The upcoming 9.5" Satori may be a better match than the SB29, but we'll have to wait a little longer to confirm.
Why use the neo tweeter instead of the ferrite? MW16P-8 is only 86dB?
More resistor = less damping, so isn't he better off with the 91dB ferrite and smaller resistor? With his metal oxide resistors there'll be no fire left in the neo.
The new neo MR16P-4 92dB with the old ferrite TW29R 91dB would make a nice pairing for 3 way. I guess that mid wasn't available when he designed it. I'd expect an upgrade to the new midrange to come along eventually.
I have TW29R with Kairos and I could not wish for more detail or less fatiguing, natural SQ. But I'd like to have higher sensitivity than 85dB Kairos. Was thinking about MTM before the new neo came out. This is interesting, I always learn a lot from Troels projects.
More resistor = less damping, so isn't he better off with the 91dB ferrite and smaller resistor? With his metal oxide resistors there'll be no fire left in the neo.
The new neo MR16P-4 92dB with the old ferrite TW29R 91dB would make a nice pairing for 3 way. I guess that mid wasn't available when he designed it. I'd expect an upgrade to the new midrange to come along eventually.
I have TW29R with Kairos and I could not wish for more detail or less fatiguing, natural SQ. But I'd like to have higher sensitivity than 85dB Kairos. Was thinking about MTM before the new neo came out. This is interesting, I always learn a lot from Troels projects.
Hi Gang,
Since so many esteemed and knowledgeable folks are watching this thread I thought I would ask. The good Mr. G has not provided step or impulse performance in his test results, which he's not obligated, but his design mimics something that has vexed me recently.
I like the idea of time alignment, I truly do. But I'm not sure the point of tilting the baffle and not getting perfect time alignment. Take the Stereophile review of the Wilson Sabrina. The impulse response, copied below, doesn't show the drivers to be co-incident in the time domain, like the Vandersteen for instance.
Neither is any other Wilson apparently.
So, besides aesthetics, what exactly does Wilson or Gravesen gain in the tilt of the tweeter and mid range? He does mention time alignment, but I may have missed the step response. Is he just making crossover design easier, but not perfect? Or is it to improve phase, but not try to be fully time-coincident (whatever you call it when the drivers create a perfect spike followed by triangular decay a la Vandersteen).
Thank you,
Erik
Since so many esteemed and knowledgeable folks are watching this thread I thought I would ask. The good Mr. G has not provided step or impulse performance in his test results, which he's not obligated, but his design mimics something that has vexed me recently.
I like the idea of time alignment, I truly do. But I'm not sure the point of tilting the baffle and not getting perfect time alignment. Take the Stereophile review of the Wilson Sabrina. The impulse response, copied below, doesn't show the drivers to be co-incident in the time domain, like the Vandersteen for instance.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Neither is any other Wilson apparently.
So, besides aesthetics, what exactly does Wilson or Gravesen gain in the tilt of the tweeter and mid range? He does mention time alignment, but I may have missed the step response. Is he just making crossover design easier, but not perfect? Or is it to improve phase, but not try to be fully time-coincident (whatever you call it when the drivers create a perfect spike followed by triangular decay a la Vandersteen).
Thank you,
Erik
Last edited:
Jeff Bagby says in his original Kairos paper that the tilted baffle allows him to achieve pseudo linear phase response. This is what makes Kairos sound so good, imo, beyond the high quality drivers. Flat phase is the reason for the relaxed, natural sound of a full range driver, Quads, Danley Synergy and Kairos. Troels hasn't achieved the flat phase response of Kairos.
A quick Xsim confirms a good SPL level match for: SB34NRXL75 + MW19P + TW29R. The Zmin dips to 4.2ohms, but just for the low power tweeter.
The MW19P 7" midbass might find a "just a little bigger" niche in diy-designs.
Attachments
It appears that spot is already filled.
So sorry, no foul was intended.
Fare thee well Captain America!
Fare thee well !
I was confused by this too. He mentions that the tilt appears to be more than is necessary to remove the acoustic offset between drivers. So did he add some extra tilt or is 14 deg. really just the amount needed to align the acoustic centers of the mid and the tweeter?
Dan
What Troels does enables him to achieve good integration with symmetrical crossover. He likes the sound of LR2 filters so he has to tilt or make stepped baffle to achieve that.
I've been folowing his site for a very long time. You can see the evolution he went through. If you look at TQWT - it is 8" midbass and 1.34" tweeter with xover frequency at 3100Hz. That just can't look good off-axis. But he is getting better and better and i enjoy his measurements of drivers in boxes. Lets us know what to expect from it in the real conditions.
I've been folowing his site for a very long time. You can see the evolution he went through. If you look at TQWT - it is 8" midbass and 1.34" tweeter with xover frequency at 3100Hz. That just can't look good off-axis. But he is getting better and better and i enjoy his measurements of drivers in boxes. Lets us know what to expect from it in the real conditions.
Last edited:
I designed a speaker very similar to the kairos in about '99 (same basic box design and same crossover philosophy and approach, but using Scan drivers) and IME with these sizes of drivers, 13 to 14 deg baffle tilt was needed for "time alignment" on a listening axis roughly at the top of the woofer basket rim, without resorting to extra delay tricks in the xover.
Here's what I found as benefits to the sloped baffle (~ 7th post down):
Angled baffles - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video Discussion Forum
Here's what I found as benefits to the sloped baffle (~ 7th post down):
Angled baffles - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video Discussion Forum
looks like FHCL has lower q, lower fs, larger vas, maybe just a small update.
I've got the FHC's and there really nice.
I`m considering the SBA-10 speaker as a winter project.
But have a few changes some of You maybe could help me with.
I think I would try active bass module.
And I would like to have sealed box design.
Would 2 ea (in each box) of the soon to be released Satori 9.5" woofer suit this design?
I`m assuming that Satori drivers are similar sounding.
Alternatives?
Closed box because this works well in my room.
Will use Mini DSP DDRC-24 and 4 x UcD400HG HxR Hypex amps.
Will eventually go full active, but start out semi.
But have a few changes some of You maybe could help me with.
I think I would try active bass module.
And I would like to have sealed box design.
Would 2 ea (in each box) of the soon to be released Satori 9.5" woofer suit this design?
I`m assuming that Satori drivers are similar sounding.
Alternatives?
Closed box because this works well in my room.
Will use Mini DSP DDRC-24 and 4 x UcD400HG HxR Hypex amps.
Will eventually go full active, but start out semi.
Last edited: