Scaper said:
Similar story here. I estimated 6 items using the simple estimate on the UPS site, and the total from Jack was within $20 of my estimate.
Keith
*******NOTE: As NHT is currently performing a physical inventory, all orders of NHT products are currently on hold. No NHT products will ship until the inventory is completed. If you haven't received tracking information from UPS yet, that means your order has not shipped yet. Please do not send any orders for NHT products until AFTER this notification is gone from the website. I am not going to even look at them until then, and I do not know how long the inventory is going to take. The only products I'm going to be shipping until the inventory is complete are, Foster WF-100k amplifiers, AR 12" woofers, Jensen 15" woofers, stainless steel cones, ring terminals and binding posts.********
Shipping cost seems to be a moot point at this time. 🙁
Wondering if all the attention these new offerings are getting has gotten the notice of the NHT dealer network ; some of which have remaining inventory for sale. Just speculation on my part.
Shipping cost seems to be a moot point at this time. 🙁
Wondering if all the attention these new offerings are getting has gotten the notice of the NHT dealer network ; some of which have remaining inventory for sale. Just speculation on my part.
When you say CCW, do you mean CCW when "VR603" is right-side-up on the top of the PCB? That is, the side with no solder?Jack Hidley said:
Thanks. Just received my amp. Looks like a well-built unit (even has a cap across the power switch 
), but the customs killed me 🙁
), but the customs killed me 🙁Hey Jack, any thoughts on how a B-20 would work with the 11-116 drivers? I'd like to do a ported alignement but not sure if the B-20 has built in boost/eq and would be better suited for sealed?
I meant he B-20 Control amp, which i think i won't be able to use without the subs that came with it now that i've found the manual online. Please tell me i didn't shoot myself in the foot?
The B-20 amplifier has a simple 2nd order high Q HP filter for bass boost. This could easily be modified to use the 116 woofers in a vented enclosure. If you want the schematic, send me an e-mail.
I also have one pair of B-20 woofer modules if you are interested in those.
I also have one pair of B-20 woofer modules if you are interested in those.
Email Sent...thanx Jack
If you think the boost in the B-20 is workable for a sealed alignment, i'd just assume do sealed instead. Flat extension to 30hz is all i'm looking for for music, so the smaller box would be a welcoming adjustment.
If you don't mind, it appears that there's some voltage passed via the XLRs from the control amp to the modules. Is it just for the LED indicator or is there some active circuitry inside the modules?
If you think the boost in the B-20 is workable for a sealed alignment, i'd just assume do sealed instead. Flat extension to 30hz is all i'm looking for for music, so the smaller box would be a welcoming adjustment.
If you don't mind, it appears that there's some voltage passed via the XLRs from the control amp to the modules. Is it just for the LED indicator or is there some active circuitry inside the modules?
Anthony,
Yes, the B-20 amplifier has a 100kHz oscillator in it. This goes through the power amp section and puts a 100kHz sine wave at about 3V RMS onto the subwoofer signal. There is a rectifier in the B-20 cabinet to turn this into DC power for the LED. You can just junk all of that circuitry if you want. On the latter B-20 amplifiers we disabled the 100kHz oscillator completely to reduce heat build up in the amplifier modules.
The EQ circuit (with value changes) in the B-20 can be used to EQ a sealed subwoofer, but the 116 woofer in small sealed box, will require quite a bit of EQ and not be super flat. The 116 woofer in a vented box, which is still quite small, will need less EQ and be flatter. Vb = 1 cu ft, Fp = 25Hz, high pass of 27Hz with a Q of 1.3. F3 is under 30Hz.
Yes, the B-20 amplifier has a 100kHz oscillator in it. This goes through the power amp section and puts a 100kHz sine wave at about 3V RMS onto the subwoofer signal. There is a rectifier in the B-20 cabinet to turn this into DC power for the LED. You can just junk all of that circuitry if you want. On the latter B-20 amplifiers we disabled the 100kHz oscillator completely to reduce heat build up in the amplifier modules.
The EQ circuit (with value changes) in the B-20 can be used to EQ a sealed subwoofer, but the 116 woofer in small sealed box, will require quite a bit of EQ and not be super flat. The 116 woofer in a vented box, which is still quite small, will need less EQ and be flatter. Vb = 1 cu ft, Fp = 25Hz, high pass of 27Hz with a Q of 1.3. F3 is under 30Hz.
The M-60's continue to impress. I spent some time with them in my main listening area, and they managed to fill the space with coherent, extended sound. I also grabbed a few REW measurements, and here's the bass region on position 1 of the m60-no-sub filter. Not too bad for a 6.5" two way.
This is obviously with no optimization for placement, but I wouldn't have the same placement flexibility as I would with subs anyway. Very enjoyable to listen to.
Keith
This is obviously with no optimization for placement, but I wouldn't have the same placement flexibility as I would with subs anyway. Very enjoyable to listen to.
Keith
Member
Joined 2003
Hi Homemade,homemade said:
I've done some more listening with my crossover (posted here, and have some comments on it:
-Their best attribute is that the high treble has some impact that I rather enjoy. High hats and symbol crashes sound real nice.
-I think I crossed the drivers over a little too high, I can hear some harshness in vocals (especially in "s" sounds) that I think may be due to harmonic distortion due to the cone breakup. I may look into reworking the crossover a little.
Other than that they are quite good, all I have to compare them to is my own speakers, tower speakers using Peerless HDS 8" and a HDS tweeter. I still enjoy the big speakers much better, and it's not just due to the fact that they produce bass. They are still king 😉
Good to hear you're making progress with the XDS. I had a chance to hear the complete XdS system , with XdA/XdW. I can understand the reason the reviews were so good. These are very low distortin speakers. Very nice treble and midrange. But I have to believe that used fulrange , these XdS by themselves would run out of steam , and sound just like anyother overdriven set-up. Even with the XdA/XdW , I noticed some lower mid/upper bass stress. I really feel this complete system requires 2 XdW subs , and to cross the XdS higher to fill in the gap of the single sub set-up. Also , as I stated in a previous post , these magnesium drivers need a very well designed c/o's to prevent overexcursion and cone breakup. I think alot of work will be needed to get a passive c/o that gets the most from these drivers. DSP and steep slopes are what is needed to go from good to excellent. But I'm happy to see the effort being made.
Hope the NHT stuff is available soon
Hope the NHT stuff is available soon
Member
Joined 2003
So I had a look at my crossover, and this is what I can do without changing any expensive components. Basically, I have reduced the main resonance a lot, but there are two pore peaks slightly higher up in frequency that can be reduced further. I can reduce the peaks by ~6dB more by adjusting the notch filter. If I reduce the inductor value by half, and double the capacitor value, this is what happens without affecting the overall frequency response at all.
Have a look at my response curves here. The peaks I am speaking of are at 11 and 13kHz.
The problem is that 0.1mH is the smallest inductor value I can find. I would have to unwind it to 0.5mH, but I don't have an LCR meter, I can only measure capacitance. I have read that I can calculate the inductor value from the dimensions of the one I have (inner diameter, wire gauge, etc), but I would have to look this up which I haven't done yet.
Does anyone looking at my simulated response think this speaker would benefit from an additional 6dB of attenuation of these peaks?
Have a look at my response curves here. The peaks I am speaking of are at 11 and 13kHz.
The problem is that 0.1mH is the smallest inductor value I can find. I would have to unwind it to 0.5mH, but I don't have an LCR meter, I can only measure capacitance. I have read that I can calculate the inductor value from the dimensions of the one I have (inner diameter, wire gauge, etc), but I would have to look this up which I haven't done yet.
Does anyone looking at my simulated response think this speaker would benefit from an additional 6dB of attenuation of these peaks?
Member
Joined 2003
Yes, absolutely.
The metal cone breakups are very difficult to filter properly, and show through on many commercial speakers using these drivers.
An extra 6dB is a beautiful thing.
The metal cone breakups are very difficult to filter properly, and show through on many commercial speakers using these drivers.
An extra 6dB is a beautiful thing.
Member
Joined 2003
Member
Joined 2003
Hmm, that looks like a very small difference to have a significant effect on the sound. I have some 2 Ohm resistors in my stockpile of parts, so I may try that, it'll be fairly easy to do even with the mess of a crossover I built. Looks like it will make the response a bit flatter, lowering a bump at 4.3kHz
I may have changed my mind on this whole "just unwind the inductor a bit" idea. I think it may let more of the fundamental cone resonance through, which will likely only make things worse. I'd have to buy the extra caps, and unwind the inductor a fair bit to get real results, which I'm not sure I'd really want to do without being able to measure the resulting value of the inductor. Being off here could be detrimental, so I will try the resistor change first.
I may have changed my mind on this whole "just unwind the inductor a bit" idea. I think it may let more of the fundamental cone resonance through, which will likely only make things worse. I'd have to buy the extra caps, and unwind the inductor a fair bit to get real results, which I'm not sure I'd really want to do without being able to measure the resulting value of the inductor. Being off here could be detrimental, so I will try the resistor change first.