OK as I suggested a new thread here it is.
Where do we start?
What size woofer for the bass? If we do what I want most people would find poor WAF as I really like big woofers.
Given Rabbitz comments on bass quality and simple 2.5 way set-ups that is one option, but my preference would be for a full 3-way. With the possible option of 3.5 way with the 0.5 woofer firing to the rear for baffle step.
Perhaps the best solution is to pick a midrange that gives a smooth end extended range and then select a woofer and tweeter to complement it and extend the range up and down.
What is the aim in the bass? All the way down to 25Hz? or just down to 40?
Perhaps a good little driver like the Peerless 832873
Speaker driver
Although I would find it hard to rebate the truncated frame.
We may even need 2 options, one for a sealed box and the other for a ported box, although to keep it as simple and small as possible dual 8 inch woofers in a sealed box may be a reasonable compromise between bass extension and good WAF.
Where do we start?
What size woofer for the bass? If we do what I want most people would find poor WAF as I really like big woofers.
Given Rabbitz comments on bass quality and simple 2.5 way set-ups that is one option, but my preference would be for a full 3-way. With the possible option of 3.5 way with the 0.5 woofer firing to the rear for baffle step.
Perhaps the best solution is to pick a midrange that gives a smooth end extended range and then select a woofer and tweeter to complement it and extend the range up and down.
What is the aim in the bass? All the way down to 25Hz? or just down to 40?
Perhaps a good little driver like the Peerless 832873
Speaker driver
Although I would find it hard to rebate the truncated frame.
We may even need 2 options, one for a sealed box and the other for a ported box, although to keep it as simple and small as possible dual 8 inch woofers in a sealed box may be a reasonable compromise between bass extension and good WAF.
I'd suggest a 10" woofer as a compromise between WAF and outright performance. You can consider separating the woofer and mid/tweeter cabinets and using the woofer cabinets as the stands for the mid/tweeter cabinet.
The crossover freq is going to be important... how low do you want your mid's playing, and how high can your woofer comfortably go. My 10" drivers are not available any more otherwise I'd suggest them (maybe a bit on the expensive side though)
Having separate cabs presents a bit of a dilemma when it comes to the crossover I guess, but it adds some flexibility too. An external crossover is a possibility, and it makes active crossing simpler too.
My strategy is to have my crossover freq at the baffle step freq (200Hz in my case) and actively cross at that freq, using gain adj for the woofer to bring the level up to match the mid/tweet and avoid any crossover circuitry on the woofer. I haven't yet decided on the BSC for the mid/tweet.
I'm using 5" drivers for my mids, but perhaps a 4" full range may be a good option. Certainly my mids and tweets are outside of the price range that would be appropriate for a diyAudio reference design.
I guess another really important decision is whether the woofer will be sealed or ported (or even TL)!! That is bound to cause some contention!
Tony.
The crossover freq is going to be important... how low do you want your mid's playing, and how high can your woofer comfortably go. My 10" drivers are not available any more otherwise I'd suggest them (maybe a bit on the expensive side though)
Having separate cabs presents a bit of a dilemma when it comes to the crossover I guess, but it adds some flexibility too. An external crossover is a possibility, and it makes active crossing simpler too.
My strategy is to have my crossover freq at the baffle step freq (200Hz in my case) and actively cross at that freq, using gain adj for the woofer to bring the level up to match the mid/tweet and avoid any crossover circuitry on the woofer. I haven't yet decided on the BSC for the mid/tweet.
I'm using 5" drivers for my mids, but perhaps a 4" full range may be a good option. Certainly my mids and tweets are outside of the price range that would be appropriate for a diyAudio reference design.
I guess another really important decision is whether the woofer will be sealed or ported (or even TL)!! That is bound to cause some contention!
Tony.
Sorry, but I'd say a so-called "reference project" is just meaningless. We all have different priorities and problems to deal with, so what exactly is the 'reference' ?
There are many thoroughly thoughtful contributors here in this forum, and most of the time their opinions are so different. Such diversity has already provided so many feasible ideas for anyone who wants to jump in. That's enough, or more than enough.
Just my 2c.
There are many thoroughly thoughtful contributors here in this forum, and most of the time their opinions are so different. Such diversity has already provided so many feasible ideas for anyone who wants to jump in. That's enough, or more than enough.
Just my 2c.
First thing that pops into my brain is putting the existing 2-way ref on top of that 10" woof.
Wouldn't take much to convince me of that (ouch, quit twisting so hard
)dave
Hi Dave/ Wintermute/CLS
Putting the existing 2-way on top would be a great idea if it wasn't for the fact that Vifa has discontinued the P13 and there are very few left.
Taking from the original thread "REFERENCE" here does not mean ultimate, but a system to which other systems could be compared and as a more simple project than some that have been posted.
While I personally prefer to Bi-amp perhaps as a DIY reference this should be passive only.
So what-ever drivers come to be used they need to be available worldwide and for at least the next couple of years, I would hazard that this isn't a project for the beginners but a "Next Step" for people who want just a little more, bearing in mind that that last bottom octave or two will double the cost of the project ( at least )
Putting the existing 2-way on top would be a great idea if it wasn't for the fact that Vifa has discontinued the P13 and there are very few left.
Taking from the original thread "REFERENCE" here does not mean ultimate, but a system to which other systems could be compared and as a more simple project than some that have been posted.
While I personally prefer to Bi-amp perhaps as a DIY reference this should be passive only.
So what-ever drivers come to be used they need to be available worldwide and for at least the next couple of years, I would hazard that this isn't a project for the beginners but a "Next Step" for people who want just a little more, bearing in mind that that last bottom octave or two will double the cost of the project ( at least )
3/3.5 sounds good to me.
Down to past 40 Hz.
How much do we want to spend.?
We should include a crossover, but those who want biamping, no brainer just don't build the crossover.
I'd like to build something fairly high end. We can consolidate our requirements for some $$ savings.
I need some high WAF some would consider 10" absolute max. It would depend not only on the size but the ration width to depth to height. i was considering using the either the modified Thor or Zaph ZRT as my starting point.
With group resources we could get some of the trickeir parts made up e.g routed items curved panels etc very cost effectively.
Who is located in Melbourne?
Down to past 40 Hz.
How much do we want to spend.?
We should include a crossover, but those who want biamping, no brainer just don't build the crossover.
I'd like to build something fairly high end. We can consolidate our requirements for some $$ savings.
I need some high WAF some would consider 10" absolute max. It would depend not only on the size but the ration width to depth to height. i was considering using the either the modified Thor or Zaph ZRT as my starting point.
With group resources we could get some of the trickeir parts made up e.g routed items curved panels etc very cost effectively.
Who is located in Melbourne?
Yes, that makes the idea a no go... maybe an idea to rev the 2-way ref because of that.
If we think about 4 inchish FRs to use as a midrange, let's create a list of suspects that should be around for awhile, have wide distribution, and don't cost too much
Fostex FE103e (has been around for sometime, one hopes Fostex won't rev it anytime soon)
CSS/Mark Audio EL70 (Bob is insistent that this driver remain the same for an extended time so that a box library can be built up. 4 ohms might be an issue)
MarkAudio CHR-70 (also 4 ohms and efficiency is not all that great)
TandBand has a number of 4" but the models seem to be on a carosel.
I find that an amazingly short list... there must be more
dave
First thing that pops into my brain is putting the existing 2-way ref on top of that 10" woof.
Wouldn't take much to convince me of that (ouch, quit twisting so hard
dave
Good thinking Dave!
(at least until I read Moondogs response about the driver availability)If the 2 way was revamped with current drivers, and there was an optional stereo sub "speaker stand" it would give people an upgrade path.... Obviously it would need to play down to a level that was acceptable without the bass units, but would be enhanced significantly by adding them.
So maybe three references to be developed, new version of reference 2 way, a pair of reference stereo subs as an upgrade path for the reference 2 way with options for active or passive crossover (fits in well with some of the strategies I've seen for WAF)
and a complete standalone 3 way reference speaker I agree it shouldn't be considered the ultimate speaker (is there such a thing?) just something that the majority of people would think was a decent sounding speaker at a reasonable price.... Just don't count on me building anything, you will likely be waiting a LONG time
Tony.
Nice thread, Moondog55!
I fully agree with you guys saying that the 4-way system will be a better system than a 3-way system when calling it a "reference" system.
However, Moondoog55 started the thread as a "3-way reference system" thread so let us try to keep it by that.
I know it is very difficult when designing such a system. Size, drivers, frequency range, ported vs. closed box, WAF (design), building materials, price range, etc. all come to mind.
However, when talking "reference" it will not be an easy task and it will absolutely not be cheap or simple.
Sorry for being a bit "coloured" here, but I have two 3-way systems in mind (one ported and one closed box) that might be used for inspiration. These two speakers are from Gryphon Audio in Denmark.
These speakers (Trident - closed box and Atlantis - ported) have constant phase cross-overs (extremely important in my opinion). These cross-overs are extremely complex but they are really worth the effort.
These speakers might not be for everyone - especially when you experience the price range ;-). Though, they are extremely high-class both regarding the sound quality and the design.
If one is able to come close to the quality level of these speakers you for sure can call your 3-way speakers for "reference".
If you want to go for 4-way please have a look at the Gryphon Poseidon. It doesn´t get better than this, I think!!! Ok, this may be discussed in another thread....
I am sorry, but I could not link directly to the two speakers mentioned above. However, please go to: www.gryphon-audio.dk - then enter the page. Thereafter, press the "Products"-button and then "speakers". Now you should be able to read a little about these amazing and fantastic speakers.
Just my 2c
Karsten
I fully agree with you guys saying that the 4-way system will be a better system than a 3-way system when calling it a "reference" system.
However, Moondoog55 started the thread as a "3-way reference system" thread so let us try to keep it by that.
I know it is very difficult when designing such a system. Size, drivers, frequency range, ported vs. closed box, WAF (design), building materials, price range, etc. all come to mind.
However, when talking "reference" it will not be an easy task and it will absolutely not be cheap or simple.
Sorry for being a bit "coloured" here, but I have two 3-way systems in mind (one ported and one closed box) that might be used for inspiration. These two speakers are from Gryphon Audio in Denmark.
These speakers (Trident - closed box and Atlantis - ported) have constant phase cross-overs (extremely important in my opinion). These cross-overs are extremely complex but they are really worth the effort.
These speakers might not be for everyone - especially when you experience the price range ;-). Though, they are extremely high-class both regarding the sound quality and the design.
If one is able to come close to the quality level of these speakers you for sure can call your 3-way speakers for "reference".
If you want to go for 4-way please have a look at the Gryphon Poseidon. It doesn´t get better than this, I think!!! Ok, this may be discussed in another thread....
I am sorry, but I could not link directly to the two speakers mentioned above. However, please go to: www.gryphon-audio.dk - then enter the page. Thereafter, press the "Products"-button and then "speakers". Now you should be able to read a little about these amazing and fantastic speakers.
Just my 2c
Karsten
I was thinking along the line of the classic 3-way speakers of the 70s, just a box with a woofer , mid-range and tweeter.
Keep the woodwork simple, keep the XO simple, and for the sake of a smaller budget either WMT or WWMT
WAF I'd go with twin 8inch woofers or a single 10, but there is a cheap 12inch Chinese Peerless that looks smooth in the bass and goes fairly deep in a sealed box.
I do think we should start with the midrange and work up and down from that choice.
"johngalt47 How about the Tang-Band 1337 for a mid? "
What's it like price and performance wise John?? Link??
Keep the woodwork simple, keep the XO simple, and for the sake of a smaller budget either WMT or WWMT
WAF I'd go with twin 8inch woofers or a single 10, but there is a cheap 12inch Chinese Peerless that looks smooth in the bass and goes fairly deep in a sealed box.
I do think we should start with the midrange and work up and down from that choice.
"johngalt47 How about the Tang-Band 1337 for a mid? "
What's it like price and performance wise John?? Link??
I agree completely
try to get a midrange that will cover the full vocal range well, and then compliment it at either end.. what goals here? 200-300Hz through to 3-5Khz??I just found this scanspeak driver which seems very interesting except for one caveat. It doesn't seem to be suitable for a sealed box
I'm thinking that to keep things simple a sealed enclosure for the mids would be appropriate. I had a look at that tangband, doesn't look too bad except for the peaking (I guess cone breakup , its a titanium cone) looks like about 15db at 15K! The W4-1320SJ (bamboo fibre cone) looks a bit tamer, but without quite as good bass extention.
I'm glad you qualified WMT Moondog, I was thinking that would probably keep the costs down, also means a more expensive mid can be used than if going with say a WMTM or WWMTM etc. However it does also raise the question of sensitivity of the mid.... MTM allows use of drivers that are of a lower sensitivity than an MT would (unless overall lower efficiency isn't an issue).
I guess we also need a ballpark total cost for drivers? Is $1000 AU reasonable (doable even?) or should we be looking at closer to $1500 (that is roughly the cost of the drivers in my system I'm buidling). Are both of those figures way off (in either direction)?
I guess another thing to be clear on is the word reference. To my mind I'm not thinking of it as being a reference in the way that industry would use it, being an absolute, maybe it can be qualified as a sub $X reference design?
Tony.
Last edited:
OK, I think I totally misunderstood the word "reference". I my world it means the "best possible" - or at least "close to best possible" .
However, if you are going for at "low budget reference" I can recommend a few drivers here.
Bass: Monacor SPH-265 (10", 8 Ohm, Fs = 23 Hz)
Mid range: Monacor: SPH-176 (6½", 8 Ohm)
If you want smaller midranges:
Monacor SPH-130 (5½", 8 Ohm) (very nice MLSSA-plot! - if that means anything to you?)
Monacor SPH-115 (4", 8 Ohm)
Monacor MSH-115 (4", 8 Ohm)
Monacor MSH-116/4 (4", 4 Ohm)
Tweeter: Huh, here are a lot of different types and prices. Have a look at John Kritkes site. He has tested a lot of drivers. Mostly cones since he doesn´t like ribbons....
Make no mistake: The Monacor drivers are very good drivers indeed and they are relatively cheap. Don´t judge them out just because of the fair price...
All drivers are with coated paper cones so they do not have any terrible peaks and dips like metal cones have. Hence, you do not need a lot of special compensation in the cross-over to tame the peaks of metal domes. BTW, peaks from metal domes can stille be heard on a tone sweep even after compensation but this is another story...
Karsten
.However, if you are going for at "low budget reference" I can recommend a few drivers here.
Bass: Monacor SPH-265 (10", 8 Ohm, Fs = 23 Hz)
Mid range: Monacor: SPH-176 (6½", 8 Ohm)
If you want smaller midranges:
Monacor SPH-130 (5½", 8 Ohm) (very nice MLSSA-plot! - if that means anything to you?)
Monacor SPH-115 (4", 8 Ohm)
Monacor MSH-115 (4", 8 Ohm)
Monacor MSH-116/4 (4", 4 Ohm)
Tweeter: Huh, here are a lot of different types and prices. Have a look at John Kritkes site. He has tested a lot of drivers. Mostly cones since he doesn´t like ribbons....
Make no mistake: The Monacor drivers are very good drivers indeed and they are relatively cheap. Don´t judge them out just because of the fair price...
All drivers are with coated paper cones so they do not have any terrible peaks and dips like metal cones have. Hence, you do not need a lot of special compensation in the cross-over to tame the peaks of metal domes. BTW, peaks from metal domes can stille be heard on a tone sweep even after compensation but this is another story...
Karsten
To me Reference means the best possible. If this is the point - I would say that a 4-way is needed. One or two at least 25cm bass drivers ( preferably a Scanspeak Classic 25W or Revelator 23W ) cut at 80Hz 1st or 2nd order ( I would prefer the steeper 2nd order ) sealed box, a smaller midwoofer of the size of 18cm - a Seas Magnesium W18 or the 18W Revelator 2nd ( 4th order for the Seas ) order up to 600Hz - sealed, a Veravox 5s to play up to 7-8Khz open baffle 1st order, and a Raal ribbon or at least a Revelator ring radiator to take on from the Veravox, 1st order. If made with at least 45mm sandwich wall thickness, sand dampening for the bass sections and if all sections are on module construction - I think that you will have a very dynamic, air and natural sounding system with full bandwith coverage, good sensitivity so you could run tubes and you will need a large room for it If you go with the SS they would not need any impedance compensation neither notches so they shall work for tubes as well.
Reference cannot be built with cheap speakers that contain compromises in their structure.
If you go with the SS they would not need any impedance compensation neither notches so they shall work for tubes as well. Reference cannot be built with cheap speakers that contain compromises in their structure.
Last edited: