Design a Bose-beater - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27th March 2005, 12:13 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Racine, Wisconsin
If you really like this woman, buy her the Bose system complete with the tiny little tent thing and the continuous real featuring "Rolling Thunder" driving scenes. Maybe you could get some slack jaw couples in Nascar hats and kids with sticky hands and dirty faces to do an audiophile review of the Bose system.

"It's like you're right there in the stands."

"I like the rumble."

"Ehhhh, did you, errrr ehhhhh, see, ehhhh, Petty, hit the, errrr ehhhh, wall."

"It's small enough for the trailer".

"Bose is the best."


Bose is the TOP OF THE LINE at all the Sam's Clubs and Walmarts.

Tell her it's the line arrays or the road.

Seriously, follow the threads on the TB's or the Extremis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 12:47 PM   #22
Wizard of Kelts
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Connecticut, The Nutmeg State

With all respect, "a little bit bigger than the picture, assuming an average size hand", doesn't quite narrow it down, sizewise.

What I am really driving at is: can we make it big enough to include a 4" driver? There are some real good ones out there.

How does this sound for a box size, outside dimensions: 4.5" front, 4" deep, 6" high?

This will be bigger than the Bose, but still pretty small, and allows any number of 4" drivers into the picture.

Please let us know if that is an acceptable size right from the beginning. I think we can all use a concrete size goal. I've looked and looked, but I can't seem to locate any driver manufacturer who gives the Vas spec in hand size.
"A friend will help you move. A really good friend will help you move a body."
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 01:34 PM   #23
mAJORD is offline mAJORD  Australia
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Brisbane Australia
that does sound like a plan, go the 4" in 2 way? make life easier..
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 01:37 PM   #24
Zaph is offline Zaph  United States
diyAudio Member
Zaph's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Interesting. I looked at this thread last night before bed and it had one reply. Woke up this morning to find a riot.

There are many things wrong with Bose systems, the worst thing being their size. When your primary design objective is the keep the overall size very small, you've already accepted a major compromise that will drag the sound quality down to mediocrity. If you want to "beat" Bose, you need to get out of the market where sound quality doesn't matter.

Blunderman posted a link to my Hi-Vi B3S project. That represents pretty much the smallest I would make a speaker that still allows it to have low enough bass response to properly cross over to a sub without localization. Those are just over .1 cu ft.

In the case of Bose cubes, they are .02 cu ft, which when combined with their high Qts high Fs drivers, results in lower midrange peaking and a massive dip in the midbass response where the satellites have no output. There are two routes Bose could have taken: 1) cross the sub over low enough to not cause localization but then have a massive midbass dip in response, or 2) they could cross over higher and have too much midbass coming out of the sub. They chose #1. Both options suck.

The speaker shown below is 5" wide and 9" tall. The woofer is 3". I supply crossover options for those who wish to use these in an "architectual audio" environment. This is pretty much the smallest I can make a speaker and have it not exhibit Bose sound quality.

Click the image to open in full size.

I'd recommend against Fostex drivers for this application. They are the most efficient 3" drivers of the bunch, but that efficiency gets you nothing when you run out of Xmax with 1/2 watt input. with 3" single drivers, efficiency means nothing but overall output and power handling means everything.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 02:37 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
Paradise_Ice's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: cosmological consciousness
I would also second the Fostex, much better than bose, no disrepect intended, Bose is a life style product and it does that job well.

You could go for Ribbon planars as that can go down to 200Hz, some say even as low as 100Hz but there at risk and i dont like risks with expensive equipment.

If you really love your partner, let her be for now and show her the error of her ways later on.

Its not a task to make something that sounds better than Bose.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 03:01 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mumbai

though mentioned quite a few times - ill mention again - why is the bose system not approved to ac-3 & thx standards -

amongst other faults - which are numerous

it just cannot take the dynamics of a theatre - and therefore bose has compressed the sound heavily in his cross over - limiting it - heavily - by bulbs - ptc etc etc

i would suggest the Mangers & a good set of front firing subs to accompany

suranjan das gupta
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 03:24 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
Paradise_Ice's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: cosmological consciousness
Whats your budget Dave?

The managers are very expensive units and vey fussy about amplification.

I dont want to bash any company but the domestic Bose are not made for high fidelity sound reproduction.

Have you asked your partner why she wants Bose?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 03:46 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
badgerboy's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Kingston upon Hull, UK
Originally posted by burnedfingers
No Highs and no lows its Bose.

To be honest I would dump her and get a real woman that knows audio. I can see the future with a woman that doesn't really know
audio nor does she have the ability to do so. Can you really imagine being able to put together a DIY project in the future?

My daughter was asked to leave a music class recently.
They had been listening to an assortment of music, and the teacher took one look at my daughters face and said "Don't you like this music?"
At this point my daughter replied "There's nothing wrong with the music, I listen to this at home. But this sound system and loudspeakers really suck!"
Some women (and older children) DO know audio. I've been lucky to be blessed with a wife and daughter who put up with my audio foibles...
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 05:13 PM   #29
amt is offline amt  United States
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: oregon
My wife wanted some Bose like speakers that we could hide in our living room for HT. After looking at building something, I finally decided to buy the Dayton HT system from PE. They sell the system for $99 when on sale and it actually sounds pretty good (for what it is) The satalites are 2-way and the sub is of course, one note but does have some punch. I listened to an Accoustimass system at Best Buy and it is really no better performer than the Dayton. I couldnt buy the raw materials for $100. And they look nicer than the typical cheap Sony, Magnavox, KLH kind of stuff sold at Walwart etc.

Not HiFi or diy but quite cost effective. My time is worth something so for a system that is used for non-critical, low volumn listening and meets the "hide the enclosures" requirement, these are fine. She puts up with my other 12 pairs of speaker elsewhere in the house, so I can easily accomodate her on this one issue. And now I have more time for building REAL speakers.

  Reply With Quote
Old 27th March 2005, 05:53 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Costa Rica
Send a message via AIM to johninCR Send a message via MSN to johninCR Send a message via Yahoo to johninCR
If you want to maximise SQ in the smallest size possible then A-periodic boxes are the way to go for both the speakers and sub. Get the SQ of sealed in a much smaller box. If you make them bipole, then you can overcome much of the negative sonic impact of having a tiny front baffle and forget about BSC.
Everyone has a photographic memory. It's just that most are out of film.
  Reply With Quote


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
Harmon Kardon HD-970 modded, a world beater? Nigel Page Digital Source 128 15th February 2015 11:20 AM
Bose 901 design 901Fixer Multi-Way 33 1st April 2013 06:12 PM
Bose PAS like raintalk Multi-Way 16 23rd December 2004 11:32 PM
Was Bose right all along? navin Multi-Way 50 18th June 2004 02:13 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:13 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2