Yes, that's what I did/do for current speaker with 2 different DSP crossovers. ;=)
JH> I think I tried to be funny and failed here with "bashing". Critic is appropriate here.
JH> Yes, it is a filler to me. To be more precise, I am considering it in a 4-way design with some cone midlow or midbass. And it's not exactly picking drivers first, as I at least once considered 4-way, but my friend was against it(with a valid point), and VM527 didn't show as good specifications as I hoped for. Satori has a promising spec and good price(compared with ATC or Volt).
JH> Yes, I see such nonsense like 250K-priced ones you mentioned. I hate those overpriced ones without even some good technical excuses. Compared to those $$$$$, the $$$ for drivers in this field looks rather cute or negligible(sometimes). Of course, $$$$ is a different story. 🙂
I am too scaredy to use Be in my room, maybe except Usher DMD, whose diamond layers protect and conceal Be membrane front and back. 🙂
Currently, ATC is in both my 3-way plan and 4-way plan. But as a hobby project, I am gradually leaning toward trying new things(4-way, different drivers, modular enclosures, etc.). In the 4-way design, Satori seems to be a better option in multiple aspects.
On your baffle design comment, I think I asked a generic question, but I guess that was too vague to answer or requires too long an answer. I didn't/don't have a good idea about it, so am currently sticking blindly to the idea of "minimize the battle area". What would be the pitfalls in this approach?
I just want to share my experience with my current speakers and the 1st-gen DSP crossover. I was kind of expecting it to work properly, with the DSP crossover providing only some steep FIR filtering for dividing audio signals into 2 bands(had to use traditional LR4 in DSP for bass/mid split due to the DSP performance limitation), and letting Audyssey MultEQ room correction handle the rest(tune for drivers, tune for box, and the room correction). But I was deeply shocked how it just simply worked to produce very well balanced audio. Engineers can do some more tunings or improvements before room correction applied to make it work even better, but the room correction really did/does A LOT. That's also why I still remain ignorant on many mechanical/acoustic stuffs. 🙂
Why? If it is Materion foil it is completely safe and as it's rugged as hell and won't shatter. Vapor deposited on the other hand is much more fragile.
Rob 🙂
https://www.materion.com/en/product...ryllium-products/truextent-acoustic-beryllium
Oh god that tweeter is expensive!!!!!!! I gotta say Jim for performance value, my cheap a$$ is looking at the SS D2004 with an Fs of 440hz instead! Lol
So again, here’s the thing with the ATC as well as most mid domes….they’re poking drivers by design so the passband is extremely narrow at its peak……and as such given the wide dispersion pattern Best only used in the near to near-mid field…..if you‘re plan is to use these at a listening distance of 2 meters or more, they’re not the best choice by a mile…..you'll have all the upper mid range splayed around the room and a nasty directivity mismatch…….you would need to narrow the tweeter a little as it meets the mid but you don’t have the center to center distance to pull it off without creating a very fwd lobe……..all bad at 2 meters and out.
Not sure where you’ve come across the notion to combat baffle step loss with response shaping and/or EQ…….again these are not tools without consequence and phase is tilted. From a recording standpoint, look at it this way……nearly any microphone can be shaped to the desired response this way…….and yet us engineers will audition sometimes dozens of microphones for the best NATIVE response to match the source…..with the intent and purpose to avoid as much equalization /correction as possible….which is clearly evident in the end result. Same goes for the 2nd woofer to augment the low end and loss…….no EQ, no phase wobble, just purity and with increased power handling and lower distortion. Sure……there’s a little price to pay with the coil but at 200hz who cares?…….there’s no fundamental details to polish here……the harmonic attack is way up 2-3 octaves in most cases……..and there no coil on that top woofer which is closer to ear height and summing quite nicely with your midrange……it’s win win.
@jheoaustin,
Like you, I am planning to experiment a 4-way enclosure, now that I met success with my 3-Ways one :
This time, it will be a large sealed one :
Speakers are :
Still with a passive serial/parallel Xover, the planned transition frequencies are :
W ---> CM = 300Hz
CM ---> DM = 3000Hz
DM ---> T = 7kHz
As you choose it equally, I opt for a large 8" Cone Midrange, in order to have a good low-mid tone, notably including the main part of the voices in its range. By the way, that's what I did on my 3-Way enclosure, and it's a very positive experience, offering a very lively tone, somewhere like if it was a "Wide-Band speaker completed with the rest", if I can say so...
T
Like you, I am planning to experiment a 4-way enclosure, now that I met success with my 3-Ways one :
This time, it will be a large sealed one :
Speakers are :
- Beyma T-2030 1.25" Tweeter.
- SB Acoustics Satori MD60N 2.5" Dome Midrange.
- Beyma 8M60N 8" Cone Midrange.
- Beyma 12BR70 12" Woofer.
Still with a passive serial/parallel Xover, the planned transition frequencies are :
W ---> CM = 300Hz
CM ---> DM = 3000Hz
DM ---> T = 7kHz
As you choose it equally, I opt for a large 8" Cone Midrange, in order to have a good low-mid tone, notably including the main part of the voices in its range. By the way, that's what I did on my 3-Way enclosure, and it's a very positive experience, offering a very lively tone, somewhere like if it was a "Wide-Band speaker completed with the rest", if I can say so...
T
It's not nonsense if the person paying £250k remains happy with the purchase. The value of the speakers to them is £250k and most of that value resides in what they associate with the object rather than the object itself. Building luxury brands is about raising this value.
What's interesting about the production company speaker is how much value might be added for some audiophiles by a wise use of the association with the production company in the videos and marketing. OK they have dug a bit of a hole for themselves initially by not knowing or having someone in the loop that knows basic speaker design resulting in their current mainstream review showing something like a 15 dB on-axis variation and more off-axis around the range where the ear is most sensitive. Presumably a bit of homework and/or talking to someone with a bit of relevant technical knowledge swiftly lead to reasonable filters but the damage to the brand and the associations built up in the minds of some audiophiles is likely to be significant. I guess it will pass (not that I know much about the sales side of things) if they can front it out and get a version 2 plot out there. Interesting stuff and good luck to them.
I use a driver simulation software (AJ Designer) and a DBX PA 2 crossover and Dreamweaver by Audio Concepts DSP / crossover / Eq and used to use both DEQX and a Mini DSP... I use them all effectively and get great results which align with the tutorials... It took me about 4 days on average, ( 1 day for the PA2 and 10 days for the DEQX) to watch the all instruction videos and learn all I needed to know....
BUT, I remain am clueless as to there internal coding / algorithms / bit rate etc...
I also drive a car with a complex engine that turns compressed vegetation into energy... I am a great driver (ok , average driver!) but I am clueless as to the physics / chemistry / electrical / mechanical engineering of the engine...My document holder is stationary! (I rest my case)
Cloning the best design you can afford to clone is TWO steps, the first and the last step! It the only step any music lover (not audio geek) ever needs to take.
You have missed my point: The appeal of DIY loudspeaker design is to save $$$ and build the highest quality loudspeakers for the lowest cost, Agreed?
It is NOT to invest time and money in becoming a scholar of loudspeaker design... That is the sole preserve of PCB SPR CED (see below).
No one in their right mind wants to waste their life reading 50 year old AES papers and "Loudspeaker Design Cookbooks" Forget becoming a Floyd Toole groupie (they can still be spotted in the lobby at AES conferences with autograph pads protruding from their cardigans) or god forbid one of the even rarer and sadder PCB SPR CED (passive crossover/baffle step/polar response/cabinet edge diffraction) geeks - A rare sub species of the critically endangered audio geeks.
Music lovers want to hear their favorite music reproduced with the highest possible quality / realism for the lowest possible price... Time is money and life is to short for boring loudspeakers design theory...Select your budget, clone your design and you are done!
I stand by and reinforce my point:
If 100 newbie DIY guys believed your last few posts 99% of them would think "Sod this... that sounds like years of study, trial and error and reading the DIY forum to learn form the "PCB SPR CED" (see my previous post) gods and I cant be bothered and dont have the time."
Jim, you posts will have already actively deterred some members from fast tracking to a successful build and great personal achievement and musical bliss!
My message to the 100 newbie guys is "Ignore all the BS from the old school Tooles 🤣 and clone your way to musical bliss!!!
I bet a huge % of the 100 newbies are capable of cloning PDP designs (which are modular and start with low cost two ways and can be added to as funds permit) and then IF that leads them into becoming an acoustic engineer or loudspeaker designer thats great.... BUT that is NOT the reason 99% of new members want to build a pair of DIY speakers and it is NOT your job to burden them with all the dead weight dinosaur speaker design garbage that is garbage to them even although its everything to you.... What brings you joy is irrelevant... It is your job (as a long term well respected DIY community member) to show newbies the simplest, safest, best bang for the buck to fast track musical bliss!!!
My document holder is now stationary (I rest my case).
Last edited:
I had a similar experience with the DBX PA 2 active crossover /DSP ... I bought as a stop gap until I could afford the Danville Sound gear, but Wow (to quote Jim 🤣 that PA2 is soooooo good and within a few hours I was dancing round the room to "The Fun Loving Criminals"! Its amazing how good and easy to use modern audio DSP is. And actually the PA 2 is 10 years old and due to replaced... The next gen one will be amazing if its even better.
I knew ZERO about its internals when I bought and still dont care!
PS, This is huge as it makes a mockery of all the hallowed passive crossover, baffle step, edge diffraction, polar radiation pattern etc that the cardigans love to portray as "essential" . Tech as made the Tooles redundant, cloning is so easy and so effective.
Personally I do enjoy playing around with driver spec sheets and making Sims... But its not required.
Yes, if you put in some time and learn how to read spec sheets and experiment with different driver loading you can easily produce your own designs that will match or maybe even be superior to commercial kits, but my whole message is detailed tech knowledge is NOT required, its a bonus if you find it fun!
Last edited:
If you don't plan on being a designer and knowing all of the ropes, then a one-stop clone is likely best. If you are only building one pair, this really is all you require.
For those with higher objectives and goals to build, experiment, and develop their audio knowledge, I'm with Jim.
For those with higher objectives and goals to build, experiment, and develop their audio knowledge, I'm with Jim.
Me to Wolf, as I just posted, a moment ago, "... my whole message is detailed tech knowledge is NOT required, its a bonus if you find it fun!"
Personally I do enjoy playing around with driver spec sheets and making Sims... But its not required.
Yes, if you put in some time and learn how to read spec sheets and experiment with different driver loading you can easily produce your own designs that will match or maybe even be superior to commercial kits, but my whole message is detailed tech knowledge is NOT required, its a bonus if you find it fun!
Personally I do enjoy playing around with driver spec sheets and making Sims... But its not required.
Yes, if you put in some time and learn how to read spec sheets and experiment with different driver loading you can easily produce your own designs that will match or maybe even be superior to commercial kits, but my whole message is detailed tech knowledge is NOT required, its a bonus if you find it fun!
Interesting, esp the 8 inch cone mid combination with the 2.5 inch dome mid.@jheoaustin,
Like you, I am planning to experiment a 4-way enclosure, now that I met success with my 3-Ways one :
This time, it will be a large sealed one :
View attachment 1317510
Speakers are :
- Beyma T-2030 1.25" Tweeter.
- SB Acoustics Satori MD60N 2.5" Dome Midrange.
- Beyma 8M60N 8" Cone Midrange.
- Beyma 12BR70 12" Woofer.
Still with a passive serial/parallel Xover, the planned transition frequencies are :
W ---> CM = 300Hz
CM ---> DM = 3000Hz
DM ---> T = 7kHz
As you choose it equally, I opt for a large 8" Cone Midrange, in order to have a good low-mid tone, notably including the main part of the voices in its range. By the way, that's what I did on my 3-Way enclosure, and it's a very positive experience, offering a very lively tone, somewhere like if it was a "Wide-Band speaker completed with the rest", if I can say so...
T
I will watch with interest as you progress with the pros / cons Vs a single 6.5 inch midrange.
Also one question please, have you heard a comparison of the Beyma TPL 200 (not the 150) Vs the Beyma T- 2030?
Thanks and all the very best
A.
PS That 8 inch Beyma looks nice, but its not listed on Beymas web site as currently available, is it a discontinued model?
I found this spec sheet. https://www.beyma.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/8M60N-34563.pdf
Thanks
A.
I found this spec sheet. https://www.beyma.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/8M60N-34563.pdf
Thanks
A.
Thanks ! 🙂
I already have all the speakers except for the pair of SB Satori MD60N 2.5" dome midranges : I have to purchase them.
I tested a smaller version of my 375L using a Beyma 5MP60 5" Midrange : the 345L
But it did not worked as satsfactorily as with the 8", particularly on man voices, despite what I could do... So I put a standby on this project, waiting the day when I'll recreate my obsolete measurement gear with new softwares. I am somewhat lazy 😕, and I should urge the decision quickly ! 🙄
I never heard the Beyma TPL-200, but since it costs nearly 600 Euros the piece 😱, while I have several pairs of T-2030 at 60 Euros the pair 😀... So no way for me ! 🙁
Yes, the 8M60N is a discontinued model, that's too bad because it is an excellent, reliable and unsophisticated speaker, as you can see on the datasheet you have find. I also have fortunately several pairs...
Installing the 8M60N in a 7.5L sealed-fulkl filled enclosure provides a 110Hz natural cut-off, which is fine for matching a Woofer cut at 300-400Hz.
T
Nope... perhaps for you this is true, but for me and many many others on this site, the appeal is learning, studying, and creatively designing and building a loudspeaker system... saving money is secondary.
PCB SPR CED (passive crossover/baffle step/polar response/cabinet edge diffraction) geeks... I like that. I am a retired engineeer, and analysis, experimentation, and design is what I do. Yes I do read 50 year old AES papers.
Baffle step, polar response, and cabinet edge diffraction are important concepts to understand, and they are of first-order importance in the design of a high performance speaker system. It does not matter if the system has passive crossovers, DSP IIR filtering, or DSP FIR filtering, these attributes are highly important. Now it is true that with DSP active filtering, it is faster and easier to make changes, but it is also faster and easier to get a system completely out of whack. The design process is mostly the same, but with DSP, the final voicing goes faster.
" The lady doth protest too much, methinks " Why does this seem to annoy you so much? Perhaps you feel threatened that new people joining this site will become proficient in simulation and modern design process, and pass you up.
Further, you have invented a straw man argument rather than actually debate me. When I listed what a comprehensive "Everything you need to know about speaker design" would include, nowhere did I say that a person would need to master everything before they could start. I certainly have not mastered all of it, and I doubt there are more than two dozen people on the planet who have.
I am annoyed by the personal attack against my reputation. But responding too forcefully and too negatively will accomplish nothing. I will say that I stand by my accomplishments on this site, and I am proud that I have helped some people move their projects forward.
kindest regards, ..... Jim
Well "The lady is not for turning!" (Quote from one of my heroes and a very British joke so dont worry😉)
Glad you are a self confessed member member of the PCB SPR CED geek squad, autograph pad and all.. I'd keep that one quiet outside of the DIY forum... Coming out takes courage Jim. xx🤣
To your latest "points"(I'm feeling generous):
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks " Why does this seem to annoy you so much? Perhaps you feel threatened that new people joining this site will become proficient in simulation and modern design process, and pass you up."
Mmmn, some tasty imprinting going on there James...Lets go slow and enjoy the experience:
(1) "The lady doth protest too much, methinks " - Yes, I am a very vocal advocate of KISS and have no time for time wasters. Your advice/design philosophy is both deliberately and unnecessarily over complicated (in order to justify your 2,789 posts in under 5 years, see (4) below) and is a huge waste of anyone's time who believes it. I explained in detail in previous posts why this is the case.
(2) "Why does this seem to annoy you so much? " See my answer to (1)
(3) "Perhaps you feel threatened that new people joining this site will become proficient in simulation and modern design process". So close James, you nearly got away with it, trying to claim your PCB SPR CED philosophy was actually modern...! Back in the real world and for avoidance of doubt, all my previous posts and this one are promoting the "modern design process" which of course consigns you and your fellow PCB SPR CED club to the file "How it used to done"
(4) "and might pass you up." . Now we get to the good bit James! Imprinting ones weakness on those around you is a common trait and your insecurity is understandable. For some perspective lets look at the maths, you have mentioned a few times you like numbers 😉 I dont have a lot of time to post on this forum and my numbers are 543 post in over 10 years, approx 1 per week although there tend to be long breaks with little or no activity when I get really busy, and then short intense bursts when I something interests me. Now your numbers...2,789 posts in under 5 years, thats a lot...Average of over 11 posts per week!!
So it is not me who is worried about "being passed up"... Could it be you James with over 11 times more posts... Too much time on your hands ??????!!!!
My document holder is stationary... You know the rest by now😉
Glad you are a self confessed member member of the PCB SPR CED geek squad, autograph pad and all.. I'd keep that one quiet outside of the DIY forum... Coming out takes courage Jim. xx🤣
To your latest "points"(I'm feeling generous):
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks " Why does this seem to annoy you so much? Perhaps you feel threatened that new people joining this site will become proficient in simulation and modern design process, and pass you up."
Mmmn, some tasty imprinting going on there James...Lets go slow and enjoy the experience:
(1) "The lady doth protest too much, methinks " - Yes, I am a very vocal advocate of KISS and have no time for time wasters. Your advice/design philosophy is both deliberately and unnecessarily over complicated (in order to justify your 2,789 posts in under 5 years, see (4) below) and is a huge waste of anyone's time who believes it. I explained in detail in previous posts why this is the case.
(2) "Why does this seem to annoy you so much? " See my answer to (1)
(3) "Perhaps you feel threatened that new people joining this site will become proficient in simulation and modern design process". So close James, you nearly got away with it, trying to claim your PCB SPR CED philosophy was actually modern...! Back in the real world and for avoidance of doubt, all my previous posts and this one are promoting the "modern design process" which of course consigns you and your fellow PCB SPR CED club to the file "How it used to done"
(4) "and might pass you up." . Now we get to the good bit James! Imprinting ones weakness on those around you is a common trait and your insecurity is understandable. For some perspective lets look at the maths, you have mentioned a few times you like numbers 😉 I dont have a lot of time to post on this forum and my numbers are 543 post in over 10 years, approx 1 per week although there tend to be long breaks with little or no activity when I get really busy, and then short intense bursts when I something interests me. Now your numbers...2,789 posts in under 5 years, thats a lot...Average of over 11 posts per week!!
So it is not me who is worried about "being passed up"... Could it be you James with over 11 times more posts... Too much time on your hands ??????!!!!
My document holder is stationary... You know the rest by now😉