Jim: forum member Colin would be your go-to guy with recommendations for custom designs / installation of Jordan drivers.
In addition to several DIY designs published on their site, he might have some further insight / recommendations.
http://www.ejjordan.co.uk/products/diy-plans/
FWIW, with my few forays into small home surround systems, the various surround channels - now possibly numbering twice as many as the front row- is one area where you could save quite some $, if so inclined.
I haven't heard the most recent Jordans, but have done the FX120 (very nice, but wouldn't be my first choice for this application either), and virtually every driver that Mr Fenlon has designed.
In addition to several DIY designs published on their site, he might have some further insight / recommendations.
http://www.ejjordan.co.uk/products/diy-plans/
FWIW, with my few forays into small home surround systems, the various surround channels - now possibly numbering twice as many as the front row- is one area where you could save quite some $, if so inclined.
I haven't heard the most recent Jordans, but have done the FX120 (very nice, but wouldn't be my first choice for this application either), and virtually every driver that Mr Fenlon has designed.
Last edited:
Is this your first built? How loud do you listen? Do you plan on using a sub or multiple subs? How far from the speakers is the main listening position? Do you want to get into measuring and dialing in the system yourself or will you use one of the automated systems like Audyssey?
All nice drivers (i haven't heard the new Jordan, but it is highly regarded, analogous to the Alpair 10.3 if you wanted to do a Ted Jordan vrs Apprentise shoot-out)
The Pluvia Seven (P7) can work OK sealed, but can be taken lower in a "vented" box. It seems to be close to a direct dropin for the EL70 opening up a wide range of exisiting designs.
As Chris points out, the P7 would make a good candidate for less expensive surrounds if you are using Eikona or A7.3 as the front row.
dave
I like them as office speakers - rarely get above 70dB though out of respect for co-workers. It's running mono actually and powered by a TDA7297 "lunch money amp" that has been converted to make stereo to mono.
Here are some details of the room and system
The room size is 15 feet wide by 14.5 long.
TV goes on the wall that is 15 feet. Couch will be on the opposing wall. So the sitting area will be approximately 12-13 feet from the TV.
Other than news and an occasional sporting event, don't watch all that much TV. About twice per week, almost always in the evenings, we watch a movie. The type of movies range from dramas to action movies. We listen to movies louder than normal TV watching, but by no means as loud as in a typically movie theater. For this reason, I'm not too worried about meeting THX specs, whatever that happens to mean.
For equipment, I have a DIY 5-channel LM3886 amp, which sounds awesome.
Don't have a pre/pro yet. There is a decent chance I just use an Oppo 105 or pick something up used on Audiogon or elsewhere.
Have not investigated subs at this point. Just assumed I would place one in a corner of the room. This one looks interesting, but am far making any decisions.
Rythmik L12 - sealed HT sub
Dave, thanks for the tip regarding the Alpair 10.3. Was not aware of that driver. Any idea on the internal volume of a seal box and how low it would go?
In my mind, there is a lot to be said for using the Alpairs. I like the idea of possibly using the 10.3 up front, and then maybe 7.3 in the rears. Seems like keeping all the drivers in the same family makes sense.
Don't want to turn this into an Alpair vs. Jordan grudge match. But would like some opinions on the Eikona vs. 10.3 drivers for my application, again in-wall sealed boxes. Which gets lower? Which gets plays louder with less distortion.
The room size is 15 feet wide by 14.5 long.
TV goes on the wall that is 15 feet. Couch will be on the opposing wall. So the sitting area will be approximately 12-13 feet from the TV.
Other than news and an occasional sporting event, don't watch all that much TV. About twice per week, almost always in the evenings, we watch a movie. The type of movies range from dramas to action movies. We listen to movies louder than normal TV watching, but by no means as loud as in a typically movie theater. For this reason, I'm not too worried about meeting THX specs, whatever that happens to mean.
For equipment, I have a DIY 5-channel LM3886 amp, which sounds awesome.
Don't have a pre/pro yet. There is a decent chance I just use an Oppo 105 or pick something up used on Audiogon or elsewhere.
Have not investigated subs at this point. Just assumed I would place one in a corner of the room. This one looks interesting, but am far making any decisions.
Rythmik L12 - sealed HT sub
Dave, thanks for the tip regarding the Alpair 10.3. Was not aware of that driver. Any idea on the internal volume of a seal box and how low it would go?
In my mind, there is a lot to be said for using the Alpairs. I like the idea of possibly using the 10.3 up front, and then maybe 7.3 in the rears. Seems like keeping all the drivers in the same family makes sense.
Don't want to turn this into an Alpair vs. Jordan grudge match. But would like some opinions on the Eikona vs. 10.3 drivers for my application, again in-wall sealed boxes. Which gets lower? Which gets plays louder with less distortion.
Jim - a few more observations:
-It might be difficult to elicit opinions in answer to your last query and avoid exactly the grudge match you hope to
-I've found that a corner mounted single sub is not always the best solution, but that 2 or more strategically located - often not corners - can often deliver more even distribution throughout the entire listening area. As well, after several years of discussing the matter with a local audio store speaker repair tech, I'd tend to avoid a sub with amp built in - either in a commercial product, or a DIY build. Short story is that the amps fail a lot, often after warranty, and without available or affordable replacement modules. Most surround processors have all the bass management that is required to completely obviate the need for the plate amp's XO functions - indeed you'll note that many will have an LFE input that bypasses most of the sub amp's internal circuitry.
-I'd consider surround processing by DSP, including protocols such as the Audyssey that pnix mentioned, to be almost essential. I've had several multi-channel receivers over the years, and the various auto-set up / calibration systems that are now available in even entry level HT receivers are a godsend. Note that many of them also have line outputs for all channels, which would enable you to retain your existing multi-channel chip amp.
-It might be difficult to elicit opinions in answer to your last query and avoid exactly the grudge match you hope to
-I've found that a corner mounted single sub is not always the best solution, but that 2 or more strategically located - often not corners - can often deliver more even distribution throughout the entire listening area. As well, after several years of discussing the matter with a local audio store speaker repair tech, I'd tend to avoid a sub with amp built in - either in a commercial product, or a DIY build. Short story is that the amps fail a lot, often after warranty, and without available or affordable replacement modules. Most surround processors have all the bass management that is required to completely obviate the need for the plate amp's XO functions - indeed you'll note that many will have an LFE input that bypasses most of the sub amp's internal circuitry.
-I'd consider surround processing by DSP, including protocols such as the Audyssey that pnix mentioned, to be almost essential. I've had several multi-channel receivers over the years, and the various auto-set up / calibration systems that are now available in even entry level HT receivers are a godsend. Note that many of them also have line outputs for all channels, which would enable you to retain your existing multi-channel chip amp.
Last edited:
Attachments
Thanks again to all for all the useful info.
The comments about using sub(s) w/o plate amps makes great sense.
The plan is to have some built in cabinets along the wall beneath the TV. Since this cabinetry will be custom made, I suppose we could design in alcoves for sub(s) to fit in. Would one or two subs, probably directly below the L & R speakers, firing into the room and several feet away from the corners be a better choice? I hope so since there is no other option in the room other than a corner.
Dave, thanks for the graph and the specs for the 10.3. If I have a clue of whats going on, here are the dimensions for the box (internal):
6L = 366.142 inches cubed or (14.5W x 8.4H x 3.0D)
Not sure what Butterworth Q, F3 or F10 means. But I assume the 10.3 will play down to 86Hz, which I'm guessing, should be fairly easy to mate with sub(s).
Wow, what a great forum!
J
The comments about using sub(s) w/o plate amps makes great sense.
The plan is to have some built in cabinets along the wall beneath the TV. Since this cabinetry will be custom made, I suppose we could design in alcoves for sub(s) to fit in. Would one or two subs, probably directly below the L & R speakers, firing into the room and several feet away from the corners be a better choice? I hope so since there is no other option in the room other than a corner.
Dave, thanks for the graph and the specs for the 10.3. If I have a clue of whats going on, here are the dimensions for the box (internal):
6L = 366.142 inches cubed or (14.5W x 8.4H x 3.0D)
Not sure what Butterworth Q, F3 or F10 means. But I assume the 10.3 will play down to 86Hz, which I'm guessing, should be fairly easy to mate with sub(s).
Wow, what a great forum!
J
Q[tc] is the system quality factor. Which isn't quite what it 'sounds' like -essentially it's a mathematical descriptor of the low frequency behaviour of the speaker.
Qtc = 0.707 is Butterworth or maximally flat, which is what it sounds like: it's the flattest alignment available inasmuch as it stays flat to a lower frequency than any other sealed alignment.
Qtc = 0.577 is a Bessel alignment; it has the quickest settling time after an impulse
Qtc = 0.5 is critically damped; no overshoot after an impulse
A Qtc value > 0.707 is under-damped and will have a peaking LF response -how much so depending on the specific value. The higher the Q, the greater the peak.
F3 = the -3dB LF frequency under anechoic conditions unless otherwise specified
F10 = (surprise!
) the -10dB LF frequency under anechoic conditions unless otherwise specified
Short version: the smaller the box, the higher the system Q / system resonance, and the higher the F3 etc.
Note the caveats regarding anechoic conditions; in practice you can expect there to be some lift due to room gain, so what is maximally flat in an anechoic chamber will not be flat in practice. The values here are system Q, so any series resistance from speaker wire / the output impedance of the amplifier needs to be considered.
Qtc = 0.707 is Butterworth or maximally flat, which is what it sounds like: it's the flattest alignment available inasmuch as it stays flat to a lower frequency than any other sealed alignment.
Qtc = 0.577 is a Bessel alignment; it has the quickest settling time after an impulse
Qtc = 0.5 is critically damped; no overshoot after an impulse
A Qtc value > 0.707 is under-damped and will have a peaking LF response -how much so depending on the specific value. The higher the Q, the greater the peak.
F3 = the -3dB LF frequency under anechoic conditions unless otherwise specified
F10 = (surprise!
) the -10dB LF frequency under anechoic conditions unless otherwise specifiedShort version: the smaller the box, the higher the system Q / system resonance, and the higher the F3 etc.
Note the caveats regarding anechoic conditions; in practice you can expect there to be some lift due to room gain, so what is maximally flat in an anechoic chamber will not be flat in practice. The values here are system Q, so any series resistance from speaker wire / the output impedance of the amplifier needs to be considered.
Last edited:
Here is a box designed for mounting between the studs.
http://www.planet10-hifi.com/downloads/inwall-cMarS103-plan-290116.pdf
dave
Hi Rebelvox - We've sold a number of Eikonas for use as home theatre systems and customers generally use them in wall-mounted enclosures. There are several suitable DIY designs on the website:
loudspeaker plans - E J Jordan Designs
The DCR is a shallow, two unit reflex. It's basically our Reflex 7 design doubled up, so there is no reason why you couldn't adapt the single unit reflex into a similar shape. There's also the MLTL18, which is an unusual MLTL design which is fairly shallow. Ted's original VTL is also an unobtrusive option for a floor-standing design.
Some practical experience - last summer I ran a 4.0 surround system using Eikonas. This was for the BBC Proms surround experiment, an online feed which was strictly four channel so the centre front wasn't needed. I used either the Reflex 7 or Aurora 400 front and a pair of sealed Eikonas rear. These were the 5.5 litre BBC LS3/5a enclosures shown here
technical - E J Jordan Designs
The BBC box is larger than necessary; for a Qtc 0.707 the Eikona requires just under 4.0 litres sealed. LF -3dB was 55Hz for the reflex, 85Hz for the sealed. The system was run from a Marantz 1504 AVR, mains were rolled off at 80Hz and bass fed to a BK Electronics sub. The system worked very well for orchestral music and sounded surprisingly immersive on the live feeds from the Albert Hall. The sub helped but the system sounded good without and the AVR proved a very flexible control centre for the set-up.
loudspeaker plans - E J Jordan Designs
The DCR is a shallow, two unit reflex. It's basically our Reflex 7 design doubled up, so there is no reason why you couldn't adapt the single unit reflex into a similar shape. There's also the MLTL18, which is an unusual MLTL design which is fairly shallow. Ted's original VTL is also an unobtrusive option for a floor-standing design.
Some practical experience - last summer I ran a 4.0 surround system using Eikonas. This was for the BBC Proms surround experiment, an online feed which was strictly four channel so the centre front wasn't needed. I used either the Reflex 7 or Aurora 400 front and a pair of sealed Eikonas rear. These were the 5.5 litre BBC LS3/5a enclosures shown here
technical - E J Jordan Designs
The BBC box is larger than necessary; for a Qtc 0.707 the Eikona requires just under 4.0 litres sealed. LF -3dB was 55Hz for the reflex, 85Hz for the sealed. The system was run from a Marantz 1504 AVR, mains were rolled off at 80Hz and bass fed to a BK Electronics sub. The system worked very well for orchestral music and sounded surprisingly immersive on the live feeds from the Albert Hall. The sub helped but the system sounded good without and the AVR proved a very flexible control centre for the set-up.
Last edited:
Lots of good info here. I've set up a few small HT systems in similar sized rooms for various people. I'm sure you can make the small full range drivers work well if implemented properly.
Alpair 7's work great with good bass management if you are not expecting rafter rattling volumes. You can use the budget friendly CHR70s or Pluvias as surrounds. If using multiple sub's you can push the crossover point a bit higher to gain power handling.
If you want more headroom, consider Alpair 10s or the above mentioned Jordans upfront.
I at one point had a 5.1 set up in my listening room similar to the one mentioned above and was quite pleased. It got plenty loud and sounded great.
If budget permits, I'd shoot for the bigger drivers, but if space, budget, WAF, etc are a concern, don't be afraid of the smaller units.
Alpair 7's work great with good bass management if you are not expecting rafter rattling volumes. You can use the budget friendly CHR70s or Pluvias as surrounds. If using multiple sub's you can push the crossover point a bit higher to gain power handling.
If you want more headroom, consider Alpair 10s or the above mentioned Jordans upfront.
I at one point had a 5.1 set up in my listening room similar to the one mentioned above and was quite pleased. It got plenty loud and sounded great.
If budget permits, I'd shoot for the bigger drivers, but if space, budget, WAF, etc are a concern, don't be afraid of the smaller units.
They both distort a lot because they can't move enough air around the crossover frequency to the sub. How do you plan on equalizing those drivers? Do you have measuring equipment (which is mandatory if you want to design your own speakers)?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.