morel CAW 538 5" Cast Frame Woofer
What about this woofer? I could most likely squeeze this in somehow
Morel CAW 538 5" Cast Frame Woofer
Slant-faced:
https://images.cdn.whathifi.com/sit...nds/Neat/neat_iota_alpha_01.jpg?itok=9V2mudxI
http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/large/809965-bose-601-series-iii-speakers.jpg
..but appearing more like this in the front flat because of the frame-grill and foam surrounding the drivers:
http://www.audiogurus.com/learn/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MartinLogan-Motion-50XT-angled-black.jpg
Note the top monolithic appearance of the speaker:
http://usr.audioasylum.com/images/2...s-ii-direct-reflecting-vintage-speakers-1.jpg
-yet this is what it looks like underneath:
http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uplo...series_2_speakers_mint_woriginal_brochure.jpg
(..gloss black vinyl wrap (used on cars) can give you that piano black finish without painting.)
-using a very light-weight black fabric grill-cloth (sourced from womens nylon stockings), you'll still be able to see the drivers easily.
..and 30 ppi black block filter foam.
-I doubt the poly-cone will sound like the carbon fiber version.
https://images.cdn.whathifi.com/sit...nds/Neat/neat_iota_alpha_01.jpg?itok=9V2mudxI
http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/large/809965-bose-601-series-iii-speakers.jpg
..but appearing more like this in the front flat because of the frame-grill and foam surrounding the drivers:
http://www.audiogurus.com/learn/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/MartinLogan-Motion-50XT-angled-black.jpg
Note the top monolithic appearance of the speaker:
http://usr.audioasylum.com/images/2...s-ii-direct-reflecting-vintage-speakers-1.jpg
-yet this is what it looks like underneath:
http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uplo...series_2_speakers_mint_woriginal_brochure.jpg
(..gloss black vinyl wrap (used on cars) can give you that piano black finish without painting.)
-using a very light-weight black fabric grill-cloth (sourced from womens nylon stockings), you'll still be able to see the drivers easily.
..and 30 ppi black block filter foam.
-I doubt the poly-cone will sound like the carbon fiber version.
Last edited:
-you can do one driver, but it will look weird.
CAUTION.
Remember, what we are talking about here is an "active" biamplified speaker with a digital crossover from minidsp. (..and from the minidsp you'll go to your amplifiers - one for the tweeter and one for the midbass driver(s).)
This is NOT something that takes amplifier out from an HT Reciever. Instead it's more like a *pre*amplifer with component level out (..that goes into the minidsp crossover). This plate amplifier has the minidsp crossover in it already:
miniDSP PWR-ICE125 2 x 125 Watt DSP ICEpower Plate Amplifier
HT preamps are usually more costly than HT Recievers.
CAUTION.
Remember, what we are talking about here is an "active" biamplified speaker with a digital crossover from minidsp. (..and from the minidsp you'll go to your amplifiers - one for the tweeter and one for the midbass driver(s).)
This is NOT something that takes amplifier out from an HT Reciever. Instead it's more like a *pre*amplifer with component level out (..that goes into the minidsp crossover). This plate amplifier has the minidsp crossover in it already:
miniDSP PWR-ICE125 2 x 125 Watt DSP ICEpower Plate Amplifier
HT preamps are usually more costly than HT Recievers.
Last edited:
Ok makes sense. So I'm going to need to amplify each speaker individually? I agree it will look weird. So what I'll do in that case is for the front 3 speakers, I'll use a two woofer design on each one and make it a 3 way. For the speakers above and behind I'll just use a woofer and a tweeter and make it a two way. That will solve the looks issue, and give me lots of power for when I listen to my turntable on the two speakers only.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.