4way OB project

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#5
Helmuth said:


I can see you know what you are doing.🙂

How about a review about the sound.
Click to expand...


Well, I`m not new in loudspeaker building (probably developed close to 200 different loudspeakers of all types over the las 15 years).
As for the sound, I am not exactly the right person to describe it, but those who heard it commented positively.
As you would probably expect, they give that big, effortless sound with great weight in the lover mid and upper bass regions. The stage is tall with good instrumental positioning and focus. The upper mids are way less congested on heavy material than a typical smaller loudspeaker (no wonder). With such passive (baffle) and active (drivers) surface area, the music sounds completely different, more real IMHO.To fully develop it`s potential they need somewhat bigger room, with 1-3 m distance to back wall. Of all the projects from my site, this was definitely the most satisfying one.
I am about to move it to one really large room and when done I can post some further comments.

Cheers!
 
#10
Helmuth said:
Witch one do you prefer fivestring the monopole fountec or the dipole ER4.

Because I am thinking about trying the ER4 once and for me 350 Euro is also not quite cheap.

Regards Helmuth
Click to expand...

They are different animals, it depends on use. Eton has much larger total surface area vs Fountek and is therefore much more usable at lover crossover frequencies,
while Fountek definitely leads at higher frequencies. IMHO small ribbons aren`t usable at lower crossover frequencies, unless there is no need for higher spl. If you use steeper crossover, say 3rd or 4th and cross it over at 2Khz, you loose dynamics and you get typical hifi, upper mid hardness. I know there is a great number of commercial two way loudspeakers that are built like this, but they sound awful, just IMHO.
I agree with Paolo, Neo 3 (dipole type) could be a nice compromise, I haven`t tried it though (only Neo 8).

Regards Miro
 
#14
Hi inertial,

I have listened extensively the Manger Swing and IMO it sound excellent to my ears
Click to expand...

You didn't hear a close sweet spot?. I read different this about the msw.

That it has a small sweet spot and the THD isn't that good.

And others say there is nothing what can compare to it . And that you have to learn listening again with the manger such a difference.

The figures that manger claims are curtain unique!

I am very curies about what more you can say about it.

Regards Helmuth
 
#15
Hi Helmuth,

( excuse the O.T.)

I think there is too much B...S about MSW. Too much people speculating instead listen to it 😀
IMO there is nothing problem about "spot" and a little problem
about excursion when MSW is filtered too much low as Swing.
You are right, THD is a bit high for who are obsessed by numbers,
but the sound remain unique and it sure deserve a serious listening.
The only true issue is the high cost IMO :hot:

If you have the opportunity, listen MSW.

Cheers,

Paolo
 
#17
And still satisfied with the performance fivestring?

I lately wrote with a Finnish guy how was very satisfied with his new line-array and was disappointed by the soft base of his OB projects.

Open baffle bass sounded weak and slow was his comment. Your design has some thing from a line array in it.

How do you rate the punch of the base.


Nice photo's contrast nice with the rubbish around it.😎

Regards Helmuth
 
#18
Looks good, I bet these sound great!

That's the Dayton 5S52? Did you remove the rear cup to make them open baffle too or is it just open baffle up to 1.2kHz?

Between those 12 woofers I expect the bass has plenty of impact? I was very impressed with OB bass myself when I ventured into it, so much so that I will be building OB subs to go with an otherwise monopole system. Certainly didn't find it lacking in punch and depth myself, I just don't have enough cone area at the moment for huge levels but it looks like you do!
 
#19
fivestring,

Your project looks great! I've been throwing around a similar idea with a line of 6 12" cheap subs (9mm xmax) per side or 6 of the RS225s per side, both of which I own 12 of. Next would be a pair of RS180s or RS150s which would cross to the RS52, one in the front and one in the rear, to get a full dipole effect with a rear tweeter. Any reason why you chose two RS52s which such a high crossover point to the ribbon? Do you get bad combing? What size room are these in?

Also, do you have a rear picture of these?
 
#20
Helmuth said:
And still satisfied with the performance fivestring?
I lately wrote with a Finnish guy how was very satisfied with his new line-array and was disappointed by the soft base of his OB projects.
Open baffle bass sounded weak and slow was his comment. Your design has some thing from a line array in it.
How do you rate the punch of the base.
Regards Helmuth
Click to expand...

Soft base..., you probably mean soft bass?
The woofers I used in this project have quite stiff suspension and I much more prefer stiffer suspensions over softer ones.
The sound of a dipole bass is very different from the boxed one, less boomy, more detailed and you can listen to it all day long without listening fatigue (dipole bass represents sound velocity, while boxed bass represents sound pressure). If open baffle bass sounds weak and slow, then it must have been implemented wrongly. Like with all boxes, you need to fine tune the OB bass through the XO and if you observe the frequency response of my 4way OB project, there is a downward tilting frequency response with a peak in the bass, a sure sign this loudspeaker shouldn`t sound lean in the bass or overall balance. Since this loudspeaker wasn`t meant for small rooms in the first place, I voiced it with all this in mind. To answer your question, yes I`m still satisfied with it`s performance, it sounds better than all boxed loudspeakers I ever developed.
By the way, that guy from Finnland, Kimmo?

Best regards,

Miro
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom