atc mid
....btw you could start out with using the original atc filter for the mid and then trim the bass and treble units to it....?🙂
....btw you could start out with using the original atc filter for the mid and then trim the bass and treble units to it....?🙂
Just my 2 cents ...
Like planet10 already said , i also consider the Fostex 168 Sigma an excellent midrange. I hooked them up just a couple of days ago (i had them laying around for a while cuz i was messing with other drivers ..) and yeah this fostex drivers definetly got talent.
I personally wouldn´t go for the "wohaaaaaaaaa" drivers from scanspeak and excel. You pay a lot of bucks for the name and image ...
It all comes down to this:
I LOVE paper ... i HATE aluminium and all other metal / polypropylene etcetc cones.
The fostex (as well as the triangle ...??) have lightweight paper cones plus high SPL and this in in my opinion the key to a good midrange.
Cheers
PS:
Ok about tweeters ... i like the Morel tweeters very much. The big MDM 55 is great , the MDT 33 is expensive but great , too. MDT 30/32 are as good as the MDT33 (well maybe some minor ... details or stuff) but they are great value for money.
I have heard the MDM55 and MDT 40 combination once and it was very very good.
I haven´t heard the ATC unfortunately but they sure look great and ATC has an excellent reputation ...
Cheers
Like planet10 already said , i also consider the Fostex 168 Sigma an excellent midrange. I hooked them up just a couple of days ago (i had them laying around for a while cuz i was messing with other drivers ..) and yeah this fostex drivers definetly got talent.
I personally wouldn´t go for the "wohaaaaaaaaa" drivers from scanspeak and excel. You pay a lot of bucks for the name and image ...
It all comes down to this:
I LOVE paper ... i HATE aluminium and all other metal / polypropylene etcetc cones.
The fostex (as well as the triangle ...??) have lightweight paper cones plus high SPL and this in in my opinion the key to a good midrange.
Cheers
PS:
Ok about tweeters ... i like the Morel tweeters very much. The big MDM 55 is great , the MDT 33 is expensive but great , too. MDT 30/32 are as good as the MDT33 (well maybe some minor ... details or stuff) but they are great value for money.
I have heard the MDM55 and MDT 40 combination once and it was very very good.
I haven´t heard the ATC unfortunately but they sure look great and ATC has an excellent reputation ...
Cheers
navin said:
You know my response. /hehe
More than nice would be.
SA8535 tweeter $600
PHL 2520 midrange $169 ?
Lambda TD15H Apollo $479
You really don't need the Apollo
version unless you want to drive
>500w on the woofer. But don't
use LE version, use Faraday motor
for this design.
On the test bench in the garage,
just playing the tweeter and midrange
I can create some insane concrete vibrations to be felt on the floor.
This design isn't for everyone, you
may scare off those mellow neighbors in Fremont... /hehe
I should have some weird pics of
my custom made tweeter enclosures
within 2 weeks.
Why mess around with TL's when
monster subwoofer are a dime a dozen?
stereo bass needs to be well defined (hence my penchant for sealed/aperiodic boxes, TLs and now dipoles).
I tried my Lambda TD15 Apollo woofer
in a sealed box and ported box, with
crossover and without, every test I could
think of.
Throwing out the door all the hype
and stereotyping, this Lambda woofer
exceeded expectation peforming bass,
midbass, and midrange running full range
with a rear firing dual 4" flared port
4 ft^3 box tuned to 35hz. It worked better than the theorectically better
3 ft^3 sealed box. There were more
pros than cons in the ported design.
The ported design gave me much lower
bottom end, increased effeciency, lower
cone excursion near port tuning (less distortion), dual flare large diameter
rear port created no audible port noise
with 600 watts of power driving the woofer.
Normally, noone is going to run their
Lambda wide open, but it was designed to function as a wideband
driver for the unity horns that Nick
developed, a 2 way design. For a 3 way
design, you may end up running the crossover around 200hz - 500hz,
even up to 1khz if you use soft dome
midranges, in any case, the woofer is up to the task.
If you want low SPL defined bass,
then buy some headphones /hehe
If you want high SPL defined bass,
then get some Lambda TD15's with
faraday motor, Apollo being top of the line.
This isn't the only solution, you
can always create a line source
of Seas Excel 8" (or equivalent)
for well defined bass, the line source
gives you the SPL.
I tried my Lambda TD15 Apollo woofer
in a sealed box and ported box, with
crossover and without, every test I could
think of.
Throwing out the door all the hype
and stereotyping, this Lambda woofer
exceeded expectation peforming bass,
midbass, and midrange running full range
with a rear firing dual 4" flared port
4 ft^3 box tuned to 35hz. It worked better than the theorectically better
3 ft^3 sealed box. There were more
pros than cons in the ported design.
The ported design gave me much lower
bottom end, increased effeciency, lower
cone excursion near port tuning (less distortion), dual flare large diameter
rear port created no audible port noise
with 600 watts of power driving the woofer.
Normally, noone is going to run their
Lambda wide open, but it was designed to function as a wideband
driver for the unity horns that Nick
developed, a 2 way design. For a 3 way
design, you may end up running the crossover around 200hz - 500hz,
even up to 1khz if you use soft dome
midranges, in any case, the woofer is up to the task.
If you want low SPL defined bass,
then buy some headphones /hehe
If you want high SPL defined bass,
then get some Lambda TD15's with
faraday motor, Apollo being top of the line.
This isn't the only solution, you
can always create a line source
of Seas Excel 8" (or equivalent)
for well defined bass, the line source
gives you the SPL.
beaming
Isn't beaming going to be an issue in the 1-5 Khz range?
Assuming your crossing over there.
Seems like the PHL 3040 10' seems like the perfect speaker.
Except of beaming in the HF range.
Wouldn't it be better just to do a push pull arrangement with two 6.5 drivers?
So you get less beaming at HF's and extended lower end with less excusion limit worries
David
Isn't beaming going to be an issue in the 1-5 Khz range?
Assuming your crossing over there.
Seems like the PHL 3040 10' seems like the perfect speaker.
Except of beaming in the HF range.
Wouldn't it be better just to do a push pull arrangement with two 6.5 drivers?
So you get less beaming at HF's and extended lower end with less excusion limit worries
David
As far as the ATC, I would like to bring up one point: How often do you read a manufacturer's frequency use recommendations, only to look as the responce curves, and say... yeah right, I would use this only after trimming the the responce by a couple of octaves on each side, or use some serious impedence tameing parts. With ATC, it is hard to say, since they do not publish the curves. I would love to use these drivers, but I am dying to see the graphs.
as mentioned before, if used "correctly" the atc mid deliveres in every way.........even if i took the biggest top$$$$$$lotto i would still use it...
thylantyr said:
dude thanks for teh recomendations but....
1. what is the SA8535 tweeter and why shoud one spend so much on a tweeter if the mid is under $200. the is mid is where the ear is most sensitive.
2. too small a mid and one does not get enough SPLs. too large a mid and one has to deal with beaming. The mid should be able to cover 80-3k only because i hope to use the same driver for rear and center. this means a mid about 6" dia.
3. a 4 cu. ft will be too large. i was looking at a box that would be about 8" wide, less than 20" deep and about 28-30" tall. using dipole technology i was thinking of 2 x 12" or 1 x 15". a diploe box size is less as there is no box. my concept of a dipole is making a wood structure with a cross section of an "I". the width of the I is 8" the depth of the I is 20" the I is about 28" tall. that would fit 2 x 12".
the woofer would then fire sideways and the mid and tweeter would be mounted on a panel on top of the I.
My ideas are pretty exotic, not for everyone.
what is the SA8535 tweeter
http://www.stageaccompany.com/cdload.html
and why shoud one spend so much on a tweeter if the mid is under $200.
Are you unhappy that the midrange is affordable?
the is mid is where the ear is most sensitive.
After you hear an SA planar you will say that both tweeters
and midrange are important in system design, you have to
cover the majority of the audible range.
2. too small a mid and one does not get enough SPLs. too large a mid and one has to deal with beaming.
Beaming is a personal preference issue. Are you going to
cater to a large audience in a large room or just sit and
listen to music ? If you are stationary I would worry about
beaming even from a 15' diameter driver.
Normally I would use the PHL1120 not PHL2520 if the SA planar
is not used, perhaps if you used a normal dome tweeter. But
when doing auditions and mixing/matching drivers, the synergy
between 2520 and SA are really good, but the smaller PHL1120
works very good too, it not as powerful in the low midrange region as the larger 8" midrange.
The mid should be able to cover 80-3k only because i hope to
use the same driver for rear and center.
Check this out. Flat down to 1.6khz
http://www.stageaccompany.com/download/files/product/techdoc sa8535.pdf
3. a 4 cu. ft will be too large.
I tried my Lambda 15" in a 3 cu. ft box sealed, works well too.
I think dual Lambda TD12H would be very cool.
I was trying to figure out a design also that had a small width
with sideways firing woofers, but my design called for woofers
that needed to operate up to 500hz so the sideways firing idea
would destroy the sonics, I ended up designing a completely
new system, much larger. /hehe
If your woofers are doing low pass 100hz or less, sideways
is not a problem.
The thing that I hate about system design is compromising.
The less compromising I do, the larger the design becomes. /hehe
My compromise was this.
I decided to place priority on music then HT, this allowed me
to design the two big front cabinets, the center channel
can be designed using the same midrange/tweeter, but the
surrounds would just be a normal design, perhaps an ordinary
dome tweeter and dual 6" midranges. MTM or TMM ...
These ideas are too extreme and not practical for most people,
but if you want big sound, it would do it. The SA planar for
example, I love the sonics but it's not mechanically user friendly.
The mounting holes are not threaded, they are not thru-holes,
the diaphram blocks the holes internally. You have two slots
to insert some clips for mouting - poor mechanical design.
The second issue is electrical. They have the terminals on the
front not rear. I have to do some modifications here too.
In the end, I designed some aluminum enclosures for these
tweeters, they are in the shop being built, these enclosures
will fix the issues, but at an added cost.
Now check this driver out.
http://www.slsloudspeakers.com/prd1000.htm
The rumor mill said that the engineer who worked on the
SA planar project developed the SLS planar. As you see,
they finally worked out the mechanicals, it looks easy to
work with. But, the rumor is... SLS doesn't sell raw drivers
to DIY..... arg !!!
what is the SA8535 tweeter
http://www.stageaccompany.com/cdload.html
and why shoud one spend so much on a tweeter if the mid is under $200.
Are you unhappy that the midrange is affordable?
the is mid is where the ear is most sensitive.
After you hear an SA planar you will say that both tweeters
and midrange are important in system design, you have to
cover the majority of the audible range.
2. too small a mid and one does not get enough SPLs. too large a mid and one has to deal with beaming.
Beaming is a personal preference issue. Are you going to
cater to a large audience in a large room or just sit and
listen to music ? If you are stationary I would worry about
beaming even from a 15' diameter driver.
Normally I would use the PHL1120 not PHL2520 if the SA planar
is not used, perhaps if you used a normal dome tweeter. But
when doing auditions and mixing/matching drivers, the synergy
between 2520 and SA are really good, but the smaller PHL1120
works very good too, it not as powerful in the low midrange region as the larger 8" midrange.
The mid should be able to cover 80-3k only because i hope to
use the same driver for rear and center.
Check this out. Flat down to 1.6khz
http://www.stageaccompany.com/download/files/product/techdoc sa8535.pdf
3. a 4 cu. ft will be too large.
I tried my Lambda 15" in a 3 cu. ft box sealed, works well too.
I think dual Lambda TD12H would be very cool.
I was trying to figure out a design also that had a small width
with sideways firing woofers, but my design called for woofers
that needed to operate up to 500hz so the sideways firing idea
would destroy the sonics, I ended up designing a completely
new system, much larger. /hehe
If your woofers are doing low pass 100hz or less, sideways
is not a problem.
The thing that I hate about system design is compromising.
The less compromising I do, the larger the design becomes. /hehe
My compromise was this.
I decided to place priority on music then HT, this allowed me
to design the two big front cabinets, the center channel
can be designed using the same midrange/tweeter, but the
surrounds would just be a normal design, perhaps an ordinary
dome tweeter and dual 6" midranges. MTM or TMM ...
These ideas are too extreme and not practical for most people,
but if you want big sound, it would do it. The SA planar for
example, I love the sonics but it's not mechanically user friendly.
The mounting holes are not threaded, they are not thru-holes,
the diaphram blocks the holes internally. You have two slots
to insert some clips for mouting - poor mechanical design.
The second issue is electrical. They have the terminals on the
front not rear. I have to do some modifications here too.
In the end, I designed some aluminum enclosures for these
tweeters, they are in the shop being built, these enclosures
will fix the issues, but at an added cost.
Now check this driver out.
http://www.slsloudspeakers.com/prd1000.htm
The rumor mill said that the engineer who worked on the
SA planar project developed the SLS planar. As you see,
they finally worked out the mechanicals, it looks easy to
work with. But, the rumor is... SLS doesn't sell raw drivers
to DIY..... arg !!!
thylantyr said:
Firstly many thanks for your quick and detailed response. unfortunately i live in an apt. the whole apt is less than 1000 sq. ft. so there is limited ammount of space i can dedicate to a HT/stereo system.
my thoughts were this...
dipole woofers (or TL) upto 100-150Hz
a good mid from 100-2/3k
a good tweeter from 3k up.
my present system works on a simialr principle but the drivers are dated. The subs are 2x12" audio concepts DV12s, the mids are 2 x6" scan speak 18W8546 and the tweeter is a 9900. see pic below.
Attachments
what ia am now trying to do is build a system that will outperfrom this system but occupy less floor space and look more aesthetic.
so i was considering a tower about 8"-10" wide, 20" deep. the bottom part of the tower would house the woofer (either dipole or TL). the top part a 6" 2way or similar system. the top part would then be replicated for rear and center.
here is a pic of both channels...excuse the mess...
so i was considering a tower about 8"-10" wide, 20" deep. the bottom part of the tower would house the woofer (either dipole or TL). the top part a 6" 2way or similar system. the top part would then be replicated for rear and center.
here is a pic of both channels...excuse the mess...
another option for a dipole bass is to use a palanr driver for the top like....
http://www.ele.tut.fi/~artoko/audio/speakers/hybrid.html
http://www.ele.tut.fi/~artoko/audio/speakers/hybrid.html
trying to do is build a system that will outperfrom
What sound do you desire that your
current system doesn't give you ?
Are you driving that system with
generous power ?
What sound do you desire that your
current system doesn't give you ?
Are you driving that system with
generous power ?
well i cant say my system is really deficient in any one area it is that i am still chasing the holy grail - untill i question IS IT LIVE I will never be satifsfied.
also i want to look at dipoles and TL
power.....funny u ask....
subs are powered by a Carver M1.0t
the sats are powered by a home made amp. the tranny is 1200VA there is 60,000uf of caps, the bridge rectifier is 100A per channel, the design is a modification of the B&K ST140 only I use 3 pairs of Toshiba MOSFETS per channel and use a higher grade driver stage biased into class A.
cooling for the power amp is via 2 huge heat sinks. the heat sinks are 8" high, 14" deep and have 10 2.5" fins. there is a thermistor on teh heat sinks that turn on 4 4" computer fans at 55 deg. C.
the amp weighs 33 kgs.
the preamp is home made too. the CD player is a Phonosophie with KI mods of you can say a 63Ki with phonosophie mods.
there are other componets too...see pic below
also i want to look at dipoles and TL
power.....funny u ask....
subs are powered by a Carver M1.0t
the sats are powered by a home made amp. the tranny is 1200VA there is 60,000uf of caps, the bridge rectifier is 100A per channel, the design is a modification of the B&K ST140 only I use 3 pairs of Toshiba MOSFETS per channel and use a higher grade driver stage biased into class A.
cooling for the power amp is via 2 huge heat sinks. the heat sinks are 8" high, 14" deep and have 10 2.5" fins. there is a thermistor on teh heat sinks that turn on 4 4" computer fans at 55 deg. C.
the amp weighs 33 kgs.
the preamp is home made too. the CD player is a Phonosophie with KI mods of you can say a 63Ki with phonosophie mods.
there are other componets too...see pic below
Attachments
mid
years ago i had speakers like yours, but i couldn't live with the sound they made......then i got the atc scm 100sl, and what a lift in quality - i'm mainly referring to the mid as this is what you seek, there are several things this mid can do....it really covers such a wide area (350-3800) and its very easy to hear the difference if you have or do not have a crossover in this area....
it is the least colourring mid i have experienced....
its dispersion is just much better than a cone type....
it can play very loud....
i don't feel any lack of dynamics....
its very easy to use - it doesn't need a box....
it mates well with all dome tweeters....
its spl/w is above average - 94 db.....
but...its very expensive.....
🙂
years ago i had speakers like yours, but i couldn't live with the sound they made......then i got the atc scm 100sl, and what a lift in quality - i'm mainly referring to the mid as this is what you seek, there are several things this mid can do....it really covers such a wide area (350-3800) and its very easy to hear the difference if you have or do not have a crossover in this area....
it is the least colourring mid i have experienced....
its dispersion is just much better than a cone type....
it can play very loud....
i don't feel any lack of dynamics....
its very easy to use - it doesn't need a box....
it mates well with all dome tweeters....
its spl/w is above average - 94 db.....
but...its very expensive.....
🙂
Re: mid
At what frequncy do you feel the dispertion of the ATC becomes directional (worsening of the off-exis responce). Also, do you think it is a good idea to get "lesser" tweeters when using the ATC, since it goes so high, as most respectable tweeters are crossed over at 2k and below?
tbla said:
At what frequncy do you feel the dispertion of the ATC becomes directional (worsening of the off-exis responce). Also, do you think it is a good idea to get "lesser" tweeters when using the ATC, since it goes so high, as most respectable tweeters are crossed over at 2k and below?
atc mid
domes work for me, i know that other driveunits can have better resolution....but if there is a middome its best to use a hfdome too.
imho, if one uses a 1" and the crossover point is too low < 3000hz it can not move enough air and many instruments looses there natural size.....
🙂
well, i don't know but my guess would be > 5 khz....there is absolutely no signs of beaming.
i think that you should use the best your money can buy, personally i would use a dometweeter and if i should choose i would go for the dynaudio esotar dome or the 3/4" hiquphon dome....http://www.isa.dknet.dk/~hiquphon/page1.html#top
domes work for me, i know that other driveunits can have better resolution....but if there is a middome its best to use a hfdome too.
imho, if one uses a 1" and the crossover point is too low < 3000hz it can not move enough air and many instruments looses there natural size.....
🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.