Mission Accomplished designs question...

[Cool Mr Steve]

I've been looking into taking on the challenge of either the Modula MTM 1 design or possibly the Natalie P. Both designs look similar to me, though, and I was curious where the differences were. I noticed quite a large difference in price which looked like it was because of the more expensive crossover components in the Modula MTM. Can anyone tell me what exactly the differences are? I like the price of the Natalie P, but if I could have much higher quality with the more expensive Modula MTM I'd rather go that route. Sorry if I missed something incredibly obvious, and thanks in advance for the replies!

[bmowis]

If you look at the first few posts in each thread, you'll see Jon explains what the differences are.

The crossover, as you've noted, is the biggest difference, and that's where money can be saved going the Nat P route.

The Modulas outperform the Nat Ps. Whether or not the performance justifies the price difference, well, the ball's in your court on that one.

Brad

[dynamowhum]

The cross over is the only difference. As Brad pointed out the MTM does perform better you have to decide if it is worth the difference in price. Many people have built both of these designs and none are disatisfied as far as I have read.

[Cool Mr Steve]

Ok, thanks for the replies! One more question... Someone pointed me toward this design and I like the fact that it is a large enclosure with seemingly higher quality components. Does it matter that the crossover design is so simple? Its a very inexpensive, simple crossover and I'm not sure if that would cause the sound quality to be lower than that of the Modula MTM, despite the quality of the drivers. I'm VERY new at this, so any and all insight is MUCH appreciated!

[ThomasW]

Ok, thanks for the replies! One more question... Someone pointed me toward this design and I like the fact that it is a large enclosure with seemingly higher quality components. Does it matter that the crossover design is so simple? Its a very inexpensive, simple crossover and I'm not sure if that would cause the sound quality to be lower than that of the Modula MTM, despite the quality of the drivers. I'm VERY new at this, so any and all insight is MUCH appreciated!

Our JonMarsh is a considerably more knowledgable and technically advanced designer compared to Wayne J.

I'll just leave it at that because you'd be buried alive in technical info were I to itemize the differences between Wayne's designs and Jon's.

If you want a small sample of Jon's theories regarding loudspeaker design download and read this (note it's 48 megs). It was published in AudioXpress magazine. FYI, Jon's also a twice published member of the AES (Audio Engineering Society) http://www.megafileupload.com/file/8...nMkIV.pdf.html

[cjd]

I can't really speak to Wayne's technical prowess, but the drivers he chooses enable "simpler" crossovers and cater to the "soft smooth audiophile-happiness" crowd in their general sound characteristics. Very much a completely different design philosophy.

Very likely good stuff - better than commercial offerings with similar components I would guess.

I make this comment because I *know* my qualifications are nowhere near Jon's yet I tend toward that same design philosophy, and you could as easily ask the same question re: me and Wayne.

I also know the work here gets very high praise at the DIY events, suggesting that people that don't know the crossover complexity, etc. definitely don't mind the resulting sound.

I will also say, Jon's approach is far simpler than a brief analysis of the response measurements would suggest. He does things many crossover designers don't know how to do without twice the component count or more - which leaves the designs lacking the "way too many crossover components" sound people claim is "high slope" but is probably "still learning about crossover design"

C

[ThomasW]

I can't really speak to Wayne's technical prowess, but the drivers he chooses enable "simpler" crossovers and cater to the "soft smooth audiophile-happiness" crowd in their general sound characteristics.

If one looks at the FR plot/impedance plot for the Vifa PL18, it's pretty easy to see the cone breakup at ~1.2Khz. http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/297-324.pdf

And the SS9500 drops like a stone below 2Khz.

http://www.madisound.com/pdf/scanspeak/d2905_950000e.pdf

So "Houston we have a problem", with the Eros MKII XO design .....:wink:

If one chooses to ignore the negative effects of allowing a driver to operate out of it's it's pistonic region that's fine. But the consequences of doing that are known.

[Cool Mr Steve]

Wow... Ok, so Jon's design wins my vote! I didn't know so much went into it ops: but I'll definitely be trying one of these designs out! Thanks a lot!

[ThomasW]

It's not quite rocket science, but it's a bit more complicated than most people think....:wink:

The first post in each one of Jon/Evil Twin's designs explains the design process for that particular speaker. Fortunately it's not necessary to understand all that's written to build and enjoy the speakers... :T

I'm sure there are those that look at the sticky thread designs and think what's the big deal? Well those designs have been specifically targeted to builders wanting a 'budget' priced, but reasonably high performance speaker. Forth coming will be a no holds barred design that will rival the very best on the planet. And accordingly the price of admission will be $taggering....So as they say, "stay tuned"...... :B

[awm]

Hmm, very intriguing, Thomas. You've certainly piqued my curiosity. Could you at least share whether it's closed boxed vs dipole?

Thanks,
Andy

[ThomasW]

dipole

[awm]

Drivers?

[ThomasW]

There are posts scattered throughout the forum where Jon has posted tests of various of high-end drivers. Find those and you'll have a clue.

More than that I can't say....

[awm]

Thanks, Thomas. And, your response speed practically defies gravity!