Yep, the mid is your most important driver to work around.
But I didn't like my Accuton C173-6-090 in a closed box.
For the mid I went from a 4 liter closed box to a 10 liter aperiodic vented cone shaped box.
With the closed box I didn't get it to sound completely good (nasal),
I suspect it was due to the backwaves of the cone bouncing around in the closed box.
Now with the 10 liter cone shape tapered box (45cm long), the backwave is completely absorbed.
It sound much more natural, open and dynamic, here some pictures.
My findings correspond to Troels ones, see halfway "Mid cab vent"
Regards,
Danny
But I didn't like my Accuton C173-6-090 in a closed box.
For the mid I went from a 4 liter closed box to a 10 liter aperiodic vented cone shaped box.
With the closed box I didn't get it to sound completely good (nasal),
I suspect it was due to the backwaves of the cone bouncing around in the closed box.
Now with the 10 liter cone shape tapered box (45cm long), the backwave is completely absorbed.
It sound much more natural, open and dynamic, here some pictures.
My findings correspond to Troels ones, see halfway "Mid cab vent"
Regards,
Danny
Last edited:
I would consider using light mms woofer instead of subwoofer one. You have separate subwoofers, no need to low going main speakers.
Great info , thanks Juhazi .
For the woofers , my theory was not to try and run them to 25hz, but maybe be 3db down at 35hz-40hz, and let the subwoofer reproduce the frequencies the towers are not .
Don’t know if that contributes to ear fatigue?
It would be tempted to go with a sealed enclosure with two of the 11’s I like from Scanspeak. I know some drivers work better in ported as opposed to sealed according to there Q .
I’ve been out of the car audio game for a few decades and have to catch up on a few things again .
I had thought of using two of there 8” aluminum cones instead, as the tower would not have to be so wide ,but the price isn’t much different, and the 11’s would be moving considerably more air . Way better bang for the buck imo .
Bi amped may be a good solution to . Have a class D running the woofers and a class A for the other two drivers .
I guess where my concern would be , if I replace my Studio 100’s up front , then I won’t be timber matched with the CC690 .
So when I build a new CC, then I’m needing more amplifiers yet , especially if I’m tri amping and using a dsp mini .
Would be nice to phase out the front three speakers and keep it as uncomplicated as possible.
Ideally I want to build a Focal clone simular to the one pictured . I do not want a crank though , just carefully aimed enclosures .
Only thing I’m not understanding is how they are not creating diffraction issues having sharp horizontal edges close to the tweeter and midrange like that ?
That’s why I considered designing them more like there Sopra series .
As for the midrange, I was wondering myself if a large driver may create some imaging issues .
Scanspeaks 5.5 revelator seems to be unavailable on this site , but they sell a 4.5” still .
ScanSpeak Revelator 12M/4631G 4.5" Midrange
Using a 4.5 Midrange would help with a centre channel build , as seeing it will be placed below the tweeter , the enclosure wouldn’t have to be so deep
For the woofers , my theory was not to try and run them to 25hz, but maybe be 3db down at 35hz-40hz, and let the subwoofer reproduce the frequencies the towers are not .
Don’t know if that contributes to ear fatigue?
It would be tempted to go with a sealed enclosure with two of the 11’s I like from Scanspeak. I know some drivers work better in ported as opposed to sealed according to there Q .
I’ve been out of the car audio game for a few decades and have to catch up on a few things again .
I had thought of using two of there 8” aluminum cones instead, as the tower would not have to be so wide ,but the price isn’t much different, and the 11’s would be moving considerably more air . Way better bang for the buck imo .
Bi amped may be a good solution to . Have a class D running the woofers and a class A for the other two drivers .
I guess where my concern would be , if I replace my Studio 100’s up front , then I won’t be timber matched with the CC690 .
So when I build a new CC, then I’m needing more amplifiers yet , especially if I’m tri amping and using a dsp mini .
Would be nice to phase out the front three speakers and keep it as uncomplicated as possible.
Ideally I want to build a Focal clone simular to the one pictured . I do not want a crank though , just carefully aimed enclosures .
Only thing I’m not understanding is how they are not creating diffraction issues having sharp horizontal edges close to the tweeter and midrange like that ?
That’s why I considered designing them more like there Sopra series .
As for the midrange, I was wondering myself if a large driver may create some imaging issues .
Scanspeaks 5.5 revelator seems to be unavailable on this site , but they sell a 4.5” still .
ScanSpeak Revelator 12M/4631G 4.5" Midrange
Using a 4.5 Midrange would help with a centre channel build , as seeing it will be placed below the tweeter , the enclosure wouldn’t have to be so deep
Attachments
Last edited:
I’ve read about that ceramic midrange and didn’t know what to think about it .
Great build btw ,wow!
I like how your crossover isn’t sharing air with the drivers , or at least I don’t think they are .
Imo , even with passive ,I’d like to have them outside the enclosure ,and just have multiple wires going to the enclosure
Last edited:
I really like that Accuton mid, it can project a large holographic soundstage.
Also it's 93db sensitive and has no severe cone breakups thanks to the cone cutouts,
I can run them without attenuation thanks to my double woofers.
Troels has a good a description how they sound.
The crossovers are outside because they're in development phase, since last week they're finally finished. At last 🙂
The woofer crossover will go in the large woofer cabinet,
mid and tweeter crossover stay outside behind the tweeter where the cabinet is open (picture taken of backside).
I chose for two separate cabinets so the woofers can be decoupled from the mid/tweeter, I use Sylomer SR110 pads, very effective!
The woofer vent is at the bottom to the front, this works very good, vent length is only 2cm (thickness of the wood).
Also it's 93db sensitive and has no severe cone breakups thanks to the cone cutouts,
I can run them without attenuation thanks to my double woofers.
Troels has a good a description how they sound.
The crossovers are outside because they're in development phase, since last week they're finally finished. At last 🙂
The woofer crossover will go in the large woofer cabinet,
mid and tweeter crossover stay outside behind the tweeter where the cabinet is open (picture taken of backside).
I chose for two separate cabinets so the woofers can be decoupled from the mid/tweeter, I use Sylomer SR110 pads, very effective!
The woofer vent is at the bottom to the front, this works very good, vent length is only 2cm (thickness of the wood).
Attachments
Last edited:
Yes I’ll bet a ton of research and trial and error went into your setup . Well thought out imo , and what makes this such an interesting hobby . Those drivers are a little to expensive for me, but I’m sure they sound incredible with the right enclosure and crossover . I nearly purchased a pair of Paradigm Persona F5’s , but I wouldn’t be able to build my cnc router table if I had done that . I think I’d rather build my own speakers and phase out my Studio 100’s at some point. I’m in no hurry ,as being subjected to the sound I have now isn’t all that terrible lol Here’s no current setup . Things are going to get a little tight if I go to wide on new towers . I sit approx 11.5’ away from the front speakers
Attachments
SS 12M has only 79mm diameter of the cone, more like 3"! Low end distortion will easily get problematic.
Choosing drivers and deciding baffle geometry shoud actually go hand in hand. You should make a rough estimate of where xo's will be, then diameter of drivers, their inter-driver distances, baffle width at height of drivers, tweeter plain or with waveguide etc. Then it is easier to find drivers to fulfill your dreams 😉
Choosing drivers and deciding baffle geometry shoud actually go hand in hand. You should make a rough estimate of where xo's will be, then diameter of drivers, their inter-driver distances, baffle width at height of drivers, tweeter plain or with waveguide etc. Then it is easier to find drivers to fulfill your dreams 😉
You guessed that right, lots of trials and measurements (1000 or so),
also listening to lots of different music.
For the mid I made a test cabinet in which I could move the back wall to have different volumes from 3l to 10l, closed and vented(aperiodic).
Tested also the effect of different damping materials, Twaron angelhair 3 to 4 grams/liter, came out as best.
Tested also different vent lengths for the woofer, surprised that vent length of 2cm (thickness cabinet) gave the most output at 30-40 Hz.
So at the bottom I have an opening of 8cm diameter without a real vent.
And so on, I'm glad they're finished 🙂
Nice friend that you have, I hope it's the one from T2 and not T1 😉
also listening to lots of different music.
For the mid I made a test cabinet in which I could move the back wall to have different volumes from 3l to 10l, closed and vented(aperiodic).
Tested also the effect of different damping materials, Twaron angelhair 3 to 4 grams/liter, came out as best.
Tested also different vent lengths for the woofer, surprised that vent length of 2cm (thickness cabinet) gave the most output at 30-40 Hz.
So at the bottom I have an opening of 8cm diameter without a real vent.
And so on, I'm glad they're finished 🙂
Nice friend that you have, I hope it's the one from T2 and not T1 😉
Last edited:
I guess if it went to too low of a freq . It would probably be more suited for a 4 way system then that had a dedicated midbass driver
Sheesh, now I probably need to replicate the Grand Utopia and be done with it 🙁
Not srs
Attachments
Last edited:
lol .
He’s not screen correct , and it’s yet another project to undertake after I get my garage insulated.
Good thing I’m single.
Below is a statue of what he’s supposed to look like eventually, and a close up of the bust .
I will be adding servos and using a Rasberry Pi to control different movements. Was going to have the shoulder and elbow joint on the damaged endo arm move , and have him turn at the waist .
I have all the body parts excluding the damaged knee so far . A guy in Cali makes the busts ,chest plate and knee . Also have an air soft replica of the rocket launcher . I probably have to somehow build replica shells , as I can’t find any in Canada , and you can’t get replica ammunition over the border . Wish I had a lathe, but I’m running out of room
Attachments
Last edited:
Just to clarify. One of my friends have the older miniDSP and another has the newest one. The new one is clearly more low noise and quite. They both work great with both some of the most expensive drivers on the marked and also some of the most sensitive drivers.
Reason why I mentioned Groundsound, was only to say that I have an active system, but do not have deeper knowledge of miniDSP - only heard it many times at friends places in combination with very good speakers. I have Groundsound because they came with a good solid and great sounding product way before miniDSP. But today when you can produce something very cheaply in the east - I clearly understand that someone will go that route. And with the new design from miniDSP, they are finally at a low enough level, when it comes to noise, that they will be considered usefull in good stereo systems - IMO. The older product could work - but it required some fiddeling with gain, to reduce hiss and ground noise.
Yes - it's expensive to develop and build something in Denmark - but I'm very happy with it - even though it cost more 🙂
But when I bought it. I compared with the price of a very good seperate products and the fact that I did not care so much for swapping DAC's and other type of equipment.
And yes, the new SHD seems very good and capable - no doubt that the marked is turning heavily towards active solutions these days 🙂
Impressive, if you're able to do this, I'll bet your speakers will turn out as impressive.
For active there's also the new Hypex Fusion series.
Don't go for the older MiniDSP series, they will be the limiting component especially when you consider class A amplification.
Here they test the the newer HD series, not that impressive.
The MiniDSP nanoshark looks better, you can add you own DACS and have more control over the sound quality and noise.
SB Acoustics builds a high end line of Satori brand drivers, including a 9.5" woofer WO24P-8, which fits your size and quality goals.
Consider:
-- Avalon Compas style TMWW cabinet for low diffraction distortion with artistic appearance. No CNC machine required.
Satori 1.1" TW29R-4 dome tweeter Beryllium dome is available.
Satori 5.5" MR16P-4 midrange - sealed
TWO 9.5" Satori WO24P-8 woofers - sealed
You want to accelerate your decision process on DSP with 1-amp per speaker, or with a passive crossover on the tweeter-midrange plus bi-amping.
Around the world there are several passive crossover designs for these drivers, including Avalon style cabinets..tilted T-M baffle.
The cabinet could have a vertical front baffle, and adjustable height front legs for tilting.
A stained plywood cabinet box with a painted black/white front baffle saves veneering.
Consider:
-- Avalon Compas style TMWW cabinet for low diffraction distortion with artistic appearance. No CNC machine required.
Satori 1.1" TW29R-4 dome tweeter Beryllium dome is available.
Satori 5.5" MR16P-4 midrange - sealed
TWO 9.5" Satori WO24P-8 woofers - sealed
You want to accelerate your decision process on DSP with 1-amp per speaker, or with a passive crossover on the tweeter-midrange plus bi-amping.
Around the world there are several passive crossover designs for these drivers, including Avalon style cabinets..tilted T-M baffle.
The cabinet could have a vertical front baffle, and adjustable height front legs for tilting.
A stained plywood cabinet box with a painted black/white front baffle saves veneering.
Attachments
Last edited:
That’s the same test I seen recently, and I had concerns. There better actives out there, but expensive .
I seen SB drivers at the Madisound site, but haven’t heard much about them. Seem to see more reviews and builds with Scanspeak .
But I’ll certainly do more research.
Update :
I’m sure liking the SB 9.5” woofer . Decent price also.
Just looked at there tweeter . Very wide response for a tweeter, and the midrange has an incredibly wide response .
They should work well for many crossover frequency options
Last edited:
For those of us on a budget and some woodworking skills this is a great place to visit. Gallery — Selah Audio
Regards,
Dan
Chinese Curse: "May you live in interesting times."
SB Acoustics makes 24 different dome tweeters.
I have seen designs using the Satori MR16P-4 midrange crossed to four different SB Acoustics tweeters.
1) TW29R-B-4 ....black trim, most common selection with MR16P-4
2) TW29RN-4 ....N=NdFeB motor for higher efficiency, highest BL = fastest
3) TW29RBN-4 ....B=Beryllium dome, N=NdFeB motor, most expensive, best?
4) SB26STCN-4 ....N=NdFeB motor, low cost, small 41mm diameter == short C-to-C == reduced lobing
SB Acoustics makes 24 different dome tweeters.
I have seen designs using the Satori MR16P-4 midrange crossed to four different SB Acoustics tweeters.
1) TW29R-B-4 ....black trim, most common selection with MR16P-4
2) TW29RN-4 ....N=NdFeB motor for higher efficiency, highest BL = fastest
3) TW29RBN-4 ....B=Beryllium dome, N=NdFeB motor, most expensive, best?
4) SB26STCN-4 ....N=NdFeB motor, low cost, small 41mm diameter == short C-to-C == reduced lobing
Attachments
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.