Not so sure. My wife like my 6' 8" BIBs, smack in the middle of the living room (well, on one side...)
Is she trying to tell me something?
Just got a reply to my mail to SEAS. They said that the drivers that Jonasz mentioned where good stuff. They also said that it was worth to have a look at D1001-04 L26ROY and E0040-06 T29CF002, the alter beeing a better and more expensive tweeter. Anyone got any opinions on those?
They where also very nice and send me some good models of their speakers!
Here is how stuff looks now!
They where also very nice and send me some good models of their speakers!
Here is how stuff looks now!
Attachments
Last edited:
LOL - what else did you expect than them praising their products ?
Top of their tweeter line still seems to be :
THE ART OF SOUND PERFECTION BY SEAS - E0011-06 T25CF002
I've used it and ts not bad - but certainly not a must.
You also should consider a rear firing tweeter - does not necessarily have to be the same (expensive one).
Michael
Last edited:
I'm sure during your research you discovered that the Jamo R907 and R909 use versions of the Peerless SLS series drivers for the woofers.
I really like the baffle design a lot. Given its similarities to the Jamo configuration though, I would maybe consider something different.
I personally have thought a lot about trying 4 - 10" (or 12") drivers and an 8" fullrange in a W FR WWW configuration.
Edit:
If SEAS is going to help sponsor this than I guess you can just disregard the previous suggestion. Good for them and for you.
I really like the baffle design a lot. Given its similarities to the Jamo configuration though, I would maybe consider something different.
I personally have thought a lot about trying 4 - 10" (or 12") drivers and an 8" fullrange in a W FR WWW configuration.
Edit:
If SEAS is going to help sponsor this than I guess you can just disregard the previous suggestion. Good for them and for you.
Last edited:
Seriously - how about using a B&G RD-75 (or RD-48) ribbon without any baffle, with a nice looking speaker cloth covering it up? It has response down to 150 Hz, and will not require a complicated crossover. Very narrow speakers are easier to accept, thats my experience. The RD-75 is just 120 mm wide.
Baffle diameter issues
Intended to comment on the baffle width issue earlier. Panomaniac makes a good point. It is well documented that as the baffle narrows, the effective low freqency cut off rises and low end bass radiating efficiency diminish. S. Linkwitz describes the physics in great detail at his site Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design.
My guess is that the baffle prototype - example is around 15" wide and would yield an F equal of around 180 Hz and a -6 db point of around 90 Hz assuming no crossover correction. Some sort of sub would definitely be required. As Pano points out, wings can help, lowering the potential F equal to around 110 - 120 Hz or so before we get into distructive cavity resonance issues.
Jamo gets around this with a baffle width that is deceptively wide and trades woofer efficiency away to achieve bass extension. With a pair of 15" drivers on approximately 20" of baffle width, you can make it work. Part illusion, part driver-crossover manipulation.
Intended to comment on the baffle width issue earlier. Panomaniac makes a good point. It is well documented that as the baffle narrows, the effective low freqency cut off rises and low end bass radiating efficiency diminish. S. Linkwitz describes the physics in great detail at his site Linkwitz Lab - Loudspeaker Design.
My guess is that the baffle prototype - example is around 15" wide and would yield an F equal of around 180 Hz and a -6 db point of around 90 Hz assuming no crossover correction. Some sort of sub would definitely be required. As Pano points out, wings can help, lowering the potential F equal to around 110 - 120 Hz or so before we get into distructive cavity resonance issues.
Jamo gets around this with a baffle width that is deceptively wide and trades woofer efficiency away to achieve bass extension. With a pair of 15" drivers on approximately 20" of baffle width, you can make it work. Part illusion, part driver-crossover manipulation.
Talking to Truels, the guy wo was refered to in a previous post, he was not to sure about how the seas would perform in an open baffle.
Tho, im intersted in this ribbon thing. Is it a dipol, meaning i need/should to have an opening in the "back" aswell?
Yeah ofcourseactually, you need to have an opening in the "back". if you build dipole.
i think i might have confused myself
Agree - no serious bass ever will happen with such a "sled design".
On the other hand - I've found out that I easily could live - and have lots of fun - with even a single nude 12" Pro speaker (at least most of the time).
OB is different for me in this respect.
So it might do for him "as is" ?
Alternatively - as he is interior designer - adding a "furniture-sub" may always be an option...
Michael
Last edited:
The Seas tweeter works in OB like a charm (about the mid's and low mid's you should have a look to Stig Erik's thread).
Regarding back firing tweeter you should know that this is a matter of taste (to some degree) - some think its not mandatory, some need a lot of time to come to the point that they *finally find* it mandatory, some never ever considered without.
IMO for what you are looking for you do not need a "true" dipole tweeter - meaning - a simple backfiring tweeter to "slightly illuminate" the front wall will do.
RD-75 "tweeter" would be a pretty different animal though...
Michael
I think its good that there is something constructive coming out here. Lots of suggestions for everyone! i Like it
Im reading alot from the links you have been providing, and it starts to dawn for em that speaker design is a lot harder than just putting drivers on a sheet of wood
Doing this would make it possible to go for a thiner more elegant shape, and also keep the "speaker" look.
Everything is very "open" right now, and i feel that it can go anywhere i want it to, depending on where the driver setup and sound needs it to go.
Nothing is set in stone at this point
Also, i should maybe have been more clear on it before but the speakers are meant to be for a male customers. Women don't go and buy this things, they buy pocket speakers for their iPod or a Tivoli radio. The thing im trying to achieve is :
1) a speaker that is good looking, different, but stil recognized as a speaker
2) something you can buy without having to sweet talk your wife for months.
Im reading alot from the links you have been providing, and it starts to dawn for em that speaker design is a lot harder than just putting drivers on a sheet of wood
Okay, so if we have that settled, i can just drop the woofers and go with double midtones instead, leaving the lower range to a dedicated sub?
Doing this would make it possible to go for a thiner more elegant shape, and also keep the "speaker" look.
Everything is very "open" right now, and i feel that it can go anywhere i want it to, depending on where the driver setup and sound needs it to go.
Nothing is set in stone at this point
Also, i should maybe have been more clear on it before but the speakers are meant to be for a male customers. Women don't go and buy this things, they buy pocket speakers for their iPod or a Tivoli radio. The thing im trying to achieve is :
1) a speaker that is good looking, different, but stil recognized as a speaker
2) something you can buy without having to sweet talk your wife for months.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.