Curcuit board would make adjustments and changes more difficult
Possible ongoing improvements seem to me like one of the biggest advantages of this project
And sound wise hardwired is optimal
Besides, theres nothing to learn from mounting on a curcuit board
To get minimum interaction between inductors its good to have some distance between the 3 driver sections
It will also be easier to try different connect wires
I also prefer to to have all drivers mutual xo connection positioned at speaker input terminals
But as usual, everything holds compromises
Its just a matter of which you prefer to bother with
I dont understand the TL thing
Back in the seventies TL was HOT
Then later it was NOT so hot
And now it is hot again
I wonder why
The TL I have heard lacked some of the bass attack
Better calculaters maybe ?
The other day I heard a sub with cheaper Dayton 12" and passive slave
Active with modest EQ around 30hz
Passive unit was carefully tuned with exstra weight
I was quite impressed, and surpriced
I suppose a 2.5way would be a good partner
In these "active" times Im not sure I would go purely classical passive
Seems a bit like too much nostalgia to me
Last edited:
finally the voice of EXPERIENCE. The options I would suggest are as follows:
1. For stand mounted monitors the neatest option is to build the XO into teh base of the stand (a box at the base) and rune the wires through the stand to the drivers.
2. For fullrange single box 3-5 way speakers what I have done is build the XO on top of the box. The XO is then covered with a dark tinted glass cover and you can see the copper coils and polyester caps - which I think look cool - but not all the dirty wiring. Since the speaker cabients are about 4 ft in height the XO then comes to about a nice level for me (at 1m 75cm) to look inside (without bending my back) and even change an element or two.
Either a slanted baffle or a stepped baffle.
Hardwired makes sense becuase the number of components are limited.
TL has always needed an evangilist. Bud Fried of IMF/TDL fame was probably the most notable one (along with John Wright). TL bass if done well can be fantastic. I have heard a Fried 2 way that looked like a pregnant lady (forget the model) and the sound (especially the quality of the bass) is still etched in my memory. What happened in the 80s and 90s was probably that aduio got hijacked by the digital/hometheater world. Now 5 TL boxes was something that few could afford to keep (atleast few married men could afford to keep). So out went TL and in came the mini 4"/5" 2way or worse the 2.5" fullrange (a la Bose). Now audio (and vinyl) is back. People are going back to having a stereo system in their bedrooms and relegating the HT/AV system to their living rooms.
As far as PRs go I too have heard some very nice PRed bass. Most notable was an ALR-Jodran speaker called the Factor 2 (and it's larger sibling - the Factor 7). I guess any bass tuning if tuned to work with a room can sound nice.
Stepped baffles are a no-no as a rule as they add unwanted reflection points. The slanted baffle is the easiest design to implement and most elegant too, IMO.
Slanted baffle also have the effect of a gradual offaxiss
You can listen directly on-axis on woofer, and at the same time have a bit more offaxiss on mid, and even more offaxis on tweet
Advantage? I dont know, but thats how it is
On a straight vertical design, stepped or not, you have the opposite effect, which to me seems worse
Optimally it might be a gradual stepped and slanted
Btw, anything other than having xo directly at speaker terminal and mounted inside WITH the woofer is equal to outboard xo to me
Mine are in a seperate room below woofer
You can also use the back of speaker
Often there will be enough space on back of mid chamber
Just have mid and tweet xo there
And woofer xo behind woofer
This kind of xo doesnt result in wires outside the box
To me thats advanced outboard xo
The closer you have xo to the drivers, the better
Just dont mount it on the magnet, or too close
You can listen directly on-axis on woofer, and at the same time have a bit more offaxiss on mid, and even more offaxis on tweet
Advantage? I dont know, but thats how it is
On a straight vertical design, stepped or not, you have the opposite effect, which to me seems worse
Optimally it might be a gradual stepped and slanted
Btw, anything other than having xo directly at speaker terminal and mounted inside WITH the woofer is equal to outboard xo to me
Mine are in a seperate room below woofer
You can also use the back of speaker
Often there will be enough space on back of mid chamber
Just have mid and tweet xo there
And woofer xo behind woofer
This kind of xo doesnt result in wires outside the box
To me thats advanced outboard xo
The closer you have xo to the drivers, the better
Just dont mount it on the magnet, or too close
Last edited:
I don't care about enclosure shape but I do care about XO.
Will there be a version of the XO with Baffle Step Correction??
And..... one without BSC??
The third option is tri-amping. Just need XO frequencies and slope.
So far, I like where this is going WRT the drivers considered/chosen.
I think it will be very valuable for a beginner to be able to build a proven 3-way easily.
Will there be a version of the XO with Baffle Step Correction??
And..... one without BSC??
The third option is tri-amping. Just need XO frequencies and slope.
So far, I like where this is going WRT the drivers considered/chosen.
I think it will be very valuable for a beginner to be able to build a proven 3-way easily.
With mine I went with a sloped baffle for the tweeter and mid woofer in an effort to get reasonable time alignment with the woofer etc. I left the woofer firing straight out and low as it places it more off axis to reduce the amount of mids arriving from it to the ears.
The angle of the baffle for the tweeter and mid woofer helps with getting them more off axis and not pointing directly at the ears.
The angle of the baffle for the tweeter and mid woofer helps with getting them more off axis and not pointing directly at the ears.
Attachments
Ofcourse we will have to account for BSC. So far there seem to be 2 versions a single 10" TL version and a 2 x 10" sealed version. The cost difference between the 2 versions would be about USD$100 (per speaker - $200 per stereo pair).
The TL version would have to have BSC built into the XO while for the 2 x 10" sealed box the second 10" woofer can be used for BSC maybe as a push-push 3.5 way.
Active is a great way to go as you eliminate the need to match sensitivities of the drivers.
Something like the Beheringer DCX2496 or DEQX PDC2.6/HDP3 should work why even a Marchand Electronic Crossover or DBX digital Crossover would work fine.
Seriously I dont know why the DEQX products are so expensive. For less than $300 you can buy a car audio Head unit that has sub, rear & front (6 channels) outputs with an electronic XO and time delay (Time alignment) for each channel and guys like Eclipse (7200), Alpine, and Clarion throw in a CD player mechanisim and small 10W amp in as well. Even the famed Clarion HX-D2 is under $1000.
Very nice woodwork. The drivers are all ScanSpeak? or is the woofer another make/brand/model?
Last edited:
The tweeter is the Peerless 810921 (replaced a S2905) so is essentially a Scan Speak as they made them, mid woofer 18W8531G00 (coated), woofer M22WR-09-08. I did try a 22W8851T00 but didn't work as well as the M22WR in the design.
There's are bit of chip out around the top edge which was a bit disappointing but these were cut down from an OB mid design and became sealed in the mids. Cutting and trimming finished enclosures is a real pain as normally associated with the whirr sound is clunking sounds as timber splinters and breaks out.
It hasn't disappeared; just waiting for more people to jump in with mid-range suggestions and for some-one to have a go at a possible passive XO for the SEAS drivers already talked about.
I think people are trying to sort out how serious the project is ; that way we can get the most purchasers for the best deal, especially if we can get 100 kits together world wide
Actually we got to a point where we had a set of SEAS drivers proposed. The options being discussed were a TL with the woofer on top W-T-M so as to get a TL that is about 2.5m long (tuned to about 30Hz) or a dual woofer push-push sealed 3.5 way.
Actually no one was really belling the cat. I wanted to propose cabinet details for the 2 options but the same evening (about 2 weeks ago) my mom fell and broke her left ball and socket and left arm in multiple places. She spent over 6 hours in surgery last wednesday and we've been running back and forth trying to help her and run our lives. Extremely sleep deprevied right now. Sorry.
The 26RFX/R4EX / 15MCY / 27TDFC/TFFC drivers are resonably well behaved and working on a XO using LSPCad should be well within our capabilities. Maybe we were just hoping for one of the Pros to jump in and dothe hard work
.
It will come and go over time as it's not a quick process.
The 2-way ref thread took a long time and didn't really kick off until the thread originator (USA) bit the bullet and built the first design I (AUS) came up with. He then tried different crossovers, designs and boxes over a short period giving me feedback. It wasn't until at least another 12 months or so before I committed time and money for the build. Then I was then able to do the alternative box and finalised 3 crossover variations. This work has to be done to prove the design so builders don't waste time and money. Since then I have played with various tweeters but these have not been documented at diyAudio as they have been for my own fun.
The 26RFX/R4EX / 15MCY / 27TDFC/TFFC drivers are resonably well behaved and working on a XO using LSPCad should be well within our capabilities. Maybe we were just hoping for one of the Pros to jump in and dothe hard work
Sorry to hear about your mum and they become very fragile in the older years. Been through a similar experience and very hard to keep it all together. Come to think of it I'm getting close the older years.
I'm posting a pic of the mid crossover for a MCA15RCY which was an alternative requested by a builder for the 3W Classic speaker. Troels supplied this information and is untested with the 3W design but he was confident. I hope I'm not stepping on his toes or annoying him by posting this. If I am, I'm very sorry.
The reason I want to post it is the mid crossover is the hardest to get right IMO and this would be a great starting point for the crossover design. The tweeter crossover from the 3W would work and could be easily tweaked. The woofer crossover would need some work and as it's a 10" woofer, the mid crossover point may want to be lowered a tad to suit. There is a bit of padding of the mid driver to suit the 3W and which means there is mid SPL available.
Maybe someone in Denmark may be able to obtain the help of Troels as he has bags of experience with these type of SEAS drivers in 3-ways. Madisound design service is always another option but maybe not in keeping with the diy and learning flavour of this thread. Hopefully someone will pick it up and run with it providing a learning tool in the process.
Attachments
Last edited:
Rabbitz I could not find the 3W Classic with the MCA15 mid on Troel's website. The only links I found there (on Troel's website) that could be related to what we are doing were these.
Poor Man'
Clarion by SEAS
crossovers
Navin, I'm sorry to hear about your mother - I hope she is feeling better soon.
Well she is home but in terrible shape both mentally and physically.