| Bluto |
OB/FR is where I ended up finding myself seeing 'Nirvana' after much experimentation and study. Simply my preferences, not necessarily anyone else's Cup of Tea. Still crazy over Horns, simply no room for them.
I'm an admitted Couch Potato when not online or working so HT is important to me as well as music. My music takes preference regards quality of sound and a year ago I saw myself needing separate systems for each. When I started studying amplification I also saw myself investing bucco dollaro to meet all needs.
Of late I'm wondering if all this is necessary for those of us of meager means.
I'd like to see sensitivity of high 90's for music just because of distortion concerns, not because I'd seek lower powered amps. Subs don't really concern me that much as to my way of thinking I see all kinds of options there that I believe would integrate fairly well for Movie use and I personally don't need to rattle the walls for entertainment when a helicopter flies over. Again, simply me.
Some guys run tubes for both music and HT. Out of the question financially for many of us as well as beyond our DIY skills for many. I'm not seeing GC as a meets all needs alternative anymore and even done DIY properly not an inexpensive task. I do like them as alternatives to standard fare for Office use and plan to limit my excursions there to that purpose for near future. Of late I'm also over at Nelson's page primarily spurred on by Scott Mouses comments regards build difficulty being easier than many GC's in another thread. I'm also impressed as to how many testimonies from guys believing they sound just as good as or even better than tubes. They are still beyond my skill levels without a good deal more reading. Financially appears to be doable.
Stay with me on this, I'm getting there.
Posted in another recent thread I bring into play the multi amp units from Emotiva, Outlaw, Rotel and even used Bryston. You can't knock a 20 year transferable warranty. 3 years old Brystons are fairly affordable and most that invested that initial sticker price likely treated such as the investment they were.
I don't personally know tubes but all that run them claim this is the ultimate. Financially I'm starting to see these above mentioned units as 2nd. best alternative and combined with high sensitivity OB/FR speakers a good bet for both music and HT . I haven't read a great deal about each companies processors but I'm sure there is a Sub out and if not many are versatile enough in hook-up options to get you plenty of power for Subs unless you simply must have 20hz. at 110 decibels.
Adding an active XO and equalizer if individual felt such necessary (I'm not convinced, especially if you used dual Subs, think gain settings likely adequate) should integrate well enough to give you a pretty kick tail music and HT system for reasonable dollars.
Many guys are posting low buck OB efforts of late but some don't meet both needs and several that appear they would aren't telling us how they are powering same.
Moderator - Asking much but could we see a separate gallery section for OB efforts? It's growing rapidly.
I'd like to hear from those of you who have built that are happy if you believe your choice meets both HT and Music needs as well as how you amplified. Kind of a dual topic question but really a combined question I thought answered best posted here.
Move it if you desire.
Show off guys - please. Many of us want the whole story.
Thanks - Bluto |
|
|
| DaveCan |
I agree, OB should have it's own category.. Please Mod people please!!:cop: :D
Also very intrigued as of late, since going through a rather long OB thread, and reading Martins thread and MR.Pass and also the Feastrex OB review, plus Ron has mentioned it before.. Seem's like a good deal to go boxless, but would be cool to keep the x-over out of the mix as much as possible..
I think you may need as much room if not more for most OB's as a horn. It would appear that OB's like to be well out from walls etc where some horns work in corners or quite close to room wall's, plus OB's are at least as large in some respects..
Very good thread Bluto, would be cool to explore the daylights out of this design and see all the different ways it could be implemented. I'd dig a top notch fullrange driver, Fostex,Lowther,Aer, Feastrex etc mated well to an amazing bottom end, with little to no x-over on the fullrange.
As far as amps, I'm for tubes but thats just me, and in no way have I ever heard any of the better SS amps for any length of time to get into the whole debate. I got to experience a Bryston at one time and really enjoyed it, and could imagine using one for the low end would be amazing :cool: This amp has gained some good praise as of late and reasonable to get into tubes if not wanting to diy an amp http://6moons.com/audioreviews/glow/one.html Also Decware has a kit that would be hard to beat for the $$$ http://www.decware.com/newsite/mainmenu.htm
Dave:) |
|
|
| bvan |
A very good reasonably priced ob system to do both 2 channel and HT well, with a slight bias towards 2 channel, might be some Hawthorne Audio 15' Silver Iris coaxials with Augie bass driver. (if I can count coax as fullrange?)
I'm a music and movie guy but priority is music. Had B200 OB but the Hawthorne SI's have a bit more scale an impact which suits movies. There Augie which I have in the same baffle is bi-amed with a cheap plate amp and gets me down to mid 20hz with room gain. I have a box sub as well for bellow there but am thinking of selling it as I might only miss it on the Transformers 2.
Using 30w Red Wine class D which is plenty, and am about to build first tube amp kit, the S.E.X amp from Bottlehead. Might use it as a pre or by itself. I expect enough juice for music but not movies if I run the SI's full range. Setting speakers to small in my dvd player should fix this (but I have a fairly convoluted setup where I run a Oppo dvd player to external dac for music, and the Oppo's analogue outs strait to amp and sub for movies - and control volume with Oppo remote)
cheers
bevan |
|
|
| gainphile |
+1 Vote for OB section in Loudspeakers.
But for now lo and behold !
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...25&pagenumber=1
I think I've found the sound nirvana too ... a pair of big woofers, good fullrange and few gainclones and linkwitz eq circuitry :D ... and no box! |
|
|
| Lowrider |
I had a reasonable AV system, Theta player, Krell processor, BelCanto amplifier, Sonus Faber speakers and REL subwoofers, pretty good with music too...
Now I have a Linn player/processor, tube amplifier, OB speakers and subwoofer run active from the processor bass management...
It does everything better, even helis, and covers almost 360 with only a stereo pair... |
|
|
| Bluto |
bvan -
Nice sounding set-up.
15" Auggie? I spent much time there and didn't think the Auggies would go that low. Where are you setting gain to XO to Iris?
My problem is I need to keep drivers 12" or less and still find bass to mid 30's for my mains.
Bluto |
|
|
| bvan |
Yeah sounds good. Truth be told I've actually got the Sterling Silver Iris's and they sound freek'n amazing. And this after coming off Zu and before that Dynaudio Focus.
I've got a bit of a room node at 30hz which helps as I'm running a DEQ2496 on the Augie and am pulling it down by 10db ar 30hz. Crossover I'm not sure as I've got a bit of a suckout above the normal XO and am boosting that a bir. Most guys over at the Hawthorne forums using about a 45-50hz XO and getting flat down to the upper 20's if I'm not mistaken.
I dont listen to loud and reckon I could eq the Augies flat down to 20hz but feel no need as they are plenty full range on music. For a while before I had the Augie I had the DEQ on the SSI's and eq'd them down to the mid 30's no problem. But the Augie is such a seemless blend with the SSI and for so little outlay that it wouldnt make sense not to use them.
FWIW I had some Peerless XLS 830500 drivers in for a while before the Augies arrives, good with eq but I think the Augies slightly better. Interestingly the 12" Peerless drivers would vibrate the baffles and suspended floor more than the Augies, perhaps due to their smaller diameter and therefore greater excursion? or maybe higher mass cones? You might find joy using 2x 10" Augies??
cheers
Bevan |
|
|
| Kensai |
My recent experiments have me leaning toward FR driver up top, no filter, running from T-Amp (or tubes for you fancy lads) with woofers below running either from a plate amp for each channel or something like the Dayton APA150 stereo amp that can be converted to either stereo or mono sub amp with active crossover built in just like a plate amp (I've even talked to their techs who talked to the product developer to make sure that it can do stereo sub duty instead of just running a pair of woofers in dual mono).
What started all this was me picking up a pair of Dayton RS100-8 fullrangers. I fell in love with their sound immediately, even in OB with no EQ they hit about 70Hz just in quick and dirty little bits of folded cardboard for baffles, so they were really easy to play with right out of the box. Of course I was used to getting around 55Hz w/EQ from my tricked out B20s in OB, so I wasn't perfectly happy and realized that I needed to start experimenting to see what I could do to go with RS100s and bass augmentation. Have a pair of old 15"ers from a pair of titanic Sansuis that were made the year before I was born (lets just say they're really quite old), and figured from my reading that since they were supposedly 102dB sensitive (still had the manuals from each speaker, crazily enough, along with the original packaging), I could put some resistance in line with them to get their Qts up high enough to be useful in OB. Not only did that not seem to do much other than dirty the sound (with almost no bass to speak of, no less, sadly leaving the RS100s as the thing most present at the bottom), putting the big coils from the Sansui crossovers in line between resistor and driver rolled them off just barely noticeably, still leaving them overlapping the RS100s for 3-4 octaves.
So first things first, I needed OB appropriate woofer to try. Only thing on hand is the 8" drivers from a pair of Yamaha bookshelves that anchor my livingroom system. I'd have drivers from the previous model out on OB before, and they had been quite pleasing. Turned out that had been a long time ago, because when I swapped them for the B20s in my tiny OBs (18"x12" hinged to my desk; more about that in a bit) they surprised the **** out of me by hitting about 45Hz with no EQ with authority and no small sense of space. Of course I don't have much of anything crossover component wise to really play with. Those big coils forming a 1st order really don't roll much off the top of the Yammy 8s, and having them hooked up absolutely killed SQ, so I nixed trying to get them set up with the RS100s at that moment and pulled the B&G Neo3PDRs that I had previously upgraded the Yamaha cases with and popped them in OB with the Yammy drivers, using the Yamaha crossovers (consisting of a the 8"er running full range and the Neo3 on a 2.2uF cap). This didn't sound as integrated in the near field as it did, in the box, about 12-14 feet from my seat in the living room (apparently need a bit smaller cap on the tweet), but it showed me that yes, a single cap on a tweet was a much better solution in an FR situation than a single coil on a woofer. Running this experiment also showed me that those Yamaha drivers were very well behaved and with optimal EQ were good from about 35Hz-5kHz on OB.
On the down side, it also showed me that I preferred the sound of the RS100's top end to the Neo3 on a small cap, so the next step was to bring in my newly acquired floor sample Panasonic XR-57 receiver with digital amps, hook up the RS100s as small fronts and run the subwoofer out to my T-amp to run the Yamaha 8"ers in dual mono. Not the optimal solution, but I'm just trying to learn experientially here. So I do that, and the first thing I find is that there's this strange high frequency whine coming from the 8"ers that stays the same level no matter where I changed the volume (at the T-amp, at the receiver, using the receiver's various adjustments, or at the computer which is my source). As long as there was power to all components, there was the whine, though it was low enough level that if you cranked some music or a DVD with no real quiet spots, you'd stop noticing it almost immediately). Secondly, I find that with an 80Hz crossover set in the receiver, in the nearfield with maybe 6-7 feet between drivers, I wasn't able to notice the bass out of place, even on my most familiar tracks or on DVDs where the video should make your brain see any directionality problems quite clearly. If it weren't for that whine (anyone know what it is and/or how to stop it?) that might have been a good place to pause for awhile, because the overall response, sound stage and SQ were really quite good. Again, I tried my big, salvaged coils between the T-amp and the Yamahas and while they did roll the whine off noticeably, the whine was still there, and the SQ suffered quite a bit more noticeably (do big inductors usually make woofers sound like gritty ****, or are these things just some old, bad design?).
So, my thinking came around to the theory that maybe that whine is a normal interaction between a receiver's sub out and a normal line level in on a full range amp, and that running to a plate or other amp specifically intended to drive subwoofers, with integrated active crossover could very reasonably eliminate the whine from perception, as well as improving the performance of the system as a whole. This makes my next action kinda pricey (probably about $150, minimum) as I'll need 2 channels worth of sub amplifier. After that, I'll probably need a pair of 15" Goldwoods (Fs 29Hz, Qts 1.95) to really get down to the bottom of things, so to speak.
What's you guys' current thinking on things like this? I suppose we're still waiting on MJK's active OB article to get a bit more solid perspective on things.
Kensai |
|
|
| gurley123 |
Bluto,
Don't rule tubes out as too exspensive. For over ten years now I've been running a Jolida 202a as my main music amp. I bought it in my early twenties while working part-time and going to school. Sure, I was able to find a good deal and put it on layaway, but you can still find good deals on some here and there. The amp itself sounds great, responds to easy mods, and since I've had it has only needed one re-tubing and that was under $100 total. A real good choice. Plus look for some of the hybrids for an even cheaper alt.
As far as OB's go, I think Kensai is oon the right track, or at least the track that I was looking at. Seprate amps for high and low. The RS-100's look ideal for top end. Even those Goldwood 8" 'ers may be a good choice. Use your tube amp or maybe t-amp for those and use a sub-amp or pro-sound amp or even one of these (you could run two woofers per side) with a PLLX-O for a low end speaker like this guy . You did say a max 12" right?
That's just one more project that only exists up in my noggin. |
|
|
| Bluto |
This is getting Good.
I've read and re-read 4 times and have serious questions for 3 of you.
I need more time to to ask properly.
Thanks Guys - much said in just a few threads.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
Guess I'll work backwards - easier to read all.
gurley123 - Tubes or Pass Amps will stay on my list til I one day can afford them or have confidence enough to build. Considering OB/FR that can handle both HT and music needs driven by 'whatever' amps used is simply priority for speaker design in my mind. I really like Jolida's offerings and have heard nothing but good from those I've spoken with running them.
I had ran into this 'Sure Electronics' amps quite awhile back and they impressed me as well. I'm gona do a search here and elsewhere to see if I can learn more. Price looks near to unbeatable.
In another OB thread I have saved from just several weeks back talk of that Goldwood came up and changed my mind from pulling the trigger on Hawthorne Auggies which I was real solid on. Consideration of Altec-Lansing or ElectroVoice Vintage FR's also stopped me from going with Hawthornes FR's. Good choices non the less and best I'd seen as value. Wish I could hear both possibilities as described side to side.
I've just started reading on PLLX-O and all XO design where fact I'm an idiot shows.
Seeing guys put together both low and high buck systems that work with included XO and Amp concerns is where I'm hoping this thread will go.
Kensai - Man ..... I love the way you think! You're twice as knowledgeable as I but have that same experimental Spirit!
I am real disappointed to hear your results with the Sansui's as I mentioned in another thread I have 4 of them and the numbers had me believing they'd be excellent as OB bass. At least now I know not to try them. I'm still thinking these might be a go in a bass bin box. I'll admit they do sound sloppy under power. Bin may actually make such worse. Likely I'll just sell all 4 speakers as is. They are an easy 8.5 out of 10. I'm giving up my Quad basement dream.
I'm with gurley in thinking as you do regards separate amplification for both highs and lows. The most control possible with the least electronics in XO is where I'd like to see design go. I don't know where my idea of Emotiva, Bryston etc. and using their signal processors puts me on this without more study. Also thinking possible pre-amp via soundcard in a PC. There are experts here on this subject and I hope some with OB/FR desires show up to enlighten us. Appears to me much possible with this route but my knowledge is minimal at best. Also seems an economical route.
Gain Phile - 'You Da Man' !!!
Thanks for link. I'd seen a few of those here and there but didn't realize you'd put together an entire library. I had a ball there! Talk about ideas! There are several other loose ones here and there on forum that I hope people see your thread here and add to it. Best collection around. Thanks for that.
bvan - You'll see I pulled back from Hawthorne but still think it likely the best integrated reasonably priced system out there. You can't beat that price for 2 FR's and 2 Auggies at 15" with crossover actually built for you. I've also heard nothing but great reviews on the Oppo's and that likely my choice for next DVD/CD, an editorial on your mods would be most welcome or a link if you've already done so.
Davecan - Agreed regards space on Horns but I want to run 2 sets of drivers plus subs and all I read made it appear getting 2 different types of horns to integrate is a tall order. My experiments didn't get me bass I was after in horns and thinking a horn combined with an OB set-up and bass augmentation wouldn't integrate at all. Overall wall length as well as depth makes choice of drivers a tough decision in my consideration. Right now I'm leaning towards a 10" FR and 2 - 12" bass units bi-amped as one set and the 2nd. set being a line array of 6 - 5" x 7" FR's I own with an SPL of 95. These run 70-12000 so I'd add little Dayton tweets. Midrange clarity on these is outstanding.
Really Cool thoughts - hope to see more.
Bluto
Wondering if this thread would get more action if placed by Gain Philes Library? |
|
|
| Bluto |
Kensai -
Have you looked at the Perfect Technologies' - 'Force' that gainphile has in his library?
I'm gona try my Misco's simply as I own them or I'd invest in the Daytons. 8 of those should get you to near 94spl.
Think on a clone with those of this 'Force' using little Dayton Neo tweets.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
Thinking I might be able to fit in a 12" FR.
Any suggestions available here in the States ?
Bluto |
|
|
| DaveCan |
Hawthorne has a 10'' that may suit the bill for you. Perhaps a pair of those and a set of the 15'' Augies may be all you need for your room. I would guess the 10'' coax's sound better or more accurate than the 15'' ones... http://hawthorneaudio.com/drivers.htm#10SICoax
I'd start with the music system first and work in HT later after getting the main 2 channel right..
This could be a killer OB and amp system for the money:
One pair Silver Iris OB 10'' includes x-over = $290.00
One pair of Siver Iris OB 15'' Augie's = $300.00
Glow Audio Amp One http://www.glow-audio.com/home.html = $488.00
Now you just have to power the Augies. That could get you going for $1078 not including Augie power ( I wouldn't use a plate amp, perhaps the Reckhorn or? ). Use your old wire or some Cat5 and your set for reasonable $$$$
Dave:) |
|
|
| Bluto |
DaveCan -
Thanks for heads up on Glow Amp - hadn't seen that.
Nobody else with OB ideas?
Bluto |
|
|
| bvan |
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?board=90.0
the Tone Tubby hemp alnico seems to be a most interesting development, might be worth waiting a while while others put in the r&d time. if there is luck running it fullrange with a tweeter filling in after its natural 7(?)k roll off i might be interested myself, for a second system. at this stage I wouldnt know what tweeter would match sensitivity wise so as not to require passive or active eq. dr mason et al got their finger on the pulse i reckon. |
|
|
| marec |
Hi Bluto
you mentioned the Sure Electronics amps. If these are the boards available on Ebay, I'd advise caution, especially with high efficiency speakers. I've found them quite noisy. The smaller 12 v supply ones ( I forget the output) were grim in this regard and also lacked life with my 90db OBs. There is a thread on modifying these, and some of the changes generated some improvement, but I still don't find them satisfactory. I haven't bothered modifiying the 24v 100 watt. These again are very noisy, but at least show some life in the sound.
Power supply, whether SLA or switch mode seems to make little difference...
Rgds |
|
|
| happy.gringo |
Kensai,
I have a panasonic SX55 and was sending the sub output to a bass guitar amp for awhile until I built subs and there was no whine. I think you might have some kind of ground loop problem. |
|
|
| Kensai |
h.g
I had thought that for a second at first, but ground loop hum is at the frequency of your AC, or 60Hz in my part of the world. This is way up over 1kHz, so unless some interaction that's is unknown to my is going on (and that never happens ;-p )
Bluto,
Is that what this is, and OB brain dump? I really don't think you want to get me started. I've got conceptual design acumen way out past what I actually know about speaker building. So many ideas, so little budget, you know?
Anyway, how about a bass line array to go with our active low pass setup? Got some cheap options if you're not intent on digging into the bottom octave:
Apex Jr.
The 6" CV drivers about a third down.
or
Goldwood 7"er
Make a line of at least 4. 8 would probably be optimal for most spaces. Baffle can be pretty narrow, especially since we're actively crossing and hopefully have a much beefier amp for the bass section. What we need then is probably a fairly high efficiency FR unit, likely a Fostex of some flavor, though if tuned properly, we might be able to integrate some sort of Tang Band or the RS100 or whatever sort of fullranger you might have on hand.
The Cerwin Vegas are a mostly unknown quantity. Don't know what their top end might do if you weren't low passing them. All we have is the supplied T/S which show it should be good on OB. On a flat baffle with a good line of them and a good amp, you'll probably be able to get them politely into the upper 40s. We could possibly make the baffle into a U which could get us a few extra hertz at the bottom. Possibly we could build the bottom of the line to be an H baffle which would get a couple more herts and build a cheap, solid base structure for the line baffle. So say we might optimally get a 40Hz-20kHz OB with line array bass and the bass drivers would only cost $40+ship per side. Once you've got your signal chain set (nice tube or digi amp up top and a solid plate amp on the bottom) these could actually sound very nice, even if the CV drivers are junk (they don't look like junk but you'll never know till you have them in hand) because absolute SQ is hard to make out down below the non equalized bottom end of a small FR unit on a narrow baffle.
The Goldwoods review pretty well there on the PE product page. On guy is reporting response to 32Hz from singles in very large sealed cabinets. These are most likely to sound adequate up to their upper rolloff in case you wanted to try them, say, on a cheap serial crossover up beyond the vocal range (definitely real 2-way stuff, not really for FR forum material, but its OB and I'm thinking in print). One of my more recent revelations is that dust caps have very distinct effects on EQ, and the styles I find least offensive are either A), no dust cap, having been replaced with a phase plug or B) an inverted dust cap. Being one of the few OB appropriate drivers I can find that have inverted dust caps, I'm inclined to believe that they might sound really quite good, and being treated poly cones, they might even run full range with a polite rolloff up top. But used in our active setup here, maybe using our U and/or H baffle strategies, these might possibly dig down into the mid-high 30s.
Anyway, you'll notice that I'm building bass arrays here, not true line arrays. With drivers the size of any of our FRs, even my tiny RS100s, you're going to run into comb filtering pretty early on as the frequency rises. Now, I've not actually built anything that should theoretically create comb filtering, but more knowledgeable parties agree its there, at least showing up as an early rolloff up top, sometimes as a noticeably ragged early rolloff. I have, however, witnessed arrangements taking units with smooth midranges run in multiples and this always tends to result in a muddying of the midrange, so from experience I would recommend not doing it. Line arrays should be limited to bass unless you've got the proper drivers to achieve the right spacing (or more optimally, some long planars or ribbons to at least handle the high frequencies where combing is hardest to avoid).
Oh well, I think that's enough for now. I'll hand off the hot potato.
Kensai |
|
|
| DaveCan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bluto
DaveCan -
Thanks for heads up on Glow Amp - hadn't seen that.
Nobody else with OB ideas?
Bluto |
It would seem like a great buy.. There have been some good reports on this amp, and also a 6moons review I linked earlier here you can check out, seems worth every penny..
Anyhow as the thread title says, ''OB-What do we really all want?''
I want the most incredible detailed mids and highs, at a given price point and from one driver.
The most accurate and detailed bass that I've ever heard.
The ability to be very detailed and jaw dropping at low volumes as well as higher spl's, but I'm not so worried about high spl's as I listen at lower to moderate volumes and want my hearing to stay as healthy as possible into the years ( however many I have)..
Dave
:) |
|
|
| Kensai |
I'm not terribly concerned with detail or accuracy. Not really much I personally can do to infuse those into a loudspeaker. What I'm hoping to do is to take away as many layers as possible between the mechanisms of transmission and reception (the speakers and my ears) as I can without spending much money or working at it too hard.
OB and FR seem to be the key ingredients here as they shed the vast majority of the chaff from our sound. That really just leaves us with the bass and geometry as issues.
OB and FR are bass shy methodologies, period. They've got nothing reinforcing, amplifying or even preventing the bass from canceling itself in free air. We see to have the solution with helper woofers and Martin is helping us out on the theory and math side with his work. We've seen it done commercially (Jamo 909, Emerald CS2, et al). Now I think we're just trying to outdo those efforts on a shoestring budget, but I've got absolutely no doubt since my most recent experiments that OB bass is really not going to be that difficult to attain, at least down to 30Hz or so (I'm not sure how viable infrabass is on OB, though I'm not terribly convinced that it is necessary, or even terribly pleasant to have if given for free, even for HT use; just IMO).
That leaves us mainly with issues of geometry. What configurations of drivers are we going to use? What FR? Which side gets to be FR? Do we run well behaved OB compliant midbass drivers with well behaved rolloffs FR with super tweeters capped in? Do we run small FRs up top with woofers crossed in below? If so, do we cross passive or active? Do we shoot for point source geometry or are line arrays the secret? Do we even care? Just slap our chosen drivers on our chosen baffles in a pleasing arrangement and go to town. Since we're obviously not using single drivers now, do we start having to worry about things like phase and time alignment, and if so, how do we get that right?
So many questions, but all I really want is a big feeling sound that puts me where the music is or sticks me inside the movie without resorting tricks or surround speakers or anything that gets my attention as not sounding good. And I'd like all that for maybe another $200 beyond what I already have in gear and maybe an hour or two more effort. Is that too much to ask ;)
Kensai |
|
|
| DaveCan |
I had an idea today, what would you all think of an OB/IB set up?
I was thinking about building a cab that houses 2 IB drivers and have the OB driver in a baffle on top of the IB cab at a perfect ear height to be determined.
The IB cab would vent through the floor or wall depending on position. It would only work if when the speaker cabs were in the best position, where they will stay for good, and you can vent through the floor or to a wall etc.. The lows would be fabo compared to OB bass I would think.. The best of both worlds?
Dave:) |
|
|
| Kensai |
I'm guessing that IB will have the same sound characteristics as regular sealed enclosures, but much better low end response due to the massive volume of the "enclosure", not to mention the (in most applications, at least) massive baffle surface in comparison to a regular cabinet. I'll admit that I really do like the sound of sealed cabinets, at least in the far field (in the nearfield, I can't really tolerate, let alone really listen to anything other than OB).
My living room rig is a pair of sealed units mounted into an enormous oak entertainment center that doubles as a massive baffle and as a secondary resonator (they sit on the bottom panel which is a single piece of plywood, elevated almost 2 inches from the floor by three edges, leaving the rear edge open to the 4-5inches of empty space between it and the wall). Bass is clear and sharp down to about 35Hz on just one pair of 8" drivers. Now, if I could just be running those as "subs" (build some custom cabinets to fill the space completely and use some 8"-10" subwoofers rather than the higher Fs woofers that are in there now), and then get smaller FR units up to ear height in OB, I could pretty easily get true 20-20k response from just 2 drivers per side while really upping the SQ level due to factors such as getting a higher quality driver for the FR and getting it to the appropriate height and generating more of a natural soundstage in OB.
Crossed low enough, you wouldn't notice that your bass isn't exactly in line with the rest of the range, physically speaking, and I've seen lots of examples of this being done and the owners being really happy. One of the coolest was stereo IB bass arrays consisting of 4x15" IB speced drivers firing into a garage from an HT room, each line placed just outside the area of the HT gear on the front wall. They'd measured that the arrays were flat to 16Hz, and calculated that they were getting like 110-115dB from 1 watt, so they could power the arrays with whatever they wanted, and at normal listening levels, there was no such thing as audible distortion. With that arrangement, they were able to not only experiment with swapping amplification, but they could us any speakers they wanted, placed in space however they chose and get decent integration with minimal effort. I bet some nice freestanding, line source, OB units (likely planar and or ribbon since FR dynamic driver lines are really kinda problematic) would be outstanding in that environment. Next best would be some high quality, smaller FR unit that could extend low enough on a small baffle to integrate well with the bass arrays. That way, the sound stage thrown by the FR would be as large as possible, and the baffle and/or stand could be made in such a way as to present the smallest possible profile to keep from interacting poorly with the bass arrays' wave launch.
Now I'm just jabbering.
Kensai |
|
|
| Nelson Pass |
I find IB bass somewhat less satisfying than OB, possibly because
of the different way it interacts with the room.
It's not that difficult to achieve OB bottom end with some simple
equalization, since the rolloff is only 6 dB/oct below the frequency
determined by the baffle size. A decently large woofer with a low
Fs will make it down to 30 Hz or so with only modest EQ and power
requirements. |
|
|
| Kensai |
Nelson,
Good to know I won't be missing out on anything since I have no practical way to go IB. I really love how involving OB bass is. So the question is, would we be better off trying to get our OB bass more toward a point source or more toward a line source?
Kensai |
|
|
| tinitus |
| My future "corner-OB" subs with 2 x 3 AE IB15 ... driven by Reckhorn subamps |
|
|
| LineArray |
Hi tinitus,
i am not sure if this will work the way you might desire ...
Cheers |
|
|
| tinitus |
Line Array, I suppose you mean the "horn loaded" asymmetric front/back
Dont know, but to me it doesnt seem worse than an H-frame |
|
|
| DaveCan |
Nelson and Kensai, I'm for whatever works best, and if keeping all OB gets the job done then thats where I'm at too.. I just thought IB may be a neat way to go, and kind of different as a IB/OB cab/baffle type of thing.. I have no experience with either methods and really appreciate all you guys that ''get er done'' and share your wisdom:cool:
I'm interested in what you eventually end up with as a "full meal deal" set up with the Feastrex drivers you have.. I'm looking to the D5nf driver when funds allow, and I'm considering going OB with them after maybe using the recommended enclosure first, so as to have a reference point etc..
Dave:) |
|
|
| LineArray |
| quote: | Originally posted by tinitus
Line Array, I suppose you mean the "horn loaded" asymmetric front/back
Dont know, but to me it doesnt seem worse than an H-frame |
Just to think about :
- The area behind the cones seems to be very much
smaller than the cone area of the three drivers.
This will cause an accelleration of the air in the
pipe behind the driver which in turn introduces a huge
mass load to the drivers, thereby lowering fs and increase Qts.
The mass load will tend to decrease efficiency.
- A dipole source is worst to be located in a corner.
Room excitation by a pressure gradient transducer is difficult
- if not impossible - from there.
I feel not able to predict whether the thing can work, but i feel
it will suffer from some drawbacks.
Cheers |
|
|
| tinitus |
| OK, I see your point ... I am actually rethinking the whole thing ... I may skip this "monster sub thing" and work on a single more integrated 15" (AE OB15 ?) with higher passive xo point ... its more like my kind of thing ... yeah, Im a hopeless dreamer :clown: |
|
|
| Bluto |
marec -
Thanks for heads up on 'Sure'. Price seemed too good to be true.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
Davecan -
Interesting statement regards the 10" Hawthorne perhaps sounding more accurate than 15" ........ . I may yet end up with those as my Vintage alnico dreams seem too expensive til some rainy day. I personally still don't see a better deal than the Hawthornes in that price range and thats what I was out to beat.
IB Bass ...... My initial plan had me there as well and past posts show A.E. was where I'd been heading. Best bargain out there in my opinion as well for price. Of late I've read too many posts regards IB that bother me concerning both vibration picked up from walls as well as actual structural damage to building due to subsonic vibration. A guy over at P.E. actually poured concrete between studs about 6" deep to stop such and still recommended to others to use plywood across an entire 4' section for baffles as he still is picking up vibration that he's hearing through his drivers as wall is simply not stiff enough with baffle being only width of stud. Another guy is finding his footings for his foundation are actually crumbling. All this has me wondering what IB using stud mounting will do to your roofing system.
Kensai - You and I are uncanningly close in design ideas. I simply draw on quad paper or would send you my latest iteration. Your system idea sounds more 'closed' regards entertainment center whereas mine is more open. We are planning narrow bookshelves near outside walls with open shelving for components on either side of tube about 45" and up with FR/OB and OB bass augmentation below. The OB Line array would be outside of bookcases and at walls farthest point. I've been thinking some Apex Jr. 8" subs in small Onken type enclosures sitting at bottom shelf of bookcases might work just fine for HT Sub duties. So .... from outside in we'd have an OB line array, bookcase with Onken Subs on bottom, open shelving for components with OB/FR and OB bass augmentation below shelving and then TV. All we have is 146" to work with so driver choice is critical. Some guys are using minimal baffles for OB ... yes, much argument, and hanging them free air with good results. There are some good threads regards that concept and science behind it at Hawthornes site but it was not the 1st time idea has been tried. I'm sure not optimum but combo of other drivers can make up for weaknesses. If the right OB bass driver was used I'm not even convinced you'd need independent Subs if you'd be willing to lose those 20hz HT signals. Vive - versa is another thought in that XOed properly a good Sub could handle both HT bass needs as well as low end of music if OB/FR gets down 300 or so without distortion.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
tinitus -
Don't know your room size but only 2 of A.E.'s 15" IB Subs will make a whole lot more bass than you think.
Bluto |
|
|
| tinitus |
:happy1: Yes please, get me back on track :clown:
btw ... my reason fore using more drivers than "just" 2 is because bsides my pure OB project I have yet another 2way project with 98db sensitivity |
|
|
| Kensai |
Got my Dayton APA150 amp last night and was able to play with it enough to see how the whole active cross/biamp thing was going to go.
I'm using the Dayton RS100S-8 as my fullranger and the 8" woofers from a pair of Yamaha NS-6940s as my helpers. I estimate from extended listening and tinkering that these Yamaha units have a Qts somewhere in the .7 to 1.0 range and an Fs around 45.
My baffles are a multipart, jury rigged affair. I've got a pair of bamboo cutting boards that had until recently held my B20s serving baffle duty for the Yamahas. Those are hinge mounted to my desk about ear height. The RS100s are mounted in quick and dirty cardboard baffles with folded back wings meant to allow them to stand up more than to act as U-baffles. These are sitting on top of the carcasses of my titanic old Sansui boxes, with one wing pressed against the edge of the bamboo baffles, though the driver height is a few inches lower.
First, let me say, the continuously variable low pass crossover controlled by the knob on the back of the APA150 is just about the most wickedly cool bit of instantly gratuitous audio kit I've ever worked with. Just put on a very familiar track with lots of low bass, then just turned the knob up from 50Hz till it got decidedly bloated in the upper bass then back down till it just started to lean out too much then a touch back up and voila . . . perfect balance between the two drivers using just that knob and maybe 20 seconds of time. The setting I ended up with was just about 70Hz on the nose, though only 50, 100 and 150 are marked, so I'm just guessing based on assuming the scale is linear.
Second, I'll say that this setup delivered exactly as I had hoped, unreservedly.
I'm getting the fantastic clarity and soundfield of the RS100 (yeah, even after a having them for awhile now, they still sound fresh and involving), and I'm now getting deeper and better controlled bass from the Yamaha 8s than I had been able to before, regardless of EQ. And the kicker is, I'm getting that with 0 EQ. Nothing between source and amp, not even digitally other than the active lowpass on the 8s
That being said, I couldn't leave well enough alone and played with the EQ a bit. Turns out that the Yamaha units could really only handle being pushed a touch more. A +6dB curve starting at 50Hz is pretty stable except for a few exceptionally bassy tracks or an SFX DVD where it would push them to distortion. Not terrible or scary or anything, but unpleasant. EQ would still be an option for drivers that needed some help up top or some problems inbetween, but for what I'm running, no EQ is best, and upsampled to 176.4kHz for music (where the Emu 0404 + Patchmix won't allow any EQ) is even better.
A side note . . . the APA150 is intended for use as a fullrange stereo amp as well as monoblock and/or subwoofer functionality, and it touts a beefy power supply, high quality components and construction, and pretty much universally high review marks. It does sound better than my old, not to mention bottom of the line for its generation Pioneer receiver in the living room. It was almost as good as my Panasonic XR57 receiver and its digital amps, losing out mainly because it has a different character to the sound, and I, personally, had a preference. It is, however immediately and blatantly obvious that its sound quality pales compared to the 2nd Gen SI T-amp. Just another moment supporting the use of digital amps, especially Tripath based ones, for high sound quality. Now I'm interested in hearing some higher quality and/or upgraded examples, and possibly some of the more interesting if not quite as affordable tube amps.
Kensai |
|
|
| Bluto |
tinutis -
Both sets of speaks I speak of using in OB as fronts have SPL in the top 90 to over 100 region as well.
As you will amplify your subs from a separate source anyway matching sensitivity is of little concern.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
Kensai -
This is good news, I had looked at that Amp awhile back but I'm not sure I'm totally understanding.
I also see you are using a soundcard ( had to Google it) which is a desire I had and mentioned in another thread.
Now I really have questions!
You say 'nothing but lowpass on the 8"s'. Are you referring to lowpass from amp or do you still have some network hooked up to the 8's?
The soundcard itself ...... I know nothing of these as I earlier stated and hoped others would join in as from little I'm told these newer ones can act as entire preamp section for gainclones as well having EQ capabilities. I'd like to own DB2496 for active XO needs but we're talking money again here. I'd also like to play with podcasting as a hobby a bit. Perhaps not as sophisticated as DB2496 but do you see this as meeting the needs? Some of these cards do 7.1 and wondering if EQ has capabilities for each channel? My ignorance regards Computers makes me look a genius regards Audio so that tells you how dumb I am. I would like to put all of my music in a computer library and use a service beyond the free ones to run it all from and I own 2 computers just sitting here that could be upgraded. Why Bluray CD/DVD burners are cheaper for Computers than stand alone units is beyond me. All this and podcast desires make me think the way to go. Can you send me to where I can get a quick laymans understanding to this?
I'd prefer no electronics to drivers themselves with exception to maybe a cap where I think I might want tweets.
Am I understanding you correctly that you believe Gen11 Sonic Amp sounds better than the Dayton? Thats tough to believe but maybe not so when you consider power capabilities.
Your report is good news.
Right now and best luck I've had 'stringing' stuff together is the 10" Marconi FR's I picked up combined with some Pio mids that handle 500-6000 and a pair of the Onkyo buyout tweets.
You're good but I remain the OSB King. Tired of that though, also went through 12 - 4' x 8' sheets in the last year and want to get my mind straight here and build some serious baffles.
Bluto |
|
|
| Kensai |
Bluto,
"nothing but the lowpass on the 8s" means the adjustable lowpass on the APA150. That is the only filter in the analog domain in my signal chain. And now, since I don't need any EQ (just playing through some music last night, I found batch of dance tracks hidden away in my library that had me thinking about level adjusting the APA150, though the apparently enhanced bass of the current settings is very pleasant for the vast majority of my library.
I'm using the Emu 0404 as my preamp. The basic concern with doing this is that the Windows kmixer that most everything passes through, resamples everything to 48kHz at some point (music is generally 44.1kHz) and does a really poor job of it. Also, the kmixer handles the general software volume control, and the Windows method of volume control involves chopping bits off the end of your bitstream, thus removing detail.
The way around is a sound card that supports ASIO drivers and playback software that has an ASIO out path. I use an old 2.9x version of Winamp and a more current version of the out_asio.dll for it, along with a couple of other choice plugins to play back my harddrive based library. The out_asio.dll is what handles my upsampling when I use it, and if you're going to resample at all, its best to do it in whole number multiples as that keeps the math exact, not to mention much less processor intensive. Anyway, when using the ASIO path, the kmixer doesn't touch the bit stream, so using the software volume control actually just changes the level in the drivers, which instead of altering the bitstream, changes the analog output level of the DAC section of the card.
As for the gross, obvious sound quality difference between the SI T-Amp and the Dayton APA150, well, I can't really address your disbelief. It seems to just be the difference between topologies. Even a really good sand amp still sounds like a sand amp. The Class D stuff is just by its base nature capable of being something different, better. The Tripath based ones, Class T if you will, is so far my favorite representation of Class D kit, and given the proliferation of Tripath based, modded and/or high end units seems to show a similarity of opinion amongst those able to design/build their own. It just really sound fantastic. I'm sure you can do better, but not for the $50 I gave for the SI. I mean I only gave $150 for my XR57, and it was a great deal, but even letting it biamp the mains out giving it insane amounts of headroom, it just sounds different in a way that's inherently less good than the T-amp but also inherently better than the similarly priced, 2 channel only APA150.
Anyway, I'm much, much more satisfied with my solution now. Next up is finding a more permanent, nicer baffling method.
Kensai |
|
|
| DaveCan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bluto
Davecan -
Interesting statement regards the 10" Hawthorne perhaps sounding more accurate than 15" ...
Bluto |
IMO I can't really see listening to a 15'' driver with a tweeter attached to it, and getting a captivating midrange in the like of the smaller Fostex and the Lowthers, AER and Feastrex etc.
I'd bet the 10'' sounds better overall than their 15''.. I know many really enjoy those big drivers and thats totally cool, but ain't my thang.
Also it would seem many like using their 15'' drivers on small little baffles with the SI's just a few inches up off the floor and tilted back towards the listening position stage monitor style, go figure.. It would be neat if Hawthorne would do a nice 8'' driver and work it into a killer OB system:cool:, but make sure to tell people to not mount them at floor level:xeye: Here's my meaning
Dave:)  |
|
|
| Bluto |
Kensai -
Thank you so much.
Your explanation on what's happening with your soundcard is easiest I've seen to date to understand. I'm surprised that I actually understand most of what you say and think I can pick it up from there.
Not so much doubt regards the Tamp as surprise and that for same reason you mention by comparison to Panny. I would have thought headroom would automatically have it sounding better. No replacement for superior circuitry.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bluto |
Davecan -
I see Hawthorne is considering a 'high end' 10" but I don't like where it's heading at present.
Started there a year ago, came back and then got on this 'vintage' thing.
I'm happy you made statement, I personally see the 10" as better FR prospect as well regards quality of sound. Seems not a popular choice at site and I wonder reasoning behind such.
Bluto |
|
|
| Bob Brines |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kensai
....The basic concern with doing this is that the Windows kmixer that most everything passes through, resamples everything to 48kHz at some point (music is generally 44.1kHz) and does a really poor job of it. Also, the kmixer handles the general software volume control, and the Windows method of volume control involves chopping bits off the end of your bitstream, thus removing detail.
Kensai |
Perhaps you should look at the PC Audio forum at AA. As with most AA forums, it is 90% BS, but you will be able to read the signal through the noise. My take is:
The main objection to Vista vs XP is "I hate Bill Gates". The Vista audio package is simply better than that in XP. Audio was an afterthought in XP while "media" was one of the driving forces for Vista.
You can get around the XP kmixer with either an ASIO or kernel streaming package. KS is really iffy in XP. You will know you have bypassed the kmixer if the Windows volume control has no effect on the output. In Vista ASIO is unnecessary. Either KS of Direct Sound will work about equally well. DS is (I think) going to up sample to 48K, but does a pretty good job of it. The Windows volume control is bypassed with KS, but operates with DS. I use a USB DAC that has no driver. Vista automatically outputs to the USB through KS.
Most DAC require 48k for the audio conversion. You can either feed the DAC 44.1k and have the DAC up sample or you can up sample in your player. If you up sample in the player, DS will not do anything.
I am not an expert on the inner workings of Windows. I accept Vista for what it is and I think the results are pretty good. My configuration is Foobar2000 > KS > USB > DAC > T-amp. YMMV
Bob |
|
|
| Kensai |
I used to spend alot of time over at headfi.org. My office had been the third bedroom, so I spent most of my "desk time" listening over my Grados so that everyone else could sleep. They had a pretty heavy focus on using computer as source. This started when I was still running 98SE, and only some folks were really XP savvy. We'd determined through certain relatively arduous means that as long as you were using ASIO or were able to get KS working properly (which in 98SE and in my early XP efforts never seemed to happen), you could get bit perfect output with most equipment, or at least most equipment that was worth listening to. No need for external, analog volume control or preamp or amp or whatever (though often those things could help if of suitably high performance).
If you dig through the specs, you'll find that most DACs and CODECs have native 44.1 settings, and generally, if you work around the kmixer, you'll get your 44.1 tracks laid down bit perfect that way. There's no hardware that I know of that actually requires 48 in, though all of it has to have native 48 setting for some windows sounds and, more importantly, DVD playback. Actually, I don't know of any hardware that does resampling in hardware, and only one time have I seen drivers that do it (Via after they'd bought Envy and started making new Envy chips and really nice CODECs for low cost). Generally the upsampling happens at the player level and if you interact with the drivers at all, its just to change its mode (like my Emu 0404; I have sessions built for different sample rates, different speakers/amp combos, etc.) As it stands, most hardware, even the really cheap stuff these days (which, aiming for the Intel HD Audio standard specs, is leagues beyond the cheap chips of just a year or two ago, thankfully) will have a good double handful of native sample rate settings, in addition to the ability to handle all of the necessary sample sizes.
I've not really played with Vista at all. Definitely not enough to have even started exploring these topics, but I find it interesting that you say that it does USB Audio over KS by default. Actually I'm almost kind of incredulous that M$ would do something so simple, elegant and good for their users like that, no matter how small of a niche function it is. Go M$, GO!
I have played with some USB DACs, though, and a huge assortment of crappy onboard sound chips, and I've found every USB DAC I've played with and well over half of the onboard chips to have been useable with something called ASIO4All. Its a generic driver layer that will let you go from an ASIO out from your player software to a piece of audio out kit that doesn't natively support ASIO. This is the solution I always came back to when KS would fail me. It gives you a bit of interface that, when in advanced mode, gives you a ton of settings to increase performance and/or hardware compatibility. Its free, and it works with alot of stuff, even some really old stuff (its got stuff in it that should make it work with say, old SB16 cards, though why you would want to is beyond me), though generally the only reason I ever messed with that sort of thing is because I'm a tweaker by nature. Generally just works straight out of the box.
Another puzzle piece I'd like to throw out there, at least for MP3 playback (yeah, I know, not audiophile, but I have alot of tracks that either only exist as MP3s, remixes, indie tunes and such, or which I only really have the reasonable possibility of possessing as a DLed MP3, like stuff from foreign albums, most of which I would never have known existed if I hadn't stumbled across them online). The in_MAD.dll plugin for Winamp (though winamp plugs can be used for foobar, too, right?), replaces the usual in_mp3.dll and helps you extract the maximal quality from your MP3 files. It allows you to increase sample size up to 32-bit which has worked just fine with every bit of hardware I've ever tried it with, and it really helps out in, say, a work situation where I just want an acceptable, quick and dirty setup to listen to the occasional track as when you use the kmixer and you change the volume in software, it will cut the null bits padded to the end of the 16-bit samples first, keeping detail loss from ever becoming a factor. Again, not audiophile, but makes the best out of the situation.
Okay, I think I've lost it again. Enjoy.
Kensai |
|
|
| Bob Brines |
OK, I stand corrected on the up sampling at the DAC. As I said, I'm not an expert, just reporting what I have picked up by trial and error.
My experience with MP3:
I used to listen to KLRE out of Little Rock on FM. 24 hour classical with the mix heavily weighted to the 18th and 19th centuries. And they played whole works, not experts. The KLRE stream is 24kb/22kHz mono. Absolutely unlistenable even on laptop speakers. I now spend a lot of time an Minnesota Public Radio which is 128Kb/44.1kHz. OK for background music, and they will play whole works outside of rush hour. I'll also listen to some of the AVRO Klassiek channels which are 256kb. Not bad for even serious listening. There are some jazz channels streaming at 320kb, and these are very good.
Bottom line: for my 65 year old ears, Anything 320 and over is going to take A/B comparison to hear the differences. 256 is good, but the problems at the top end are obvious. 128 is only good for background music. Anything under 128 is going to sound bad and you have to really want to hear a particular track to stand it.
Again, YMMV.
Bob |
|
|
| rjbond3rd |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bob Brines
for my 65 year old ears... |
I would have thought 50. What's your secret?! |
|
|
| Kensai |
When I got started using PC as a source, I ripped all my CDs to MP3 using the LAME codec. I hadn't really been able to tell the difference, and I'd thought that 128 was just fine, but just to be on the safe side, I encoded them in 320, though in VBR so the average bit rates were in the 220s generally. That sounded great back when I was using a Sound Blaster Live, cheap multimedia speakers and low end Koss and Sony headphones. Then I for some reason added audiophile to my list of bad habits and purchased an M-Audio Revolution and swapped out my other kit with Monsoons and Grados.
Its been all down hill ever since. Its gotten to the point where not only can I tell the difference between the uncompressed track and the max quality MP3 from across the house, I've been able to tell the difference between a 196 track and a 128 version of the exact same cut (I've got like 8000 tracks in my library on random, and lets just say that my library management has been a bit hit or miss so far). So, if anyone who's reading this post hasn't officially become an audiophile, please, for the love of whichever deities or cosmic forces you believe in, please turn back now. It'll save you no end of trouble.
So, back to OBs. I've mentioned before that I've got these giant old Sansuis. They had basically been serving as side tables next to my desk. I've got the grills off, the backs off, all the stuffing removed (nasty old natural stuff was just gross), and the 6 other drivers (yes, 2 of everything in a 4 way speaker) removed, leaving the 15"ers in the bottom. I'd tried using them in OB like that a few times previously but not really gotten any useful response out of them. Now with the new active setup for the woofers, I hooked them back up and they did fill in the bottom, going deeper and much louder than the Yamaha 8"ers (to be expected given the size difference and the fact that the Sansuis had been rated at 102dB sensitive), but they sounded really confused. So I flipped the cabs over so the woofers would be at the top, alot closer to the little baffles for the RS100s I have sitting on top, and this sounds much better, more coherent. They were really bloated in the upper bass using the settings I had for the Yamahas, and I ended up turning the crossover all the way down to 50Hz and volume, which had been set for full (though I was thinking it needed to come down a bit for the Yamahas), came to rest at about 9:30, so I had to really back off the power for these.
Now these aren't exactly OB. More technically, they'd be about 20" deep U-baffles, which only have 3"-4" clearance to the wall and a weird array of venting in the front below the woofer. I'm sure this colors things quite a bit, but I'm still getting the same impression from these woofers as I had when the Sansuis were whole . . . they sound dark and cloudy and really unmusical. On the upside, this is showing me that using the active setup for the woofer section should allow me to use drivers that don't have particularly high Qts and still get the bass I want with proper setup. I've been thinking to use a larger Reference Series driver for that duty, though that would involve more budget, and I just gave at the office for the new amp, so it'll have to wait for a bit.
This, is getting good.
Kensai |
|
|
| Bluto |
Kensai and Bob -
Really good stuff here regards PC and Soundcards . I searched here and not much I could find on subject. I don't want to get way off OB here in this thread so don't want to ask a whole bunch more questions regards subject. We have 4 computers here, 2 in use and 2 just sitting. The best is one I commissioned build on for my Wife so can't touch that. #2 is older Dell Dimension L800r which was O.K. in it's day but cheap integrated soundcard and I don't believe it's other attributes would lend to better soundcards of today. I would like to play with this idea on a low buck level with this system and could likely find a fairly inexpensive compatable S.C. that would give me a taste though I 'm aware SQ would not be of quality you guys are using. Can either of you recommend a forum I could further my education on this? Computer sites I've visited spend little time on Audio applications beyond gaming.
Kensai ....Back to those Sansui's. I don't know which series you are using, Sansui made a whole bunch of big 3-5 ways way back then. The research I did on mine showed SPL of near 98 with QTS near .7. Alot of guys on various forums still rave on them while others claim junk. I think post 76 quality went down based on all I've read. I'm still going to sell mine whole as they're in excellent condition but can't help but wonder if you wouldn't get better results with yours if you simply tried a flat baffle vs. using them in the box ? I'm thinking you're getting all kinds of 'interference' as currently set-up. Likely no Eminence but surely as good as Goldwood big woofs which many guys have been happy with for OB bass.
Bluto |
|
|
| Vix |
Kensai,
You should cut some test baffles, as the sound of the unobstructed, simple baffle is pretty different than one coming out of the U shaped baffles. Then, biamp and use an active crossover set somewhere between 60-120 Hz 2nd order (you'll have to try different points and see what works best in your case). Fullranger should be high passed as well. You might be surprised... :cool: |
|
|
| Kensai |
Right. Like I've got time enough to do more than flip a couple of boxes upside down ;-p I realize that they're terribly colored the way they are not, but I'm in quick experiment mode since I'm not able to do any better at present. Thing is, even the direct radiation from the front sounds kinda like listening to flapping cardboard, which, given the weight of the paper cones. They also most definitely have a relatively low Qts. Initial testing with the box opened showed no more bass response than say unequalized B20s, and they responded much more poorly to EQ than anything else I had on OB. So, mostly, the reason I've done this is checking to see if I can use my new active setup to get reasonable OB performance out of drivers whose Qts isn't high enough for traditional OB use. I'd like to use a pair of 8" Dayton Reference Series drivers for bass to match the RS100s, so I had to know what could be done. I don't think high passing the RS100s is going to be feasible, mainly because I seem to be able to hear crossovers affecting the sensitive range. The active lowpass on my amp seems to be just fine, as are the single cap passes I've had for integrating tweeters with larger fullrangers, but that's because they're both out of the range where I can make out such subtleties. The RS100s are very well behaved with low bass of a nonEQed signal through the T-amp. No apparent extra cone movement or distortion. I'm sure this too is not perfect, either, but I'm sure its better in terms of absolute SQ than the huge cap it would take to high pass them properly, even if using high quality bypass caps, too. The other thing I'm sure of, too, is that I can't afford all the passive crossover components ;-p
Kensai |
|
|
| Bluto |
..... 'relatively low QTS'. Hmmm. Must be a big difference amongst woofers Sansui used in various models or parameters I found were incorrect.
Definitely want to avoid passive XO if possible.
Still looking like Goldwood woofs best low buck high QTS drivers available for bass needs.
No computer soundcard forum advice? Anybody?
Bluto |
|
|
| wakibaki |
I'd like one of these:-E-mu 1616M
If you're interested in soundcards there's a lot of good sense here:-tweakheadz.com
w |
|
|
| Kensai |
Bluto,
Try www.head-fi.org. I know, its all headphones, but that's really where I cut my chops on pc sound. You can also check the HTPC board on www.avsforum.com. That's where I really started, but ended up having to spread out to get more rigorous learning.
As for the Sansui woofers, surely they could have used several very different models. These are some huge cabinets but they were tuned with a 4" port, maybe 10"-12" long, so the educated guess is that their Qts is in the .3-.4 range or there abouts.
Kensai |
|
|
| Bluto |
Wakabaki , Kensai -
Thanks for forum info .... I'll check them out.
Kensai - I've never taken a good look at my Sansui's but seriously have began to doubt numbers I found. Why a high QTS driver in a big box and even more so considering they are 4 way?
Found another possible driver for an OB line array yesterday ..... Fostex f83e ?? 3.5" . Not cheap and would need a bass unit but would make a nice thin array.
Bluto |
|
|
| REC1 |
A short focus array with the focus point around 36" would emulate a single driver. It would require an added HF horn or such.
ron |
|
|
| Scottmoose |
I'd probably go with the FE87E -factory specs (for what they're worth, which isn't much) suggest a Qt of 0.92 as opposed to 0.79 for the FE83E. Which should be useful in keeping the necessary LF XO point as low as possible for a very narrow OB.
If (if) they're used in a focused array, neither of the Fostex units should need HF support (either Eq or added tweeters). If they're in a straight line though, they will. |
|
|
| REC1 |
I dont know Scott, it kinda depends on the radius of the element and driver location. Looking at the beam spread when you near focus at a high frequency there is a chance you will lose some high frequency energy. This really dosent apply if the focus point is 10 ' away , but may only apply when its a near focus.
ron
The point , in my case, dosent apply as i cant hear above 10 Khz anyway. |
|
|
| Scottmoose |
| Good point Ron. I tend to automatically think relatively long focal lengths / points, forgetting about possible shorter distances, which as you say will likely be problematic. :o Good job you pointed that out. :) |
|
|
|
