Hi guys!
I want to build 3-way floor speaker for my home cinema, can you suggesting me some designs?
I'm thinking to use a sealed enclosure for all the ways, and use a 8" woofer, I need nothing bigger because I've two 12" sub-woofer.
The room is a rectangle with 4 meters width, 7 meters length and 2,10 meters height approximately (Sorry, I use metrical units).
I said that I want to use a sealed enclosure, but I wouldn't mind to build a bass reflex system if performance will be better.
About the project cost, I prefer that it is cheap, but to begin with it, say about 1000$ approximately.
Thanks.
I want to build 3-way floor speaker for my home cinema, can you suggesting me some designs?
I'm thinking to use a sealed enclosure for all the ways, and use a 8" woofer, I need nothing bigger because I've two 12" sub-woofer.
The room is a rectangle with 4 meters width, 7 meters length and 2,10 meters height approximately (Sorry, I use metrical units).
I said that I want to use a sealed enclosure, but I wouldn't mind to build a bass reflex system if performance will be better.
About the project cost, I prefer that it is cheap, but to begin with it, say about 1000$ approximately.
Thanks.
This is about as good as it gets: SEAS-3-Way-Classic
You could use a SEAS CA22RNY and a metal 27TBFC/G tweeter too, if you are feeling adventurous.
H1471-08 CA22RNY
H1212-06 27TBFC/G
You could use a SEAS CA22RNY and a metal 27TBFC/G tweeter too, if you are feeling adventurous.
H1471-08 CA22RNY
H1212-06 27TBFC/G
Hi,
For a 3 way : zaph|audio - zdt3.5 because there is also a very good centre version.
The centre is sealed, and its not difficult to convert the vented floorstanders
into less deep sealed, though I'd suggest a sand loaded bottom section.
rgds, sreten.
For a 3 way : zaph|audio - zdt3.5 because there is also a very good centre version.
The centre is sealed, and its not difficult to convert the vented floorstanders
into less deep sealed, though I'd suggest a sand loaded bottom section.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
You don't really need 3 way if you plan on using it with subs. Build a good 2 way. A 3 way in most cases will sacrifice something to get that bass with additional bass driver. And it's eaither big enough to make a difference, or it's better to stay with quality 2-way.
Among Zaph projects - the SR71 is extremely good and possibli his best design.
Troels new 3WC should be also very good, but nothing beats SR71 value in it's price range imo.
Maybe you don't need a 3-way, but you might want one. 
Kidding aside, the extra woofer(s) can improve the 80-300Hz region and at the same time improve the midrange by relieving it of those duties.
I would suggest staying sealed with a 3-way with subs. There is no need for the extra LF output a port gets you.
One thing you might want to consider is whether or not the speaker also has an accompanying CC design and perhaps a surround 2-way design as well.
Have a look at this assortment. I like the Khanspires - lots of SPL, sealed with very high value Dayton RS drivers. Plus there is a matching CC and the similar RS WT/MW CC as well.
Look here too.
Kidding aside, the extra woofer(s) can improve the 80-300Hz region and at the same time improve the midrange by relieving it of those duties.
I would suggest staying sealed with a 3-way with subs. There is no need for the extra LF output a port gets you.
One thing you might want to consider is whether or not the speaker also has an accompanying CC design and perhaps a surround 2-way design as well.
Have a look at this assortment. I like the Khanspires - lots of SPL, sealed with very high value Dayton RS drivers. Plus there is a matching CC and the similar RS WT/MW CC as well.
Look here too.
I would suggest any of these two Troels designs:
SEAS-3-Way-Classic-mkII
ScanSpeak-3W-Discovery
I would definately go 3-way over 2-way. :
SEAS-3-Way-Classic-mkII
ScanSpeak-3W-Discovery
I would definately go 3-way over 2-way. :
I would ask what amplifier you are using for HC? If it is virtually any AVR, then a good two way or 2.5 way is all you require.
If running (decent) 12" subwoofers, there is little to be gained by trying to go for a three way in the traditional full range sense, but I built some sealed versions of the Curt Campbell Mini Statements and Statement Centre for a friend and that works very well in a similar sized room to yours. He is running a pair of Cinepro 2k6 power amps though.
Russell
If running (decent) 12" subwoofers, there is little to be gained by trying to go for a three way in the traditional full range sense, but I built some sealed versions of the Curt Campbell Mini Statements and Statement Centre for a friend and that works very well in a similar sized room to yours. He is running a pair of Cinepro 2k6 power amps though.
Russell
But also mess the phase, dispersion, polarity, timing and ton of other things that no matter how much you simulate - in reality are always worse than a single driver with exception of spl/excursion limit after which 2-way limitations start to show... But in our case we have active subwoofers that should take care of it.Maybe you don't need a 3-way, but you might want one.
Kidding aside, the extra woofer(s) can improve the 80-300Hz region and at the same time improve the midrange by relieving it of those duties.
P.S. Even Troel's best speaker is de-facto 2way with subwoofer...
Last edited:
Hi,
FWIW the 3(.5) way I suggested has a unique power response
due to being based around using a 2" dome midrange as its
core driver. The wide power response in the midrange is
great for AV, and it also has an optimised centre version.
Its not a classic 3 way, but is IMO a great design that
tackles the limitations of most 2(.5) ways and 3 ways.
(The matching of off axis responses at the treble x/o point.
Some will pipe up about waveguides to do the same, that
matches the treble to the mid, but IMO for AV match the
mid to the treble, wide dispersion all the way.*)
rgds, sreten.
* Unlike HiFi IMO AV always needs farfield, and the wider
the dispersion the shorter the farfield distance becomes.
FWIW the 3(.5) way I suggested has a unique power response
due to being based around using a 2" dome midrange as its
core driver. The wide power response in the midrange is
great for AV, and it also has an optimised centre version.
Its not a classic 3 way, but is IMO a great design that
tackles the limitations of most 2(.5) ways and 3 ways.
(The matching of off axis responses at the treble x/o point.
Some will pipe up about waveguides to do the same, that
matches the treble to the mid, but IMO for AV match the
mid to the treble, wide dispersion all the way.*)
rgds, sreten.
* Unlike HiFi IMO AV always needs farfield, and the wider
the dispersion the shorter the farfield distance becomes.
Last edited:
Yes, the logic says that, in most cases is better a good 2 way than a bat 3 ways.
Accurate, it may be a momentary whim, perhaps i would see a good two way system.
I've a Yamaha RX-V1071 that have double subwoofer output (7.2) and now I have these 2.5 way system:
In the future it's possible that I would add a power amp to the system.
I hope you understand me well, I'm helping me with google translator.
Thanks.
Perhaps it will help if we understand what is good about a 3 way here. And why it works better than a two way.
In fact it's the opposite to your stated views. Even a bad three way tends to work better than a two way.
SEAS Kit 503
Filtering a three way is easy, because there is little problem with time alignment. Inevitably you end up near LR2 second order 12dB/octave. Each driver works within its comfort zone and cone breakup is well down, and the sort of MCA12RC mid driver Troels uses is a very different animal from the usual 4-5" midwoofer which is one of the good points.
H1304-08 MCA12RC
H1152-08 CA12RCY
Light, fast and responsive with good dispersion. It's almost a fullrange driver, but spared the two problematic frequency extremes. Which is why 3 ways have great dynamic range and ability to go loud.
Make no mistake, two ways don't get near this sound.
In fact it's the opposite to your stated views. Even a bad three way tends to work better than a two way.
SEAS Kit 503
Filtering a three way is easy, because there is little problem with time alignment. Inevitably you end up near LR2 second order 12dB/octave. Each driver works within its comfort zone and cone breakup is well down, and the sort of MCA12RC mid driver Troels uses is a very different animal from the usual 4-5" midwoofer which is one of the good points.
H1304-08 MCA12RC
H1152-08 CA12RCY
Light, fast and responsive with good dispersion. It's almost a fullrange driver, but spared the two problematic frequency extremes. Which is why 3 ways have great dynamic range and ability to go loud.
Make no mistake, two ways don't get near this sound.
Well, since you mentioned Troels - noticee that his best/favorite speaker technically a 2 way (DTQWT). And the only speaker that could withstand competition was his 4way ATS4, but recently he's back to DTQWT again in it's mk3 form.
I have one too and it eats 3ways i had for breakfast, especially when it comes to dynamics, speed, attack and transparency. Zaph's SR71 can also teach many 3ways a lesson, let alone poor ones, although reduced sensitivity does affect dynamics, but it just means you need a good amp.
Most often - there's no measureable advantages for 3 way at reasonable SPL compared to good 2 way except for bass extension. But having a huge cap and resistor in series with midrange is disadvantage of it's own. There's more to it than measurements
But honestly - topic starter can't go wrong with any projects mentioned here
Although i presonally recommend SR-71 as best value i even heard\built at that price range and it become ultimate in quality when actively crossed with subwoofers.
Last edited:
You could..... build a floor standing 3-way with enough bass reflex ported low power to reach F3 < 30Hz as stand alone front speakers. Place your 12" woofers around the room to both deepen the low bass and remove room modes.... a woofer swarm.
Then.... you would also..... have the option to plug the reflex port to get potentially better transients at the cost of less low frequency extension. Now your 12" woofers would supply the front deep bass.
Two 8" woofers or one 10" woofer is a good formula considering you have 12" low bass woofers.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/212738-sb-acoustics-3-ways-4.html#post3971494
SB Acoustics 3 ways
The speakers are:
2 x SB Acoustics :: SB29RDC-C000-4
2 x SB Acoustics :: 6" SB17NRXC35-4
4 x SB Acoustics :: 8'' SB23NRXS45-8
=========
Jenzen CA
Troels Gravesen Jenzen series including the SEAS CA
The Speakers are:
CA26RFX,
ER18RNX and
T25C003 / T25CF001
Several other good full range 3-way floor standers if you decide to investigate this path further.
Then.... you would also..... have the option to plug the reflex port to get potentially better transients at the cost of less low frequency extension. Now your 12" woofers would supply the front deep bass.
Two 8" woofers or one 10" woofer is a good formula considering you have 12" low bass woofers.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/212738-sb-acoustics-3-ways-4.html#post3971494
SB Acoustics 3 ways
The speakers are:
2 x SB Acoustics :: SB29RDC-C000-4
2 x SB Acoustics :: 6" SB17NRXC35-4
4 x SB Acoustics :: 8'' SB23NRXS45-8
=========
Jenzen CA
Troels Gravesen Jenzen series including the SEAS CA
The Speakers are:
CA26RFX,
ER18RNX and
T25C003 / T25CF001
Several other good full range 3-way floor standers if you decide to investigate this path further.
Well, since you mentioned Troels - notice that his best/favourite speaker technically a 2 way (DTQWT). And the only speaker that could withstand competition was his 4way ATS4, but recently he's back to DTQWT again in it's mk3 form.
I have one too and it eats 3 ways I had for breakfast, especially when it comes to dynamics, speed, attack and transparency. Zaph's SR71 can also teach many 3ways a lesson, let alone poor ones, although reduced sensitivity does affect dynamics, but it just means you need a good amp.
Most often - there's no measureable advantages for 3 way at reasonable SPL compared to good 2 way except for bass extension. But having a huge cap and resistor in series with midrange is disadvantage of it's own. There's more to it than measurements
But honestly - bubu54 can't go wrong with any projects mentioned here
Although I personally recommend SR-71 as best value i even heard\built at that price range and it become ultimate in quality when actively crossed with subwoofers.
Who are you kidding!
It probably depends what sort of music you listen to. If you actually know what a live orchestra sounds like, a three way is the best speaker. Don't get me wrong, I love the 8" bass two way idea. But they have dispersion problems. You've got to sit in the small sweet spot. Here was one of my first experiments.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Troels Gravesen has worked mightily at finding a revealing high efficiency 8" driver. Then creating his own with a foam surround, and lately a phase plug. His new driver looks like a superb bass unit and it is crying out to be fitted to a three way.
High Efficiency Speakers
TQWT-
I've actually tried a lot of his circuits. And I do like high efficiency bass. It has real slam and detail. Like this rather retro bass I picked up.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Lot to like there. Cloth surround and acoustically transparent dustcap. It continues to frustrate me, TBH. Nearly right.
But here's the problem. 8" bass starts to break up around 3kHz. You can't get away from it. His solution is to use an exotic £200 tweeter that can do 2kHz. And there's another problem. High efficiency means less low bass.
You see, however good a two way can get, I think you can build a better three way with the same drivers. Three ways are a bit weird. They sound unremarkable. They go loud effortlessly without distortion. A lot of two ways can satisfy most of the time, but play a big piece of music, and those good dynamics and good dispersion of a three way fill the room.
I was talking about DTQWT DTQWT-mkIII
And that 8" is no bass unit - it's midrange. Without dual 10" or single 12" as in his latest MKIII DTQWT-mkIII it can't do much in bass, even with help of 1/4wave horn. But it doesn't have crossover between bass/midrange so it's 2 way. Same concept as topic starter would have with 2 way + subs. Even Troels state that having no passive crossover between midrange and bass is a plus.
It's tweeters who have dispersion problems that can't match dispersion of woofer. 8" never have any dispersion issues if crossed no higher than 2khz.
Exotic tweeter? Not a single project/speaker i built even with standard 1" was ever crossed higher than 2-2.3khz, known designers like Troels or Zaph usually don't cross higher as well.
I have huge true 3way speakers (Zaph SB12.3) and they having hard time catching up with DTQWT which is 2way. As long as excursion/cone movement is relatively small - it doesn't matter how many "ways" you got, it's all sound pressure dependent.
But anyway - with active subs the topic starter will get 3 way which is better than any passive 3 way on it's own. Instead of passively crossed woofer he'd better spend money on better quality midrange&tweeter
But like i said - you can't go wrong with any of these projects. I just happen to have experience comparing good 2way+sub vs 3way+sub and 2 way won most of the time. Sub really changes things
Last edited:
Alexander, excuse me here, but the Troels Gravesen DTQWT is a three way, unless I am losing my mind.
DTQWT-mkIII
I really don't care how you define it. Every two way is compromised in different ways. You solve it by going three way. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
And, FWIW, Troels generally likes a high 3.5 kHz tweeter crossover. There's a lot to be said for that in terms of low distortion. Read Lynn Olson if you are interested in learning something. You see, it's all a tradeoff. There is no perfect speaker. One day people will understand the laws of physics. Until then, you can dream on.
DTQWT-mkIII
I really don't care how you define it. Every two way is compromised in different ways. You solve it by going three way. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
And, FWIW, Troels generally likes a high 3.5 kHz tweeter crossover. There's a lot to be said for that in terms of low distortion. Read Lynn Olson if you are interested in learning something. You see, it's all a tradeoff. There is no perfect speaker. One day people will understand the laws of physics. Until then, you can dream on.
Last edited:
Maybe you are, unless you see a high pass filter there?Alexander, excuse me here, but the Troels Gravesen DTQWT is a three way, unless I am losing my mind.
Troels himself writes: "DTQWT is in principle a 2-way with integrated subwoofers, thus no high-pass filter on the main front driver. This has the indisputable advantage of not needing any series capacitors, which would be excessively expensive if of good quality and sonically inferior to no caps, no matter how good the caps are. ". I'm already not sure if it makes any difference to you, but in our case - there IS high pass filter when 2 way is used with active subwoofer so it takes a 3 ways system if done well.
We're not talking about 2 way, we talk about 3 way consisting of passive 2 way actively crossed to subwoofer. Please provide valid arguments or stop writing nonsenseI really don't care how you define it. Every two way is compromised in different ways. You solve it by going three way. Stop trying to defend the indefensible.
Then you better start learning them soon - it will help you to argue better than just expressing your subjective opinion repeatedlyOne day people will understand the laws of physics. Until then, you can dream on.
Last edited:
+10Well, since you mentioned Troels - noticee that his best/favorite speaker technically a 2 way (DTQWT). And the only speaker that could withstand competition was his 4way ATS4, but recently he's back to DTQWT again in it's mk3 form.
I have one too and it eats 3ways i had for breakfast, especially when it comes to dynamics, speed, attack and transparency. Zaph's SR71 can also teach many 3ways a lesson, let alone poor ones, although reduced sensitivity does affect dynamics, but it just means you need a good amp.
Most often - there's no measureable advantages for 3 way at reasonable SPL compared to good 2 way except for bass extension. But having a huge cap and resistor in series with midrange is disadvantage of it's own. There's more to it than measurements
But honestly - topic starter can't go wrong with any projects mentioned here
this corelate my experience as well. I have seen many 2 ways eat three ways.
The only real advantage of three ways are definitely high SPL. My big 250L three way can go so loud without even breaking a sweat. very powerful stuff. and the room filling aspect of a three way is undeniable.
I think 2 way plus sub is best solution. but no high pass on mains, simply active sub and nothing for the mains.
Op, I would do kairos + sub!
but the dtqwt is interesting as well.
alexander, how is the imaging capability of the dtqwt. I see that its time aligned and in phase design...
I'd say sub's active crossover (if well built) may produce good results because i think it's most important is to get away from passive stuff...Also - any 2 way is probably bass-reflex design and will benefit from not playing frequencies down to port tuning frequency, but otherwise port is a good thing
It's not easy to say once you get used to a speaker - you start to think it's the way it should be and only direct comparison may tell you how good it is via others.
So far - my imaging was limited only by equipment i use and room, dtqwt never end to amaze me with realism. So in short i'd say it's very good, but good in precise way - some songs have a huge soundstage and some are flat as recorded. Large baffle speakers i have always sound big but similar from song to song.
Speaking of 3 way - the only other speaker i like which really
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.