Yes, I have an homage to LS3/5A using modern drivers and an updated XO that replicates the step response and freq response of LS3/5A. More info here.
They turned out really well - super sounding and have been built by about half a dozen other members whom all like it.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/rst28f-and-dc130a-foamcore-homage-to-ls3-5a.359176/
Stained BB ply cabinet with a matte finish baffle:
Only issue is the depth is a bit much for my space. I did see those and they look great
I just finished a set of piccolos as well. They ended up in a slightly larger box (~9.5 L vs 7.5 L in Jeff's original design), and the tuning as a result is flatter than the original.
I am very pleased with the sound of these little speakers, definitely a great bang for buck compact solution i would recommend. I cannot compare with Jeff's own box alignment, but the bass is very full and goes deep (the Fb is a bit lower than the 7.5 L box). I have not had a great deal of time listening to these so at the moment i can just say that plugging them in for the first time was a very pleasant surprise, and i had not expected such full bass from them. My impression is also that the integration between the drivers works really well, and not something i notice.
I also happen to own a pair of bookshelf Alpair 10.3s. These are in 14L bass reflex boxes (originally used for 10ps), but the tuning was adjusted to suit the metal cone drivers. They are great sounding speakers that i have used happily for many years. They became my secondary set of speakers after i put the 10ps in Pensil cabinets, but they deliver a lovely detailed and full music experience. I cannot say i notice a great deal of difference in the top end between these full-rangers and the two-ways with actual tweeters so far, but that is going to differ from person to person. Suffice to say i would also not hesitate to recommend these speakers, and as Dave said, optimal box is around 10L so comes to much the same size as the piccolos. I have heard from others that full-rangers don't do all genres of music well, so that's another consideration, but for my needs they have been great speakers that i have and still do enjoy.
Just another 5c.
I am very pleased with the sound of these little speakers, definitely a great bang for buck compact solution i would recommend. I cannot compare with Jeff's own box alignment, but the bass is very full and goes deep (the Fb is a bit lower than the 7.5 L box). I have not had a great deal of time listening to these so at the moment i can just say that plugging them in for the first time was a very pleasant surprise, and i had not expected such full bass from them. My impression is also that the integration between the drivers works really well, and not something i notice.
I also happen to own a pair of bookshelf Alpair 10.3s. These are in 14L bass reflex boxes (originally used for 10ps), but the tuning was adjusted to suit the metal cone drivers. They are great sounding speakers that i have used happily for many years. They became my secondary set of speakers after i put the 10ps in Pensil cabinets, but they deliver a lovely detailed and full music experience. I cannot say i notice a great deal of difference in the top end between these full-rangers and the two-ways with actual tweeters so far, but that is going to differ from person to person. Suffice to say i would also not hesitate to recommend these speakers, and as Dave said, optimal box is around 10L so comes to much the same size as the piccolos. I have heard from others that full-rangers don't do all genres of music well, so that's another consideration, but for my needs they have been great speakers that i have and still do enjoy.
Just another 5c.
Does that also mean the original crossover is still perfectly matched or does it throw some aspects slightly off?
Glad to see another Piccolo fan here. As I have posted in several threads, I think these relatively small speakers punch way above their size and cost. Particularly at the high end where the SBA tweeter excels.
It may not matter much for popular music, but for classical music with lots of violins, flutes, and of course, piccolos, the high end to me is magic.
And that also goes for pianos. Part of what makes these so sound good for pianos is their ability to sustain individual piano notes. Just like you are in the room with piano yourself. Of course, that depends on the recording as well. But if it is in the recording, these speakers will deliciously reproduce it.
Original XO should work fine. Tweeter frequency response change will be minimal; changes will be more to the woofer response, but minimal.
You can use The Edge to predict changes; I'm not an expert in using it - I'll see if I can spend some time learning it to quantify my statements.
OK I think I done this right - I put the Sopranos' baffle and 4" midwoofer into the Edge (curve1 green) then just doubled the height of it (curve 2 red) but keep the width the same. This would give a silly looking speaker but as you can see, even in that example, the diffraction difference cause by increasing the height is negligible.
Last edited:
If you're going to put them right up against the wall, go sealed and get a sub, IMO.
If you're going to put them less than half a foot away, then it would be preferable to go front-ported, depending on what the tuning frequency is.
If they will have a foot or so, then it won't make much difference.
If I go back to my earlier recommendation for Goran's Classic, we have a 27L cabinet with front baffle of 40cm H x 26cm W, therefore original depth is 26cm.
If your depth constraint is 25cm, then you just need to increase the height below the woofer by 1-2cm and keep everything else the same so 41-42cm H x 26cm W x 25cm D - pretty easy.
Goran had also modeled a closed box where ported F6 = 32hz, sealed F6 = 45hz - not bad at all!
I just approximated the visual difference quickly -- looks fine.
If you're going to put them less than half a foot away, then it would be preferable to go front-ported, depending on what the tuning frequency is.
If they will have a foot or so, then it won't make much difference.
If I go back to my earlier recommendation for Goran's Classic, we have a 27L cabinet with front baffle of 40cm H x 26cm W, therefore original depth is 26cm.
If your depth constraint is 25cm, then you just need to increase the height below the woofer by 1-2cm and keep everything else the same so 41-42cm H x 26cm W x 25cm D - pretty easy.
Goran had also modeled a closed box where ported F6 = 32hz, sealed F6 = 45hz - not bad at all!
I just approximated the visual difference quickly -- looks fine.
Last edited:
Nice. Looking through his stuff now. Does he have designs using the higher end Illuminator drivers? (Those the top scan speak models?)
If you mean the notch filter, there isn't much to see, just inductor parallels capacitor, both connecting amp + with driver +. Here's a summary of my minimalist methods https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...nge-drivers-and-a-tweeter.391053/post-7143129
An interesting observation is that, regardless of the actual impedance Z, the notch center frequency is fixed because both LPF and HPF will move linearly (if higher Z) toward or (if lower Z) away from each other, only affecting the depth of the notch -- which if needed could be filled in with a resistor-chain.
Before I had this "figured out", I had seen some mention of Mr Pass's filter for the Lowther PM6A, but later when I tried to find the filter I couldn't. This page 1/3 down has pics https://homeaudio.jimdofree.com/
Hi, actually I was looking for the design of the crossover because I wanted to build myself an MTM center speaker with two SB12NRX25-4 in series + one SB26STCN-04 tweeter.
PS I don't have a program to do it, I only have bassbox 6 pro. If you want to help me I will be grateful. Thanks in advance
PS I don't have a program to do it, I only have bassbox 6 pro. If you want to help me I will be grateful. Thanks in advance