nice speaker but I wouldn't use a Titanium diaphragm for indoor use. I would instead use Faital Pro HF10AK with that horn and I prefer 8PR155 over 8PR210. just sounds a little bit more lush and detailed on midrange area. Oh damn! I also would use Faital Pro 15FH520 or 15PR400 there.
Well, TL-III will physically fit in that room. What else is in there? A fridge, or a bed maybe? Might be getting a bit cramped in there.
I'd suggest to make two cheap mockup boxes from cardboard or similar with the same dimensions as the speakers would be. Put them in the room at a position that should work well (stereo triangle and stuff). This has helped me a lot in the past to decide if things fit in or not.
I'd suggest to make two cheap mockup boxes from cardboard or similar with the same dimensions as the speakers would be. Put them in the room at a position that should work well (stereo triangle and stuff). This has helped me a lot in the past to decide if things fit in or not.
The room compatibility depends on many factors, TL3 have less problem in small rooms because the bass is handled by a DSP controlled amp. But DSP can be used on normal passive speakers either.
That's a great idea, I'll do this later.
There's a bed, a desk, and bookshelves. The speakers would be placed in both corners, which are dead corners anyway since there's a desk.
https://i.imgur.com/tr7Mjos.jpg
Thanks guys for all the help and feedback!
Nice discussion. I am interested in this design because of the most criticized aspect, namely: the use of high-efficiency drivers to tune back the system to a "ridiculous 92db" (?). It seems crazy, but I think there is a rationale that I agree with.
I think Troels always starts from the bass and mid-bass. And he is right because below 300Hz we get the most important half of the music power, and the most critical part to reproduce in boxy toys like our loudspeakers.
There are certain things that a small woofer cannot do whatever it goes low. I spent years trying to understand why in my room none of the best 8 or 10-inches woofers could reproduce certain sounds (e.g. drums, synths, some male voices) in a realistic way even if some of them were perfectly able to play sufficient SPL in the low region. Frequency response is a time-average at frequency components, it can't explain what happens in the time domain, and frequency response doesn't say how a woofer renders certain sounds physically. If you like a massive, dense, and realistic sound field, there is nothing that can beat certain 15-inch woofers (large Qms, large acceleration factor, relatively low inductance, and generous Xmax).
He wanted to have a 15-inch pro woofer that is used in a non-standard way. These woofers in pro applications are used to go up to the mid region, and down to the upper bass, certainly not real low basses when pushed hard. However, they can do magic in the middle of their usual range, which is 60Hz-300Hz. The problem with these 15-inch pro woofers is that on average they have an FS of about 30-35Hz, and unless you tune the box in a boomy way a 97db 1W/1mt woofer cannot maintain such a clean SPL below, say, 50Hz even considering room gain.
Take the Faital 15PR400 (one of the best 15-inch to me), it is rated at 99dB... but this happens above 100Hz. Suppose we cross it at around 250Hz, and we reduce the level of 7dB. Of course, below the critical 50Hz its response is scaled down by 7dB, and apparently we just lose its SPL capability there. However, he uses DSP to push up the response below 50Hz and he can do it safely because by reducing the reference level of 7dB he has plenty of headroom to maintain spectacular linearity (low excursion) down to the hell of the first two octaves. This also explains the unconventional choice of putting this kind of woofers in boxes that are much smaller than usual. I believe he uses to tune the bass-reflex to achieve the best possible group delay and excursion because the headroom allows him to tune the SPL.
I do something similar in my 4-way project where I cross a 98dB 18-inch pro woofer at 90Hz at which point the reference level is set to get about 93dB 1W/1m. The only difference is that I use an high-quality analog xover followed by a pro digital eq feeding a 200W high-quality solid-state amp capable to put out 80A of current. I say this because another critique often made is that one drives these efficient pro woofers with low-quality solid-state stuff... SET-lovers get crazy here! I've often seen SET-lovers trying to put up efficient systems with pro woofers... it doesn't work. Below 100Hz these woofers, having strong motors, want current and control that a tube amp cannot do. During peaks these monsters are nasty electro-mechanic devices... unfortunately music reproduction is all bout how quickly and easily you can play a peak from the average (= dynamic range)
Everybody advertises its own system philosophy. Mine is very close to that of Troels in this project, and I think it's a smart design. I am now proud of my system that for certain things I consider spectacular. I'd invite all of you to listen to the opening of Beethoven's 5th, or "In the Flesh?" by Pink Floyd... after 25+ years of hifi I've finally reached my nirvana.
Regard
Pietro
PS: I have no personal or commercial relationship with Troels Gravensen
I think Troels always starts from the bass and mid-bass. And he is right because below 300Hz we get the most important half of the music power, and the most critical part to reproduce in boxy toys like our loudspeakers.
There are certain things that a small woofer cannot do whatever it goes low. I spent years trying to understand why in my room none of the best 8 or 10-inches woofers could reproduce certain sounds (e.g. drums, synths, some male voices) in a realistic way even if some of them were perfectly able to play sufficient SPL in the low region. Frequency response is a time-average at frequency components, it can't explain what happens in the time domain, and frequency response doesn't say how a woofer renders certain sounds physically. If you like a massive, dense, and realistic sound field, there is nothing that can beat certain 15-inch woofers (large Qms, large acceleration factor, relatively low inductance, and generous Xmax).
He wanted to have a 15-inch pro woofer that is used in a non-standard way. These woofers in pro applications are used to go up to the mid region, and down to the upper bass, certainly not real low basses when pushed hard. However, they can do magic in the middle of their usual range, which is 60Hz-300Hz. The problem with these 15-inch pro woofers is that on average they have an FS of about 30-35Hz, and unless you tune the box in a boomy way a 97db 1W/1mt woofer cannot maintain such a clean SPL below, say, 50Hz even considering room gain.
Take the Faital 15PR400 (one of the best 15-inch to me), it is rated at 99dB... but this happens above 100Hz. Suppose we cross it at around 250Hz, and we reduce the level of 7dB. Of course, below the critical 50Hz its response is scaled down by 7dB, and apparently we just lose its SPL capability there. However, he uses DSP to push up the response below 50Hz and he can do it safely because by reducing the reference level of 7dB he has plenty of headroom to maintain spectacular linearity (low excursion) down to the hell of the first two octaves. This also explains the unconventional choice of putting this kind of woofers in boxes that are much smaller than usual. I believe he uses to tune the bass-reflex to achieve the best possible group delay and excursion because the headroom allows him to tune the SPL.
I do something similar in my 4-way project where I cross a 98dB 18-inch pro woofer at 90Hz at which point the reference level is set to get about 93dB 1W/1m. The only difference is that I use an high-quality analog xover followed by a pro digital eq feeding a 200W high-quality solid-state amp capable to put out 80A of current. I say this because another critique often made is that one drives these efficient pro woofers with low-quality solid-state stuff... SET-lovers get crazy here! I've often seen SET-lovers trying to put up efficient systems with pro woofers... it doesn't work. Below 100Hz these woofers, having strong motors, want current and control that a tube amp cannot do. During peaks these monsters are nasty electro-mechanic devices... unfortunately music reproduction is all bout how quickly and easily you can play a peak from the average (= dynamic range)
Everybody advertises its own system philosophy. Mine is very close to that of Troels in this project, and I think it's a smart design. I am now proud of my system that for certain things I consider spectacular. I'd invite all of you to listen to the opening of Beethoven's 5th, or "In the Flesh?" by Pink Floyd... after 25+ years of hifi I've finally reached my nirvana.
Regard
Pietro
PS: I have no personal or commercial relationship with Troels Gravensen
Last edited:
It's simple. Troels has to obey the same law of physics as everyone else. The baffle step will always "eat" 6 dB of the efficiency in the bass (below the 2pi / 4pi transition). Therefore you will never be able to get the nominal woofer efficiency, which is for 2pi space.
I found this an interesting discussion, i use one of Troels designs, Fusion BAD, also using relatively inexpensive high power solid state for the bass with DSP and my quite ordinary valve prima luna doing the rest of the work. i think this principle works well and seeing him use it more and more he obviously comes to the same conclusion.
I use a similar design from Troels: his MUN-17, with a Hyper plate amp driving the 11" woofer and Kevin Kennedy's differential 300B monoblocs driving the mid and high frequencies. It works extremely well 🙂.
Alx
I know this takes us off thread but i searched out your article on the monoblocs you mentioned, and from there to the speakers, which has a link which is blocked outside the university, what is your TT, and did you know that Mark Baker of Origin Live was at the University?
M
M
Hi Mike,
I lost the use of the Uni website a few years ago - the writeup of my build of Kevin's monoblocs is now here. I meant "Hypex", rather than "Hyper", in my last post, of course - damn autocorrect!
My turntable is a Pink Triangle PT TOO, modified by the Funk Firm to full Vector status, with a Funk Firm FX-R and Lyra Delos.
I know Origin Live are based in Southampton, but have never had anything to do with Mark or the company. No particular reason, just that my interest always went elsewhere!
Alex
I lost the use of the Uni website a few years ago - the writeup of my build of Kevin's monoblocs is now here. I meant "Hypex", rather than "Hyper", in my last post, of course - damn autocorrect!
My turntable is a Pink Triangle PT TOO, modified by the Funk Firm to full Vector status, with a Funk Firm FX-R and Lyra Delos.
I know Origin Live are based in Southampton, but have never had anything to do with Mark or the company. No particular reason, just that my interest always went elsewhere!
Alex
I get great fun and satisfaction making some of this stuff, and i think Troels' experience allows him to be very helpful as he saves one making silly errors and also tells you what he can help you with and what he cannot! (e.g. telling you what you will or wont like)
I also muck around with RTA, you can see on the parallel TA thread...........M
I also muck around with RTA, you can see on the parallel TA thread...........M
Did you check with Troels already? - i believe from reading his site he is likely to say that's ok!
If Mike56, according to troels, should work, I think so too, just wanted to hear some more opinions.
In any case, in a while I will verify it empirically, there I will leave doubts ;-)
Best regards
In any case, in a while I will verify it empirically, there I will leave doubts ;-)
Best regards
Hey guys,
I'm considering building Troels' TL3, so I made a few drawings to see what would be my preferred design for the cabinets (including grill cloth).
I haven't made any decision yet. If anyone wants to comment on which one they prefer, and why, I would appreciate it.
Thanks
Version 1
Version 2
I'm considering building Troels' TL3, so I made a few drawings to see what would be my preferred design for the cabinets (including grill cloth).
I haven't made any decision yet. If anyone wants to comment on which one they prefer, and why, I would appreciate it.
Thanks
Version 1
Version 2
Last edited:
That could very well be the best path when "I grow up", that is, when my knowledge increases exponentially and allows those feats! 🙂 👍