My last "Which design?" thread!!!

[peter_m]

Zaph's L18, Zaph's SR71 ( ER18 ) or John Marsh's Modula MT? Which would you pick based on sound only and why?

Let the comments fly!

Peter_M

[cjd]

uh, can you get drivers for all those any more?

[peter_m]

uh, ya!

[joecarrow]

I don't know much about the ER18 yet, but the Modula MT versus L18 seem to come down to woofer vs woofer. Both crossovers look well executed to me, and the tweeters are very similar- or can be the same if you use the H1212 as I did for my Modula MT.

I read this test before I decided what design to build for myself: http://www.markk.claub.net/Testing/W.../L18vRS180.htm

Overall, my interpretation of this data and from other places, was that the RS180 had just a smidge cleaner bass than the L18. However, the midrange on the L18 seems like it would be just a hair better than the RS180. Either of these assumes that you can pull off the metal cone crossover properly. In my opinion, both designers look like they seriously know what they're doing, and have gone to great lengths to execute the crossovers properly and document that they have done so.

It's a personal choice, I say. If you're totally new, it'd be hard to beat the ease of buying an actual kit from Madisound.

[joecarrow]

Having now read Zaph's description of the new ER18 woofer, I find it interesting. The three designed mentioned certainly offer strong competition. The kit with pre-routered enclosures is a huge time saver (some might say it takes all the speaker building out of it), but you can't forget about Parts Express's free holiday shipping on orders over $99. The build quality of their cabinets is superb.

[cjd]

Ahh, for some reason I had a different project of Zaph's in mind when you said ER18.

C

[peter_m]

Well the pre-built cabinet is not an issue for me as I plan to build my own in a floor standing version. I'm interested in audible differences only.

[joecarrow]

I think that the choice between these is more of a choice of what you are personally looking for than anything. There is no "best" among these, just "best for you".

Can you provide any comments about whats important to you? What you enjoy most about the music? If you're expecting huge differences between these or heavily weight some characteristic, we may very well suggest a project that you haven't even listed. Hopefully whatever you say will illuminate for us what it is that you're looking for.

[peter_m]

Well I listen to pretty much any type of music. The one thing I listen to the least is Classical. The things I listen to the most are Classic Rock, Modern Rock and Female Jazz Vocals.

I was hoping never to have to use a sub. Movies are not a priority and will be only occasionally played on them. As I understand it, a 7" is about as large as you can go in a two way so that explains my choice on 7" systems.

[dawg1161]

For what its worth : I listened to the Moduls MT at the Iowa DIY 2007 event and it was awesome. I am now building my own.

[technimac]

I was hoping never to have to use a sub. Movies are not a priority and will be only occasionally played on them. As I understand it, a 7" is about as large as you can go in a two way so that explains my choice on 7" systems.

If you really want to enjoy the music you say you do, a sub will add immensely to your experience.

I have a quad of Modula MT's (Seas1212 version) and love their sound....but there are certain passages of music that, to be "complete", demand the use of a sub to fill-in the bottom end. While the Modula MT's deliver incredible, accurate sound down to the upper 30Hz range, below that you'll need some serious cone displacement to move the amount of air that only a sub can deliver. :B

For instance, on Clapton's One More Car One More Rider DVD (in DTS of course), Nathan East's bass and Steve Gadd's drums, on the River of Tears track, require the use of a sub to "fully experience" this incredible piece of music. 8O

Now, if you haven't heard this with a good sub, then you won't know what you're missing - but once you do, there'll be no turning back. :W

One possibility to consider would be John Krutke’s Dayton RSS315HF sealed sub, or another could be bass-bins below each speaker doing double duty acting as stands. :T

[Jed]

I'd go with the ER18 design because these are great woofers and easy to listen to rock music. Some designs can often get harsh with a woofer that has higher 3rd order distortion.

[Ray Collins]

Hope I am not infringing or highjacking but I am considering the same three designs for my HT. It is a 12'x13' room and I have two 15" Rythmic subs ready to go. In fact I just received a call to pick-up my new Panasonic 50" TV. I will also be purchasing a new AVR or Pre/Pro and amp.

Ray

[peter_m]

Ray Collins,
If I could expel you from this thread simply because you have more money to spend then I do.... :M Just kidding :

[peter_m]

I have a quad of Modula MT's (Seas1212 version) and love their sound....but there are certain passages of music that, to be "complete", demand the use of a sub to fill-in the bottom end.

Technimac,

Did you build the Modulas sealed? How do you find the H1212 tweeters? Did you do a listening test between the H1212 nd the TDFC?

Peter

[peter_m]

I'd go with the ER18 design because these are great woofers and easy to listen to rock music. Some designs can often get harsh with a woofer that has higher 3rd order distortion.

Jed,
do you say this based en hearing the ER18, L18 or RS180? Please feel free to be long winded!

[peter_m]

For what its worth : I listened to the Modula MT at the Iowa DIY 2007 event and it was awesome. I am now building my own.

Was there an L18 system? Did you have the chance to listen between the TDFC and TBFCG tweeters of the Modula?

Peter

[technimac]

Technimac,
Did you build the Modulas sealed? How do you find the H1212 tweeters? Did you do a listening test between the H1212 and the TDFC?
Peter

I built them vented and chose the TBFC/G over the TDFC after lotsa angst and research. I've never heard the TDFC, but I've read that the TDFC is accurate like a metal dome and the TBFC/G is smooth like a fabric dome. 8O

Basically what I love about them is their incredible accuracy. :T
Good examples of how well they perform can be found on piano and female vocals (Sarah McLachlan Answer & Diana Krall Live in Paris DVD; horns (Van Morrison on sax Spanish Steps); guitar (Uhh... I guess my Clapton worship is showing) or Friday Night in San Francisco with Paco DeLucia, Al DiMeola and John McLaughlin.

I've wondered sometimes how the TDFC sounds, but I'm perfectly happy with the TBFC/G. It is 1dB more sensitive than the TDFC, but a simple L-pad adjustment could be done to fix that.

Gotta thank Jon for doing a stellar job in this design. ;x(

HTH, Bruce

[Jed]

Jed,
do you say this based en hearing the ER18, L18 or RS180? Please feel free to be long winded!

yeah, I did a system with the ER18 and I was really impressed with this woofer. It has nice bass extention and some really low distortion in the midrange. I found it very enjoyable on a wide variety of music as opposed to some other designs. I can't say that I've heard the L18, but have heard the L12, and RS225 in a variety of designs. ER18 has a very natural timbre. Besides, I tend to go for more "advanced" motor designs, so the ER18 edges out the L18 for that reason.

[Jim Holtz]

Was there an L18 system? Did you have the chance to listen between the TDFC and TBFCG tweeters of the Modula?

Peter

Hi Peter,

I've built speakers with the TBFC/G and TDFC. Both are excellent tweeters. The differences are, the TDFC has a little more air and the TBFC/G has more body to the sound. I hope the audiophile terms convey what I'm trying to describe.

You can't go wrong with either tweeter, however I tend to prefer the TBFC/G slightly.

HTH

Jim

[peter_m]

....I've read that the TDFC is accurate like a metal dome and the TBFC/G is smooth like a fabric dome. 8O

Basically what I love about them is their incredible accuracy. :T
Good examples of how well they perform can be found on piano and female vocals (Sarah McLachlan Answer & Diana Krall Live in Paris DVD; horns (Van Morrison on sax Spanish Steps); guitar (Uhh... I guess my Clapton worship is showing) ...

Man oh man oh man, you got me almost convinced just with you musical selection... You my friend have taste! But I just have to wonder how a reed/aluminum & fabric/metal sounds... Craps I am getting more confused buy the minute!

...heard the L12, and RS225 in a variety of designs...

Did you hear the RS28/RS225 two-way by any chance and how did you find it?

Peter "confused" M

[peter_m]

Hi Peter,

I've built speakers with the TBFC/G and TDFC. Both are excellent tweeters. The differences are, the TDFC has a little more air and the TBFC/G has more body to the sound. I hope the audiophile terms convey what I'm trying to describe.

You can't go wrong with either tweeter, however I tend to prefer the TBFC/G slightly.

HTH

Jim

LOL, to answer it in one word.. NO. What do you mean by air vs body? Which do you think would go well with the ER18 and which woud you choose with the RS-180?

[Jim Holtz]

LOL, to answer it in one word.. NO. What do you mean by air vs body? Which do you think would go well with the ER18 and which woud you choose with the RS-180?

You're being hard on me. Let me see if I can put this in "normal" language.

Air= a lighter more delicate sound but it still has a sparkle to it.

Body= A fuller sound that is a little more 3 dimensional but it still has sparkle on the top end.

These are fairly subtle differences. Both tweeters will work equally well with either the ER which I haven't heard and the RS180 which I've used numerous times. Both are excellent tweeters.

Jim

[Jed]

I've designed my own speakers using the RS225 with an ESS AMT1. I find the RS drivers to suite my tastes a bit less than the ER18 in the mids. A bit lifeless. I hate to generalize though- as I haven't heard every different crossover available to tame these drivers. Jon and Mark use a lot of tricks to get these drivers sounding very good.

My own design using the ER18 was a 3way with RS52 and Visaton MHT12. I recently tore it apart and sold the drivers to make way for the Lineup Series.

A change in drivers doesn't mean that I didn't like them. I'm just always trying new stuff and I don't have the luxury to keep all the drivers I try.

The ER18 is really nice and my L16s are nice too. Maybe I should try a little MTM with them and the 27tdc/g or that new waveguide tweeter that's coming out. Wish it would come out soon.

[cjd]

How's this. The TBFC rolls off a little and then has a nice tall peak. It's a metal dome which brings the lack of self-damping to the table. The droop in response probably accounts for the lack of sparkle, as well as the material's lack of self-damping. The mild droop also likely brings slight emphasis to the lower frequencies which might give it more body.

The TDFC has a mild rising response where the TBFC has a mild droop. It has no harsh breakup, and the softer cone self-damps I suppose. This adds a little pleasant distortion and a little extra up top, both of which I think contribute to the "air" Jim refers to.

Both are superb. The TBFC breakup (I assume it's that) hits me in a bad spot and I prefer the TDFC slightly.

The music described is relatively easy to do well (all things considered) - very little non-massaged sound and less dynamic range, far less as far as technically difficult layering of sound. Any of these designs should do well, though I think I would give the nod to the two I've not heard: ER18 or RS180 designs. But, for this type of music I'd probably go with the TDFC.

Also, I believe the RS drivers may be sensitive to stuffing more than we might be used, particularly in their midrange. And to box size (they do tend to like it big!) But, the implementation of the RS180 I have is a little less full and forward than the RS150 design I have, so I think I'll be revisiting stuffing (that probably translates to "less life")

C

[Maximiliano]

Peter, you cannot choose between these two tweeters by taking others' subjective listening impressions. They are equally good tweeters---very low distortions. They share exactly the same motor---only the dome materials are different. Though the 27TBFC/G has a little bit lower measured distortions, I don't think their differences are very much audible. Their top end response difference should also be minor---human ear is not very sensitive beyond 13-15 kHz. So, the tweeter difference should be a very minor consideration in your choice of the designs, IMO.

Keep in mind that the driver choice of each design is not the only thing you need to consider. A more important thing is how it is used in the design. Zaph used more than 6 dB baffle step compensation for the SR71 design---see its frequency response between 100 Hz and 1kHz (http://www.zaphaudio.com/SR71-modeled-FR-IMP.gif). If you build this in a floor stander, it will have a less baffle step loss, resulting in too warm or heavy tonal balance. If you can adjust BSC by using a lower value inductor in the woofer network and adjust the tweeter level accordingly, you may want to try. If you don't want to bother, I'd choose the Modula MT which seems to have 4 to 5 dB BSC.

Max

Edit by moderator to add
The person posting as Maximiliano is Woe Jay Kim

[peter_m]

...Zaph used more than 6 dB baffle step compensation for the SR71 design---see its frequency response between 100 Hz and 1kHz (http://www.zaphaudio.com/SR71-modeled-FR-IMP.gif). If you build this in a floor stander, it will have a less baffle step loss, resulting in too warm or heavy tonal balance. If you can adjust BSC by using a lower value inductor in the woofer network and adjust the tweeter level accordingly, you may want to try. If you don't want to bother, I'd choose the Modula MT which seems to have 4 to 5 dB BSC... Max

Interesting point you raise Max. Here Zaph gives an option with a reduced baffle step: http://zaphaudio.com/SR71-options-reducedBSC.gif How many db of BSC does this bring?

I am definitely leaning away from the L18 all together. It's x-over at 2khz seams too high when I look at the Modula's 1800hz and the ER18 (SR-71) 1750hz. Specially when I consider that the L18 is a driver that misbehaves a little more then the other two. As for a tweeter, I think I will stick to the 27TDFC simply because it is simpler for me and the original designs call for it. If I feel like fooling around with it later, I will experiment with the TBFCG.

Now the question remains... ER18 with a reduced baffle step or the Modula MT?

[joecarrow]

Building a floorstander without a sub, I'd say that the original Modula MTM (which has a less compromising crossover) and Natalie Portman (similar crossover design to the Modula MT) both deserve consideration. They cost more, but they'll play louder- and the Modula MTM takes better care of the drivers.

[peter_m]

Building a floorstander without a sub, I'd say that the original Modula MTM (which has a less compromising crossover) and Natalie Portman (similar crossover design to the Modula MT) both deserve consideration. They cost more, but they'll play louder- and the Modula MTM takes better care of the drivers.

Ok so I could play them louder and will a little more LF out of them. But what kind of amp would drive a 4ohm load? Will I need to look at exotic amps? Maybe MTMs are much more expensive because of the extra drivers, more complex x-over AND the new amp required.... 8O

[joecarrow]

Yes, it will cost more. Any "good" amp should handle the 4 ohm load well. Not talking about exotic, just one that lists its wattage at 8 and 4 ohms, and comes close to doubling in wattage at 4 ohms. The Behringer A500 is one such amp for $200:

http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=248-749

The Modula MTM is definitely more expensive, but it uses a $50 tweeter, and uses a more advanced approach at the crossover. The lowpass cutoff for the woofer is lower and steeper, cutting out the metal cone breakup even more agressively. The tweeter highpass is also steeper initially, though it does rely on the RS28a's exceptional low-frequency capabilities to pull it off.

A three-way is definitely a bigger price jump than from a 2-way MT to 2-way MTM. Anyway, if budget is a big concern, then Modula MT all the way! I built a pair, and I'm quite satisfied. I've listened critically to a few commercial speakers in shops that were set up fairly well, and I'm satisfied that I more than got my money's worth from building these.

There's also the issue of your room setup. If you can't set your speakers in a decent location, listen from the sweet spot, and have peace and quiet when you turn the thing off (no road noise, etc), then there's only so much you can do with speakers before you stop getting a good return on your investment.

Anyway, I hope this has been helpful. It's always interesting getting into it in the beginning. There's a lot of stuff out there to read and think about.

[jkrutke]

Zaph used more than 6 dB baffle step compensation for the SR71 design

I saw Jay Kim say that over on the PE forum, then post a web page pointing out what he thought were flaws in the design, and went ahead recommending his own design without even having built or listened to it. Good thing I'm pretty much insensitive to what anyone says.

It's not more than 6, it's pretty much 6 exactly when you look at off axis and power response. The amount of BSC in that design was chosen by ear. Tonal balance is difficult to get right. There are a lot of factors that affect it, and it's a bad idea to throw around generalizations. I do listen to designs to test them. I went through about 8 different crossovers for that system over a 2 month period. One of those was Jay Kim's non-built and non-listened to design. When I first fired that one up, I couldn't help but think "where is the bass?" That lower amount of BSC seemed to bring out a bit of forwardness in female vocals. Not much at all, and it did sound good, but I came away from it convinced I could do better with the tonal balance.

I guess my point is don't get hung up on numbers too much. (yes, Mr. Objective just said that) They are important but it's no simple matter to interpret them. I'm listening to my ER18 system in my 11 square foot home office right now, and it doesn't sound excessively heavy or warm. (with the door open - it helps smooth out the primary node) That considered, I was happy that they didn't sound too lean when I put them in my large HT room with 13 ft cathedral ceiling.

John

[Jed]

I saw Jay Kim say that over on the PE forum, then post a web page pointing out what he thought were flaws in the design, and went ahead recommending his own design without even having built or listened to it. Good thing I'm pretty much insensitive to what anyone says.

John

Not only that it looks like he takes your measurements (traces your measurements) to develop "his" speaker design using only simulation and no system measurements of his own to verify sensitivites are correct, off axis response, system FR, impedance, tonal balance, etc. etc. etc.

IMO simulations are only a very small fraction of the total design package and suggesting someone build an untested, unmeasured, not listened to design over a design that was fully developed seems like the wrong suggestion to me. I can see helping someone make changes to a crossover after one listens to it, but that's something very different.

Jed

[ThomasW]

Mr Vaporware claims to have replicated (reverse engineered) the Modula MT, and has 'his' version. Problem being Passive Crossover Designer can not model the hybrid series design used the Modula MT. So any comparisons he makes are apples to oranges...

He is good though, his "Designing Crossovers with Software Only" is the best 'strawman' arguement I've read since the so called LLT 'whitepaper' was posted.

[cjd]

I almost always "sketch" using the sim-only mode, but that's just to get a vague idea of where things are heading, what kind of series impedance will be added to the system (necessary for proper box tuning), and the like. I've gotten pretty good with this method but have never found the results as good as what's resulted from live data. And the only reason I've gotten pretty good is I'm able to compare live data with the sim and find out where my assumptions were wrong, correcting those for the next attempt.

C

[peter_m]

... It's (BSC) not more than 6, it's pretty much 6 exactly when you look at off axis and power response.

John, the reduced BSC version, how many db is it? Is it more suitable for a Floor-stander? What volume/freq would you pick for a floor stander since you would not be limited to the Madisound 14L enclosure?


Peter

[peter_m]

Thank you all for your input. I'm going for the Zaph ER18 (SR-71) based on your comments and the following.

A newer driver (ER18) that behaves very well, my prejudice against metal tweeters combined with my ears being easily annoyed by high frequencies... and my love and respect for my dog's well being. The ultrasonic breakup of the TBFCG could be painful for him :lol:

But seriously, I also prefer to not give my money to a shipping company as I can drive to Solen and pickup anything I need.

Thank you again all. I feel confident in my decision.

Peter

[Jim Holtz]

LOL, to answer it in one word.. NO. What do you mean by air vs body? Which do you think would go well with the ER18 and which woud you choose with the RS-180?

Hi Peter,

I stumbled across this link in a different thread that is a glossary of audiophile terms. You'll never wonder again.

http://www.stereophile.com/reference/50/

Jim