Glad I ran into this thread! I've been designing a slim tower MMTMM with the B3S (or B3N, not sure yet) and the Dayton ND20TA 3/4" Neo tweeter. I was going for a 5-6" width and roughly 46" height to allow the tweeter to be at ear level. Sealed design that would be crossed over to a sub with a Dayton DVC 8" with dual 8" radiators and a 70w plate amp, using a Panny SA-XR25 receiver as the crossover. The outer 2 mids will serve as the baffle step correction. Plugging this into The Edge is shows a -3db point at 250hz for the baffle step, so running the two outer mids FR and placing a 5.0mH inductor before them should cover them for baffle step reasons, correct? The 5.0mH is for an 8 ohm load, but would it be a 4 ohm load since I'll only be applying it to the 2 outer woofers? If so I can get away with a 2.5mH inductor and save a few bucks. I'm still pretty new to this whole speaker design thing 
As for the crossover, I'd like to keep it as simple as possible. I was thinking of running it anywhere from 4k-6k and if I could get away with a single component each that would be awesome, although I'm not so sure about that with the small tweeter. If I were to do a butterworth 2nd order I'd need to reverse the polarity on the tweeter to correct the phase, right?
Do you guys think this is a good design for something cheap and something to start out with? Total part cost should come in at around $120, so with wood and finish I should be able to complete the pair for around $150.
Thanks!
As for the crossover, I'd like to keep it as simple as possible. I was thinking of running it anywhere from 4k-6k and if I could get away with a single component each that would be awesome, although I'm not so sure about that with the small tweeter. If I were to do a butterworth 2nd order I'd need to reverse the polarity on the tweeter to correct the phase, right?
Do you guys think this is a good design for something cheap and something to start out with? Total part cost should come in at around $120, so with wood and finish I should be able to complete the pair for around $150.
Thanks!
Re: Zaph
Not much unfortunately. Looks like I'm going to finish this TMM first. The enclosures are finished and I'm cutting the baffles this weekend.
These MMTMM's have been in the planning stage for some time, but I have not started to build yet. I've become a little uncertain on the woofers to choose. I know what people would like to see though:
Poll Title: What kind of MMTMM speaker system would you prefer?
Slim with higher quality drivers..................41.8% (59 Votes)
Slim and inexpensive..............................29.7% (42 Votes)
Large with higher quality drivers.................16.3% (23 Votes)
Large and inexpensive.............................12.0% (17 Votes)
Total Votes: 141
Things I do know: I will use the Vifa D26NC55 for the tweeter. In my tests, I've found it to be the best small flange neo tweeter I've ever tested. The woofers will not be the HiVi B3S - not because they are cheap, but because I want something that works a little lower in frequency.
For the woofers, I'm leaning towards the Aura NS3 because I can keep the cabinet narrow. But keeping the cabinet narrow prevents mouning a sub plate amp on back and it also prevents using a larger side firing woofer Possible ideas for a side firing sub might be the Adire Extremis 6.8, though I don't know if I can get enough efficiency out of it.
If I were to go with a large MMTMM, that would be easy: I'd likely use 4 Dayton RS150's per side and grab one of those new 10" Dayton subs with a rear mounting plate amp. Output would certainly not be a problem in that case. Slim complicates the design choices however. The side firing sub presents some issues. Slim is important, but so is output and bass depth. I'm fighting some ideas here, and it has slowed the project. I'm open to ideas.
Maybe that's why so many people wanted to see me keep it slim. It's a difficult design full of hard choices. I'll try not to let you guys down.
Danse said:
Not much unfortunately. Looks like I'm going to finish this TMM first. The enclosures are finished and I'm cutting the baffles this weekend.
These MMTMM's have been in the planning stage for some time, but I have not started to build yet. I've become a little uncertain on the woofers to choose. I know what people would like to see though:
Poll Title: What kind of MMTMM speaker system would you prefer?
Slim with higher quality drivers..................41.8% (59 Votes)
Slim and inexpensive..............................29.7% (42 Votes)
Large with higher quality drivers.................16.3% (23 Votes)
Large and inexpensive.............................12.0% (17 Votes)
Total Votes: 141
Things I do know: I will use the Vifa D26NC55 for the tweeter. In my tests, I've found it to be the best small flange neo tweeter I've ever tested. The woofers will not be the HiVi B3S - not because they are cheap, but because I want something that works a little lower in frequency.
For the woofers, I'm leaning towards the Aura NS3 because I can keep the cabinet narrow. But keeping the cabinet narrow prevents mouning a sub plate amp on back and it also prevents using a larger side firing woofer Possible ideas for a side firing sub might be the Adire Extremis 6.8, though I don't know if I can get enough efficiency out of it.
If I were to go with a large MMTMM, that would be easy: I'd likely use 4 Dayton RS150's per side and grab one of those new 10" Dayton subs with a rear mounting plate amp. Output would certainly not be a problem in that case.
Slim complicates the design choices however. The side firing sub presents some issues. Slim is important, but so is output and bass depth. I'm fighting some ideas here, and it has slowed the project. I'm open to ideas.Maybe that's why so many people wanted to see me keep it slim. It's a difficult design full of hard choices. I'll try not to let you guys down.
Thanks for the update!
Life is full of compromises.
Must we have the sub amp mounted on the box?
Could just make a box and have it sit by the receiver.
+ Could only use one amp, easier to plug to the suboutput of the receiver.
- have to send two sets of wires to the speakers.
TB have some small subs, don`t know if they are any good though. Don`t seem to be very efficient though
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1208_03/w5-1138sa.htm
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1230_04/w6-1139sg.htm
Just more food for thought
Life is full of compromises.
Must we have the sub amp mounted on the box?
Could just make a box and have it sit by the receiver.
+ Could only use one amp, easier to plug to the suboutput of the receiver.
- have to send two sets of wires to the speakers.
TB have some small subs, don`t know if they are any good though. Don`t seem to be very efficient though
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1208_03/w5-1138sa.htm
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1230_04/w6-1139sg.htm
Just more food for thought
Re: Re: Zaph
Hi John,
That would be one d@mn nice speaker.
Personally I hope you go with the RS150s and RS 10 or 12. HO versions reguire small volumes.
Couldn't cabinet width be kept to 6.5 - 7.5"? That certainly fits my idea of slim, but maybe not everybodys?
Maybe try a new poll on defining cabinet dimensions with higher quality drivers? >>> Ill vote for the large MMTMM
.
Just my .02 and maybe a little encouragement.
Thanks for the effort.
Zaph said:
These MMTMM's have been in the planning stage for some time, but I have not started to build yet. I've become a little uncertain on the woofers to choose. I know what people would like to see though:
Poll Title: What kind of MMTMM speaker system would you prefer?
Slim with higher quality drivers..................41.8% (59 Votes)
Slim and inexpensive..............................29.7% (42 Votes)
Large with higher quality drivers.................16.3% (23 Votes)
Large and inexpensive.............................12.0% (17 Votes)
Total Votes: 141
If I were to go with a large MMTMM, that would be easy: I'd likely use 4 Dayton RS150's per side and grab one of those new 10" Dayton subs with a rear mounting plate amp. Output would certainly not be a problem in that case.
Maybe that's why so many people wanted to see me keep it slim. It's a difficult design full of hard choices. I'll try not to let you guys down.
Hi John,
That would be one d@mn nice speaker.
Personally I hope you go with the RS150s and RS 10 or 12. HO versions reguire small volumes.
Couldn't cabinet width be kept to 6.5 - 7.5"? That certainly fits my idea of slim, but maybe not everybodys?
Maybe try a new poll on defining cabinet dimensions with higher quality drivers? >>> Ill vote for the large MMTMM
.Just my .02 and maybe a little encouragement.
Thanks for the effort.
listening to NS3, impressions
I recently found that I needed new computer speakers (old ones were crap, and powered by a motherboard that bit the dust), and I decided to something very similar to Timn8er's NS3 computer project . I ordered my Sonic Impact and NS3s, and through together a quick bass reflex box to check the sound and bass alignment.
So, how does it sound? Obviously the box resonates overly (it's foam-core), but if you can imagine that's not happening then the bass goes nice and low. I'd say I can clearly hear clean bass to the low 50s with this thing. Box volume is in the neighborhood of 200 cubic inches, and the port is 1 inch diameter and about 7 inches long. It plays loud enough for near field computer use, but that low bass I mentioned causes excursion and distortion to go completely nuts at a moderate loudness (moderate loudness obtained with an amp that is NOT the sonic impact).
My big problem with this driver is the treble. Perhaps a filter could tame the high end, but I think there's really only so much you can ask of a 3" aluminum cone driver. Zaph's CSD data seems to show some sort of ringing in the 12khz area, and that might be what's causing the problem. Anyway, it definitely sounds like there's some breakup that would be handled nicely by a tweeter.
Overall, this driver gets my enthusiastic thumbs-up as an extended range mid in a 3-way, or in something like this MMTMM project. It should be noted, though, that this is a novely. It gains points for its "cute" factor more than anything, and stays a serious contender in spite of its size by performing surprisingly well for its size at bass and treble. They only win on terms of performance if size is a major factor.
Oh yeah, and I finally figured out why Zaph is pushing for a rear mounted plate sub amp! It never occurred to me how big this is on SAF, but when I got the Sonic Impact my girlfriend asked, "What's THAT?", and I had to explain that to make the new computer speakers work we would have to fit one more thing into the computer area. Now I can't imagine convincing her that an outboard crossover and two amps are required to make the NEW speakers work!
I recently found that I needed new computer speakers (old ones were crap, and powered by a motherboard that bit the dust), and I decided to something very similar to Timn8er's NS3 computer project . I ordered my Sonic Impact and NS3s, and through together a quick bass reflex box to check the sound and bass alignment.
So, how does it sound? Obviously the box resonates overly (it's foam-core), but if you can imagine that's not happening then the bass goes nice and low. I'd say I can clearly hear clean bass to the low 50s with this thing. Box volume is in the neighborhood of 200 cubic inches, and the port is 1 inch diameter and about 7 inches long. It plays loud enough for near field computer use, but that low bass I mentioned causes excursion and distortion to go completely nuts at a moderate loudness (moderate loudness obtained with an amp that is NOT the sonic impact).
My big problem with this driver is the treble. Perhaps a filter could tame the high end, but I think there's really only so much you can ask of a 3" aluminum cone driver. Zaph's CSD data seems to show some sort of ringing in the 12khz area, and that might be what's causing the problem. Anyway, it definitely sounds like there's some breakup that would be handled nicely by a tweeter.
Overall, this driver gets my enthusiastic thumbs-up as an extended range mid in a 3-way, or in something like this MMTMM project. It should be noted, though, that this is a novely. It gains points for its "cute" factor more than anything, and stays a serious contender in spite of its size by performing surprisingly well for its size at bass and treble. They only win on terms of performance if size is a major factor.
Oh yeah, and I finally figured out why Zaph is pushing for a rear mounted plate sub amp! It never occurred to me how big this is on SAF, but when I got the Sonic Impact my girlfriend asked, "What's THAT?", and I had to explain that to make the new computer speakers work we would have to fit one more thing into the computer area. Now I can't imagine convincing her that an outboard crossover and two amps are required to make the NEW speakers work!
This would work in your slim enclosure but would need its own power, as 83dB sensitivity is probably too low to work off most amps. Takes 300 watts, though. Looks like biamping with a plate amp is in order. Something that can do 500-600W into 4 ohms. Mms is less than the aluminum cones on AV series woofers, so it might be okay with a 100 Hz crossover point.
AE Speakers SL10
I had a chat with John. He is saying that he is going to be moving his operation to his house (which from what I hear is rather large) so he can save some money until things start picking up for him, but these woofers and the AV series are in stock. Eventually once he can get things in order, he hopes to get back into a shop of some sort but his unoccupied 1200ft^2 basement and three-car garage and backyard aux. garage will be where he does his assembly and shipping.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
AE Speakers SL10
I had a chat with John. He is saying that he is going to be moving his operation to his house (which from what I hear is rather large) so he can save some money until things start picking up for him, but these woofers and the AV series are in stock. Eventually once he can get things in order, he hopes to get back into a shop of some sort but his unoccupied 1200ft^2 basement and three-car garage and backyard aux. garage will be where he does his assembly and shipping.
I guess it boils down to what is "thin".
Would 5" on the front baffle be a good compromise?
Maybe easier to intergate the side-firing woofer.
Personal, I wouldn't add an amp to the side firing woofer, may have over-boosted bass. Maybe have the side firing woofer be 6 db more sensitive then the speakers on the front panel.....
Would 5" on the front baffle be a good compromise?
Maybe easier to intergate the side-firing woofer.
Personal, I wouldn't add an amp to the side firing woofer, may have over-boosted bass. Maybe have the side firing woofer be 6 db more sensitive then the speakers on the front panel.....
Actually, you can have too much bass or too little bass, whatever your tastes are, with a separate amplifier. The bass will be better, though, because the plate amp will be able to deliver more current than most stereo receivers (though I did hear some high-end Harman-Kardons that impressed me when hooked up to big JBL Northridges). Anyway, John says he's stocked and ready ready to ship with stuff, so worries about availability are no longer an issue
Here is some inspiration. Saw a picture in a magazine, I do not know the specs. Not sure how wide the front baffle is.
It is Manufactured by Opera Loudspeaker in Italy.
http://www.operaloudspeakers.com/cgi-bin/tebaldi (Small) (Custom).jpg
It is Manufactured by Opera Loudspeaker in Italy.
http://www.operaloudspeakers.com/cgi-bin/tebaldi (Small) (Custom).jpg
John Krutke's progress
John's been pretty busy lately finishing his gorgeous RS subwoofer project that is now posted on the PE board.
Somewhat still under wraps is his progress on this project. Here you can see what appears to be a beta version of the enclosure with its four RS125's and Vifa D26NC55 tweeter. Very impressive so far:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/MMTMM4.pdf
But even more impressive is his November 20th blog post complete with a "thumbnail" image of the MMTMM with side-firing (sub)woofer found here:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/blog.html
Wow, what a professional looking design. His accompanying straight-up and incisive commentary is a bonus.
Don't miss the nearly finished "TMM with wave-guide" project that also looks very promising.
Cheers, Bruce
John's been pretty busy lately finishing his gorgeous RS subwoofer project that is now posted on the PE board.
Somewhat still under wraps is his progress on this project. Here you can see what appears to be a beta version of the enclosure with its four RS125's and Vifa D26NC55 tweeter. Very impressive so far:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/temp/MMTMM4.pdf
But even more impressive is his November 20th blog post complete with a "thumbnail" image of the MMTMM with side-firing (sub)woofer found here:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/blog.html
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Wow, what a professional looking design. His accompanying straight-up and incisive commentary is a bonus.
Don't miss the nearly finished "TMM with wave-guide" project that also looks very promising.
Cheers, Bruce
mini monitor RS125 + D26NC55
Hi Zaph,
I just read Roman microbe project http://www.rjbaudio.com/Microbe/microbe.html
amazing mini bookshelf speaker, just like Hatt Tony gee http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/HATT-III.html
I wonder if use Vifa D26NC55, like you said best mini tweeter, and Dayton RS125 best value mini midbass driver
regards
Kurniadi
Hi Zaph,
I just read Roman microbe project http://www.rjbaudio.com/Microbe/microbe.html
amazing mini bookshelf speaker, just like Hatt Tony gee http://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/HATT-III.html
I wonder if use Vifa D26NC55, like you said best mini tweeter, and Dayton RS125 best value mini midbass driver
regards
Kurniadi
digging this up from the grave...
I have, in my garage, started building the basic version of the system described earlier.
B3S
B3S
ND16FA
B3S
B3S
All in a 2.5 way configuration. Or maybe that's a 2.5.5 or something else. The point is that the top and bottom B3S are .5 woofers.
Driver spacing is amazing on this thing. i've literally got a hair's breadth between drivers. Center to center distance on the outer drivers is under 11 inches.
oh heck here you guys go.. a quicky cad rendering:
A few things:
The cabinets are 4 inches wide. I realize that is a compromise in terms of back-wave of the B3S because the inside is only 3 inches wide and it puts the magnets right up against the walls. We shall see how it affects everything.
Next up, filters. Since this design is a function follows form idea, I was planning on using active filters and a 41Hz 4 channel amp to drive them. I realize I may be able to get away with 2 channels an a series inductor. Or depending on the raw driver response, 1 channel and a simple crossover.
The OTHER and significant portion of this design is that it doesn't play below 200 Hz. This is to control distortion. My solution (tentatively) and in the vain of the 4" wide tower speaker is to put a side-firing Tang Band neodymium 10" woofer behind the tower. I would probably make it active as well. And it should fit in a 4" deep enclosure (give or take! ) Four channel amp that can drive 4 ohms happily.
Anyway, I wanted to wake this thread back up and was also curious if Zaph had done any work on it since the thread went stale.
Matt
I have, in my garage, started building the basic version of the system described earlier.
B3S
B3S
ND16FA
B3S
B3S
All in a 2.5 way configuration. Or maybe that's a 2.5.5 or something else. The point is that the top and bottom B3S are .5 woofers.
Driver spacing is amazing on this thing. i've literally got a hair's breadth between drivers. Center to center distance on the outer drivers is under 11 inches.
oh heck here you guys go.. a quicky cad rendering:
A few things:
The cabinets are 4 inches wide. I realize that is a compromise in terms of back-wave of the B3S because the inside is only 3 inches wide and it puts the magnets right up against the walls. We shall see how it affects everything.
Next up, filters. Since this design is a function follows form idea, I was planning on using active filters and a 41Hz 4 channel amp to drive them. I realize I may be able to get away with 2 channels an a series inductor. Or depending on the raw driver response, 1 channel and a simple crossover.
The OTHER and significant portion of this design is that it doesn't play below 200 Hz. This is to control distortion. My solution (tentatively) and in the vain of the 4" wide tower speaker is to put a side-firing Tang Band neodymium 10" woofer behind the tower. I would probably make it active as well. And it should fit in a 4" deep enclosure (give or take!
) Four channel amp that can drive 4 ohms happily. Anyway, I wanted to wake this thread back up and was also curious if Zaph had done any work on it since the thread went stale.
Matt
I don't understand. This type of design usually is best with the closest space between the mid-woofers and the lowest x-over frequency. Is it not?
For example would the D26NC55 not allow for a lower x-over? I would also keep an eye on Zaph's site as he is about to post results for 2 small tweeters from Vifa that might be nice for this project.
Also having 4x 3inch mid-woofers so far apart, wouldn't it better with just 2x 4inch drivers allot closer? M4N or B4N both have round flanges that allow for flush mounting and closer placement to the tweeter.
Just my 2 cents.
Peter
For example would the D26NC55 not allow for a lower x-over? I would also keep an eye on Zaph's site as he is about to post results for 2 small tweeters from Vifa that might be nice for this project.
Also having 4x 3inch mid-woofers so far apart, wouldn't it better with just 2x 4inch drivers allot closer? M4N or B4N both have round flanges that allow for flush mounting and closer placement to the tweeter.
Just my 2 cents.
Peter
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.