Hi all
Many years ago I had a pair of Triangle Magellan Cello SW2 before personal circumstances forced sale. I’d now like to try build my own speakers to try better the Cellos. I do recall favouring the sound of the Cellos, particularly vocals.
Any publicly available designs that may replicate or better the Cellos?
I am very comfortable with carpentry work by the way.
Thanks
P.
Many years ago I had a pair of Triangle Magellan Cello SW2 before personal circumstances forced sale. I’d now like to try build my own speakers to try better the Cellos. I do recall favouring the sound of the Cellos, particularly vocals.
Any publicly available designs that may replicate or better the Cellos?
I am very comfortable with carpentry work by the way.
Thanks
P.
Hi buggers, I have started a better thread with more info that has developed, but haven't discussed the Magellan. However, on the Magellan Cello, I loved the life like voices produced. Just for info, was this likely to be coming from the midrange or the tweeter (forgive my basic knowledge, I couldn't hazard a guess as to where these might crossover)? WhatHifi magazine described the magellans as there to enjoy music rather than analyse. That is exactly how I felt about them. In the other thread, i have decided on Scanspeak Discovery 3WC design from Troels G and hope to have something similar that I had with the magellans.
Unlikely.
Triangle makes their own drivers which are more efficient than most "Hifi" loudspeaker manufacturers use and this has an audible effect that's more difficult to achieve with most available drivers. Their midbass drivers are particularly unusual (small diameter honeycomb with large motor), and their tweeters are also unconventional (and could be improved upon). My guess is that both the tweeter and the midrange are still "padded-down" in spl to properly crossover to midbass driver array (because of baffle-step compensation despite their larger motors).
You could do something similar but better - but it wouldn't be quite the same and it would be a LOT larger.
Triangle makes their own drivers which are more efficient than most "Hifi" loudspeaker manufacturers use and this has an audible effect that's more difficult to achieve with most available drivers. Their midbass drivers are particularly unusual (small diameter honeycomb with large motor), and their tweeters are also unconventional (and could be improved upon). My guess is that both the tweeter and the midrange are still "padded-down" in spl to properly crossover to midbass driver array (because of baffle-step compensation despite their larger motors).
You could do something similar but better - but it wouldn't be quite the same and it would be a LOT larger.
What characteristics should I be seeking in a DIY build to better them? Will the Scanspeak Discovery 3wc design from from Troels G get me there or is that not large enough?
I used to have Antals a long, long time ago. Quite unusual speakers and drivers - high sensitivity, zingy tweeters. Really want a valve amp partner, IMO.
I think driver format and ways would be a start - that dual 6-7" woofer setup has a distinct kind of sound in a normal room.
I don't think the 3WC is the right choice in that regard, rather Troels' CNO-Grande or Ekta-Grande -- these are both eye-wateringly expensive.
Maybe these http://speakerdesignworks.com/MiniStatements.html
There are numerous issues with the triangles - beaming, not particularly linear, having to pad-down the treble and midrange, low output impedance, etc.. (and preferably a more extended lower freq. response).
The 3WC II doesn't have an efficient midrange driver nor are the rest of the drivers particularly efficient. My guess is that clarity for the 3WC will be better than the triangle, but it won't have as "lively" a presentation. (..what brit's call PRAT, also sometimes referred to as dynamic expression.)
Troel's Faital 3WC-10 might get you closer to what you want at a moderate price. I'd ask Troel's though.
For more money and likely a better result than the Triangle (though similar) I'd look to the open-source Monkey Coffin (and particularly the "Tower" version)
https://github.com/mbrennwa/osmcdoc
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/open-source-monkey-box.327594/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/open-source-monkey-tower.349736/
..going beyond this would be a more efficient design.
Last edited:
Greets!
Per this interactive chart, vocals are from ~ 100 - 16 kHz, though FWIW Altec spec'd their prosound monitor systems as only being 'uniform' (~flat) from 250 - 8 kHz for vocals, typically using either 500 or 800 Hz XO points and 12-1600 Hz studio/HIFI apps, but these are 12-15" drivers + compression horns, so in your case, whatever driver sizes you choose will somewhat limit your XO choices.
In terms of overall sound quality, would the Scanspeak Discovery 3WC likely get me at or beyond th me Triangles?
I think in some respects it might be better - like detail retrieval (after the midrange's suspension is "worked-in").
Lower freq. extension might be a bit better.
It's also going to be less "dynamic" sounding, less "fast" and the midbass region won't have as much "boost".
More of an apples and oranges comparison. If you really want an "apple" you need a loudspeaker with "apple-like" attributes. The Faital 3WC-10 is much closer to that "apple".
Lower freq. extension might be a bit better.
It's also going to be less "dynamic" sounding, less "fast" and the midbass region won't have as much "boost".
More of an apples and oranges comparison. If you really want an "apple" you need a loudspeaker with "apple-like" attributes. The Faital 3WC-10 is much closer to that "apple".