Dayton RS WMTW Center & TMWW Mains

[ThomasW]

Just sitting around on Sunday afternoon gluing up 3 ways........Who's motto says "progress is our most important product?" ....:wink:

Go-getters build their crossovers while the glue is drying.. :B

[chasw98]

Who's motto says "progress is our most important product?" ....:wink:

Go-getters build their crossovers while the glue is drying.. :B

Like a fine wine, I am taking my time with this. I had to build my sub quick to meet a deadline, I had to build ssabripo's CC to meet a deadline, etc. There is no timetable for this project. I am enjoying every moment of it. From breathing MDF dust to trying to find the right schematic to searching out parts. I am savoring this build. By the way Thomas, what do you use to mount crossovers on? Seems like everyone is using masonite pegboard. I am looking for mil spec glass epoxy resin circuit boards that are bare so I can drill my own holes. Any ideas?

[Brian Bunge]

Hell, my center channel cabinet has been finished since November but I've yet to buy crossover parts and assemble them. I'm actually waiting to see if my big Pioneer Elite TV can be fixed before proceeding. If not, then I'll be building an audio rack/TV stand for a new TV, which may require different baffle step compensation than with the center sitting on top of a big RPTV.

[kgveteran]

Who's motto says "progress is our most important product?" ....:wink:

Go-getters build their crossovers while the glue is drying.. :B

I built mine while eatting dinner :) I think I might have even taken a couple pics of it.This really is a great project :T

[chasw98]

I built mine while eatting dinner :) I think I might have even taken a couple pics of it.This really is a great project :T


Yeah, I remember. Crossovers on the kitchen table, Big Mac pushed out of the way! :rofl:

[ThomasW]

I've always used tempered Masonite when I could find it. It handles the weight of the big inductors well. And it's cheap, like me...:wink:

[chasw98]

So where do you find it?

[jonathanb3478]

Anyway, I'm happy to share my experiences and thoughts but I wanted to make clear that there are many with much, much more experience than I.

I never saw a beginners question from you in this thread, and you were willing to modify the enclosure to suit what you felt would sound better. Add your recent comment that you cannot hear the difference between .7-.6 Qtc, which would imply that you have heard both. Combine all of this with your description of your resulting speakers performance, and you have plenty of experience to be able to help me, even though you may not fall into the "Guru" category. :T

Here is a link to the NRC rated foam that I mentioned. http://www.foambymail.com/Wedge.html

48 sq ft of that, in 2", ships for free. Not bad. I will be using this, as well. Thanks!


Here is a link to the asphalt sheeting that PE sells. http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=268-020

I linked to the largest size they offer but they also have smaller sizes available.

As I indicated in a previous post, I will be using this. That is the size I will be ordering. I need one per speaker, I believe.

It has *nothing* to do with the midrange or high frequencies, only bass roll off.

This I knew, but I played with the Seas L22 (pretty sure it is the L) woofer, used by Rick in his Peridot kit, in WIN-ISD some time ago. That was the reason I downloaded it in the first place, even. I remembered that higher volume enclosures rolled off, what I would call the mid-bass, around the 150Hz range.

I quit being lazy, and put what TS numbers I had for the RS-225S-8 (listed in your standard BOM), since I do not have "Dia" or "STD", into WIN-ISD Beta. I found that I was dead-on. At 103 Liters (the biggest I believe I might possiblely be able to extend the woofer volume to), the roll off visiblely begins at ~150Hz vs ~100Hz with the 6X Liter enclosure that is specified for the TMWW sealed implementation.

But I looked closely, and the 103L enclosure is only about 1db down by 100Hz. Whoopty-friggin-do, right?

If there are no other side effects from increasing the enclosure size, such as a "sloppier" response, then I will be doing so. Do I need to match the Qtc of the mid woofer's enclosure to the woofers' enclosure? That would make sense to me.

If they do need to match, do I increase to the same Qtc number (via running what-ifs? through WIN-ISD using the mid's TS nubmers), or just increase it by the same proportion I do the woofers' enclosure?

I would appreciate clarification on this from someone.


Go-getters build their crossovers while the glue is drying..

Well, go-getters that have not tapped out, finantially. I need a couple months to recover from recent "toy" purchases, plus travel and gift related expenses regarding the upcomming, out of state wedding of my close friend.

At this point, I cannot get $22 4'X8' MDF sheets as fast as I can work them. Things will be good again in August. Looking forward to that. :D

[marc g]

I wish there were builders out in the Portland OR. area so I could hear some of these projects before I built them. I just might have to start "building them for friends". Yea right.
My CC cab is finished. The SIZE! Man, I failed to appreciate the finished size of this thing untill the drivers arrived so I could cut the baffles. 'Bout the size of a big under cabinet microwave, wow.
Note to self: build shelf or CC will crush TV.
Spec size and actual size of drivers differ a noticable degree. So wait until you have those babies in your hand before you cut. (hint hint) The bondo has been sanded down to just whisps and the sanding sealer has dried . PE was out of one funky resistor so I have a bottle neck there. Will try to source locally. Probably going to use duplicolor truck bed liner spray for the finish. Worked well on my sub. Ringer for the M&K look anyway.

http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/6311/dsc034276ol.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img282.imageshack.us/img282/3968/dsc034243eh.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[kgveteran]

I wish there were builders out in the Portland OR. area so I could hear some of these projects before I built them. I just might have to start "building them for friends". Yea right.
My CC cab is finished. The SIZE! Man, I failed to appreciate the finished size of this thing untill the drivers arrived so I could cut the baffles. 'Bout the size of a big under cabinet microwave, wow.
Note to self: build shelf or CC will crush TV.
Spec size and actual size of drivers differ a noticable degree. So wait until you have those babies in your hand before you cut. (hint hint) The bondo has been sanded down to just whisps and the sanding sealer has dried . PE was out of one funky resistor so I have a bottle neck there. Will try to source locally. Probably going to use duplicolor truck bed liner spray for the finish. Worked well on my sub. Ringer for the M&K look anyway.


I can imagine if you build it with the intended depth of 16" compared to my 12".I choose to call them "RS Mains".They have to weigh at least 75lbs each with drivers.Great project.More pics from the new builders please.


KG

[marc g]

I did a shelf brace and also did a couple of back braces tieing the mid chamber to the back to stiffenn things up. It's had to see but I used baltic birch laminated to the baffle to give the screws something to bite. I cut a window in the back for a bi-wirable mounting plate and so I can get my hand in there if I have to in the future. BTW $125-$150 to have this thing made was a deal ! If I didn't enjoy it I'm paying myself about $5/hr. :roll:

[Spendorite]

I've been following this thread with much interest for a few weeks now.
This RS 3-way Dennis Murphy design looks like a real winner judging by the rave reviews from Jim Holtz and others here.
I've been seriously considering getting a 3-way full range kit such as the Peridot or Phase'st from Rick Craig's Selha Audio.
I'd like to ask Jim Holtz or anyone else here who might be familiar with Rick Craig's designs. In terms of overall speaker performance would I be getting less if I go with the RS 3-way rather than the Peridot or Phase'st from Rick which would be double or more in cost for the kit versions only.

I'll be using the speakers for stereo listening only and my music is predominantly classical and jazz.

Whichever kit I eventually build it will be for long term use (many years), I do'nt have the money, time or space to build and accomodate several speakers in my home. So come on guys your responses would be greatly appreciated.

[chasw98]

Laminating the front baffle tonight. Laminate the other one on Wednesday. Woofer & Mid arrive on Thursday. Tweet on Friday. Route on Saturday!

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3735.jpg

:D :D :D

[ssabripo]

Laminating the front baffle tonight. Laminate the other one on Wednesday. Woofer & Mid arrive on Thursday. Tweet on Friday. Route on Saturday!

:D :D :D

save some energy for my veneers! :lol:

[kgveteran]

Laminating the front baffle tonight. Laminate the other one on Wednesday. Woofer & Mid arrive on Thursday. Tweet on Friday. Route on Saturday!

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3735.jpg

:D :D :D

Who's XO are you using ?

KG

[chasw98]

Who's XO are you using ?

KG

I have not ordered any XO parts yet, but I am leaning heavily towards Dennis'. I have purchased the Seas tweeter. In talking with Jim Holtz and reading and rereading this thread over and over, it appears the differences are mostly in how the HF circuit is handled. (Correct me if I am wrong). There are differences in the woof and mid but they appear to be more subtle. I have never heard any of these in person except for ssabripo's CC with Curt's XO, so to me, all I can do is make an educated guess. Jon's XO is out because of expense, but I am sure it is great. I am definitely open to suggestions.

Chuck

[Jim Holtz]

I've been following this thread with much interest for a few weeks now.
This RS 3-way Dennis Murphy design looks like a real winner judging by the rave reviews from Jim Holtz and others here.
I've been seriously considering getting a 3-way full range kit such as the Peridot or Phase'st from Rick Craig's Selha Audio.
I'd like to ask Jim Holtz or anyone else here who might be familiar with Rick Craig's designs. In terms of overall speaker performance would I be getting less if I go with the RS 3-way rather than the Peridot or Phase'st from Rick which would be double or more in cost for the kit versions only.

I'll be using the speakers for stereo listening only and my music is predominantly classical and jazz.

Whichever kit I eventually build it will be for long term use (many years), I do'nt have the money, time or space to build and accomodate several speakers in my home. So come on guys your responses would be greatly appreciated.


I think you've made excellent choices but since I've not heard either the Peridot or Phase'st, I can't compare them sound wise. I can tell you that both Rick and Dennis are superb designers and produce some of the very best speaker designs available.

Rick has chosen excellent drivers that are highly regarded in the industry and appear in a number of speakers considered the best available.

Dennis has chosen the highly regarded RS series which are noted for exceptional performance at very, very reasonable prices. They are really over achievers.

Which is better. Only your ears can tell you that. I can tell you that both of these gentleman spend countless hours getting their designs just right before they offer them. Regardless of which you choose, you get an exceptional design that will offer superb sound quality.

HTH

Jim

[Jim Holtz]

I have not ordered any XO parts yet, but I am leaning heavily towards Dennis'. I have purchased the Seas tweeter. In talking with Jim Holtz and reading and rereading this thread over and over, it appears the differences are mostly in how the HF circuit is handled. (Correct me if I am wrong). There are differences in the woof and mid but they appear to be more subtle. I have never heard any of these in person except for ssabripo's CC with Curt's XO, so to me, all I can do is make an educated guess. Jon's XO is out because of expense, but I am sure it is great. I am definitely open to suggestions.

Chuck

Something that should probably be mentioned, Dennis used a 2nd order crossover in his design that he feels offers a more "natural and life like" presentation with better driver integration. I know he spent hours upon hours tweaking the crossover to get the voicing just right with smooth natural mids and highs that are never too harsh or to subdued. This is the part of crossover design that I consider to be "black magic" and what sets one design apart from another. It's the designers signature if you will. ;x(

IMHO, this speaker design will lay to rest the concerns about the 27TBFC/G being fatiguing. It's all in the crossover folks. :T

My $.02 worth

Jim

[jonathanb3478]

The admitedly complicated nature of the enclosure I intend to build, lead me on a search for CAD/CAM software. I, of course, did not want to pay anything for it! :D

A search for "CAD design" on download.com lead me to the Alibre Design Xpress software. The license is "Free". This is interesting, folks... no more issues visualizing where that brace should go. Of course I have spent a decent number of hours figureing out how to use the app to build an assembly with 71 components. There were only 10 unique parts (so far, no subenclosure yet), but still...

Thought I would share...

If you want, check out images of my intended enclosure, using this software package:

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=261803&postcount=6

[swithey]

Long time lurker but in the mood to make my own DIY speakers. I’ve read countless pages in this (and the other Dayton DIY speaker threads) and have a few questions:

I am sold that Dayton makes some nice drivers for a very good price. However, I am concerned about the tweeter. My ears are very sensitive to harsher tweets. Historically (IMO), metal dome tweets have been a bit more harsh than a soft dome (notice I said "historically" beacuse it may be different today and may also depend on the driver/x-over).

For example: I listened to the DynAudio Audience 52 (http://www.dynaudio.de/eng/systems/lines/audience/audience52.php?sid=4486d51464f4d ) which uses a 28mm soft-dome tweeter. This tweeter was a bit on the harsh side for me. I then listened to the DynAudio Audience 52 SE (http://www.dynaudio.de/eng/systems/lines/editions/special25.php?sid=4486d51464f4d) which uses the Esotec tweeter from their higher end Contour line (at about 3x the price) and I was in heaven. Now to confuse things even more, I listened to the Paradigm Studio 20 (http://www.paradigm.com/Website/SiteReferenceProduct/RModels/StudioSeries/StudioSpecs.html) which uses a 25-mm (1 in) S-PAL™ satin-anodized pure-aluminum dome tweeter and I love the sound of this little speaker too - no harshness at all.

I’ve ready a few comments from users in this thread, but these (3) come to mind (I hope you guys do not mind being quoted):

The tweeter [RS28] is a bit bright for my tastes on long listening sessions, but I will play with either padding it down, or replacing it with the Seas tweeter at some point.
The Seas H1212 is an amazingly good tweeter. I like the sound of the RS28 but felt it was a bit dead sounding on the top end. The H1212 in comparison has the same full bodied sound in the lower treble but is very extended and airy. It is really, really a nice tweeter and a bargain for the price.
IMHO, this speaker design will lay to rest the concerns about the 27TBFC/G being fatiguing. It's all in the crossover folks.
An now my questions (assuming Dennis x-over design):

1) Would you say the Seas 27TBFC/G (H1212) (http://www.seas.no/seas_line/tweeters/H1212.pdf) tweet is more smooth than the Dayton RS28 (http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-130)? This "seems" true based on Jim Holtz's comment above.

2) Is padding down the tweet something I should consider to rectify any harshness?

3) Could I substitute the Seas 29TFF/W (http://www.seas.no/Prestige%20Diskanter%20PDF/29TFF_WH1318-06.pdf) Soft Dome Tweeter and still be okay with Dennis’s X-over design?

4) Could I turn this speaker vertically to make a L/R without an X-Over design change (making the tweet and mids vertical with the dual woofs below)? From what I’ve read, I think this is a big fat NO.

5) If #4 is not an option, what options do I have if I want something that will match this center in a 2.5 or 3-way config with Dennis’s x-over design? I just do not have room for the huge Dayton TMWW 3-Way Towers (but wish I did). I think something is in the works but was not sure.

And I apologize if this has been addressed before but sometimes you miss a few things after 23 pages of posts ;)

[Brian Walter]

This thread can be very confusing if you haven't followed it from the beginning. Dennis has a crossover design for both the horizontal center channel and the vertical left and right speakers. I am building the L & R speakers myself, but I haven't looked closely at the center to see how different the crossover is compared to the L & R. Also. I'm not sure what tweeter options are available for the center channel, but if you read through this entire thread you will most certainly find out. I think there are options out there for using the Seas 27TDFC, which is very similar to the 27TBFC from a crossover standpoint. Not too far back there is a summary of what all the available designs or options are.

Brian Walter

[swithey]

This thread can be very confusing if you haven't followed it from the beginning. Dennis has a crossover design for both the horizontal center channel and the vertical left and right speakers. I am building the L & R speakers myself, but I haven't looked closely at the center to see how different the crossover is compared to the L & R. Also. I'm not sure what tweeter options are available for the center channel, but if you read through this entire thread you will most certainly find out. I think there are options out there for using the Seas 27TDFC, which is very similar to the 27TBFC from a crossover standpoint. Not too far back there is a summary of what all the available designs or options are.

Brian Walter
Thanks Brian. I think the Seas 27TDFC would work of fine (hope it DOES use the same x-over). I'll re-read and see if I can find the info you described.

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks Brian. I think the Seas 27TDFC would work of fine (hope it DOES use the same x-over). I'll re-read and see if I can find the info you described.

Per Jon, the 27TDFC and 27TBFC/G are interchangeable without crossover changes. The crossover would be different for a center however. The center Dennis designed used the RS28 rather than a Seas tweeter. He's not had a chance to revisit the design and rework it for a Seas tweeter and I doubt if he will for some time since he's moving in about a month and has many other commitments.

If you want a center using the same tweeter as the mains, Chris (CJD) has a very nice MTM based on the 27TDFC (shielded or unshielded) and RS150's that would work well. I've attached a picture of one I built for my son.

That said, IMHO, I don't think you'd notice any difference in the sound of the center that Dennis designed with the RS28 when using it with his RS 3-way mains. Home theater has much more to do with the mids and voicing than with the top octave, IMHO. The 27TBFC/G and the RS28 sound very similar to my ears until you get to the top octave.

My opinion, YMMV....

Jim

[dawaro]

An now my questions (assuming Dennis x-over design):

1) Would you say the Seas 27TBFC/G (H1212) (http://www.seas.no/seas_line/tweeters/H1212.pdf) tweet is more smooth than the Dayton RS28 (http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=275-130)? This "seems" true based on Jim Holtz's comment above

2) Is padding down the tweet something I should consider to rectify any harshness?.;)

I do not think that the RS28 being harsh is the issue here. The RS28 is not as extended as the Seas so it appears to have a little more "air" to it. This is going to be a taste issue. Some have reported that they do not care for the Seas while others love it. As for the RS28 the only mention of it being harsh is when it is pushed to low in a design which is definitely not the case here.



3) Could I substitute the Seas 29TFF/W (http://www.seas.no/Prestige%20Diskanter%20PDF/29TFF_WH1318-06.pdf) Soft Dome Tweeter and still be okay with Dennis’s X-over design?;)

I do not think so. It can be replaced with the 27TDFC softdome but I am not sure about that one.


4) Could I turn this speaker vertically to make a L/R without an X-Over design change (making the tweet and mids vertical with the dual woofs below)? From what I’ve read, I think this is a big fat NO.

This would not be recommended but it has been done. KG did it and really likes his set up


5) If #4 is not an option, what options do I have if I want something that will match this center in a 2.5 or 3-way config with Dennis’s x-over design? I just do not have room for the huge Dayton TMWW 3-Way Towers (but wish I did). I think something is in the works but was not sure.

And I apologize if this has been addressed before but sometimes you miss a few things after 23 pages of posts ;)

Post 258 has the Dennis' tower design using the Seas tweeter, 258 uses the RS28.
Post 590 has Curt's RS28 tower design.
Post 591 is a very nice set of CAD drawings for all the cabinets.

Hope this helps

[Rudy D]

So after building the ported tower version using Dennis's XO design ( and being quite pleased by the way). I'm now building the sealed version based on the box Jim constructed. The WAF did not apreciated the big ported towers. I'm going to gut it ( Ported towers) and put the drivers and Xo's in sealed version, and it gives me a chance to get better at building enclosures based on experience. As was said, the journey is half the fun. I have a question for the group. what about a sub to compliment the TMWW towers and CC?

[Jim Holtz]

So after building the ported tower version using Dennis's XO design ( and being quite pleased by the way). I'm now building the sealed version based on the box Jim constructed. The WAF did not apreciated the big ported towers. I'm going to gut it ( Ported towers) and put the drivers and Xo's in sealed version, and it gives me a chance to get better at building enclosures based on experience. As was said, the journey is half the fun. I have a question for the group. what about a sub to compliment the TMWW towers and CC?

Hi Rudy,

The doors wide open on a sub to go with the RS 3-ways. Sealed the F3 is around 50 Hz. so you could easily go with a 15" and cross it in the 40 Hz. - 50 Hz. range for serious "woofin" on the bottom octave. I doubt, given the excellent mid bass performance of the sealed RS225's, that you'd do more than barely "tickle" the sub on most music. Home theater would work the heck out of the sub as it should. An excellent combination, IMHO.

Thomas, AJ and others can give you better sub recommendations than I. I hope the chime in with their thoughts.

I'm looking forward to hearing your listening impressions of the sealed version.

Jim

[chasw98]

Tonights progress. Both baffles laminated and
ready to route. And if you can't see it in the first
picture, you will notice the crossover door in the second.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3740.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3743.jpg

[swithey]

Per Jon, the 27TDFC and 27TBFC/G are interchangeable without crossover changes. The crossover would be different for a center however. The center Dennis designed used the RS28 rather than a Seas tweeter. He's not had a chance to revisit the design and rework it for a Seas tweeter and I doubt if he will for some time since he's moving in about a month and has many other commitments.

If you want a center using the same tweeter as the mains, Chris (CJD) has a very nice MTM based on the 27TDFC (shielded or unshielded) and RS150's that would work well. I've attached a picture of one I built for my son.

That said, IMHO, I don't think you'd notice any difference in the sound of the center that Dennis designed with the RS28 when using it with his RS 3-way mains. Home theater has much more to do with the mids and voicing than with the top octave, IMHO. The 27TBFC/G and the RS28 sound very similar to my ears until you get to the top octave.

My opinion, YMMV....

Jim
Thanks for the reply Jim. The 27TDFC will work out fine. I'll also take a look at the MTM to see what works for me. I just love the idea of the really beefy center channel discussed in this thread. I may just build it and change the xover once Dennis makes one for the Seas tweet.

[swithey]

I do not think that the RS28 being harsh is the issue here. The RS28 is not as extended as the Seas so it appears to have a little more "air" to it. This is going to be a taste issue. Some have reported that they do not care for the Seas while others love it. As for the RS28 the only mention of it being harsh is when it is pushed to low in a design which is definitely not the case here.




I do not think so. It can be replaced with the 27TDFC softdome but I am not sure about that one.



This would not be recommended but it has been done. KG did it and really likes his set up



Post 258 has the Dennis' tower design using the Seas tweeter, 258 uses the RS28.
Post 590 has Curt's RS28 tower design.
Post 591 is a very nice set of CAD drawings for all the cabinets.

Hope this helps
Thanks dawaro. I'll take a look at the other designs. I may be able to fit the TMWWs in my setup -- so if I can, why not build those :)

[kgveteran]

Well, I built a little platform for the center and moved it to the edge of the subwoofers.I moved the whole front three even with the center.They have been there about two months without a hitch.

I am very pleased with the results :T The front sound stage is very powerful and has plenty of headroom.it's nice to watch a movie and not worry about lowering the volume.

[chasw98]

Tonights update. Got the mids routed.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3744.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3745.jpg
kg - Looks like a great setup you have there. I hope mine will get there some day.

[kgveteran]

Nice opening on the back of the 150. I never told my cabinet guy , so I had to use a router bit and a shoe rasp (a very rough round file).Crude, but it worked.

[marc g]

Building my crossovers while the may coats of finish dry on the CC.

I'm sure there is a reason that the midrange crossover uses such a large and expensive 15 gauge air core inductor when it is tied to ground with a 40 ohm resistor. Anyone know what might it be ?

I just realized that there are different versions of Dennis' CC crossover posted on the forum and I took my order from the BOM and schematic zip files on post 646. http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=255104&postcount=646

Any reason for the changes ?

[Landroval]

Hummm, I've been thinking.. What kind of effort would be needed to make this design into a semi-dipole with the RS150 in an OB and keeping the RS225's sealed or br? Would there be any benefits in doing this? I've heard and tried some dipole midranges and I think I prefer them over sealed versions.

[jonathanb3478]

I just realized that there are different versions of Dennis' CC crossover posted on the forum and I took my order from the BOM and schematic zip files on about pg 19.

Any reason for the changes ?

What post number?

I have only 17 pages.

[jonathanb3478]

Tonights update. Got the mids routed.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3745.jpg

Anyone,

I am planing to use a full panel depth, 30-deg chamfer instead of a roundover to allow my mid/woofers to breathe. Is there a plus/minus to that, vs the roundover approach? Or is it more of a personal-preference/use-what-you-got kind of thing (I currently only have a 1/8" roundover bit)?

[chasw98]

I was wondering about roundovering or chamfering the woofers. I know it is recommended for the mid, but I have never seen it mentioned for the woof. I don't think it would hurt.

Chuck

Damn, tweeters won't be here till Monday.

[Jim Holtz]

I was wondering about roundovering or chamfering the woofers. I know it is recommended for the mid, but I have never seen it mentioned for the woof. I don't think it would hurt.

Chuck

Damn, tweeters won't be here till Monday.

Do them all! It only helps. :D

Did you end up doing the RS or Seas design?

Jim

[dawaro]

Building my crossovers while the may coats of finish dry on the CC.

I'm sure there is a reason that the midrange crossover uses such a large and expensive 15 gauge air core inductor when it is tied to ground with a 40 ohm resistor. Anyone know what might it be ?

I just realized that there are different versions of Dennis' CC crossover posted on the forum and I took my order from the BOM and schematic zip files on post 646. http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=255104&postcount=646

Any reason for the changes ?

There are not really different versions of Dennis' CC xover. There was an inductor that was added to improve the phase but that is the only change. It is included in the BOM that you ordered from.

[marc g]

There are not really different versions of Dennis' CC xover. There was an inductor that was added to improve the phase but that is the only change. It is included in the BOM that you ordered from.

Dawaro -thanks for that info. Do you know why such a large $ gauge ?

[chasw98]

Do them all! It only helps. :D

Did you end up doing the RS or Seas design?

Jim

Seas!

[chasw98]

More progress. If any one notices something I've done really stupid (or even moderately stupid) let me know so I can fix it. Thanks.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3752.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3751.jpg
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3750.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3749.jpg

EDIT: Yes, I know there is hole for the HF driver missing. I am waiting till Monday when I have them in hand.

[jonathanb3478]

Do I need to match the Qtc of the mid woofer's enclosure to the woofers' enclosure? That would make sense to me.

If they do need to match, do I increase to the same Qtc number (via running what-ifs? through WIN-ISD using the mid's TS nubmers), or just increase it by the same proportion I do the woofers' enclosure?

I would appreciate clarification on this from someone.

Sorry to quote myself, but I never saw anyone address this. Thoughts?

Even if I do not "need" to, would it help at all? Would it hurt at all to modify the Qtc for the mids enclosure to match the woofers'?

Any insight on this would be appreciated.

[jonathanb3478]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3751.jpg

Is that the foam by mail 2" wedge stuff that Jim posted a link to, a while back? Looks like it. Just curious what you are using in there. Thanks!


EDIT: Yes, I know there is hole for the HF driver missing. I am waiting till Monday when I have them in hand.

Good call! I want very tight tolerences between the drivers and the baffle, in my implementation. I won't do any driver cutouts, 'till I have all drivers on hand. Minimize my numbers of re-do's that way!

[chasw98]

Is that the foam by mail 2" wedge stuff that Jim posted a link to, a while back? Looks like it. Just curious what you are using in there. Thanks!

This is 1" foam that I got here http://www.foamexpress1.com/Acoustic_Sound.php .
It looked very similar to what Jim recommended and was a little bit cheaper. The NRC coefficients are just about the same. Good service and quick shipping. I bought 2 each 24" X 48" X 1" sheets of wedge foam.

[Dennis H]

Do I need to match the Qtc of the mid woofer's enclosure to the woofers' enclosure? No. The crossover frequency is well above the mid's Fb so the Q is more or less irrelevant. Bigger (or at least deeper) is better for mid enclosures to give you more room to damp the backwave so you don't get the backwave mid frequencies radiating back out the cone.

[jonathanb3478]

Thanks!

I have changed my design, then. Different sub-enclosure design, now:

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=262474&postcount=13

I think the new one is MUCH better than my previous itteration.

[Brian Walter]

Jonathan, I'm sligtly confused with your drawings at the link. The top section that has the tapered wedge section in the middle, is that wedge section only behind the tweeter or is that behind the midbass? I can't quite tell what is connected to what. The reason I ask, is that all the irregular shapes outside of the wedge shaped section would seem kind of useless. I mean, it would seem that the irregular shapes would do more good if they were exposed directly to the midbass backwave. The way I am reading the drawing, the midbass seems to fire directly into the wedge shaped section and would suffer from backwave reflections. I know I may be missiterpretting the drawings, in which case my concern might be irrelevent.

One thing you could do to make it easier for us to review your drawings would be to indicate what drawing a heading is referring to. Right now, I don't know if the text placed between two pictures applies to the picture above or below the text. Also you refer to sub-e or something like that, but I have no idea what that is. You need glossary or something similar.

Brian Walter

[jonathanb3478]

Jonathan, I'm sligtly confused with your drawings at the link.

I have edited my original post, to try to improve clarity. Take another look. Thanks!


The top section that has the tapered wedge section in the middle, is that wedge section only behind the tweeter or is that behind the midbass?

I belive that the answer to this question is that the "wedge shaped section" is behind the tweeter and mid. The shape of the sub-enclosure does not change at the top, vs the bottom. For this reason, the shape of the enclosure behind the tweeter and mid are the same.


The reason I ask, is that all the irregular shapes outside of the wedge shaped section would seem kind of useless.

Those shapes are intended to be braces for the sub-enclosue walls, nothing else.


I mean, it would seem that the irregular shapes would do more good if they were exposed directly to the midbass backwave.

OK. That is correct, as far as it goes. Read my next response, to find out why I don't think it would be needed to move the braces into the internal volume of the sub-enclosure to help damp the backwave of the mid.


The way I am reading the drawing, the midbass seems to fire directly into the wedge shaped section and would suffer from backwave reflections. I know I may be missiterpretting the drawings, in which case my concern might be irrelevent.

Actually, I do not think you are misinterpreting the drawings. I think you are just concerned because only the wood used in the enclosure is shown in these images. More specifically, just the MDF to be used is actually shown.

I made the sidewalls non parallel, so the size of the surface at the rear of the sub-enclosure, which is the only surface that will provide a direct reflection (Direct reflection: one that does not bounce off an enclosure surface more than once before it hits the back of the midrange driver), is very small. This surface is ~1.78" across. One inch closer to the midrange, the width along that same dimension is just barely over 2". The reasoning behind that design feature should become obvious after reading the next paragraph.

Now, when the backwave of the mid hits one of the non parallel sidewalls, it must reflect off the various sub-enclosure surfaces many times before it could make it back to hit the rear of the midrange driver. To prevent this, all sides of the sub-enclosure will be directly covered with a layer of the asphalt-based damping material sold by PE, and then that will be covered by a layer of 1" open-cell wedge foam. No part of the backwave, which has to bounce off surfaces treated like that several times, is ever going to reach the back of the midrage and cause problems. Am I wrong on that assumption?


One thing you could do to make it easier for us to review your drawings would be to indicate what drawing a heading is referring to. Right now, I don't know if the text placed between two pictures applies to the picture above or below the text.

Ok, I have done that.


Also you refer to sub-e or something like that, but I have no idea what that is. You need glossary or something similar.

Well, the first time I used the word "sub-enclosure", I followed it with "(sub-e)", to indicate I would reference it with that term in the future. That is not perfectly clear, so I quit being lazy and just used "sub-enclosure" throughout the post. :D

Thanks for your comments!

[Brian Walter]

Jonathan,
It all makes sense to me now. I think the point I was trying to make, which is only an opinion and may not be true is as follows: It would seem to me that removing the wedge shaped inner walls from the midbass subenclosure and exposing the irregular shapped bracing and obtaining the additional volume would be more benifitial than the extra stiffness obtained from having it. I can't argue with your reasoning for having the wedge shape, it seems reasonable.

One suggestion I have would be to provide a series of holes, say 3 per layer that can be used with guide pins to help in alignment of the various pieces during assembly. The closer you come to getting these things perfectly aligned, the less sandy you will need to do. Another option to smooth out the outside would be to laminate a piece of 1/8" or 1/4" hardboard to the outside of the cabinet. I did this with 1/4" oak plywood on my cabinets and it worked out quite well. If you do this, I would suggest using one of the foaming urethane glues, as it will fill any minute gaps and prevent buzzing. There is a picture of my cabinets during construction back at post 672. I used multiple strips of 3/4" mdf to form the bulk of the cabinet and overlaid that with the 1/4" plywood. I'm sure it is not as dead as yours will be, but I used only 2 sheets of mdf and1 sheet of 1/4" oak ply.

Brian Walter

[Dennis H]

Now, when the backwave of the mid hits one of the non parallel sidewalls, it must reflect off the various sub-enclosure surfaces many times before it could make it back to hit the rear of the midrange driver. Not really. That would only be true at frequencies much higher than the midrange driver will play, where the wavelength is very short compared to the cabinet dimensions. A 500 Hz tone has a wavelength around 27" so all that's happening is the box pressurizes plus and minus with box shape only playing a minor role. The main thing is having some absorption in there to damp the backwave.

[jonathanb3478]

A 500 Hz tone has a wavelength around 27" so all that's happening is the box pressurizes plus and minus with box shape only playing a minor role. The main thing is having some absorption in there to damp the backwave.

Thats too bad...

Oh well, needed or not it was fun to do, since I thought it would help at the time!

:D

[jonathanb3478]

Jonathan,
It all makes sense to me now. I think the point I was trying to make, which is only an opinion and may not be true is as follows: It would seem to me that removing the wedge shaped inner walls from the midbass subenclosure and exposing the irregular shapped bracing and obtaining the additional volume would be more benifitial than the extra stiffness obtained from having it. I can't argue with your reasoning for having the wedge shape, it seems reasonable.

Well, Dennis H shoots down my neat little theory with a healthy dose of reality, but I am glad my attempt to add clarity worked!

One suggestion I have would be to provide a series of holes, say 3 per layer that can be used with guide pins to help in alignment of the various pieces during assembly.

I already have a pack of 500 1/4"X1.5" dowel pins in my wishlist at amazon.com. They will run ~$18, after shipping. I had been planning to pick them up, or local equivilents, once they are needed. That would pretty much be now. Using three holes per panel interface, I need >400 per pair of speakers at 3/4" long. I need >200 of the 1.5" dowel pins I found on Amazon. Getting 500 leaves me enough to make the second pair, as well.

Also, my new drill press will be a Godsend in the alignment hole drilling process. Some people questioned my purchase of a drill press in my first round of speaker building tool purchases (when I did not get a jigsaw, for instance), but I had an instinctual feel that it would be very handy. Besides, when I saw a sale in a local store for a 13" swing, 12-speed, floorstanding press with a 3/4 HP induction motor for $160 (new), that was not something I was cabable of passing up! The Craftsman with a 3/4 HP induction motor runs $480, though it has some cool goodies and a 16" swing.

On a side note, Harbor Frieght's brand "Central Machinery" may not be the best available, but when I had an issue with the induction motor that I got with the unit, I had a replacement and a prepaid shipping label for the old one in about a week. No India-based support people involved, either (pet peave of mine). Just a gal in California, and another somewhere in the US-eastern timezone. <end of HF advertisement>

Another option to smooth out the outside would be to laminate a piece of 1/8" or 1/4" hardboard to the outside of the cabinet.

I want to attach the veneer directly to the MDF (or birch ply, as it may turn out), purely for dimensional stability reasons. I may be off base, but it makes sense to me.

[chasw98]

Tonights progress. I only got one HF driver istalled. Routing out the small hole is much harder and takes more concentration than the large ones. Especially if you are going for a precision fit. It doesn't help that the rear covers on the seas tweeter are misaligned so that there is not a constant circumference around the body of the driver.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3755.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3754.jpg

Tomorrow the crossover parts arrive along with the other woofer. I should be able to hear sound out of one of them around Thursday evening with a little luck.

[chasw98]

Time for crossovers. Here is the mid and hi sections on one board. The low section will be on another separate board. I think all the inductors are aligned for least interference with any other inductors. I've checked and double checked the schematic. And.... no wires have been cut or soldered yet. So if there is a mistake, it is easily repairable by taking it apart.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3759.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3762.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3760.jpg

The left hand terminals are in & out for mid, the right for high.

[kgveteran]

I think i want to pull my pics of the hotglued XO parts on the 1/4" plywood.Geez you guys do some neat work. I building a center channel for my cabinet maker and i'm going to be following the lead of you and sherv on the detailed XO work :T

[ssabripo]

dayuM! nice job chuck....almost as nice as mine ;) hehehe.

it would be interesting to try your XO on my CC to see the difference...how about it?

[chasw98]

dayuM! nice job chuck....almost as nice as mine ;) hehehe.

it would be interesting to try your XO on my CC to see the difference...how about it?

It would probably sound "funny". There are subtle differences between the CC & Mains in the crossover schematics in both Dennis' and Curt's design. It appears to be mostly in adding a resistor to tailor driver output level and some different values in the other components. But they are close to the values between the CC & Mains designs.

[marcusicp]

So I am wanting to build these and I was wondering what crossover is thought to be the better design for the CC and the towers? What box design is better? Ported or sealed? Space is not a concern. Also what is an est. cost for everything other then wood and glue?

I have two Avalance 18'' with 1200 watts each in 5 cu ft boxes that I will be useing them with do you think it will blend together well? I have built a few other designs and they just don't seem to "keep up" with the subs. I like to fell the house shake on big bass notes and I hope this front stage will let me crank the subs up.

Thanks for any help!

[chasw98]

So I am wanting to build these and I was wondering what crossover is thought to be the better design for the CC and the towers? What box design is better? Ported or sealed? Space is not a concern. Also what is an est. cost for everything other then wood and glue?

I have two Avalance 18'' with 1200 watts each in 5 cu ft boxes that I will be useing them with do you think it will blend together well? I have built a few other designs and they just don't seem to "keep up" with the subs. I like to fell the house shake on big bass notes and I hope this front stage will let me crank the subs up.

Thanks for any help!

Welcome to HTguide!

What crossover is better? I don't think any of the 3 (jonmarsh, Dennis Murphy, or Curt Campbell) are better. They are different. Jon's is more complex and costs the most. Dennis and Curt have come up with 2 ways to achieve the same end. I am in the process of building the mains using Dennis' XO, but I have built the center with a friend using Curt's XO. Once mine are built, I will let you know what I hear.

Ported or sealed? Everyone on this thread that has built them or has knowledge tends to say that the sealed "sound" better, especially if you have a good sub backing them up. I am building sealed. One person in this thread has recently torn down his ported mains and is rebuilding them as sealed. Once again, personal preference.

Cost? In the end, I will probaly end up spending about $500.00 on components and $200.00 to $300.00 on wood, glue, screws, veneer, foam, etc. At last count I estimated my cost at about $750.00 to $800.00. I have also "spared no expense" by buying FR4 circuit boards for the XO and misc. components that cost a little more but that you could get away with spending less without compromising the design and sound of the loudspeaker system.

I feel the Avalanche 18's will work very well with these speakers. Hopefully they are positioned and EQ'd for flat frequency response. I personally have a Sonotube with a single 15 inch RL-p15 D4 in it and I think they will work well together also.

The people here are very friendly and quite willing to help so that your project will turn out well. Just ask questions and they will come! :T

Chuck

[yousuredo2]

Cost? In the end, I will probaly end up spending about $500.00 on components and $200.00 to $300.00 on wood, glue, screws, veneer, foam, etc. At last count I estimated my cost at about $750.00 to $800.00. I have also "spared no expense" by buying FR4 circuit boards for the XO and misc. components that cost a little more but that you could get away with spending less without compromising the design and sound of the loudspeaker system.
Chuck

Hey I am a complete newbie to all of this...so bare with me

Are these figures for all three speakers, or ???
Is BOM (bill of materials) ? if so, are all three available...?
would building these with a tilted front (5 degreas), or curved sides, change the crossovers ?

I realy want my first project to be an amazing set up...
and several here are looking like they will be...

[chasw98]

The prices I mentioned are only for the Left & Right WWMT Mains.

[dawaro]

Are these figures for all three speakers, or ???

That is just for a piar of the towers...

Is BOM (bill of materials) ? if so, are all three available...?
See the attachments to this post, These are just recomendations for the RS28 version only. All the part numbers are from Parts Express. Drivers not included.

would building these with a tilted front (5 degreas), or curved sides, change the crossovers ?
Tilted would change the xover, curved sides would be OK as long as the baffle dimensions stay the same.

[chasw98]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3763.jpg

What can I say. As you can see, I have it hooked up to my system and am listening to it. You don't know what isn't there until you hear it. Yesterday my Ascend 340's were a very good speaker. Today they are like an AM radio. The full range that is there in these speakers and not in the 340's is so apparent. This is only an initial impression since I have only listened to about 5 pieces of music on them. But what a difference. Everyone in the family is happy with it and wants me to continue and finish the pair and the matching center channel. Now I have to finish building them and make them look pretty. Thank you all for your help. This is a very good speaker system. Back to the workshop. :T ;x(

[Dennis H]

See the attachments to this post, These are just recomendations for the RS28 version only. All the part numbers are from Parts Express. Drivers not included. Did Dennis Murphy do a TMWW with the RS tweeter? The only one I've seen is with the Seas metal dome which will require a different crossover. His version of the center does use the RS tweeter. I'm not sure I'm too keen on mixing mains and center with different tweeters.

[Jim Holtz]

Did Dennis Murphy do a TMWW with the RS tweeter? The only one I've seen is with the Seas metal dome which will require a different crossover. His version of the center does use the RS tweeter. I'm not sure I'm too keen on mixing mains and center with different tweeters.

Hi Dennis,

I've mentioned to the good Dr. Murphy that there is demand for a Seas version of the center. I think he'll get to it as soon as he can but he has other projects he's in the middle of and he's moving with in a month I think. Lots of things on his plate.

IMHO, I wouldn't be concerned about using the RS28 in the center and the 27TBFC/G in the mains. They sound extremely similar until you get to the top octave. The RS28's roll off and the 27TBFC/G keeps on going. Up to the top octave, the sound of both tweeters is very full bodied and robust for lack of a better word. Remember, this is just my opinion, of course. :D

My main system with the line arrays has a center with a Focal 5W mid and an OWIII tweeter. They blend perfectly with the Aurum Cantus AC130MKII's and Fountek JP2.0's in the arrays. I have pretty darn good electronics too (not as good as Jon's :) ) which do home theater extremely well so it isn't lacking in resolution. IMHO, voicing of the speakers and broad dispersion are more important for home theater.

Dennis also did a RS28 version of the mains too which of course would be a perfect match with his center design. Lot's of options including ported or sealed cabinets too.

Jim

[swithey]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3763.jpg

What can I say. As you can see, I have it hooked up to my system and am listening to it. You don't know what isn't there until you hear it. Yesterday my Ascend 340's were a very good speaker. Today they are like an AM radio. The full range that is there in these speakers and not in the 340's is so apparent. This is only an initial impression since I have only listened to about 5 pieces of music on them. But what a difference. Everyone in the family is happy with it and wants me to continue and finish the pair and the matching center channel. Now I have to finish building them and make them look pretty. Thank you all for your help. This is a very good speaker system. Back to the workshop. :T ;x(
Guess we need to mark this down as the 1st comparison to the Ascends :B

I think this is great news. Is it a fair comparison? Maybe not but who cares :W I can't wait to hear your official comparison once you get the entire LCR set completed.

BTW -- What do you plan to use for your surrounds? Do you plan a DIY for those too?

[jonathanb3478]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3763.jpg

I am just curious...

I have seen people placing these speakers so the tweeter is closer to the center in other pics. I would rather have the greater seperation between the tweeters with the same edge-to-edge width, as shown above. Can people comment on which way is "better", or at least intended? Does it even matter?


You don't know what isn't there until you hear it. ... The full range that is there in these speakers and not in the 340's is so apparent. ... This is a very good speaker system.

That is great!

I would love you to post more on the bass performance you are hearing with the sealed cabinets. It would be cool to see what it is doing in your room on the bottom end, vs what the Ascend's do in the same room. Hopefully you have an SPL meter, and would be willing to use it to compare their response down low. I believe any SPL meter you have could make the comparison accurately, if not give an accurate absolute reading.

I love that you dragged them in to listen to them with the bar clamps still on them (from gluing?). I would do the same thing, I am sure.

[ssabripo]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3763.jpg

What can I say. As you can see, I have it hooked up to my system and am listening to it. You don't know what isn't there until you hear it. Yesterday my Ascend 340's were a very good speaker. Today they are like an AM radio. The full range that is there in these speakers and not in the 340's is so apparent. This is only an initial impression since I have only listened to about 5 pieces of music on them. But what a difference. Everyone in the family is happy with it and wants me to continue and finish the pair and the matching center channel. Now I have to finish building them and make them look pretty. Thank you all for your help. This is a very good speaker system. Back to the workshop. :T ;x(
looking good Chuck!! :T

so sounds like we are gonna have to build not only a center for you, but a pair of mains too for me?! ;x(

[chasw98]

Whoaaaa..... Slow down. The clamps are on the speaker (singular) because it is not glued yet. I have the LF XO hanging from a ty wrap at the bottom just so I could turn it on and hear it, check for wiring problems, etc. I am still waiting on some circuit board material to finish the LF section and I haven't even started on the other XO. The woodworking portion is mostly done on the other one, but it needs to be wired and a bunch of piddly stuff done like mounting terminals, etc.

Guess we need to mark this down as the 1st comparison to the Ascends :B

I think this is great news. Is it a fair comparison? Maybe not but who cares :W I can't wait to hear your official comparison once you get the entire LCR set completed.

BTW -- What do you plan to use for your surrounds? Do you plan a DIY for those too?

Fair? I level matched the WWMT to the system with an SPL meter and just listened to L&R, no sub, L&R sub. WWMT is way better then the Ascends even without being glued up. Eventually, I am going to build the MT's (4 of them) for surround side and back but thats down the road.

I do not think I will ever purchase a commercial speaker again. Evil Twin has worked his force!

That is great!

I would love you to post more on the bass performance you are hearing with the sealed cabinets. It would be cool to see what it is doing in your room on the bottom end, vs what the Ascend's do in the same room. Hopefully you have an SPL meter, and would be willing to use it to compare their response down low. I believe any SPL meter you have could make the comparison accurately, if not give an accurate absolute reading.

I love that you dragged them in to listen to them with the bar clamps still on them (from gluing?). I would do the same thing, I am sure.

I will be doing a full set of measurements and post graphs. Yes, I have ECM8000 and all the accessories. See above. They are not even glued yet.

looking good Chuck!! :T

so sounds like we are gonna have to build not only a center for you, but a pair of mains too for me?! ;x(

What can I say. OK!

There is one thing I noticed. After playing music somewhat low (60 - 65 DB) for a couple of hours, I turned it up to about 90-95 db. I could easily blink the clip lights on an EP2500. They seem to be really ineffficient. I am hoping that once the cabinet is sealed and they break in for a while, a little efficiency will come back. I didn't want to crank them yet because it is in a fragile state with stuff strapped together. I did measure DC resistance at 4.2 ohms. Any experience, Jim?

[Jim Holtz]

There is one thing I noticed. After playing music somewhat low (60 - 65 DB) for a couple of hours, I turned it up to about 90-95 db. I could easily blink the clip lights on an EP2500. They seem to be really ineffficient. I am hoping that once the cabinet is sealed and they break in for a while, a little efficiency will come back. I didn't want to crank them yet because it is in a fragile state with stuff strapped together. I did measure DC resistance at 4.2 ohms. Any experience, Jim?

Hi Chuck,

Dennis said they measured about 88 db so they shouldn't take a lot of power. 4 ohms minimum sounds about right. You might want to double check your crossover wiring, including wiring the mid positive to negative etc. to be sure. Rudy experience something similar and found a wiring error. Trust me, it's very easy to do. I speak with experience. :W

I'm driving mine with a 9 year old Onkyo receiver that handles them extremely well. While they sound very good, they benefit from good electronics. I had them in my main system after first building them. The better the electronics the better they sound. Remarkable considering the cost to build these.

Jim

[chasw98]

You might want to double check your crossover wiring, including wiring the mid positive to negative etc. to be sure. Rudy experience something similar and found a wiring error. Trust me, it's very easy to do. I speak with experience. :W

Jim

I definitely agree. There is a good chance of a bad solder joint or a miswire somewhere in it. I have already taken the speaker down and pulled it apart to finish putting it together proper. I will be looking at the wiring closely this weekend when I have more time than just running home after work. Building this has been like a second job this week, but it's so much fun, especially when you hear the results! :T

[w8liftr]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3763.jpg

What can I say. As you can see, I have it hooked up to my system and am listening to it. You don't know what isn't there until you hear it. Yesterday my Ascend 340's were a very good speaker. Today they are like an AM radio. The full range that is there in these speakers and not in the 340's is so apparent. This is only an initial impression since I have only listened to about 5 pieces of music on them. But what a difference. Everyone in the family is happy with it and wants me to continue and finish the pair and the matching center channel. Now I have to finish building them and make them look pretty. Thank you all for your help. This is a very good speaker system. Back to the workshop. :T ;x(

Looks great Chuck, and like ThomasW said, I need to hire you to build X-overs. My wife is going to kill me since I just built my subs, but I'm really feeling the need to buld my mains and center.

[Brian Walter]

I was going to post some pictures of the progress I've been making on my speakers, but I can't seem to figure out how to upload pictures. I did it once, but can't seem to figure out how I did it. I should have the speakers done by the end of the weekend, so it would be nice to know how to do it by then. Any help would be appreciated.

Brian Walter

[BobEllis]

Brian,

Either attach them with the "manage attachments" button on the bottom of the advanced reply page or if they are hosted on something like photobucket you can paste the image link [img] into your text.

[kgveteran]

Brian,

Either attach them with the "manage attachments" button on the bottom of the advanced reply page or if they are hosted on something like photobucket you can paste the image link [img] into your text.

Most of the time i have to load them in paint and shrink em' so they fit.i have to try a photo host.

[chasw98]

Brian:
If you click on "quote" on one of my posts with an image in the body, you will see an example of the "[IMG]" brackets Bob is talking about. Photobucket is free and works quite well. Besides, I want to see pictures of yours! :D

Chuck

[SteveCallas]

Oh man, I had no idea you were up to something like this :E

Looks like some excellent craftsmanship there Chuck, great work. I'd be very interested to hear more detailed impressions of these vs the 340s with both crossed over at 80hz to your sub. I haven't had the 340s up front since November, but I could still get a pretty good idea of where things stand.

As for the efficiency....well, you should gone with WWMTMWW's, what were you thinking? If I ever get to hear a DIY pair like these and they clearly best my Bostons, that's what I would set my sights on.

Again, great work, you've got me excited and I don't even get to hear them :T

[chasw98]

Oh man, I had no idea you were up to something like this :E

Looks like some excellent craftsmanship there Chuck, great work. I'd be very interested to hear more detailed impressions of these vs the 340s with both crossed over at 80hz to your sub. I haven't had the 340s up front since November, but I could still get a pretty good idea of where things stand.

As for the efficiency....well, you should gone with WWMTMWW's, what were you thinking? If I ever get to hear a DIY pair like these and they clearly best my Bostons, that's what I would set my sights on.

Again, great work, you've got me excited and I don't even get to hear them :T

Hey Steve:
I will be putting up results once I get them built.
Don't even get to hear them...... Never say never. DrJon and I are plotting 8)

[SteveCallas]

DrJon and I are plotting 8)
Uh oh. If you'd be willing to bring those to his place, I'd definitely bring along my towers too. This could get very interesting very quickly :B

[dawaro]

I can't remember who asked for it but someone wanted a cutlist for the sealed tower and the center so here it is. I include cut list for a 4 X 8 and 2 X 4 sheet of MDF. I find the smaller panels much easier to deal with but I am not sure what everyone may have locally.

Remember to check the list for errors before cutting. I have been known to screw up and threw this together pretty quick.

David

[Brian Walter]

I'm not sure "Mission Accomplished" is quite in order yet, but I'm getting there. Hopefully I'll be able to attach a couple pictured to show you what I've been up to.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3Way_1.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3Way_2.jpg
In these pictures I haven't applied the varnish yet, so they look slightly different now with them varnished.

I started working on the crossovers last night, but ran into trouble when I found that my 8.2 uf caps were 4.7 and my 10 ohm resistors were 12. The caps I got from PE and the resistors from Madisound, so I guess they both messed up equally. But not bad considering all the stuff I've ordered from them. I dismantled a few old crossovers and came up with suitable replacements.

I hope to have these up and running sometime this weekend, if I don't get pulled away on too many other projects.

Brian Walter

[jonathanb3478]

I'm not sure "Mission Accomplished" is quite in order yet, but I'm getting there. Hopefully I'll be able to attach a couple pictured to show you what I've been up to.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3Way_2.jpg

I hope to have these up and running sometime this weekend, if I don't get pulled away on too many other projects.

Those look great!

[removed, as I apparently could not recall what happened just 4 days ago :E]

[Bent]

those are beautififul.
are the curved sides made of wiggle-wood?

[Dennis H]

Nice, Brian! Those are beautiful!

[Jim Holtz]

I'm not sure "Mission Accomplished" is quite in order yet, but I'm getting there. Hopefully I'll be able to attach a couple pictured to show you what I've been up to.
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3Way_1.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3Way_2.jpg
In these pictures I haven't applied the varnish yet, so they look slightly different now with them varnished.

I started working on the crossovers last night, but ran into trouble when I found that my 8.2 uf caps were 4.7 and my 10 ohm resistors were 12. The caps I got from PE and the resistors from Madisound, so I guess they both messed up equally. But not bad considering all the stuff I've ordered from them. I dismantled a few old crossovers and came up with suitable replacements.

I hope to have these up and running sometime this weekend, if I don't get pulled away on too many other projects.

Brian Walter


Brian,

Those are really pretty! Excellent job! I hope to get to see them in person this fall.

Jim

[Brian Walter]

those are beautififul.
are the curved sides made of wiggle-wood?

Yes and no. Actually the sides are made up of 3/4" x 3/4" x 42" long strips of MDF glued to an interior framework of MFD. The strips are tapered so that they aren't exactly square, they are 0.72" wide on the inside face and 0.75" wide on the outside face. This allows them to pretty much make full contact across the entire face for gluing. I sanded the outside of the MDF down and laminated 1/4" Oak plywood over the top of it. I couldn't get the plywood to bend around the MDF without breaking, so I cut grooves on the backside of the plywood, about 1/2 way through and spaced every 1/4". This allowed the plywood to bend sufficiently to glue to the MDF. So, in a way I did use wiggle wood.

The baffle is semi-removable. It is composed of two layers, the inner layer is glued into and part of the basic cabinet. The outer layer is bolted down to the inner baffle with machine screws screwed in from the inside. I did this so I that if I decided to swap drivers I could make a new baffle and flush mount the drivers if they varied slightly in diameter.

I better get back to wiring up the crossovers.

Brian

[Bent]

incredible.

[chasw98]

Dennis said they measured about 88 db so they shouldn't take a lot of power. 4 ohms minimum sounds about right. You might want to double check your crossover wiring, including wiring the mid positive to negative etc. to be sure. Rudy experience something similar and found a wiring error. Trust me, it's very easy to do. I speak with experience. :W
Jim

And Mr. Jim Holtz wins a custom crossover from Chuck! Yep, Jim, A cold solder joint right where the negative lead goes into the cap on the mid portion of the crossove. I have just clamped it back together and it has all the efficiency you said it should. Sounds so much different (dih!). That lower mid bass just really rounds this unit out. Thanks for the tip.

Chuck

[Dougie085]

BRIAN!!! Those are just Gorgeous!!

[Jim Holtz]

And Mr. Jim Holtz wins a custom crossover from Chuck! Yep, Jim, A cold solder joint right where the negative lead goes into the cap on the mid portion of the crossove. I have just clamped it back together and it has all the efficiency you said it should. Sounds so much different (dih!). That lower mid bass just really rounds this unit out. Thanks for the tip.

Chuck

Chuck,

Only because I've screwed up soooo many crossovers would I know this. :rofl:

I'm glad you found the the cold joint. Now, if you thought they sounded good before, hang on! :T

Jim

[chasw98]

I'm not sure "Mission Accomplished" is quite in order yet, but I'm getting there. Hopefully I'll be able to attach a couple pictured to show you what I've been up to.

In these pictures I haven't applied the varnish yet, so they look slightly different now with them varnished.

I started working on the crossovers last night, but ran into trouble when I found that my 8.2 uf caps were 4.7 and my 10 ohm resistors were 12. The caps I got from PE and the resistors from Madisound, so I guess they both messed up equally. But not bad considering all the stuff I've ordered from them. I dismantled a few old crossovers and came up with suitable replacements.

I hope to have these up and running sometime this weekend, if I don't get pulled away on too many other projects.

Brian Walter

Let me say those are beautiful! If you hear some envy in my thoughts, you are right. I am envious. Mine will look good but nowhere close to what yours look like (or will).

So, Mr. Brian, I'll make a deal with you..... I will send you my boxes and you finish them and I will take care of your crossovers and wiring, huh, huh! :T

Anyway, here are some shots of my properly working crossovers installed in their cubbyhole at the bottom of the speaker looking through the access plate I built into the rear.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3767.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3765.jpg

Chuck

[jdybnis]

Brian,

Those are really stunning. Do you do pro work? I'm very envious of your craftsmanship. What did you use to cut the tappered strips? I'm guessing that the sides are circular arcs because of the uniform taper on the strips. It is hard to tell from the picture. What stain did you use on the wood? And what's the finish on the front baffle? That looks living room ready as it is. I can't wait to see pictures of it varnished!

[Brian Walter]

Chuck, my crossovers are mostly wired so I won't need your crossover assistance, but they are no where near as nice as your. I'll post pictures when done. I have used a separate compartment in the past for the crossovers and it worked really well, but this time I had to shoehorn them in through the speaker cutouts. I think I'll go back to the separate compartment or maybe go active on future projects.

Josh, I do not do pro work, I do this simply for fun and relaxation. The strips were cut on a table saw with the blade set at about 1.25 degrees and the rip guide 3/4" away, at the wide point of the cut. You have to keep flipping the board over with each cut, but it only took about 2 hours to cut the 80 or 90 strips. The cross section of the cabinet started as a truncated elipse, but I approximated the shape with a constant radius.

The finish looks slightly darker now that it has been varnished and was accomplished by first dying the wood with TransTint Red Mahogany (mixed with water), sealing the dye with Zinsser SealCoat and stained with Varathane "Cabernet" gel stain. I then sprayed on 2 coats of gloss and 1 coat of satin ployurethane varnish. I brushed on the SealCoat, but if I had it to do over again, I would spray it on. The baffles are simply sealed and sprayed with Rust-Oleum texture paint for plastic lawn furniture.

Thank you all for the compliments, I must admit, they are turning out quite nice. They have a few flaws, but fortunately they aren't visible from more than a few feet away.

Brian

[jdybnis]

That is excellent info. Thanks. I usually find the look of oak too unrefined. That is not the case here. Really beautiful finish.

[JonW]

Chuck and Brian-
Those speakers and crossovers look super. Very nice work! :T

Chuck, I'll be curios to see what your impressions are versus the Ascends. Of course your speakers will have more bass. But other than that...


Never say never. DrJon and I are plotting 8)

:later:

[m1ke323]

Brian.

I PM'd you about this, but I am looking to do the same thing as you with the rounded cabinets. I go the idea from Paul H's speakers but now that you already calculated out all the dimension for the TMWW design, I was wondering if you would share you design.

I plan on building mine a little differently but the dimensions would be a really big help. Thanks

Mike

[yousuredo2]

you built what I am designing in sketch up...
Brian they are Sharp...
I hope mine turn out that good...
any details you want to share with someone doing the same...
did you only angle one side of the 3/4x3/4 strips...
what are the specific demintions ect...
please do infom, so I might complet them sooner than later...

[m1ke323]

I see most people here are all doing the sealed design. I even saw a post where someone is rebuilding his into the sealed design.

I have read through the thread a few times and I tried searching for a discussion on this topic but didn't find any clear answer on the subject.

Do you gain alot of bass by doing the ported design, or is it so small it is not worth it? I will begin building this RS 3-way as soon as I have decided upon the sealed or ported design. I prefer deeper bass for HT use, but don't want ANY port noise.

I also don't want to have to build the larger cabinet if I won't be gaining much. But since I am doing curved sides, maybe I would be able to shorten the length up some, maybe around 18inches hopefully. I haven't done any calculations to see how much volume I gain with the curved sides.

Thanks for the help.

Mike

[oxcartdriver]

I went with the Dennis Murphy x-over ported version. No port noise with the 4inch flared port. Based on the comments earlier about cabinet rigidity, I significantly strenghtened the cabinet. My finished towers came in about 135lbs each.

I prefer the sound of the ported tower with these modification to the center channel. I may open up the center channel just to confirm everything and remove some stuffing.

[Jim Holtz]

I went with the Dennis Murphy x-over ported version. No port noise with the 4inch flared port. Based on the comments earlier about cabinet rigidity, I significantly strenghtened the cabinet. My finished towers came in about 135lbs each.

I prefer the sound of the ported tower with these modification to the center channel. I may open up the center channel just to confirm everything and remove some stuffing.


I'm glad you're enjoying them. Dennis is looking for feedback on the design. Dennis emailed me the other day and wondered if anyone except Rudy had built the ported version. If you could take a couple minutes to post your listening impressions, I know he'd appreciate it.

Thanks!

Jim

[jonathanb3478]

Do you gain alot of bass by doing the ported design, or is it so small it is not worth it?

Actually, you can see for yourself pretty easily. WIN-ISD is a free program, and you can add the TS parameters from the RS-225 woofer into that application. Then tell WIN-ISD how big the box is, whether it is sealed or ported, and the size of the ports if you use them. It will then tell you a reasonable aproximation of the output of each. You can get it to graph both at the same time, to directly compare.

EDIT: I wanted to see for myself, so I did what I indicated you should do. I used the 3 cu ft enclosure size I am going to use for the sealed pair I build, and I used the std 3.81 cu ft remmomended size for the ported enclosure.

What the image below does not show is the way the phase plot and group delay come out with the sealed enclosure being much better. But, for amount of bass:

(green plot is ported, and each horizontal line is one db)

http://jonathanb3478.tripod.com/images/speaker/sealed_vs_ported.jpg

[Dennis Murphy]

One thing to remember, though. The simulations don't show room gain. And in a whole lot of rooms, the ported bass will be overwhelming. I've had this problem with a number of full range speakers. I much preferred the sealed version.

[chasw98]

Well, I now have 2 WWMT's to listen to. One is sanded and ready for sealer, the other is waiting on some small parts for internal XO mounting (hence the clamps). I sat and listened for a couple of hours tonight using nothing but a Denon Universal 1920 source, a Mapleleaf tube preamp, and a Behringer EP2500. They are very smooth throughout the range they reproduce. The soundstage appears to be wider than the speakers are apart. They do not seem to work as hard as the Ascend 340SE's. They sound very open. All these observations are very subjective after working on them all weekend to get them this far. Here are some pics.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3768.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3770.jpg

[w8liftr]

Well, I now have 2 WWMT's to listen to. One is sanded and ready for sealer, the other is waiting on some small parts for internal XO mounting (hence the clamps). I sat and listened for a couple of hours tonight using nothing but a Denon Universal 1920 source, a Mapleleaf tube preamp, and a Behringer EP2500. They are very smooth throughout the range they reproduce. The soundstage appears to be wider than the speakers are apart. They do not seem to work as hard as the Ascend 340SE's. They sound very open. All these observations are very subjective after working on them all weekend to get them this far. Here are some pics.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3768.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3770.jpg


Nice work Chuck.

[cjd]

If these don't walk all over the Ascends, I would be surprised. My simple little MTM's edge them out in fullness and smoothness (smooth will be the drivers - though crossover probably can't be left out). Being a 3-way with tha tmuch more surface area should only help that along!

Some absolutely gorgeous projects here - top notch craftsmanship!

C

[m1ke323]

I really wish I wasn't so new at this. I understand how to read those graphs, I just can't imagine what that is like in real world performance comparing the two. Thanks for doing the graphs though.

I know everyone has different preferences in sound, but I was looking more for an answer of the sealed is better for music with fast accurate bass but not as loud. As opposed to the ported being a bit boomier but much better suited for HT.

I really have no idea if that is correct. I am just so new at this, and almost every commerical design I see is ported. My B&W's are ported, my old Klipsch were ported, my sub is ported.

Being that I am new I would prefer a louder speaker then one that is sonically accurate just becuase it is mostly for HT and I don't even know what sonically correct is because I am so new. Ignorace is a bliss, maybe haha.

I guess I just kinda answered my question right there. But I am just so hesitant because only one person has choosen the ported.

What would really help is this. If I did an A/B comparison would the bass be significantly lower and louder or just a bit, because as I said I can read the graphs just not put them into real world performance.

Thanks for bearing with me with these noob questions. I appreciate all the help.

Mike

[jonathanb3478]

I really wish I wasn't so new at this. I understand how to read those graphs, I just can't imagine what that is like in real world performance comparing the two. Thanks for doing the graphs though.

No problem, wanted to see for myself, anyway!

I know everyone has different preferences in sound, but I was looking more for an answer of the sealed is better for music with fast accurate bass but not as loud. As opposed to the ported being a bit boomier but much better suited for HT.

Well, OK:

Seriously, if you feel (in general) that using a sealed enclosure which would trade some output (I see +4 db in the 30-40Hz range, as the lion's share of the difference between the ported/sealed implementations - and I have an idea of what that sounds like) for some quality, when it is used for music-only listening is a good idea, then I would go for the sealed version.

If you want to use these for HT, wouldn't you have a sub that will be taking care of the heavy lifting in that department? If you are making these speakers, I would further surmise that you have an excellent sub, even. I would be MORE likely to make these sealed for HT use (mine will be for a stereo only setup in the bedroom) because of that sub. I only care what the mains can do down to ~50Hz, in that case.

Mostly, I chose sealed because my room is smallish at 14'X12'X8', and 4 x 8" woofers will be fine, even in a sealed alignment. That is my story, and I am sticking to it!

[m1ke323]

oops, I meant to say only one person has choosen the ported. Thanks for catching that Jon

Mike

[jonathanb3478]

Since that is not what you meant, I updated that part of my post with my thoughts on the sealed/ported options.

In short:

You want to be part of the "in crowd", right? Then put the things in a sealed box, like everyone else!

8O



:D



On a side note, I do hope that Dennis can get a Seas version of the center channel crossover done by the time I am ready for it. I mean, that would be a good 12 months! How busy could one guy be?!?!

<ducks heavy, flying object from crowd of onlookers>

Ok, ok! So I know perfectly well how busy one guy can be. It is cool that it is at least on his radar. I am grateful, I truely am.

It absolutely amazes me, what resources are on this site and available to someone who wants to get a good set of DIY speakers constructed. This whole thread is a perfect example. Thanks to everyone! I am sure I am not alone in that sentiment. I have seen it around these boards, before.

:T

[m1ke323]

I agree with you Jon that the sub should be taking are of my low end. But my sub is HSU STF-2 until next summer when I DIY one up. Here is my current sub I will be using with these speakers http://www.hsustore.com/stf2.html

I will be happy with the sealed 3ft^3 cabinet as long as I know it will be equal to if not better then my other B&W 604's in the bottom end. Here is a link to them and also the stats are below http://www.bwspeakers.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/products.models/label/Model%20DM604%20S3


Technical Specifications : DM604 S3
Description 3-way vented-box system
Dimensions Height: 994mm (39.1in)
Width: 236mm (9.3in)
Depth: 398mm (15.7in)
Net Weight 29.2kg / 64.2lb
Freq. Response 39Hz - 22kHz ± 3dB on reference axis
Freq. Range -6dB at 30Hz and 42kHz
Sensitivity 90dB spl (2.83V 1m)
Normal Impedance 8 ohms (minimum 3 ohms)
Power Handling 25W - 200W into 8 ohms on unclipped programme
Drive Units Unit 1: 1x 25mm (1in) metal dome high-frequency
Unit 2: 1x 180mm (7in) woven Kevlar® cone midrange
Unit 3: 2x 180mm (7in) aluminium cone bass
Finish Cabinet: Black Ash or Sorrento (light oak) vinyl
Grille: Black Cloth
Dispersion Description: Within 2dB of response on reference axis
Horizontal: over 40° arc
Vertical: over 10° arc
Harmonic Distortion 2nd & 3rd harmonics <1% 42Hz - 20kHz (90dB spl, 1m)
Crossover Frequency 450Hz, 4kHz

[kgveteran]

I my case i was looking for a speakers (three of them) that were able to handle the 100hz and up range.I never knew how demanding this could be on a twoway monitor of modest cost.Well, it was.I built the smaller RS center design (12.5"h x 12"d).They have a combined rolloff (room gain + 12db/oct sealed ) of 12db/oct starting at about 60hz. They seem to store little energy when i'm listening at 85-90db.That probably has to do with my bass traps too, but i have owned speakers that seem to store bass frequencies.I'm not sure how else to discribe this sound though.

These monitors are great :T

[Dennis Murphy]

[On a side note, I do hope that Dennis can get a Seas version of the center channel crossover done by the time I am ready for it. I mean, that would be a good 12 months! How busy could one guy be?!?!]

Hi--actually, pretty busy. I've got about 3 more projects before I can turn to the center, and there's also a chance I may have to go under the knife. That could really slow things up. But if the Doc spares me (I'll know this afternoon), I should be able to get this wrapped up in 2-3 weeks.

[chasw98]

and there's also a chance I may have to go under the knife. That could really slow things up. But if the Doc spares me (I'll know this afternoon), I should be able to get this wrapped up in 2-3 weeks.
You forget about our projects and take of yourself. And forget my PM, you just answered it. Hope the Doc spares you. Get well!

Chuck :T

[ThomasW]

In most situations the difference between sealed and ported is only the output differences at the tuning frequency combined with room gain.

I find knocking down too much bottom end easier than trying to create something that's not there.

The nice option with ported is that the port can always be plugged if the current situation calls less bass. Later if the speakers are used at a different location, the port can be utilitze.

[JonW]

Well, I now have 2 WWMT's to listen to. One is sanded and ready for sealer, the other is waiting on some small parts for internal XO mounting (hence the clamps). I sat and listened for a couple of hours tonight using nothing but a Denon Universal 1920 source, a Mapleleaf tube preamp, and a Behringer EP2500. They are very smooth throughout the range they reproduce. The soundstage appears to be wider than the speakers are apart. They do not seem to work as hard as the Ascend 340SE's. They sound very open. All these observations are very subjective after working on them all weekend to get them this far. Here are some pics.

Sounds excellent. :T Glad to hear you seem happy with them. And your workmanship looks really good (is that birch ply?). I don't see tons of extra glue all over the place like I have (ahem). Very nice.

[jonathanb3478]

[On a side note, I do hope that Dennis can get a Seas version of the center channel crossover done by the time I am ready for it. I mean, that would be a good 12 months! How busy could one guy be?!?!]

Hi--actually, pretty busy. I've got about 3 more projects before I can turn to the center, and there's also a chance I may have to go under the knife. That could really slow things up. But if the Doc spares me (I'll know this afternoon), I should be able to get this wrapped up in 2-3 weeks.

I am very sorry to hear that you may require surgery. I wish you the best, hopefully the surgery is not needed. I have managed to avoid that in my life, so far. Not even an apendectimy. I feel very lucky in that regard.

Please, just disregard my poor attempt at humor that you quoted. :(

[swithey]

[On a side note, I do hope that Dennis can get a Seas version of the center channel crossover done by the time I am ready for it. I mean, that would be a good 12 months! How busy could one guy be?!?!]

Hi--actually, pretty busy. I've got about 3 more projects before I can turn to the center, and there's also a chance I may have to go under the knife. That could really slow things up. But if the Doc spares me (I'll know this afternoon), I should be able to get this wrapped up in 2-3 weeks.
Dennis,

Hope you can skip that surgery too. I think everyone really appreciates the contribution you've made. Hope you get good news today :)

[Dennis Murphy]

[
Please, just disregard my poor attempt at humor that you quoted. :([/QUOTE]

Oh--I understood you weren't serious. I just wanted to let people know it could be a little while. And, of course, the Doc didn't let me off the hook--more tests. Looks like Friday before I know. But that gives me enough time to wire up a few more components.

[Brian Bunge]

Another thing to consider in the sealed vs. ported debate is that Chris' and my big sealed towers have roughly the same internal volume as the ported version of the TMWW towers. If you've got a big sub you can get better power handling/greater dynamics going with these big sealed towers due to the increased Vd of the dual 10's vs. the dual 8's.

[m1ke323]

Brian, are you saying you are doing the TMWW design with dual 10's, just with larger sealed enclosures? Is this possible without changing the crossover?

[jonathanb3478]

Brian, are you saying you are doing the TMWW design with dual 10's, just with larger sealed enclosures? Is this possible without changing the crossover?

There is another design in the "Missions Accomplished" section that is a MTMWW layout, with RS180s and RS270s in a rather large enclosure. Brian it the thread starter on that one. If you want, you could go that way (more $, however).

Oh--I understood you weren't serious. I just wanted to let people know it could be a little while. And, of course, the Doc didn't let me off the hook--more tests. Looks like Friday before I know. But that gives me enough time to wire up a few more components.

Well, I feel a bit better, then. Thanks for letting me know. I hope Friday goes well for you. :T

[m1ke323]

JonathanB,

I know you are designing a round sides enclosure like Brian Walter. I am also planning on making an enclosure like Brians. I plan on doing sealed one just like Brians but I can't figure out how to calculate the internal volume with rounded sides.

I plan on building mine the same way Paul H built his MTM enclosure. He made a boat frame of MDF then lined the sides with 4-6 layers of 1/4" luan plywood. I am hopeing the this will provide a much smoother arc around the sides then strip cutting mdf.

Is there a free program I can use to calculate all the dimesnsion and volume and such?

Here are pictures of how I plan on building my arced sides. Credit to Paul H and his amazing enclosure.

http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/4128/15hm3.jpg http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/3091/21dj2.jpg http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/8361/49vw.jpg

[BobEllis]

You could treat the curved area as a triangle (or triangles for more precision) on top of the trapezoid to calculate the area of the section. Break it up into as many peices as you can stand to crunch the numbers for and add up the little triangle parts. The more triangles the greater the accuracy, but when you throw in a "fudge factor" for bracing, why bother?

With the relatively flat curve, I'd bet that the bracing eats up a bit more than the curve adds to the basic trapezoid shape. You'll be within driver spec tolerance, anyway. I'd go with measure the response and adjust the port length accordingly.

I am envious of the shop in the picture. My shop consists of a couple of sawhorses in the yard and a closet to store my tools for the time being. :(

[jonathanb3478]

JonathanB,

I know you are designing a round sides enclosure like Brian Walter. I am also planning on making an enclosure like Brians. I plan on doing sealed one just like Brians but I can't figure out how to calculate the internal volume with rounded sides.

Oh, tell me about it. I googled area and volume of ellipses. I thought I died and gone to math hell. And I was good at math. Started high school math in junior high, and college in high school and all that. I even have a TI-85 graphing calculator to help out. Still, no go.


I plan on building mine the same way Paul H built his MTM enclosure. He made a boat frame of MDF then lined the sides with 4-6 layers of 1/4" luan plywood.

Paul's avatar, which I saw at www.avsforum.com, was my inspiration to switch from a non parallel sided box, to elliptical. My original construction plan was to use the same ply in 1/8", and wrap it around my elliptical frame. The plywood would not make the <3" radius bends I needed with out breaking, and layering 10 of them was not looking like an easy prospect even before I realized the material I had selected was not up to the challenge. I switched to what I had already been able to do.

For measuring the volume of the enclosures, I planned to line the inside of a test section with some plastic garbage bags, and fill it with ~7.4X gallons of water (1 cu ft). I could then figure out how much it was in total, from how tall the 1 cu ft of water was. Well, didn't actually need to do that, as it turns out.


Is there a free program I can use to calculate all the dimesnsion and volume and such?

What I did, was create an assembly of all the panels that made my internal volume in Alibre Design Xpress (http://www.alibre.com/products/) as it is free. It will tell you the surface area of any face you select in the application. I added up the surface area of each air containing space for each type of panel I am using (details on my project, as it currently stands: http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=20454). I could then multiply the total surface area per panel type by .75 (depth of each panel) and then the total number of those panels in the enclosure. Add the result for each panel types together, and I was there (in theory). Got my design's total internal enclosure volume in that manner.

Alibre Design Xpress is not paint.exe. It takes a decent amount of time to figure out how to make a part. Then you need to learn how to get parts to successfully become assemblies. It was worth it in my case, as I have a rather complicated design. It was not easy for me to visualize my design in enough detail, and with enough accuracy, to be confident with finalizing a design. Plus I did not have a really clear view of what it would look like. I do not have those issues now.

[Brian Walter]

Mike, it's not all that hard to calculate the area using relatively simple math, that is if you use constant radius's for the curved part. But I drew my plans up using AutoCAD and let it measure the cross sectional area for me then simply multiplied by the height to get the volume. Of course I also subtracted the volume of the internal braces as well, I even accounted for the cutout in the braces. If you need help simply give us the radius of the curve, width at the front and the back and the distance between the front and the back and I or someone here could give you the cross-sectional area.

Mike, I also put one layer of 1/4" Oak plywood over the top of the mdf strips to smooth out the surface. But you would be surprised how easy the mdf surface sands with a random orbit sander. I doubt I spent more than a 1/2 hour per side sanding. If I had it to do over again, I would consider using the all plywood appoach as well. Actually I would probably try using an inside surface layer of ply then several layers of 1/8" hardbord (Masonite) and then an outside layer of ply. This should give you a stiffer composite with the higher modulus material on the outside surfaces.

Brian Walter

[jonathanb3478]

My shop consists of a couple of sawhorses in the yard and a closet to store my tools for the time being. :(


Yeah, you should be grateful. At least you do not need to spend >$4 in gas to get to and from your shop. That gets old real quick, trust me!

30 miles round trip, at <20MPG = much pain!

[Brian Walter]

Mike, one more thing. You might want to experiment with scraps of plywood and a test form to be sure you can bend the plywood around it. I found I could not bend the 1/4" oak plywood around the 1'-6 3/4" radius I had. I ended up cutting relief grooves at 1/4" spaces accross the entire back side of the plywood in order to get it to bend without breaking. Cutting all those grooves was the most tedious part of the entire project, and I only had to do it for one layer. I'd hate to have to do it with 6 layers. Hopefully Luan ply will bend easier.

Brian

[Brian Walter]

I'm attempting to post part of the plans for my speakers. I'm not sure if they will come out ok or not. If they don't work out well, I'll try to post them somewhere else and link to them.

Feel free to use or modify them to suite your taste. I dont' claim them to be error free, but I was able to build mine from a less refined set of drawings. I hope to put together a short write-up to explain a few things and answer likely questions.

Brian Walter

[Brian Walter]

If you print the pattern drawing to scale on the an 11" x 17" sheet of paper it will be full size and can be used to trace onto your shelf material to make a pattern.

Brian

[jonathanb3478]

If you print the pattern drawing to scale on the an 11" x 17" sheet of paper it will be full size and can be used to trace onto your shelf material to make a pattern.

Brian

I printed out my original pattern (made in Photoshop) at 50% scale on my home HP ink jet, then took that to Kinko's and enlarged it by 200%. That cost me ~$4.50. Also, it was within 1/32" of my spec across the front baffle. This was cool, as I was originally planning to calculate how much it was off, and have Kinko's run it again at something like 102.3% (or whatever it turned out to be). The original's accuracy saved me another ~$4.50. They can copy at, or enlarge to, 36"X36" at the very least around here.

[BobEllis]

All cool toys, but with a sealed cabinet does it really matter a hoot? You'll be lucky to get the drivers within 10% of spec, and sealed alignments aren't really fussy. I doubt you'd hear a difference if you calculated your cabinet volume 10% too big or small.

Two bits from a guy who'd rather build and listen than sweat tiny details with limited effect.

[m1ke323]

Thanks for the plans Brian, that will help out a bunch.

My dads shop which I am currently working at for the summer (college break) has autocad and something called SolidWorks. I would have liked to use SolidWorks to model my enclosure but don't plan on taking the time to learn it if I don't have to.

Those brace plans will come in handy though becuase I can cut a metal template on our laser. I can then just zip around the metal template with a router and have perfectly rounded edges for the frame.

Im trying to think of some sort of metal face accent I could put on the speakers, possibly around the tweeter, any ideas. Would that even look good?

Thanks again for all the help guys.

Mike

[jonathanb3478]

Im trying to think of some sort of metal face accent I could put on the speakers, possibly around the tweeter, any ideas.

What about using something like this to outline the tweeter (or even all drivers - what I am thinking of doing):

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FN0TV2/ref=wl_it_dp/103-6378899-4275827?%5Fencoding=UTF8&colid=6TM44XO1EJFI&coliid=I756WCBWC32W5&v=glance&n=16310091

I hope that link works on a different computer. If it does not, just search amazon for stainless steel 303 keystock. Pick your dimension.

[m1ke323]

I have been looking over these Autocad drawings and they are phenominal Brian, that you so much. I was wondering if you knew the cabinet volumes for the midrange, and woofers? Thanks

Also Brian, could you post a few more pictures of your enclosure. I really really appreciate it. I am ordering all my supplies now and will start cutting this weekend.

Unfortunately I have to go to Florida next week for business, and then two weeks after that to New York. But I should be able to get a great deal of the cutting done this weekend and hopefully start a bit of gluing.


Mike

[topp]

m1ke323,
Take it from me SolidWorks is one of the easier 3D programs to learn. Looking at the drawings that Brian provided, it wouldn't take much time to model it up in SolidWorks. I normally draw up everything I am going to build, not limited to speakers, in it. That way if I need a dimension that isn't given, I can find it.

Brian,
Those speakers look really sharp and thanks for the drawings.

Later,
Topp

[Brian Walter]

Mike,
The volumes for my cabinets are 2.1 cuft for the woofer section and 0.9 cuft for the midrange section. This takes into account the braces, but does not subtract for drivers. Personally, if I was going to build these again, I would double up on the top and possibly add a shelf brace between the tweeter and midrange.

Brian

[m1ke323]

Brian,
Thanks for the promt response and all your help so far. I have another question now though, all the designs I have seen for the midrange put it at like .5 ft^3.

How come you didn't add a vertical brace behind the midrange and then use the space behind the brace as more woofer volume.

For everyone else reading this, would adding a vertical brace behind the midrange be a good idea to do?

Thanks for the tip on doubling up on the top, I will make sure to do that.

Mike

[jonathanb3478]

For everyone else reading this, would adding a vertical brace behind the midrange be a good idea to do?

Well, when I asked if I should increase the mid/tweeter enclosure beyond the .22 cu ft of the initial design, since I was increasing the woofer enclosure to ~3 cu ft, I was told that the size of the m/t enclosure just needs to be large enough to be able to damp the backwave. The mid is high passed high enough that it does not matter what size the enclosure is from a bass resonance point of view. If you can get the enclosure to damp the backwave, you are good to go. For that reason, my m/t enclosure is about .24 cu ft.

For these reasons, I would go ahead and change the bottom brace of the mid/tweeter enclosure to a "c" type brace, that has the rear open chamber of a "b" brace, but not the front one. Then put a solid vertical brace, just in front of that opening in the "c" brace. The solid vertical brace would run up to the top "a" brace which makes the top of the enclosure. You would just need to make sure the (now smaller) mid/tweeter enclosure can damp the backwave of the mid. You would also pick up some woofer enclosure volume, as well.

That is just me, YMMV. :T


EDIT: Actually, what I would do, is use two vertical braces for sidewalls of the m/t enclosure, which would get narrower as it got deeper:

|/\|

Excuse the crude example, but the two sidewalls of a mid/tweeter enclosure that small would be non-parallel in a version I did.

[Brian Walter]

If anything, I would put another vented shelf brace between the tweeter and the mid bass and stuff the tweeter section with poly fill or fiberglass. I would not put any braces behind the mid bass as a deeper cabinet and more surface area helps breakup and absorb more of the back wave. It generally never hurts to make the midrange cabinet larger and frankly, I don't think you gain much of anything making the woofer section bigger, but you do reduce power handling. Everything you do is a trade off and what's best for you depends on what you like, your room and where you place your speakers in the room.

As an update, I haven't quite gotten my speakers finished, too many other things getting in the way of working on them. All I've got left to do is mount the 4 woofers and do some tests to be sure the crossovers are working correctly before I hook them up to my receiver. I expect to fire them up this evening and take pictures tomorrow morning when I've got better lighting.

Brian

[m1ke323]

Now that we stumbled across the subject of power handeling, what kinda of power do these things need? Also, how much power can they take? I have some extra money coming up here and was thinking about buying a rotel amp as oppose to my HK435 receiver powering them. I don't think my receiver will power them to reference levels like I want it to.

Brian, why do you think the tweeter cabinet should be stuffed with polyfill?

Thanks for the help as always.

Mike

[Brian Walter]

Mike, I've got my speakers up and running and my 80 watt/channel Dennon reciever powers them quite nicely. I suspect you could use more power but it probably isn't necessary. My suggestion to stuff the tweeter cabinet based on the assumption that it was open to the midrange compartment. If so, the stuffing would provide additional absorbtion of the back wave and reduce internal reflections. But this is only a starting suggestion. You should always experiment and find what you like best. Right now I'm finding my midrange to be slightly congested sounding, so after they break in I'll experiment with the stuffing and maybe even tweak the crossover slightly. I'm also finding the tweater to be a little brighter than I'm used to, so I may pad it down slightly.

Brian

[jonathanb3478]

Brian,

What are you used to (what speakers have you been listening to before these?)

[Jim Holtz]

Mike, I've got my speakers up and running and my 80 watt/channel Dennon reciever powers them quite nicely. I suspect you could use more power but it probably isn't necessary. My suggestion to stuff the tweeter cabinet based on the assumption that it was open to the midrange compartment. If so, the stuffing would provide additional absorption of the back wave and reduce internal reflections. But this is only a starting suggestion. You should always experiment and find what you like best. Right now I'm finding my midrange to be slightly congested sounding, so after they break in I'll experiment with the stuffing and maybe even tweak the crossover slightly. I'm also finding the tweeter to be a little brighter than I'm used to, so I may pad it down slightly.

Brian


Hi Brian,

It's good to hear that you've got the RS 3-ways up and running. :)

A couple suggestions before you start to fiddle with the crossover. If you've not used foam to line the midrange compartment, try it. I've experimented with all different types of materials and I find foam to be the cleanest sounding. I've had the congested sounding experience you're describing when using fiberglass to stuff with.

Also, I'd suggest that you spend some time (days) listening before padding the tweeter. I find the top end to be very accurate and extended sounding in comparison to the Modula M/T's and Natalie P's. I'm comparing the tweeter extension of the 27TDFC and the RS28 not the designs of course. If the speakers you're used to have a rolled off top end, the H1212 would sound brighter.

Let us know what you think after a few days of listening.

Jim

[chasw98]

Right now I'm finding my midrange to be slightly congested sounding, so after they break in I'll experiment with the stuffing and maybe even tweak the crossover slightly. I'm also finding the tweater to be a little brighter than I'm used to, so I may pad it down slightly.

Brian

Brian:
Those are my impressions also. Mine are not totally built yet, but they are far enough along that I could set them up and start breaking them in and listen to them. They sound very good and clean on music with trios or soloists, but when the music gets busy, such as with a full orchestra or a lavishly produced tune, I believe the mid is doing something different. I have not had a chance to put my finger on it and I want to measure the response in my room before changing anything. The tweeter also sounds extremely crisp as opposed to very smooth. I don't know if this makes sense but I am comparing them to my Ascend 340 setup and am running them with 400w/channel amps. I should have mine ready to listen to tonight. I still have to veneer and finish them, but I will be at a point where I can do some measurement and compare to the Ascends measurement I have taken in the past. I will post graphs.

Chuck

[Jim Holtz]

Brian:
Those are my impressions also. Mine are not totally built yet, but they are far enough along that I could set them up and start breaking them in and listen to them. They sound very good and clean on music with trios or soloists, but when the music gets busy, such as with a full orchestra or a lavishly produced tune, I believe the mid is doing something different. I have not had a chance to put my finger on it and I want to measure the response in my room before changing anything. The tweeter also sounds extremely crisp as opposed to very smooth. I don't know if this makes sense but I am comparing them to my Ascend 340 setup and am running them with 400w/channel amps. I should have mine ready to listen to tonight. I still have to veneer and finish them, but I will be at a point where I can do some measurement and compare to the Ascends measurement I have taken in the past. I will post graphs.

Chuck


Hi Chuck,

Interesting feedback from both you and Brian. If I'm understanding correctly, it's large orchestra and symphony that you're hearing the congestion. I'm a jazz and blues fan and I honestly don't listen to that type of music so it's entirely possible that you and Brian are hearing something I've not heard. Interesting.

I do know that Dennis uses large and very dynamic orchestra music as a major voicing tool so you're comments about the mids do surprise me somewhat. No surprises in the tweeter comments. I'm not sure I'd agree that it isn't smooth but I would agree that it's crisp sounding. It's very clean to my ears but I never hear harshness at all.

I'm really interested in hearing more feedback from you and Brian after you've spent some time with them.

Jim

[Dennis Murphy]

Hi I'm not sure whether my relevant comment was ever posted here, but the mid is set for flat only as a starting point. In a second order crossover, that can be too much of a good thing on heavily scored sources, like full orchestra. To reduce the mids, just put a 20-30 ohm resistor across the terminals. I would start with a 20. The highs obviously are easily adjustable. Also remember that a second order will sound fuller in the lower treble, upper mids than a 4th order, due to the smoother power response of the 2nd order.

[chasw98]

Jim, Dennis: Right now I feel I am talking out of my a** because I've had them a week and total listening time for me is approx 6 hours. Not much to base an opinion on. They are also pipe clamped together to hold the front baffle on. There are no gaskets on the drivers and only 2 screws holding each driver in. Nothing major but when added up, it could be a change when I fully assemble them. Here is a graph of my L & R Ascends with my subs. This is what i am used to hearing and is my starting point.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/Subwoofer/post-eq03-LRSUB-021006.jpg

I do not believe that a FR graph even begins to tell what a speaker sounds like, but it will give you all a reference point for what i am used to listening to.

Dennis, if the mid is set for flat, that is great. I would think leaving the mid alone and getting the lo and hi to mesh with it would be the way to go. A lot also depends on the room the speaker is in. I, for one, am not touching anything until I really have them fully assembled and running. I think they will turn out incredible, but I didn't just run to circuit city and pull them out of the box and place on the tv. I must integrate them! Back to sanding and assembling. Hope this made some sense.

Chuck

[Jim Holtz]

Jim, Dennis: Right now I feel I am talking out of my a** because I've had them a week and total listening time for me is approx 6 hours. Not much to base an opinion on. They are also pipe clamped together to hold the front baffle on. There are no gaskets on the drivers and only 2 screws holding each driver in. Nothing major but when added up, it could be a change when I fully assemble them. Here is a graph of my L & R Ascends with my subs. This is what i am used to hearing and is my starting point.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/Subwoofer/post-eq03-LRSUB-021006.jpg

I do not believe that a FR graph even begins to tell what a speaker sounds like, but it will give you all a reference point for what i am used to listening to.

Dennis, if the mid is set for flat, that is great. I would think leaving the mid alone and getting the lo and hi to mesh with it would be the way to go. A lot also depends on the room the speaker is in. I, for one, am not touching anything until I really have them fully assembled and running. I think they will turn out incredible, but I didn't just run to circuit city and pull them out of the box and place on the tv. I must integrate them! Back to sanding and assembling. Hope this made some sense.

Chuck


Hi Chuck,

Interesting graph. The thing that jumps out at me is the 10 DB dip centered around 1.5K between 325 Hz. and 4K Hz. Then there is a gradual roll off above about 17K Hz. That should have an extremely recessed sound soundstage from just looking at the measurements. Does it sound anything like what I just described?

BTW, Dennis had mentioned the resistor thing to alter the presentation to me sometime ago and I spaced it off. The music I listen to sound just right with his flat voicing. ;x( Dennis is great to jump in with adjustments when you need them. He knows exactly what to do to tailor the sound to your tastes.

I'm looking forward to your feedback when you get them finished and some hours of listening under your belt so to speak.

Best regards,

Jim

[Dennis Murphy]

Hi I just wanted to make sure people understood that the mids are meant to be voiced--just like the highs. It is interesting that the Ascends appear to droop in the midrange area.

[chasw98]

From Jim:
That should have an extremely recessed sound soundstage from just looking at the measurements. Does it sound anything like what I just described?

They have had that problem since the day I got them. Quite amazing observation, Jim. One of the best qualities I have noticed about the WWMT's is the soundstage. It now extends from one side of the room to the other. The Ascends never did that.

From Dennis:
Hi I just wanted to make sure people understood that the mids are meant to be voiced--just like the highs. It is interesting that the Ascends appear to droop in the midrange area

When you say "meant to be voiced", do you mean alter the FR characteristics or subtle changes that would affect soundstage, dynamics, slope, etc.? That might explain my midrange sound. If I haven't heard it before, it would be new to me.

They are both assembled and sanded down to 400 grit awaiting application of veneer. I have them set up in the living room just playing Dire Straights "Brother In Arms" SACD in 2 channel mode, no sub. They are sounding very, very good! I like them. I will try some different music later tonight and try to do some serious listening.

BTW, Dennis, you're back! I guess the doctor said you can live! I hope so.

Chuck

[Dennis Murphy]

[
When you say "meant to be voiced", do you mean alter the FR characteristics or subtle changes that would affect soundstage, dynamics, slope, etc.? That might explain my midrange sound. If I haven't heard it before, it would be new to me.

I think any design should allow listeners in different rooms, with different music, equipment and taste to adjust the presence region as well as the highs. The parallel resistor has almost no effect on the basic driver integration, so the sound staging should be just as wide and deep. It's just a matter of, say, the brass section moving back a little. I won't comment any further on the Ascends until I see how the RS measures. What kind of equipment and measuring software are you using? I take it you don't have a signal that can give you quasi-anechoic plots that will window out all of those room reflections?

As for the Doc thing, I've become a profit center for for his lab. So many tests. But he PROMISED he would have something to say next Friday. Thanks for your concern.


BTW, Dennis, you're back! I guess the doctor said you can live! I hope so.

Chuck[/QUOTE]

[marc g]

The duplicolor truck bed liner spray turned out even better than I thought. Of course I did 3 coats of primer then bondo and spot putty, ( blocking down with 400 grit w/d inbetween coats). Bondo is really slow for sanding though. Maybe next time I would do just wood filler. The texture does show off the dust and fingerprints with the flash though... The corners turned out really well and all the recessed drivers fit tight. The cab disappears except for the shiny metal cones. I haven't weighed it yet but the temporary 27" Toshiba TV weighs about half as much!

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5258/dsc034509je.th.jpg (http://img155.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc034509je.jpg)

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/9508/dsc034494in.th.jpg (http://img155.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc034494in.jpg)

As for impressions I havent fastened the X-over yet or lined the cabinet and I'm using some interim carbon comps for the midrange. It sounds a little lively it still really needs to be broken in.

How long might the break in period last before things start to mellow ?

[chasw98]

I think any design should allow listeners in different rooms, with different music, equipment and taste to adjust the presence region as well as the highs. The parallel resistor has almost no effect on the basic driver integration, so the sound staging should be just as wide and deep. It's just a matter of, say, the brass section moving back a little. I won't comment any further on the Ascends until I see how the RS measures. What kind of equipment and measuring software are you using? I take it you don't have a signal that can give you quasi-anechoic plots that will window out all of those room reflections?

For equipment, I have a Behringer ECM8000 that goes into a MX802A mixer with phantom power which in turn feeds my PC. I also use a Radio Shack SPL meter for level checking. The graph is taken from Room EQ Wizard. One of these days I will spend the money on TrueRTA but not yet.

"Quasi Anechoic". Oh yeah, the chamber is being built as we speak! No, really, the only quasi anechoic would be to put it on a tall structure in my back yard. My room has some treatment applied as far as damping first reflections and trying to balance Sabines to control RT60. If it matters, I took a Syn Aud Con course many moons ago so I have a basic understanding of acoustics and used to design systems for auditoriums, churches, and clubs.

Right now my wife and I are watching LOTR in DTS 6.1. Now that you have mentioned the fact that I may not be used to a midrange that is there, I am listening with a different mindset for audible clues. (Psyche affecting ears?). I have the speakers set in an equilateral triangle with no toe in and approx. 3 feet from any wall or surface. It does sound good and very intelligble. I am wondering if I am hearing anomalies in older source material like a 20 year old Dire Straights album that I am mistaking for errors in the speaker system? Oh, well, I will keep running them and listening. If you have any tests you would like me to perform, let me know. I am more than willing to be a lab rat. :B

Chuck

[jonathanb3478]

I haven't weighed it yet but the temporary 27" Toshiba TV weighs about half as much!

That is quite a "TV-height-to-eye-level Conversion System" you have there!

I do not currently have the room in my setup for a center quite that beefy, but I am working on fixing that. The primary TV in the house is a 27" CRT here, too. It is my roomate's. Neither of us has felt the urge to upgrade the poor thing! If we were to relieve ourselves of its bulk, I could get a 37" - 42" LCD that could play nice with such a large center.

[jonathanb3478]

"Quasi Anechoic". Oh yeah, the chamber is being built as we speak!

Actually, I believe an actual anechoic chamber has not been strictly necessary for a while now. I believe there are software programs that only listen to the first few miliseconds of the signal they send through the speakers, thus are not really affected by the space the speaker is in. From what Dennis said, I think he was asking if you use such software, or if it is a "real-time" response graph, such as an RTA (http://www.mcminone.com/product.asp?catalog_name=MCMProducts&product_id=555-7440) would give you (all the late room contributions included, in other words).


(Psyche affecting ears?)

Your ears do not hear anything, your brain does! :D

[jonathanb3478]

I think any design should allow listeners in different rooms, with different music, equipment and taste to adjust the presence region as well as the highs.

Right...

I can see it now:

Me: "Pete [my roomate], how does it sound now?"
Pete: "Could we get more bass?"
Me: "Now?"
Pete: "Could we get more bass?"
Me: "NOW???"
Pete: "Uh... could we get more bass?"

Maybe the lunatics should not run the asylum, eh Dennis? That is what the Psychiatrists/Psychologists are for, right?

LOL

[Dennis Murphy]

[.

<"Quasi Anechoic". Oh yeah, the chamber is being built as we speak!>

Great. Can I borrow it? Anyhow, all I ask is that you make the same measurement that you made for the Ascend. I'm surprised its response is so uneven. I worked with the first Ascend model (the little 2-way), and it measured quite flat. The tweeter was overstressed, which I dealt with, but I can't say that I improved the frequency response per se.

[WillyD]

I find the top end to be very accurate and extended sounding in comparison to the Modula M/T's and Natalie P's.

*sigh* That makes me wonder about my MTs now.

[chasw98]

[.

<"Quasi Anechoic". Oh yeah, the chamber is being built as we speak!>

Great. Can I borrow it? Anyhow, all I ask is that you make the same measurement that you made for the Ascend. I'm surprised its response is so uneven. I worked with the first Ascend model (the little 2-way), and it measured quite flat. The tweeter was overstressed, which I dealt with, but I can't say that I improved the frequency response per se.

I still have the Ascend 340SE's. I was going to measure both sets for comparable results. Same setup, same location, same equipment. I was only going to set each pair to a common reference point (85 db SPL) and then measure from there.

[ThomasW]

*sigh* That makes me wonder about my MTs now.I helped a fellow troubleshoot the wiring of his Modula MT's.

During this process the upstream equipment consisted of a Sony SCD-777ES SACD player, an Ayre K5-xe preamp and a Ayre V5-xe power amp.

If there are issues with the top-end performance of the Modula MT, they weren't apparent with this level of equipment in the loop.

[WillyD]

I helped a fellow troubleshoot the wiring of his Modula MT's.

During this process the upstream equipment consisted of a Sony SCD-777ES SACD player, an Ayre K5-xe preamp and a Ayre V5-xe power amp.

If there are issues with the top-end performance of the Modula MT, they weren't apparent with this level of equipment in the loop.

That makes me feel much better.

Thanks. :T

[Jim Holtz]

*sigh* That makes me wonder about my MTs now.

WillyD,

I'll try to explain my comment. Remember, this is all my opinion and worth exactly what you're going to pay for it. :D

My favorite budget tweeter is the 27TBFC/G with the 27TDFC very close behind. The RS28 is next in line but at $50 I'm starting to look at spending a little more and go for a ribbon if the design would accommodate it. The RS28 is a fine tweeter but is not my 1st choice with the Seas tweeters sound quality being so good for $30 less a pair.

I think all three tweeters are excellent and wouldn't hesitate to use any one of them again. I'd just pick the 27TBFC/G 1st. I like the 27TDFC a lot. That said, the 27TBFC/G has a crisper sound with more body. The 27TDFC has excellent extension but is a lighter more airy sound which many might prefer. This is all subjective so YMMV....

It's my understanding that the replacement voice coils for the 27TBFC/G can be used as a replacement for the 27TDFC. http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?cart_id=8813016.12900&pid=1639

If you want to play, try converting the 27TDFC to 27TBFC/G for $14.65 each and see what you think. Jon said the two tweeters are interchangeable from a crossover perspective. Fun uh? :rofl:

One more thing. I think the Modula M/T's and Natalie P's are both exceptional designs and I have both of them in house right now. I'll be taking the Modula M/T's and Dennis RS 3-ways to the DIY events this fall so we'll see what everyone else thinks of them. Fun stuff! :T

Jim

[marcusicp]

So I think I am going to go with Denis' design for the wmtw center and the tmww sealed towers. I was wondering what is a good surround speaker that uses the RS line? I have looked around and I can't come up with anything. Does anyone have a link to a good design for one useing a 5" RS and the RS tweet?

Thanks for any help.

[Brian Walter]

I don't have much time today, I have to meet my family at the back to the 50's car show at the state fair grounds. But here are some pictures of my speakers I took.

Brian

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0417.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0411.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0412.jpg
http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0413.jpg

[Outfitter]

Marcus- I am aware of the following for 5"
http://www.rjbaudio.com/Microbe/Reference_Series_Microbes_v3.pdf

and the following for a 6"

http://home.stx.rr.com/poneal/pdfs/RS150RS28.pdf

[marcusicp]

Marcus- I am aware of the following for 5"
http://www.rjbaudio.com/Microbe/Reference_Series_Microbes_v3.pdf

and the following for a 6"

http://home.stx.rr.com/poneal/pdfs/RS150RS28.pdf

I wonder what I would need to change to make the 5" design sealed. Could I just remove the port and be good to go? I see in the tangband version of the 5" design he says that you can plug the port if you want.

Thanks for the quick reply.

[ssabripo]

[QUOTE=Brian Walter]I don't have much time today, I have to meet my family at the back to the 50's car show at the state fair grounds. But here are some pictures of my speakers I took.

Brian

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0417.jpg

Holy sh!t Brian!!! ;x( ;x( ;x( :E

that's hotness right there! :E :T

OUTSTANDING job my friend...outstanding!!! Looks like Chasw98 and myself may have to make a trip to take a look in person and hear these babies in person! that's just a phenomenal looking speaker!

A+ :T

[jonathanb3478]

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0417.jpg

Very nice! Good, clean look to those.

I'd buy that for a dollar. :D



I like your choice of feet. They allow you to keep a very "clean" look, while also offering more side to side support than just spikes on the enclosure bottom. With the speakers placed on carpet, how much effort is needed to get them to start tipping over they way you have things setup?

[Dennis Murphy]

[QUOTE=Brian Walter]I don't have much time today, I have to meet my family at the back to the 50's car show at the state fair grounds. But here are some pictures of my speakers I took.

Hope they have a nice 57 Chevy baby-blue Bel Aire hardtop like the one I failed to talk by daddy into buying. We ended up with a surf green 210 sedan with the mighty Blue Flame six. Anyhow--your speaks are really magnificent.

[kgveteran]

The duplicolor truck bed liner spray turned out even better than I thought. Of course I did 3 coats of primer then bondo and spot putty, ( blocking down with 400 grit w/d inbetween coats). Bondo is really slow for sanding though. Maybe next time I would do just wood filler. The texture does show off the dust and fingerprints with the flash though... The corners turned out really well and all the recessed drivers fit tight. The cab disappears except for the shiny metal cones. I haven't weighed it yet but the temporary 27" Toshiba TV weighs about half as much!

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/5258/dsc034509je.th.jpg (http://img155.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc034509je.jpg)

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/9508/dsc034494in.th.jpg (http://img155.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc034494in.jpg)

As for impressions I havent fastened the X-over yet or lined the cabinet and I'm using some interim carbon comps for the midrange. It sounds a little lively it still really needs to be broken in.

How long might the break in period last before things start to mellow ?

about the breakin period.I waited a while and the mid never gave in.I had to use my trusty Ashly PEQ to create a "BBC" curve.It is centered at 2khz and about three octaves wide and down about -3db acoustic. This turned that forward sound into magic.

What would be nice, would be to get back with the designer (Curt C) and see if he could model a XO to that spec for me.I'm sure an emulator would help the process.It would be dificult to do this without hearing the results.To Curts defence.The response is flat as a board.I just like a "dip".

[marc g]

I don't have much time today, I have to meet my family at the back to the 50's car show at the state fair grounds. But here are some pictures of my speakers I took.

Brian

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0417.jpg

Very nice...... but you may want to borrow my center channel for a little while to see if you tell a difference from yours :roll:

[Jim Holtz]

I don't have much time today, I have to meet my family at the back to the 50's car show at the state fair grounds. But here are some pictures of my speakers I took.

Brian

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j264/BrianWalter_2006/RS-3ways_0417.jpg

Brian,

Your speakers are absolutely gorgeous. You should be extremely proud of them. :T

Jim

[Brian Walter]

If you think speaker building is an expensive hobby, you should look into street rods. I spent the afternoon at a back to the 50's street rod show at the state fair grounds and all I can say is wow! Almost every vehicle there had a paint job that would look absolutely fabulous on a set of speakers, if you are into painted speakers. Dennis I bet I saw close to 100 - 57 Chevy Bel Aire's, not sure about the baby blue, but lots of really nice ones.

So Marc, if you really like my center channel, I'll trade yah? That or a subwoofer is going to be my next project. I had built in subs in my previous speakers, so I do notice a little bit missing on the bottom end. I'm thinking I might build Chris's RS150 MTM's for a center, it would be a little less imposing sitting on top of my TV. But I could do like Marc and put the center under the TV.

I really don't want to comment too much about my speakers until they have a chance to break in and I get used to listening to them. For whoever it was that asked, my previous speakers were a pair of Mike McCalls SE-1-P's, a Vifa P17WJ/D27TG-45 combo built into towers with side firing 10" subs.

Thanks to all of you for the nice compliments on my cabinets.

Brian

[gimpy]

A quick question. If the inside dimensions stay pretty much the same, can I glue/laminate 3/4 inch "birch" plywood from Home Depot with 1/2 inch "Baltic Birch" plywood together without making any changes to any other part of the design, etc.? I know Jim Holtz did this for the front baffle only, I think. I'm trying to get away from using mdf.

Home Depot has some pretty nice looking 3/4 inch birch plywood and Ace/Homco has/or had (haven't looked recently) some 1/2 inch Baltic Birch plywood, but not 3/4 inch. The 1/2 inch would be on the outside. I plan on either staining or dyeing it black to keep the wood grain visible. It would match other speakers in the room and that is what the wife wants. Or, two 1/2 inch layers of Baltic Birch?

Thanks, Frank

[Brian Walter]

Frank, I see no reason you couldn't use either 2 layers of 1/2" Baltic Birch or a single layer of 1/2" BB + 3/4" regular birch plywood. The main advantage of mdf is that is machines very nicely and has slightly better damping qualities.

Brian Walter

[Dougie085]

Well Brian I'm going to be starting on this very soon! My friend has a cnc mill and he is going to cut the top shelfs and braces for me on it and send them to me! I just have to buy the wood for it. I'm so freaking stoked that I found a way to build my speakers finally! Its awsome.

[Dougie085]

Brian what veneer did you use for yours?

[gimpy]

Thx, Brian. I was just trying to get away from using mdf mostly and I would like to try out some baltic birch plywood, too. How about plywood glued to mdf? Is that a fit? Just looking at options right now.

But the added outside dimensions should not affect anything else as well as the sound?

thx, Frank

[Andy Shoppa]

Brian what veneer did you use for yours?

And where did you get it, what stain, what clear, and what did you use to do the baffles with?

I am in love with those! I may try to duplicate them, but without the curved sides.

Very nice!!! ;x(

[jonathanb3478]

The finish looks slightly darker now that it has been varnished and was accomplished by first dying the wood with TransTint Red Mahogany (mixed with water), sealing the dye with Zinsser SealCoat and stained with Varathane "Cabernet" gel stain. I then sprayed on 2 coats of gloss and 1 coat of satin ployurethane varnish. I brushed on the SealCoat, but if I had it to do over again, I would spray it on. The baffles are simply sealed and sprayed with Rust-Oleum texture paint for plastic lawn furniture.

He mentioned at some point that the above was done to the face of the 1/4" oak ply he used to cover the MDF strips he used to make the side walls. Thus, no veneer.

[marc g]

I glued BB plywood to the back of my 3/4 MDF baffle to give the fasteners some holding power. This was suggested by Northcreek Music. Check out their cabinet plans and you will see a different flavor of overkill.

Brian- after building several simple cabs I can appreciate your stellar efforts for what they really are - impossible... for me... ;x(

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/4083/dsc034232ng.th.jpg (http://img154.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc034232ng.jpg)

Click for a bigger pic

[jonathanb3478]

This was suggested by Northcreek Music. Check out their cabinet plans and you will see a different flavor of overkill.


My favorite quote from Northcreekmusic.com:

North Creek Loudpeaker Kits can be tuned over about an octave by adjusting the length of straws inside the port tube.

Straws...

...in the port tube???

cool 8)

[Brian Walter]

Andy, I think Jonathan answered most of your questions, thank you Jonathan. I did use oak veneer on the top, bottom and backs of the cabinets, and as Jonathan said, I used 1/4" oak plywood from Home Depot for the sides. I built the baffles out of mdf, and I rounded over the edges of the cutouts. This really helps save some of the skin on your hands when you are reaching inside the cabinets to mount crossovers, etc.

One tip somone mentioned, which I didn't use, but would have had I thought of it, is to print out the pattern for the shelf braces and glue it to your shelf material with spray addhesive. Then you can cut close to the lines on the pattern and use a disk sander (bench top type machine) to sand up to the lines. I cut the paper pattern out and then placed it on the mdf and traced around it, not nearly as accurate as gluing the pattern to the mdf. You can then clamp this piece to your others and use a flush trim bit to cut them all exactly the same size. I kept my pattern for future use, should I decide to do this again.

All in all, these speakers were not very hard to make, but they were a little time consuming. If you don't want to cut all the relief slots on the back of the 1/4" ply, I would suggest trying to bend 1/8" hardboard (Masonite) around the mdf instead and then veneering over that. I would also suggest gluing the ply or hardboard to the mdf with one of the foaming urethane glues. That way the foaming action will fill any voids which may otherwise exist should you fail to get 100% contact between the mdf and plywood. Also, the urethane glue has a fairly long working time and sets up good and hard overnight. I used a construction addhesive and had to leave it clamped for several days and even then, I had to go back over the edges with urethane glue to hold the edges down. Using urethane glue from the start would have saved me more than a week in construction time.

Brian

[ThomasW]

My favorite quote from Northcreekmusic.com:
Straws...

...in the port tube???

cool 8)Not recommended. It's an old 'trick/tweak'. The only thing it does is make the port 'smaller' by increasing it's internal resistance.

But that's a topic for a different thread.

[Dougie085]

I think I'm going to try useing multiple layers of the wiggle board rather then cutting all those strips. Laminate 5 or so layers together, I think this will take less time. And with my friend cutting the braces for these in his CNC Mill they will be perfect to your drawings so this should all work very well I believe.

[Brian Walter]

Sounds good Doug, where do you get wiggle board?

[Dougie085]

Well hopefully from HD or somthing......If not I guess I'll be shopping around for it :B

[Brian Walter]

Ok, now that I've got the left and right towers completed, I need to start on the next phase, which I think will be the sub. I know my center channel is worse than sucks, but I don't need it for music, and I do miss the little extra low end I'm used to.

I currently have 2 - RS10HF's left over from my original plans which were dropped in favor of building the WWMT and I also have a single Quatro 15. What are everyones feelings in regards to using one of these options? or if you don't like any of these, what would you suggest? My room is relatively large at about 20ft x 20ft x 8ft with a long hallway leading out of one end. I'm used to a pair of 10" subs with only 5.5 mm xmax, and they were marginal under most listening conditions. Suggestions anyone?

I can start another thread if that is the peferred procedure?

Brian

[yousuredo2]

I think I'm going to try useing multiple layers of the wiggle board rather then cutting all those strips. Laminate 5 or so layers together, I think this will take less time. And with my friend cutting the braces for these in his CNC Mill they will be perfect to your drawings so this should all work very well I believe.

"wiggle board"
Is that the same as bending plywood ?
If so I have a sheet(4 x8 ) or two...and would love to use it, but wasnt sure how solid it is, Internally that is...

[Dougie085]

Well its 1/8" thick layers of bendebal mahogany from what I found on google. But yeah the same ans Luan Plywood, Bendable Ply. Gotta figure out where to buy the crap though.

[yousuredo2]

I worked @ Wiiliam bro. Lumber co. and got it from them...
but check out wheelers, Lumus, or others as well, not all sell to the public...

[chasw98]

Ok, now that I've got the left and right towers completed, I need to start on the next phase, which I think will be the sub. I know my center channel is worse than sucks, but I don't need it for music, and I do miss the little extra low end I'm used to.

I currently have 2 - RS10HF's left over from my original plans which were dropped in favor of building the WWMT and I also have a single Quatro 15. What are everyones feelings in regards to using one of these options? or if you don't like any of these, what would you suggest? My room is relatively large at about 20ft x 20ft x 8ft with a long hallway leading out of one end. I'm used to a pair of 10" subs with only 5.5 mm xmax, and they were marginal under most listening conditions. Suggestions anyone?

I can start another thread if that is the peferred procedure?

Brian

Look in here for Steve nn's subs. He has done a dual 15 that would fill your room very well. he has also done a single 15 that puts out a lot of sound vry cleanly. I will try and find the thread and post it here for you. I have a sonotube sub with a single 15 in a room 24 X 14 X 8 and it works very well with my WWMT's. They are sounding better every day.

Heres the thread to the dual 15's.

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=19686

Chuck

[Brian Walter]

I spent the evening listening to my speakers and adjusting my receiver. It turns out that even with my receiver set to large, if I have subwoofer selected, it still seems to roll off the main left and right speakers. I have to tell it no sub as well as set the speakers to large in order to not roll off the bottom end. I also discovered that the right speaker level was set 4 db higher than the left. Correcting these two items made a world of difference in the sound of the speakers. With the bottom end rolled off, it upset the entire balance of the sound.

Everything sounds much better now, but the tweeter still seems bright. This may just be due to what I'm used to listening to, but I don't think so. The tweeter doesn't seem to blend in with the midrange, I can tell that the sound is coming from the tweeter. It may be that I have a driver out of phase, so I'm going to open things up and verify the wiring, even though I did that about 3 times before I closed them up. And to answer the question before someone asks, I did connect the midrange in reverse phase as it is shown in the schematic.

Also, right now I've got a standard (inductive I assume) 10 watt resistor connected across the tweeter as Madisound sent 12 ohm resistors instead of the 10 ohms, so I used something I had on hand. I think I might order a handful of resistors so I can play around with the tweeter padding a little. That is after I verify the phase and other wiring. I know I never make mistakes, but that's not what my wife says.

I am a little concerned about the way my receiver seems to be managing the bass. I would have thought that with the L & R set to large the even with "using a sub" selected, that the full signal would have been sent to the L & R, but it appears not to be the case. I would like to be able to roll off the mains at about 50 Hz, so I may have to go with an external active crossover to do this. I'm leaning to wards getting a separate amp to run the front speakers anyway, so this may not be an issue.

These are going to be really nice sounding speakers after I do a little minor tweaking. Thank you Dennis for the excellent crossover.

[kgveteran]

Brian,
The devil is in the details.I ended up with a L-pad on the tweeter.I really should take it out now and measure it so i can make a fixed unit and give the results back to Curt C.

The (PE) L-pad is a stereo 8 ohm.You would need to wire it in parallel to get 4ohms.For 5.00 each it makes things real easy tweaking.The other guys can do a better job of explaining what the benifits are to an L-pad over padding down with a series resistor.

[BobEllis]

Brian, I had a similar issue with my Yamaha DSP-A1 until I told it to send the LFE to both sub and mains. Perhaps you have a similar setting.

Also, if you can get a little breathing room between your speakers and TV the response ought to be smoother.

[chasw98]

Brian:
I have been letting mine play music for a few days now and they really do seem to be "breaking in". There are some pieces of music I have been listening to over and over because I know them well and am listening for the way I think they should be sounding. These speakers are getting smoother every day. Now, I'm not sure that I believe that speakers need to be broken in, but I have heard mine seem to become more coherent the longer I play them. I would say it is me just getting used to them except for the fact that I will let them play music all day while I am at work, and them when I get home and put a song I know well on them, I am hearing differences. Good differences. IMHO, I would listen to them for a week or so before diving in and changing anything. These are excellent speakers and if you are curious, try shopping for a pair of 3 way speakers and look at the price of reputable brands. What a deal. And Dennis' XO is very, very good. I am going to try and get some measurements this weekend and post them. If you take some on yours, we can compare.

[Brian Walter]

Brian, I had a similar issue with my Yamaha DSP-A1 until I told it to send the LFE to both sub and mains. Perhaps you have a similar setting.

Thanks Bob, I'll look into that. My receiver came with such lousy documentation it's hard to figure out how much of anything works. I really wasn't looking to upgrade my receiver at this time.

Brian

[Brian Walter]

Brian:
IMHO, I would listen to them for a week or so before diving in and changing anything. <Break> I am going to try and get some measurements this weekend and post them. If you take some on yours, we can compare.

I understand what you are saying, and maybe they will change as they break in, but I kind of doubt the tweeter level will go down. But maybe the mid will rise up to match it. I know my son's got much better hearing than I do and when he walked into the room, the first thing he said is "they sound a little bright", and his speakers are considerably brighter than what I'm used to listening to. As I've said, I've got a substitute resistor in the tweeter circuit at the moment, so I'll probably at least change that out first.

I've never had much luck measuring speakers. I've always had problems getting my sound card and software to talk to eachother. And I tried three different sound cards with both Speakerworkshop and Just MLS. If I've got time I may fire up the measurement computer and see what I can do.

Brian

[Brian Walter]

Brian,
The devil is in the details.I ended up with a L-pad on the tweeter.I really should take it out now and measure it so i can make a fixed unit and give the results back to Curt C.

The (PE) L-pad is a stereo 8 ohm.You would need to wire it in parallel to get 4ohms.For 5.00 each it makes things real easy tweaking.The other guys can do a better job of explaining what the benifits are to an L-pad over padding down with a series resistor.

I'm using the Seas H1212 tweeter which is an 8 ohm tweeter, so I could use an 8 ohm L-Pad. The problem is I have not way of wiring it in such that I can adjust it while listening to it. I'd still have to pull a speaker out, adjust the setting and put the speaker back in. If I do pad the tweeter, I'll adjust both the series and parallel resistor to keep the same impedance so as to not mess with the crossover frequency.

Thanks for the insite, I appreciate it.

Brian

[chasw98]

Try Room EQ Wizard. I've had very good, repeatable luck with that. And TrueRTA. My tweeter sounded "different" when I first turned them on also. But I don't know if the mid caught up or the tweet tamed down, chicken or egg? They have consistently sounded better every day when I get home from work.

[Dennis Murphy]

Hi Brian The tweeter issue has me a little puzzled, although I'm glad the midrange seems to have come into proper balance with the bass signal restored. I never voice my speakers with elevated highs, and the mid-tweeter blend should be a major strength of the speaker. (I've worked with I don't know how many commercial kits and conventional loudspeakers, and virtually all of them have been voiced brighter than mine). That's not to say that you might not prefer the tweeter level reduced, which is easy enough to do, but the blend question is an entirely different issue. For starters, I would reverse the terminals on one of the tweeters and do an A-B to see which speaker sounds more conherent in the relevant region. Cheers, dennis.

[Brian Walter]

Thanks for the concern and suggestions Dennis. It may well be that I'm so used to hearing the tweeter at a reduced level that I've come to consider that normal. It may also be that many of my recordings aren't the best and I'm simply finding the superb detail a little too revealing. I noticed in the post above that I said I had a substitute tweeter in the circuit, I meant a substitute resistor in the tweeter circuit (I'll fix that). I've got work to do this evening, so I won't be able to do any experimenting until tomorrow evening, at the earliest.

Brian

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks for the concern and suggestions Dennis. It may well be that I'm so used to hearing the tweeter at a reduced level that I've come to consider that normal. It may also be that many of my recordings aren't the best and I'm simply finding the superb detail a little too revealing. I noticed in the post above that I said I had a substitute tweeter in the circuit, I meant a substitute resistor in the tweeter circuit (I'll fix that). I've got work to do this evening, so I won't be able to do any experimenting until tomorrow evening, at the earliest.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Do you by any chance have the test CD I handed out at the 2004 Iowa DIY event? There are two cuts (#1 & #6) that have a tremendous amount of well recorded treble. If you have it, give it a listen.

I'm hearing excellent tweeter integration in my pair so I'm suspect of the crossover or recordings.

Keep us posted!

Jim

[Brian Walter]

Hi Brian,

Do you by any chance have the test CD I handed out at the 2004 Iowa DIY event? There are two cuts (#1 & #6) that have a tremendous amount of well recorded treble. If you have it, give it a listen.

I'm hearing excellent tweeter integration in my pair so I'm suspect of the crossover or recordings.

Keep us posted!

Jim

Jim, yes I do have that CD. The problem is that my CD player doesn't play CDR's. I'll have to steal the DVD/VHS player from the family room to play it, and I don't know how good a player that is. I'll give it a try and see how it sounds.

Brian

[Jim Holtz]

Jim, yes I do have that CD. The problem is that my CD player doesn't play CDR's. I'll have to steal the DVD/VHS player from the family room to play it, and I don't know how good a player that is. I'll give it a try and see how it sounds.

Brian

Brian,

Cuts #1 & #6 may not be correct on the CD. I took the number from the files on my PC. The two cuts I had in mind are John McLaughlin and Maple Shade with the Maple Shade cut having the most treble energy. I had that terrible test tone on the CD that throws off the numbering scheme.

Jim

[Brian Walter]

Ok, I played the Iowa 2004 DIY test CD and I may have to eat crow. I don't think I have ever heard those songs sound that good. My problem must have been the music I was listening to. I suspect that since the speakers I was used to had slightly recessed highs, I tended to prefer music that was somewhat overly bright to compensate. As a result, when I play that same music through these speakers it sounds overly bright.

I need to sort though my CD's and weed out the poor recordings and head to the Best Buy that opened this past weekend and get some new music. I must say, with the test CD, these speakers sound as good as they look. I just didn't realize how good the speakers sounded. Unfortunately, a lot of the music I used to listen to and like doesn't sound so good on these speakers.

I'm still going to need a sub for HT, but most of the music is fine without. For example, James Taylor's Gaia is missing a little without a sub, but overall, you really don't need a sub with these.

Brian

[yousuredo2]

Can you tweek a XO to certain types of music ?
I hear that certain system, drivers, xo's, arent good for rock/metal/alternative...
do to their poor recording quality...
that is what I mainly listen too...

[jonathanb3478]

My problem must have been the music I was listening to.

My friend came to a similar realization when I convinced him to upgrade his Sony headphones with a set of Sennheiser, instead of the Panasonic that was one third their price.

I am glad to hear that you came to this conclusion. Not that I was terribly worried. ;)

[Dennis H]

Can you tweek a XO to certain types of music ?
I hear that certain system, drivers, xo's, arent good for rock/metal/alternative...
do to their poor recording quality...
that is what I mainly listen too... I think it's best to build the speakers to sound good with good recordings and just turn down the amp's treble control a touch for recordings that are too bright. Some rock recordings have excellent sound quality but, unfortunately, some appear to have been mastered to play on a boom box.

[chasw98]

Hi Brian,

Do you by any chance have the test CD I handed out at the 2004 Iowa DIY event? There are two cuts (#1 & #6) that have a tremendous amount of well recorded treble. If you have it, give it a listen.

I'm hearing excellent tweeter integration in my pair so I'm suspect of the crossover or recordings.

Keep us posted!

Jim

Jim:
Is there any way I could get a copy of that cd? Either rar'ed into individual files or zipped up. I think it could be helpful if we could reference some of the exact same music in comparing how our projects sound. I hope you have a fast connection.

Chuck

[Jim Holtz]

Jim:
Is there any way I could get a copy of that cd? Either rar'ed into individual files or zipped up. I think it could be helpful if we could reference some of the exact same music in comparing how our projects sound. I hope you have a fast connection.

Chuck

Hi Chuck,

I do have a fast connection and yes, I can zip the cuts and send them to you. It consists of 10 one minute excerpts from various well recorded CD's. Excellent for test purposes. Can you send me an email to jim@jholtz.us and I'll reply with the attachment this evening.

Edit: I do have a very fast download speed but only 256K upload. The files zipped came out to 92 megs so I won't be able to email them. Sorry!

Jim

[Jim Holtz]

Ok, I played the Iowa 2004 DIY test CD and I may have to eat crow. I don't think I have ever heard those songs sound that good. My problem must have been the music I was listening to. I suspect that since the speakers I was used to had slightly recessed highs, I tended to prefer music that was somewhat overly bright to compensate. As a result, when I play that same music through these speakers it sounds overly bright.

I need to sort though my CD's and weed out the poor recordings and head to the Best Buy that opened this past weekend and get some new music. I must say, with the test CD, these speakers sound as good as they look. I just didn't realize how good the speakers sounded. Unfortunately, a lot of the music I used to listen to and like doesn't sound so good on these speakers.

I'm still going to need a sub for HT, but most of the music is fine without. For example, James Taylor's Gaia is missing a little without a sub, but overall, you really don't need a sub with these.

Brian

HI Brian,

I'm glad that the mystery is finally solved. :D I find the RS 3-ways to be amazingly good. When you consider the cost to build them, they are even a greater bargain. That's the good news.

The bad news is, since you now are hearing what's really on the CD, some of your favorite music won't sound so good anymore, which means it's CD shopping time. Check out http://www.yourmusic.com for excellent CD prices. They're a division of BMG. The big difference is you have to buy one CD a month but they're only $5.99 delivered. No gimmicks, just a great deal on new CD's.

The even worse news is, since the RS 3-ways are extremely revealing, the better the electronics you power them with, the better they sound. You'll really appreciate good equipment with them. :T

Keep us posted with your progress.

Jim

[chasw98]

The even worse news is, since the RS 3-ways are extremely revealing, the better the electronics you power them with, the better they sound. You'll really appreciate good equipment with them. :T
Jim

I am finding that out extremely quickly. I am currently shopping for used Bryston or Aragon power amp to make these guys really sing.

[Jim Holtz]

Jim:
Is there any way I could get a copy of that cd? Either rar'ed into individual files or zipped up. I think it could be helpful if we could reference some of the exact same music in comparing how our projects sound. I hope you have a fast connection.

Chuck
Hi Chuck,

I don't know if the zipped file made it through or not but it took 5 hours and I lost great favor with my wife since she was also on the network trying to work from home. The upload brought my network to it's knees. I'll not be able to provide the file to others that requested it. Sorry!

Jim

[chasw98]

Hi Chuck,

I don't know if the zipped file made it through or not but it took 5 hours and I lost great favor with my wife since she was also on the network trying to work from home. The upload brought my network to it's knees. I'll not be able to provide the file to others that requested it. Sorry!

Jim

Nope, did not get it as of 10:20 AM EST this morning. I will PM you for alternative ideas. Thanks for trying.

[chasw98]

Gottas bump this thread back up there. No activity lately. Here is the first one with veneer in place. It was relatively harmless with good advice from Jim and Pete Mazz.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3778.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3777.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3776.jpg

[chasw98]

Both veneered and both stained Sedona Red.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3781.jpg

[JonW]

Chuck- Those look great! :T Is that an oak veneer? Super nice workmanship.

[chasw98]

Chuck- Those look great! :T Is that an oak veneer? Super nice workmanship.
Thanks, Jon. Yes, it is just plain flat cut red oak. $62.00 for a 4X8 sheet at Constantines (which is down the street from me). www.constantines.com . I just followed Petes instructions using titebond yellow glue and an iron and it worked. Jim Holtz gave me a few pointers on the side. I am on the downhill side now. Just have to polyurethane and paint top, bottom, and back black. I'm thinking about getting htose spike Brian Walter used on his. I like the look of them.

[Fryguy]

Is there a center with the seas tweet yet? I checked the summary post on the front page but haven't seen it yet.

I would like to build DM TMWWs and WMTW with Seas tweets if they are around. I know post 258 has the TMWWs, but I'm not sure about the center.

[Dennis Murphy]

I would like to build DM TMWWs and WMTW with Seas tweets if they are around. I know post 258 has the TMWWs, but I'm not sure about the center.


Sorry--the Seas Tweet version still isn't tweeting. I'm moving into a new house this week, and then I'll get serious about developing a center channel.

[jonathanb3478]

Sorry--the Seas Tweet version still isn't tweeting. I'm moving into a new house this week, and then I'll get serious about developing a center channel.

Weren't you supposed to get the final word from the doc? Was the word good?

[Fryguy]

Dennis:

Any idea on how long it'll take you to bang out a center design?

Also what are your thoughts on Dayton versus Seas on the towers?

[Dennis Murphy]

Weren't you supposed to get the final word from the doc? Was the word good?
Thanks for asking. He said we're taking it 6 months at a time. So that should be enough to finish a couple dozen designs. I need to get my lspCAD emulator back up and running in the new place. I didn't have room here, and it's taken forever to build complicated boards, listen, tweak, rebuild, etc. I definitely will have the center channel done this month. As for which is better--the seas or the RS--all I can say is that it's easier to get a flat response with the Seas. But the little dip in the RS response probably isn't audible. It's not a biggy. But since the Seas is cheaper, it would seem to dominate.

[jonathanb3478]

He said we're taking it 6 months at a time.

Here's to another surgery free 6 months after this one! :T




As for which is better--the seas or the RS--all I can say is that it's easier to get a flat response with the Seas. But the little dip in the RS response probably isn't audible. It's not a biggy. But since the Seas is cheaper, it would seem to dominate.

I know my thoughts on the subject:

If I am going to spend more money, I want obvious improvements, as opposed to un-obvious detriments. :D

[Brian Walter]

Dennis,
I don't know the details of your medical situation, but I'm sure I'm speaking for all when I say we certainly hope you recover completely, as soon as possible. Hang in there, we're all rooting for you.

[Brian Walter]

Chuck, those speakers are looking pretty nice. Glad the veneering went ok for you. I Know this was my first experience with veneering and I thought the yellow glue iron on method worked quite well. Keep up the good work, I'm looking forward to seeing the final product.

Brian

[chasw98]

Thanks, Brian. I am using 4 coats of Minwax Sedona Red stain and 2 coats of fast dry polyurethane. I have 1 more coat of stain and then 2 poly on one of them. The other has 1 coat of poly left to go. Waiting for them to dry (especially in FL humidity is a true test of patience) is driving me nuts!!!!!

[Dennis Murphy]

Dennis,
I don't know the details of your medical situation, but I'm sure I'm speaking for all when I say we certainly hope you recover completely, as soon as possible. Hang in there, we're all rooting for you.

Thanks Brian. I would rest a little easier if we could get your speaks voiced to your liking. Let me know if there's anything else I can suggest.

[chasw98]

They are finished....... for now :W
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3784.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3783.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3785.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3794.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3790.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3793.jpg

They sound very, very, very good. The soundstage is as wide as I have ever heard before. I believe Jim Holtz said they will sound even better with better electronics behind them, so I bought an amp to drive them. Should be here in week or so. Can't wait. After a short break to enjoy these speakers, I will tackle the center channel. I am going to try and get some graphs today of these in my room and of the Ascends I previously used. Just curious to see the difference. Thanks to Dennis & Jim & everyone else with their tips and tricks. :T BTW, the wife thinks they are beautiful and has said they can stay! Whew ;x(

Chuck

[ssabripo]

I Bowdown to my man Chuck!!! I'm not worthy!!!!!

http://www.htguide.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_hail.gifhttp://www.htguide.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_hail.gifhttp://www.htguide.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_hail.gifhttp://www.htguide.com/forum/images/smilies/icon_hail.gif

Holy mother of God Chuck....them babies are just beauties!!!! With your gain'd experience, when we start working on mine, it out to be easier, right? hehehhe :p

[Brian Walter]

Chuck, they turned out trully fantastic. I really like the color of yours. They are more like I was originally shooting for, but I like how they both turned out equally well. It's really hard to get a picture that does them justice isn't it? I bet they are even better in person. You should be very proud.

I'm glad to hear that they sound great for you. My son brought over some of his music yesterday and we listened to mine, and they sounded very good. I'm starting to think that the Eagles Farwell 1 tour is not recorded as well as I thouht it was. I had been using it as a reference, since I was so familiar with it. But I'm thinking that may have been a mistake. I think these speakers are simply more revealing than I thought.

What amp did you buy? I may do the same thing, I was thinking of getting a 3 channel amp possibly, so that I don't need to worry about all three front speakers being 4 ohm speakers. I've also been looking at a new CD or DVD player, because I found my old one doesn't sound as good as the cheap DVD/VCR combo I tried from the family room. I sure hope I don't have to replace all of my electronics now that I've got better speakers.

Brian Walter

[chasw98]

Chuck, they turned out trully fantastic. I really like the color of yours. They are more like I was originally shooting for, but I like how they both turned out equally well. It's really hard to get a picture that does them justice isn't it? I bet they are even better in person. You should be very proud.

I'm glad to hear that they sound great for you. My son brought over some of his music yesterday and we listened to mine, and they sounded very good. I'm starting to think that the Eagles Farwell 1 tour is not recorded as well as I thouht it was. I had been using it as a reference, since I was so familiar with it. But I'm thinking that may have been a mistake. I think these speakers are simply more revealing than I thought.

What amp did you buy? I may do the same thing, I was thinking of getting a 3 channel amp possibly, so that I don't need to worry about all three front speakers being 4 ohm speakers. I've also been looking at a new CD or DVD player, because I found my old one doesn't sound as good as the cheap DVD/VCR combo I tried from the family room. I sure hope I don't have to replace all of my electronics now that I've got better speakers.

Brian Walter

Thanks Brian. After seeing what you built that means a lot to me. I still want to put a final polish on them but I haven't found a good polish to buy and use yet. Pete Mazz talked about a polishing compound that I need to look into.

For good fidelity try the DVD of Eagles-Hell Freezes Over. There are some well recorded cuts on that or one of my favorites Dire Straights-Brothers In Arms SACD.

I bought an Earthquake Grande Cinenova. 300 X 3 into 8, 600 X 3 into 4 :T . I think I might have to run a new electrical circuit. Shipping weight is 150 lbs. I got a good enough deal that if it doesn't measurably sound better I will turn around and sell it. As far as DVD players, look into a Denon 1920 Universal Player. I bought one for around $260.00. It will play SACD, DVD-A, and the rest plus it has HDMI out for video.

[Jim Holtz]

They are finished....... for now :W
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3785.jpg

They sound very, very, very good. The soundstage is as wide as I have ever heard before. I believe Jim Holtz said they will sound even better with better electronics behind them, so I bought an amp to drive them. Should be here in week or so. Can't wait. After a short break to enjoy these speakers, I will tackle the center channel. I am going to try and get some graphs today of these in my room and of the Ascends I previously used. Just curious to see the difference. Thanks to Dennis & Jim & everyone else with their tips and tricks. :T BTW, the wife thinks they are beautiful and has said they can stay! Whew ;x(

Chuck

Hi Chuck,

The speakers turned out very, very nice! Excellent craftmanship. :T

I'm glad you're pleased with the sound. I think they're amazingly good. The good Dr. Murphy waved his magic wand over these., IMHO.

Jim

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks Brian. After seeing what you built that means a lot to me. I still want to put a final polish on them but I haven't found a good polish to buy and use yet. Pete Mazz talked about a polishing compound that I need to look into.

For good fidelity try the DVD of Eagles-Hell Freezes Over. There are some well recorded cuts on that or one of my favorites Dire Straights-Brothers In Arms SACD.

I bought an Earthquake Grande Cinenova. 300 X 3 into 8, 600 X 3 into 4 :T . I think I might have to run a new electrical circuit. Shipping weight is 150 lbs. I got a good enough deal that if it doesn't measurably sound better I will turn around and sell it. As far as DVD
players, look into a Denon 1920 Universal Player. I bought one for around $260.00. It will play SACD, DVD-A, and the rest plus it has HDMI out for video.


Chuck,

I second the Hell Freezes over CD. Very nice live recording. If you like Acoustic Alchemy, their greatest hits CD on the GRP label is an awesome recording and one of the best test CD's I've found. Not as demanding as a dynamic classical recording. Lot's of other great recordings out there too.


BTW, the new new amp sounds like a killer. What are you using for a preamp?

Have you checked out Squeezeboxes? It'll change the way you listen to music. :D I have a Red Wine Audio modified one that is awesome.

Jim

[Fryguy]

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=254411&postcount=591

Is this the right dimensions for the center channel using the seas driver? Obviously the tweeter hole is going to need to be cut differently. Short of making my builder aware of this (and giving him the tweeter to fit in), does anything need to be changed from that drawing? Does there happen to be a drawing around with the right cutout for the seas tweet in the center?

And is http://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php4?p=235850&postcount=258
still the latest version of the DM seas towers?

The plan is to just have the center built, and worry about the crossover later. The only important thing at this point is getting the cabinet built.

The first post on this page probably needs to get updated with the following info

-Lincolns post with his drawings (it's around mrcabinetry's stuff)
-seas tower posts

[gimpy]

Fryguy, just curious, did your speakers get built/finished, yet? If so, how do you like them/sound?
Just curious. Post some pics? (I don't think you have, have you?)

Frank

[Fryguy]

No, when I got around to getting them built (back around page 19 or so of this thread in long view, like post 580ish), I was getting ready to move to boston, and was basically trying to squeeze in getting everything worked out before I moved.

That ended up not working out, and I got caught up in the moving/starting new job process, and have been very busy with stuff until now.

And I just watched a movie on my new bigscreen (samsung 56" 1080p dlp), in 2.1 with my avalanche 18 and random audax 2-ways, and am starting to debate whether it's worth it for me to drop $1500+ on a new set of front speakers + center.

[chasw98]

Chuck,

I second the Hell Freezes over CD. Very nice live recording. If you like Acoustic Alchemy, their greatest hits CD on the GRP label is an awesome recording and one of the best test CD's I've found. Not as demanding as a dynamic classical recording. Lot's of other great recordings out there too.


BTW, the new new amp sounds like a killer. What are you using for a preamp?

Have you checked out Squeezeboxes? It'll change the way you listen to music. :D I have a Red Wine Audio modified one that is awesome.

Jim

Jim:
My preamp is an Outlaw 950 used just for audio. All video is done through an outboard HDMI switcher. It seems to sound very good when used in bypass mode with my Denon 1920 universal player. I have heard of squeezeboxes but never looked into one. I have an HTPC in my system that serves ordinary audio needs, but when listening for real, I use the Denon for playback.

Thanks for the compliments and the help you've given me. :T

[chasw98]

OK, here are some measurements taken with Room EQ Wizard. I used a Radio Shack SPL meter for setting levels and a Behringer ECM8000 into a Behringer MX802A phantom powered mixer and then to the SB Live soundcard. One set of measurements were done at 1 foot for the WWMT and the Ascend 340SE. The other set were done at the listening position for the WWMT and Ascend 340SE. Note: These are not stereo measurements, they are for one individual speaker only. All measurements were taken at 75 db SPL, C weighting, Slow response.

The setup:
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3796.jpg http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/DSCN3797.jpg


EDIT 2: These graphs are bogus due to operator error so I am removing them. Sorry, see below for updated graphs.

[jonathanb3478]

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/DSCN3790.jpg


BTW, the wife thinks they are beautiful and has said they can stay! Whew ;x(

Chuck

Wow, I have to agree with your wife, man. Very nice.

I am digging those FR graphs, too. Especially the LP ones. The RS seems to have a bit more output, overall, in the 30-60Hz range. That is nice. I expected dual 6.5" ported to be pretty close to dual 8" sealed, and that does seem to be the case.

I see that the level of output seems to increase after the tweeter crossover frequency. Seems that whole side of the graph is a bit elevated. I am wondering if that is an effect caused by the measurement technique, or some other external factor, or if the tweeter output (across the board) could be dropped by a few Db? I guess I just do not have the knowledge to understand what should be happening, vs what we see in chasw98's comparison graphs.

[Dennis Murphy]

Hi I don't know quite what to make of the measurements. Clearly the rising treble, evident in both nearfield plots, is an artifact of the technique. Probably some kind of calibration problem. In general, it looks like the room effects are swamping the inherent speaker response. About all I could conclude, very tentatively, is that the Ascend has a little more output in the 100-400 Hz range.

[chasw98]

Do you think a 3 db boost at 12 Khz would explain anything? Such as a Hi Freq tone control getting bumped and not noticed by the operator? Back to the inner sanctum. Dohhh!!!!

Try this one. It is the WWMT at 1 foot at 75 db with all tone controls flattened.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/1ft75db20-20ksweep-WWMT-1.jpg

I will have to wait till the next chance to redo all graphs of Ascend and WWMT, but I will. Sorry, a thousand apologies.

Chuck

[Dennis Murphy]

Hi That's certainly better. The peak at 3k is worrisome. My plots show a very slight depression in that area. But you're getting room interactions, whereas my measurements window those out. Still......... I'll wait until I see the corrected Ascend plots before I lose too much sleep.

[jonathanb3478]

Try this one. It is the WWMT at 1 foot at 75 db with all tone controls flattened.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b297/chasw98/RS3ways/1ft75db20-20ksweep-WWMT-1.jpg


Me like!

[Brian Walter]

I listened to my speakers for quite a while on Monday and decided that they sounded very nice on most music, but still a little brighter than I like, but maybe correct, I don't know. My son was over on Monday and listened to them as well and thought pretty much the same as I did.

Yesterday morning I modified the crossover slightly, I replaced the 3 ohm and 10 ohm resistors in the tweeter crossover with a 3.5 and an 8 ohm, respectively and I like the sound much better. I'm not sure how much this affect the response, but I'm thinking it should have dropped the tweeter level about 1.5 db. In the afternoon, I had a family get together and we listened to the modified speakers. My son liked the treble balance better, but my brother, who likes brighter sounding speakers thought they were maybe not quite bright enough, at least not as bright as his. But overall everyone thought they were very good, with one exception.

Let me explain; when playing the Eagles Farewell 1 Tour DVD, on Peaceful Easy Feeling Glen Fry sounds like his mike is turned down too low and his voice also sounds fatigued or crackly. I didn't notice this on my old speakers, but certainly do on these. If any of you have this DVD, could you play it and let me know if it sounds the same on your speakers? When my brother got home, he listened to the same song on his speakers and said that he noticed it some, but it wasn't nearly as severe as on my speakers. What I need to know is if this is correct or not. Overall, I think the Farewell Tour DVD is recorded far better than the Hell Freezes Over CD. I notice some of the same sound on most of Glen Fry's songs, so it could just be the way they record his voice.

I hope to try and get my measurement equipment up and running this evening, but no promises.

Brian Walter

[technimac]

Brian,
I'll do that later today. There are several cuts on that DVD where the lead singer's voice seems to be somewhat "recessed". I was kinda wondering too. When I'm finished the listening test, I'll post the results here.

Has anyone noticed that on the "Santana: Supernatural Live" DVD in 5.1, the center channel seems to be almost "non-existent"? I don't know if it's just the DVD I have, or if the engineers/sound mix crew took the week off. Carlos' guitar seems muffled throughout. Nothing sounds "bright" on this DVD!


Brian, those are very nice looking speakers. Great job!
Cheers, Bruce

[Brian Walter]

I should mention that I am listening to the Eagles DVD in stereo mode, no center channel.

Brian

[Jim Holtz]

I listened to my speakers for quite a while on Monday and decided that they sounded very nice on most music, but still a little brighter than I like, but maybe correct, I don't know. My son was over on Monday and listened to them as well and thought pretty much the same as I did.

Yesterday morning I modified the crossover slightly, I replaced the 3 ohm and 10 ohm resistors in the tweeter crossover with a 3.5 and an 8 ohm, respectively and I like the sound much better. I'm not sure how much this affect the response, but I'm thinking it should have dropped the tweeter level about 1.5 db. In the afternoon, I had a family get together and we listened to the modified speakers. My son liked the treble balance better, but my brother, who likes brighter sounding speakers thought they were maybe not quite bright enough, at least not as bright as his. But overall everyone thought they were very good, with one exception.

Let me explain; when playing the Eagles Farewell 1 Tour DVD, on Peaceful Easy Feeling Glen Fry sounds like his mike is turned down too low and his voice also sounds fatigued or crackly. I didn't notice this on my old speakers, but certainly do on these. If any of you have this DVD, could you play it and let me know if it sounds the same on your speakers? When my brother got home, he listened to the same song on his speakers and said that he noticed it some, but it wasn't nearly as severe as on my speakers. What I need to know is if this is correct or not. Overall, I think the Farewell Tour DVD is recorded far better than the Hell Freezes Over CD. I notice some of the same sound on most of Glen Fry's songs, so it could just be the way they record his voice.

I hope to try and get my measurement equipment up and running this evening, but no promises.

Brian Walter


Hi Brian,

I'm going to toss out a few thoughts for what they're worth.

The RS 3-ways are very high resolution. Much more than they have any right to be considering the cost. My money says, you're hearing more of what's on the recording and very possibly you're hearing your electronics. Yes, they are capable of resolving the differences between equipment.

I don't want to sound snobby, but a DVD is not a reference source nor is a DVD player a good reference to use for voicing unless it's a high dollar unit that is known to have very good sound qualities or its been modified to achieve that goal. Sorry, but I've had a lot of equipment in my system over the years that caused exactly the kind of issues your talking about and it's always been DVD players etc. that have been the culprits. I don't know whether you're using separates or a receiver to power the speakers with, but If it's a receiver, it would also be common to have somewhat harsh high frequencies.

A few posts back you remarked how good the test CD sounded. Now the DVD doesn't sound as good. I think it's your recording. BTW, I don't consider the Hell Freezes Over CD to be the ultimate test CD by any means but it isn't bad. Hotel California is the only song on there that I really felt is darn good but I'm not a fan of the Eagles.

I'd suggest that you listen to the speakers through different equipment before making changes. There is a reason some people don't care for low distortion drivers and it's because they suddenly are hearing what is on the CD and what their source equipment really sounds like. The 1st thing to blame are the speakers.

I hope my post doesn't come across wrong because I do intend it to be helpful. I'd suggest that you borrow some different electronics before you go further. Also measure and see what the FR is really doing in your room. Maybe your room is extremely reflective and causing the issue.

Best regards,

Jim