Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

MW16P-4 vs MW16P-8 & TW29R vs SB29RDC-C000-4
MW16P-4 vs MW16P-8 & TW29R vs SB29RDC-C000-4
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th September 2018, 09:32 AM   #41
ernperkins is offline ernperkins  United States
diyAudio Member
 
ernperkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by rscamp View Post
I think I have decided on the Satori TW29R-B to go with the MW16P for this project for several reasons:


I tried a layout that takes a bit of a design idea from Troels Gravesen's Illuminator Monitor suggested by Linesource. I may just stick with the original layout.
I think you'll be happy with the result. And you won't be constantly asking yourself how much better the TW29 would have sounded!
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2018, 11:03 AM   #42
rscamp is offline rscamp  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernperkins View Post
...And you won't be constantly asking yourself how much better the TW29 would have sounded!
True!

This is a very small scale project I'm working on to try out making curved side speaker cabinets. If it works out well I'll try using the same approach with these drivers.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg IMG_1359.jpg (111.3 KB, 152 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1360.JPG (113.2 KB, 150 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1365.jpg (126.2 KB, 149 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1366.jpg (141.9 KB, 148 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1367.JPG (126.1 KB, 143 views)

Last edited by rscamp; 25th September 2018 at 11:05 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2018, 08:23 PM   #43
GreatLaBroski is offline GreatLaBroski
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Los Angeles, CA
MW16P-4 vs MW16P-8 & TW29R vs SB29RDC-C000-4
Quote:
Originally Posted by ernperkins View Post
I think you'll be happy with the result. And you won't be constantly asking yourself how much better the TW29 would have sounded!
I've owned both those drivers (neo version of the TW29 though) and they're outstanding. You'll be happy.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2018, 08:31 PM   #44
rscamp is offline rscamp  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatLaBroski View Post
I've owned both those drivers (neo version of the TW29 though) and they're outstanding. You'll be happy.
I hope you are right. I just put in the order!
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2018, 08:53 PM   #45
GreatLaBroski is offline GreatLaBroski
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Los Angeles, CA
MW16P-4 vs MW16P-8 & TW29R vs SB29RDC-C000-4
Quote:
Originally Posted by rscamp View Post
I hope you are right. I just put in the order!
I'll hang around the thread so you can have an opportunity to call me out by name if I'm wrong.

In some ways, my Satori drivers (TW29RN, MW16P-8, MW19P-8, MR13P-4) impressed me more than my ScanSpeak drivers (12m, 12mu, 18wu, 32w/4847t00, D3004 BE) due to the bang-for-the-buck factor. I expected the SS drivers to be class-leading, and they lived up to my expectations, but the Satoris were a real shocker as to how good they are.

The Satoris are 1/2 the price and yet trade blows with the SS drivers. I'd probably prefer the Satori speakers for passive crossover based speakers due to their wide bandwidth and overall good behavior which I'd expect to simplify the build. And the value is great.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th September 2018, 04:35 AM   #46
LineSource is offline LineSource  United States
diyAudio Member
 
LineSource's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: SiliconValley
Quote:
Originally Posted by rscamp View Post
If it works out well I'll try using the same approach with these drivers.
If you are committed to translam construction, you should also review a few "big rounds" cabinet shapes before you start your Satori Build. A standard 2-template method can be used. Panel cut time should not be different, just more waste will be generated. Covering the sides is probably easier than sand and finish.

Vapor Audio has Genius Translams with high functionality...
-large radius on baffle edges for low diffraction
-tapered rears for resonance reduction
-integrated 3D bracing
-pockets for wool absorption reduction
-pockets for sand vibration reduction
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Rounds1.jpg (128.1 KB, 46 views)
File Type: jpg Vapor CNC.jpg (230.8 KB, 55 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th September 2018, 10:55 AM   #47
rscamp is offline rscamp  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by LineSource View Post
If you are committed to translam construction, you should also review a few "big rounds" cabinet shapes before you start your Satori Build. A standard 2-template method can be used. Panel cut time should not be different, just more waste will be generated. Covering the sides is probably easier than sand and finish.

Vapor Audio has Genius Translams with high functionality...
-large radius on baffle edges for low diffraction
-tapered rears for resonance reduction
-integrated 3D bracing
-pockets for wool absorption reduction
-pockets for sand vibration reduction
Thanks for the info! For now I'm just bending layers of thin sheets over the formers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2018, 01:28 PM   #48
rscamp is offline rscamp  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Ontario, Canada
According to parcel tracking, the order will arrive today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by krivium View Post
Hi,
Yes a dsp can do many things other than pure filtering duties.
My point about your case is that in the case your vented 2 ways is difficult to cross to your sub one possible option is to close the port and use an LT to make things easier.
My comment about low end extension is a worst case scenario: you may (or not!) need to increase extension in the low end then in that case the trade off are the one i stated earlier ( this was what i faced for my own needs) BUT the point of an LT is to change the whole system ( closed box AND driver) fc and Q.
So it works both ways, you could use it to make fc higher with a different Q. In this case there is no trade off and you may gain in overall spl ( to the xmax limit or power dissipation of the driver).
As well it can open some possibilities to use the acoustical properties of the box+driver combo to achieve a target of high pass defined.
Example you could make a Samuel Harsch filter solution for the high pass required just using the LT to have the butterworth 2pole target.
In fact it open many possibilities and different options ( it could help in a 1 pole filter too, trying to compensate for the behavior of the driver outside of its intended usable range then include a filter to have a theorical text book response... as long as you don't try to compensate things which are non minimal phase( as break up of membrane, some diffraction, geometry related issues,...) it works quite well ime.
But for your specific case you'll have to contemplate what works for you in your room and for your expectations...
All that to say dsp filter is quite flexible and it can open ways you haven't thought about...
I just started to investigate this. Are you talking about this miniDSP biquad functionality:

Linkwitz Transform

and this sort of crossover:

S. Harsch XO

?
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2018, 01:42 PM   #49
krivium is offline krivium  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Yes minidsp have a Linkwitz Transform biquad fonction ( you can apply it using other ways, usually it use one or two parametric eq band, sometimes more...).
You can simulate it using winISD ( the freeware have a dedicated tab in the eq/filter section and it will give you valuable simulation including xmax and power requirement). I suggest you try it (to have an idea of limitation and compromise).
You could try simulate here too:
Calculs d'une enceinte close avec ou sans transformée de Linkwitz, 1/6
It is in french but you should understand what it is about. In case of i can help.
Yes for the crossover too. Xrk did an extensive use and study of it. For your case i suggest you stick with the definition he gives in the first paragraph (below the first OB picture). That said you may not be after a 'quasi perfect transient' crossover type.

Last edited by krivium; 1st October 2018 at 02:03 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st October 2018, 02:01 PM   #50
krivium is offline krivium  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
How high in freq your sub are acceptable quality wise?
  Reply With Quote

Reply


MW16P-4 vs MW16P-8 & TW29R vs SB29RDC-C000-4Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB SB Acoustics SB29NRX75 , TW29R , MW16P ambisingh Swap Meet 3 3rd February 2017 10:40 AM
SB Acoustics SB29RDC vs. Satori TW29R-B gornir Multi-Way 12 11th December 2016 08:32 AM
Satori MW16P-4 gornir Multi-Way 27 5th May 2016 05:57 PM
FS SB ACOUSTICS SATORI MW16P-4 + TW29R NEW johhanson Swap Meet 16 7th November 2013 12:34 PM
FS: SB Acoustics SB29RDC-C000-4 tweeters cs Swap Meet 2 14th June 2011 09:22 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:37 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 14.29%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio
Wiki