Hello there,
I would like to build a pair of speakers which look like to the Klipsch Heresy cabinet, but I would like to use the Mark Audio Alpair 10M gen3 that i already have.
Do you have any recommendation regarding the setup:
- should i go with only this speaker and work on a tansmission line type of box
- or with the addition of a sub 12" or 15", in this case which one would be the most appropriate?
These speakers would be used in our bedroom, so best sound available at low/normal level max.
And in term of amplifier i would like to go to the Amp Camp amplifier.
thanks in advance!
I would like to build a pair of speakers which look like to the Klipsch Heresy cabinet, but I would like to use the Mark Audio Alpair 10M gen3 that i already have.
Do you have any recommendation regarding the setup:
- should i go with only this speaker and work on a tansmission line type of box
- or with the addition of a sub 12" or 15", in this case which one would be the most appropriate?
These speakers would be used in our bedroom, so best sound available at low/normal level max.
And in term of amplifier i would like to go to the Amp Camp amplifier.
thanks in advance!
Are you wanting to mimic the dimensions of the Heresy cabinet? If so, that’s about 2.5 cu ft (71 L) of nominal volume. Markaudio’s plans for an Alpair 10 bass reflex cabinet recommends roughly 12 L (.42 cu ft), almost 1/6 the volume of the Heresy. You could certainly use that much volume to create a transmission line but the width of the baffle would put me off. Isolating the 10M and a helper woofer in separate chambers would also be possible with that amount of volume available. Perhaps others will chime in with additional suggestions.
You’re welcome! Here’s the link to the plan which includes the vent specs:
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/pdf/markaudio-enclosure-plans/Alpair10-BR-nocover.pdf
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/pdf/markaudio-enclosure-plans/Alpair10-BR-nocover.pdf
Careful about asking for advice on a DIY forum.
Kinda thinking the along the same lines as Craig here:
- Why specifically the Heresy? It’s an old school high efficiency 3-way design originally from the late ‘50s that was as big as it is to allow the 12” woofer to achieve decent performance and to shoe-horn in the compression driver mid & tweeter horns.
- There’s almost 10dB difference in sensitivity between it and most of the affordable drivers now available to the DIYer. If that’s not a mission critical factor, you can certainly achieve excellent results with the A10.3, Pluvia11, or the new A11MS(still filtering its way through various supply chain pipelines) in enclosures of much smaller volume than the Klipsch’s 71 litres, and likely different proportions. Also note that its aspect ratio places the acoustic centre of the three drivers very low, which was remedied by the design of a angled support base - something you definitely want to keep in mind should you still decide to emulate its size/shape.
- As Craig suggests, that volume an enclosure would be more than sufficient to allow for a isolation of full range driver and inclusion of “helper” woofer, creating what we here have given a couple of different acronyms, but is in short simply a 2-way with lower crossover frequency than would be the case with a more traditional tweeter - i.e. anywhere between 200-400Hz. I’ve built more than a couple of this type and have found that by delegating the heaviest lifting to woofer(s) anywhere from 6” to 10” you can use a smaller full-range / wideband driver, such as in the Mark Audio line, any of the 5/6/7 cm class. The only downside to that approach is that if implementing a speaker level passive crossover, the component values of both filter poles can get spendy, but actively biamping with either passive line level XO, or digital with the likes of minidsp can save coin there. How many of us serious DIYers don’t already have multiple amps lying about?- and with a greater abundance of affordable power amp choices than I can remember in over 50yrs in this hobby, the cost of a second amp could easily be lower than the passive components.
All that said, I’ve built / renovated more than a few speaker systems over the past 15yrs using combinations of drivers from Vifa, Peerless, Fostex, ESS Heil, Mark Audio, Jordan, CSS, TangBand, JBL, Tannoy, Lowther, Eminence - plus surely more I can’t recall at the moment - and have definitely arrived at my own comfortable compromise of aesthetics and performance.
For an all round execellent value / first dip of your toe into the fullrange pool, the A10.3 is very easy to endorse. If you’ve already decided on it, or have even secured a pair, there are numerous well proven enclosure designs - my personal recommendations would be either the Pensil or FHXL. The former has a very compact footprint which can be a very important factor for some folks, and both place the driver at what I’d consider an optimal height for most domestic environments.
See, I warned ya
Kinda thinking the along the same lines as Craig here:
- Why specifically the Heresy? It’s an old school high efficiency 3-way design originally from the late ‘50s that was as big as it is to allow the 12” woofer to achieve decent performance and to shoe-horn in the compression driver mid & tweeter horns.
- There’s almost 10dB difference in sensitivity between it and most of the affordable drivers now available to the DIYer. If that’s not a mission critical factor, you can certainly achieve excellent results with the A10.3, Pluvia11, or the new A11MS(still filtering its way through various supply chain pipelines) in enclosures of much smaller volume than the Klipsch’s 71 litres, and likely different proportions. Also note that its aspect ratio places the acoustic centre of the three drivers very low, which was remedied by the design of a angled support base - something you definitely want to keep in mind should you still decide to emulate its size/shape.
- As Craig suggests, that volume an enclosure would be more than sufficient to allow for a isolation of full range driver and inclusion of “helper” woofer, creating what we here have given a couple of different acronyms, but is in short simply a 2-way with lower crossover frequency than would be the case with a more traditional tweeter - i.e. anywhere between 200-400Hz. I’ve built more than a couple of this type and have found that by delegating the heaviest lifting to woofer(s) anywhere from 6” to 10” you can use a smaller full-range / wideband driver, such as in the Mark Audio line, any of the 5/6/7 cm class. The only downside to that approach is that if implementing a speaker level passive crossover, the component values of both filter poles can get spendy, but actively biamping with either passive line level XO, or digital with the likes of minidsp can save coin there. How many of us serious DIYers don’t already have multiple amps lying about?- and with a greater abundance of affordable power amp choices than I can remember in over 50yrs in this hobby, the cost of a second amp could easily be lower than the passive components.
All that said, I’ve built / renovated more than a few speaker systems over the past 15yrs using combinations of drivers from Vifa, Peerless, Fostex, ESS Heil, Mark Audio, Jordan, CSS, TangBand, JBL, Tannoy, Lowther, Eminence - plus surely more I can’t recall at the moment - and have definitely arrived at my own comfortable compromise of aesthetics and performance.
For an all round execellent value / first dip of your toe into the fullrange pool, the A10.3 is very easy to endorse. If you’ve already decided on it, or have even secured a pair, there are numerous well proven enclosure designs - my personal recommendations would be either the Pensil or FHXL. The former has a very compact footprint which can be a very important factor for some folks, and both place the driver at what I’d consider an optimal height for most domestic environments.
See, I warned ya
It makes about as much sense as 4X4 Corvette.
BTW, I agree with Chris, regarding his Pensil recommendation.
jeff
Attachments
First of all, what is it that you like about the heresies? The box dimensions are indeed rather pleasing, and you could easily scale the dimensions down to the requiered volume for the markaudio's - and get the cool looking stands to match. With the right veneers and grills you could get your very own mini-mid century masterpiece. Nice size for a bedroom too.
Yeah, the question of application - i.e. room / placement, etc should be investigated before randomly selecting a particular design to emulate. Craig did post a link to a smallish BR design for the A10.3 which is representative of the modest enclosure size in which it, or any of the MA 10cm class drivers can work quite nicely, but then of course they’d need stands.
I’ve found in all my builds that a well implemented full height floorstanding design surpasses any bookshelf/ monitor sized enclosure for the same driver. Not only can the total cost of the materials for the enclosures cost less than a decent pair of stands alone, they’ll require the same amount of net cubic volume /floor space, and almost certainly deliver deeper and smoother bass extension.
edit: PS FWIW, one of my bespoke builds a few years ago was a complete new pair of enclosures exactly copying the Heresys, and using all original drivers, but with new crossovers, and done in BB and Birdseye maple veneer. They were a homage to the customer’s late father, so rather a sentimental project, and turned out quite nicely, but were for me rather fatiguing. I found a pair of old KLH17s in the shop to be much more musically enjoyable for an extended listen, sometimes up to 10hrs in the shop - ah, the good old days
I’ve found in all my builds that a well implemented full height floorstanding design surpasses any bookshelf/ monitor sized enclosure for the same driver. Not only can the total cost of the materials for the enclosures cost less than a decent pair of stands alone, they’ll require the same amount of net cubic volume /floor space, and almost certainly deliver deeper and smoother bass extension.
edit: PS FWIW, one of my bespoke builds a few years ago was a complete new pair of enclosures exactly copying the Heresys, and using all original drivers, but with new crossovers, and done in BB and Birdseye maple veneer. They were a homage to the customer’s late father, so rather a sentimental project, and turned out quite nicely, but were for me rather fatiguing. I found a pair of old KLH17s in the shop to be much more musically enjoyable for an extended listen, sometimes up to 10hrs in the shop - ah, the good old days
Last edited:
It makes about as much sense as 4X4 Corvette.
Hmm, need to find a pic of my neighbor's late/lamented Triumph Spitfire 4x4 roadster that's now got a Jeep long body.
GM
Indeed, 1:1.271:1.625 for the utility cab and 1:1.173:1.635 for the finished, both good room ratios, so well thought out acoustically too.
GM
If you want a Heresy size/shaped box, then this is an opportunity to do a WAW. Put the A10.3 in a midTL out the back or in a sealed sub enclosure. With sealed you could use the natural 2nd order roll-off as 2 poles of the low pass. This does limit you to an XO of about 86 hz (butterworth, 6 litre sealed/damped).
If you use the low frequency XO, a subwoofer with extended HF would work. If crossing higher you need a more extended woofer as opposed to subwoofer.
If you stick with sealed 2nd order, a plate amp with a complementary 2nd order XO would fill out the system.
Crossing higher would allow for greater maximum loudness, and give the A10.3 a bit more room to shine mid-top.
The woofers that 1st come to mind are the CSS SDX10 which are probably extended enuff for both arrangements.
I had an opportunity to break-up a vintage set of Heresy, the alnico drivers were worth a lot, the cabinet swere crap.
Attached are the reverse engineered plans i drew.
dave
If you use the low frequency XO, a subwoofer with extended HF would work. If crossing higher you need a more extended woofer as opposed to subwoofer.
If you stick with sealed 2nd order, a plate amp with a complementary 2nd order XO would fill out the system.
Crossing higher would allow for greater maximum loudness, and give the A10.3 a bit more room to shine mid-top.
The woofers that 1st come to mind are the CSS SDX10 which are probably extended enuff for both arrangements.
I had an opportunity to break-up a vintage set of Heresy, the alnico drivers were worth a lot, the cabinet swere crap.
Attached are the reverse engineered plans i drew.
dave
Attachments
Really?! How vintage? I converted a co-worker's mid '80s ['84?] pair to Vb = Vas, Fb = Fs MLTLs by taking the driver/baffle assy. out complete, splicing it into the tower with results that impressed even the dealer, but recall the cab being really nicely made with quality plywood, no sloppy glue work, etc., like I usually saw on more expensive Altecs, JBLs.
GM
@chrisb, thanks a lot for your inputs. Why specifically the Heresy? it's purely because of their look and aestetic, not the sound.
I've had them few weeks last year and had compared them with a pair of Klipsch Chorus 2 and the Heresy were much good looking than good hearing.
I then replaced my Chorus 2 by a pair of JBL XPL200 with are now coupled with a DCX2496 XO & biamplified, they sound good and are currently in my living room.
My wife wanted to keep the Heresy anyway for our bedroom but for the price paid for the pair >1500€, I really wanted to have something sounding better. So i tell her that i'll build one pair with the same look.
On the other hand, i was recently able to buy a fresh new pair of these Alpair Gen3 for less than 100€, and then came to my mind: would it be possible to go this way : Alpair & Heresy.
So yes, you're completely right Lohengrimas, i can also scale the dimensions down in order to reach the Mark Audio dimensions and also have separate volumes for the woofer.
And regarding the latest clarifications Chrisb, the objective is:
- 2 speakers separated by 4-5m
- in the corners of the bedroom
- distant from the hearing zone 2.5-3m
- digitally XO (another DCX2496 or miniDSP)
- for listening music during bedtime/nightime from certainly a Raspberry with Kali & Piano DAC
- woodworking and finishing is fine for me
- Price for the additional woofers would be less than 200-300€ (for the pair)
- i'm not willing to build the new revolutionnary speaker of the century, but would not waist as well the quality of the Alpair speakers in a cabinet volume or design that is not appropriate, nor associating it with the wrong woofer, nor waisting time and effort in wrong XO configuration.
regading that, Planet10, you lost me a little with the "WAW" as well as the "natural 2nd order roll-off as 2 poles of the low pass" i know i need to spend some time in these principles, cause today i'm like a chiken in front of a foke
I started to look where i could find a CSS SDX10 woofer, sadly not available easily in Europe/France, so if you have some alternatives that would be great.
Any way, i would like to thank you everyone for your time, you, this diyaudio forum, and the overall will to help are also another very pleasant side of the DIY world
I've had them few weeks last year and had compared them with a pair of Klipsch Chorus 2 and the Heresy were much good looking than good hearing.
I then replaced my Chorus 2 by a pair of JBL XPL200 with are now coupled with a DCX2496 XO & biamplified, they sound good and are currently in my living room.
My wife wanted to keep the Heresy anyway for our bedroom but for the price paid for the pair >1500€, I really wanted to have something sounding better. So i tell her that i'll build one pair with the same look.
On the other hand, i was recently able to buy a fresh new pair of these Alpair Gen3 for less than 100€, and then came to my mind: would it be possible to go this way : Alpair & Heresy.
So yes, you're completely right Lohengrimas, i can also scale the dimensions down in order to reach the Mark Audio dimensions and also have separate volumes for the woofer.
And regarding the latest clarifications Chrisb, the objective is:
- 2 speakers separated by 4-5m
- in the corners of the bedroom
- distant from the hearing zone 2.5-3m
- digitally XO (another DCX2496 or miniDSP)
- for listening music during bedtime/nightime from certainly a Raspberry with Kali & Piano DAC
- woodworking and finishing is fine for me
- Price for the additional woofers would be less than 200-300€ (for the pair)
- i'm not willing to build the new revolutionnary speaker of the century, but would not waist as well the quality of the Alpair speakers in a cabinet volume or design that is not appropriate, nor associating it with the wrong woofer, nor waisting time and effort in wrong XO configuration.
regading that, Planet10, you lost me a little with the "WAW" as well as the "natural 2nd order roll-off as 2 poles of the low pass" i know i need to spend some time in these principles, cause today i'm like a chiken in front of a foke
I started to look where i could find a CSS SDX10 woofer, sadly not available easily in Europe/France, so if you have some alternatives that would be great.
Any way, i would like to thank you everyone for your time, you, this diyaudio forum, and the overall will to help are also another very pleasant side of the DIY world
Last edited:
I mentione the SDX10 because i am familiar. There should be tons of drivers available that suit the purpose. Sketch it out and figure out the range of volumes that are in the scope of your size needs. Then start looking at woofer(s). You’ll need a modeler to see what the response is like in your range of box volumes.
WAW = Woofer Assited Widerange. AKA FAST (but a core of us want to loose that term.
A sealed box naturaly rolls off at 12dB/octave. 6 dB per order, so 2nd order.
I found that the analog sections of the DCX2496 as unusable. And by todays standards the UI is kind of crude. Early miniDSP got mixed reviews.But now they have quite the range. The new HD unit has had good reports. You can get units that you use your own DACs with.
You might want to look at these for an optimum size box (and a golden ratio aspect): http://p10hifi.net/FAL/downloads/CGR-MarKen103p-plan-040414.pdf
dave
WAW = Woofer Assited Widerange. AKA FAST (but a core of us want to loose that term.
A sealed box naturaly rolls off at 12dB/octave. 6 dB per order, so 2nd order.
I found that the analog sections of the DCX2496 as unusable. And by todays standards the UI is kind of crude. Early miniDSP got mixed reviews.But now they have quite the range. The new HD unit has had good reports. You can get units that you use your own DACs with.
You might want to look at these for an optimum size box (and a golden ratio aspect): http://p10hifi.net/FAL/downloads/CGR-MarKen103p-plan-040414.pdf
dave
If I may be so bold as to interject as my own version of “Obama’s anger translator” , by “unuasable”- with regards to the DCX2496; as this isn’t HBO, let me restate Dave’s comment as “kinda not as transparent” - as a couple of dollars worth of components used in a far less flexible passive line level XO active bi-amp configuration. I’ve used the latter approach myself several times, and it’s certainly not without its own limitations/ shortcomings, and perhaps sonic signature, but once the math is done the total cost of implementing for a specific system can be less than even the cheapest interconnects that would be required between a source, crossover, and the amps involved. As I noted earlier - and subject to correction- I don’t think Dave has actually heard a minidsp active system of any vintage. I have, and my impression was - maybe a bit of front end learning curve, but incredible potential. Between full DSP crossover and old school passive speaker level XO, which would win in a money no object shoot-out for the same system, I’ll leave it to others to opine / expound/ bloviate. Luckily, there’s no dearth of such experts extant here. Gentlemen, start your engines.
Jayce, for the specific application described, I’d suggest the Pensil enclosure might fit the bill sonically - I’m currently running a pair as L/R mains in a modest 7.1 system in a listening room of approx 340 sq ft, and their compact footprint makes for very easy placement. I’ve definitely had opportunity to try out multi-way / FAST / WAW - no matter how achieved, even with HP filtering on the mid-tweet, the latter two are really nothing more than a 2-way with lower crossover frequency than “normal” - systems in the same room that unquestionably outperform these when unassisted, but in this particular case the combination of use of subwoofers for the LFE channel, and room placement constraints trumps all. Do I ever look forward to the day when the “T” word is not an expletive.
Yes, the SDX10 is a pretty good performer; the brand / models have been recently resurrected - as have several by the originator of the XBL technology - Adire Audio. Should you decide that additional bass support is required, either brand are among only a few very worthy candidates.
Jayce, for the specific application described, I’d suggest the Pensil enclosure might fit the bill sonically - I’m currently running a pair as L/R mains in a modest 7.1 system in a listening room of approx 340 sq ft, and their compact footprint makes for very easy placement. I’ve definitely had opportunity to try out multi-way / FAST / WAW - no matter how achieved, even with HP filtering on the mid-tweet, the latter two are really nothing more than a 2-way with lower crossover frequency than “normal” - systems in the same room that unquestionably outperform these when unassisted, but in this particular case the combination of use of subwoofers for the LFE channel, and room placement constraints trumps all. Do I ever look forward to the day when the “T” word is not an expletive.
Yes, the SDX10 is a pretty good performer; the brand / models have been recently resurrected - as have several by the originator of the XBL technology - Adire Audio. Should you decide that additional bass support is required, either brand are among only a few very worthy candidates.
Last edited:
The analog sections of the DCX are terrible (at least mine). That is why there are so many mods to fix it (usually by tossing & replacing). If you re going digital in and digital out you be fine.
I have heard an early miniDSP. I am still waiting for 24/192.
I’m in the queue for diyAudio Store Pass B4 kit.
dave
I have heard an early miniDSP. I am still waiting for 24/192.
I’m in the queue for diyAudio Store Pass B4 kit.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.