Afternoon all,
I am in the thought process stage of designing some wall mounted rear surround speakers to replace my monitor audio silver RXFX. The reason for this is that the upgrade to the gold versions is incredibly expensive ($1500) and I would rather spend that on drivers, than the product.
I am torn between going full range in bulk, something like this:
Tang Band W4-1337SDF
I would have in biploe, 2 banks of 4 speakers angled at 45 degrees. So thats 8 speakers per surround channel, totalling 16 full range drivers.
Being surrounds, they will not need to provide anything below 80-100Hz, which is good because their response is not great down there.
The alternative is obviously a conventional 2 or 3 way setup. I am not against designing and creating a multi-way crossover circuit so that is neither a pro nor a con for going multi way. Component choice is far more free if I go this route, so I won't place any specifics here.
Given how good full range drivers perform these days, it is not clear cut to me which path to take. Any opinions on the subject would be appreciated!
I guess we need to take into consideration the disadvantage wall mount surround speakers have... Small air volume is a handicap from the start, which might swap one way or another for full vs multi way setup.
Thanks
I am in the thought process stage of designing some wall mounted rear surround speakers to replace my monitor audio silver RXFX. The reason for this is that the upgrade to the gold versions is incredibly expensive ($1500) and I would rather spend that on drivers, than the product.
I am torn between going full range in bulk, something like this:
Tang Band W4-1337SDF
I would have in biploe, 2 banks of 4 speakers angled at 45 degrees. So thats 8 speakers per surround channel, totalling 16 full range drivers.
Being surrounds, they will not need to provide anything below 80-100Hz, which is good because their response is not great down there.
The alternative is obviously a conventional 2 or 3 way setup. I am not against designing and creating a multi-way crossover circuit so that is neither a pro nor a con for going multi way. Component choice is far more free if I go this route, so I won't place any specifics here.
Given how good full range drivers perform these days, it is not clear cut to me which path to take. Any opinions on the subject would be appreciated!
I guess we need to take into consideration the disadvantage wall mount surround speakers have... Small air volume is a handicap from the start, which might swap one way or another for full vs multi way setup.
Thanks
Never heard a WR driver I thought was better than poor especially with complex material with some real dynamic range. Go multiway. There are lots of movies with quite a lot of material in the surround channels. Unless of course all you watch is Jennifer Aniston rom-coms.
Bipoles are also a product of the pro logic era. In my experience, mompoles are a much better match.
Wondering why your first paragraph is so? If you look at the frequency response of the full range I linked to, it is pretty impressive. Remarkably so.
I was dead set on 2 (or 3) way initially. While reviewing drivers I noticed how good full ranged seemed to be, which kind of begs the question why multi way has any place?!
Must be missing something!
Good advice. I just went from full range dipoles to two way conventional monopoles and I can't believe the difference. I was wrong about everything I believed about surrounds. 1 forget dipoles 2. It turns out that bass matters. Try get down to 60 Hz. 3. They need to be capable of decent spl.
A movie I watched after making the switch, a truck drove by into the background and I was startled! Before it was "a vehicle-like noise somewhere in the distance". Now it is a truck driving right past just like I see on the screen. Rumble and all.
A movie I watched after making the switch, a truck drove by into the background and I was startled! Before it was "a vehicle-like noise somewhere in the distance". Now it is a truck driving right past just like I see on the screen. Rumble and all.
This is good. The kind of experiences that datasheets and tech specs can't convey.
What subs are you running? I have an SVS ultra and I can't see that the rears, with lows of 60hz, would add anymore than the SVS already gives?
Also, if I wanted as low as 60hZ, would I realistically achieve that with such a small enclosure? (I plan that the surrounds will be pretty large, but still smaller than your average front or center speaker of course).
What subs are you running? I have an SVS ultra and I can't see that the rears, with lows of 60hz, would add anymore than the SVS already gives?
Also, if I wanted as low as 60hZ, would I realistically achieve that with such a small enclosure? (I plan that the surrounds will be pretty large, but still smaller than your average front or center speaker of course).
I'll come at it from the angle of a guy who likes full-range, single driver speakers. With the right enclosure and some imagination, my opinion is that you could do very well with the Tang Bands.
I used this driver's brother in a relatively small enclosure and it put out a surprising amount of bass:3CR-Ti | Parts Express Project Gallery
With the right enclosure, a 4" driver can dig deeper than a lot of guys might think. The problem would be how much room you have, seeing that they are surrounds. There are builds in which the cabinet is only 3-4' deep, but fairly wide and fairly tall: Ever think of building a Cornu Spiral horn? Now you can!
There are other builds as well. If you look on this site, you might find something: Frugal-phile DIY Audio Community Site
Folded transmission lines with the right full-range driver are great as well.
Don't necessarily dismiss the full-range idea. There are A LOT of great sounding full range speakers that would make great surrounds.
Mike
I used this driver's brother in a relatively small enclosure and it put out a surprising amount of bass:3CR-Ti | Parts Express Project Gallery
With the right enclosure, a 4" driver can dig deeper than a lot of guys might think. The problem would be how much room you have, seeing that they are surrounds. There are builds in which the cabinet is only 3-4' deep, but fairly wide and fairly tall: Ever think of building a Cornu Spiral horn? Now you can!
There are other builds as well. If you look on this site, you might find something: Frugal-phile DIY Audio Community Site
Folded transmission lines with the right full-range driver are great as well.
Don't necessarily dismiss the full-range idea. There are A LOT of great sounding full range speakers that would make great surrounds.
Mike
I have a 500watt 15“ dayton driver in a large vented enclosure. It produces 114 dB at 1meter in the model. I'm currently working on a horn sub to give me more output, but that's another topic.
When I initially installed the 2 ways, dayton br1. Which are awesome btw, I ran the receiver auto setup. After the truck drove by I got very curious what the auto setup had put the crossover point. I checked, 40hz! I later moved it to 60 to increase power handling but I was shocked that I could tell a difference. Bass isn't directional they say. I since found an interesting article on distributed bass in home theater that made the same argument that it is indeed. Sorry I don't have a link. My third next project is going to be surround line arrays 20“ tall with wide range drivers 500hz to 20k. And dayton hf 8" 40hz to 500hz.
When I initially installed the 2 ways, dayton br1. Which are awesome btw, I ran the receiver auto setup. After the truck drove by I got very curious what the auto setup had put the crossover point. I checked, 40hz! I later moved it to 60 to increase power handling but I was shocked that I could tell a difference. Bass isn't directional they say. I since found an interesting article on distributed bass in home theater that made the same argument that it is indeed. Sorry I don't have a link. My third next project is going to be surround line arrays 20“ tall with wide range drivers 500hz to 20k. And dayton hf 8" 40hz to 500hz.
You are missing something; WR drivers have awful distortion trying to reproduce bass and MR and HF especially with any sort of reasonable SPL involved. FR at 1W is meaningless.
I've been through several iterations of surrounds, and now to have something that keeps up with my mains, it's a 15" 3 way.
I've owned a whole bunch of WR drivers over the years after being told how good they are, and the best I'd give a 2/10.
Exactly. Mine will do 60Hz sealed with no EQ and about 115dB.
Datasheets only tell the basics.
4 sealed FTW21's.
Which LF driver are you going to use? That will determine the majority of the enclosure volume.
FWIW, design based on these requirements and you've got all movies to date 'covered': https://www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-specifications.pdf
GM
GM
Thanks for the input. It seems more compelling to go 2/3 way to me now, based on the above experiences. I guess this thread is the wrong place to discuss driver selection? I need to do a fair amount more research now that I have chosen this initial path!
I am also thinking monopole now that I have read up on room configuration; the surrounds are appx 2m behind the sofa (given behind the sofa is the through-way, they cannot be located closer).
Next decision is 2 or 3 way. I am not against the added complexity of 3 way if the results will be worthwhile. But if the difference is negligible given the extra effort, I would stick with 2 way.
Assuming 3 way for now, I COULD go down the ribbon tweeter route, which is something I have always fancied. I don't have ribbons up front, though. Would this mismatch be a mistake? Or just a nice added bonus up high for the rears?
For drivers, I am thinking either a 6" or an 8" low/mid (doesn't need to give a HUGE SPL, I am just conscious of the small, probably sealed enclosure to give the best in the compromised situation). Then a couple more drivers, either 2 silk dome tweeters but perhaps a better match between a larger woofer and a ribbon tweeter might be a couple of small 3 or 4" cones. What are the opinions here?
Once a rough outline has been established, I can go back to the datasheets to find compatible drivers.
Thanks again.
I am also thinking monopole now that I have read up on room configuration; the surrounds are appx 2m behind the sofa (given behind the sofa is the through-way, they cannot be located closer).
Next decision is 2 or 3 way. I am not against the added complexity of 3 way if the results will be worthwhile. But if the difference is negligible given the extra effort, I would stick with 2 way.
Assuming 3 way for now, I COULD go down the ribbon tweeter route, which is something I have always fancied. I don't have ribbons up front, though. Would this mismatch be a mistake? Or just a nice added bonus up high for the rears?
For drivers, I am thinking either a 6" or an 8" low/mid (doesn't need to give a HUGE SPL, I am just conscious of the small, probably sealed enclosure to give the best in the compromised situation). Then a couple more drivers, either 2 silk dome tweeters but perhaps a better match between a larger woofer and a ribbon tweeter might be a couple of small 3 or 4" cones. What are the opinions here?
Once a rough outline has been established, I can go back to the datasheets to find compatible drivers.
Thanks again.
FIY, I just finished a pair of rear speakers. 8" midbass (HiVi M8A) and 1" tweeter (SB Acoustics SB26ADC) on a Monacor WG300 waveguide. The midbass section (including box volume/tuning, but not shape) is the same as in my 3-way front speakers, which use ACR TT50 mid and Seas 22TAF/G tweeter. In a side-by-side comparison the rear and front speakers sound similar enough to be considered "timbre matched". Certainly placement in room makes more difference than 2-way vs. 3-way, so I'd suggest 2-way and invest the mid driver money into good crossover.
My previous rear speakers were some 4" plus 1" ones from a Yamaha mini hi-fi system. Redid the crossovers, of course, and they sound quite decent for what they are. But upgrading to "real" speakers that can move some air was worthwhile, as movies these days put quite a lot to rear channels.
My previous rear speakers were some 4" plus 1" ones from a Yamaha mini hi-fi system. Redid the crossovers, of course, and they sound quite decent for what they are. But upgrading to "real" speakers that can move some air was worthwhile, as movies these days put quite a lot to rear channels.
Thanks gm. That's a great reference. The only thing I might say is that in my home, when the wife is gone and the boys turn up mad max to 11, 105db for mains(+10) for sub, doesn't quite do it for me. I think in my medium to large theater a 1 meter max output of 115db for each speaker seems like enough for the front three, I should pull out the spl meter sometime and see what I'm running at the seats, I'm still figuring out how much the surrounds need, but the recommendations on the Dolby requirements of the same as the front three is probably wise. The sub is another matter. I'm not sure what output is enough, but mine 114 dB at 1 meter isn't quite gut throttling. I guess 115 +10=125db. That's probably about right. My horn sub will do 140 or so, if I ever finish it.
Because they're from early 1990's
I believe they're actually rebranded MB Quart, similar to those used in Thiel CS5 and Avalon Ascent mk2.Here's ACR catalog from 1990. Closest equivalent today is, I think, Dayton RS52AN.
You're welcome!
Seriously?! Per channel at the Lp? Lot of SPL lost over distance in larger HTs.
Sub wise, peak output depends on distance of course plus how many, if any, channels are set to 'small', routing all the < 80 or 120 Hz output to the LFE system depending on XO point. Without access to my calculators, seems to me it was at least 121 dB/m for a 5.1 system all set to 'small' to meet the original THX reference, so could still need more over distance combined with more channels, pushing it to $$$ prosound small cinema $$$ requirements; so yeah, only large horn
Better overall though is to have a sub system for every zone to keep them relatively 'compact' and positioned around the room to average out the system's in room response, and to do it up really right, is add subs up the walls at an odd harmonic to deal with the vertical eigenmodes after Drs. Toole, Geddes respectively.
Do it this way and they can be relatively small, using inexpensive components/plate amps, yet summing to an enveloping, high SQ, extreme bass output to below audibility that can literally 'bring the house down' as I learned the hard way many moons ago while enjoying U-571's depth charge scene. :(
GM
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.