Help Choosing MTM designs.

[spentit]

I have been reading this forum for the past 3 months, (much to the displeasure of my better half), trying to decide on a the best value/dollar MTM design for my home theater/music room (50/50), it's about 300sq/ft.

I have already built the subs, two SD12's in custom enclosures, tuned to around 20hz, built into my TV stand. See pictures.

Now I want to built L/C/R and surrounds. Would like to keep costs<$1000 for components, as I am a descent woodworker and have all the tools to build cabinets.

I was ready to purchase the materials for Chris's (CJD) MTM RS150's, but was concerned that they may not play loud enough for HT. I do like the size of the enclosures, the design and price.

I have also been looking at designs using the CSS WR125 woofers. www.occamaudio.com has several kits available which seem like good value considering the cost of drivers alone. I am worried about the quality of XO, as it is impossible to make out the XO design from their website here ttp://www.occamaudio.com/free.html so I sent them an email asking about BSC, variation in XO for horizontal CC, etc. the response I received from Jeff Keyes was

"Baffle step is completely removed in the crossover design. The
response listed above is actual, and done in the actual box the speakers are
in. The impedance here is without the aperiodic vent. The aperiodic vent
drops the fs peak to around 16ohms. The MTM center is the same as the MTM except the box is designed to not stand up like a book shelf. As far as
horizontal placement is concerned, all we have done is to use a steep order
crossover to help limit the dip created at the crossover point caused from
lobing. The lobing pattern for both the center and the bookshelf versions
are identical."

Unfortunately my lack of knowledge leaves me scratching my head, as I thought all XO designs incorporated some BSC.

I would really appreciate it if someone more knowledgeable than me could give their opinion on the WR125 kits vs. Chris RS150MTM, or perhaps offer another design for my consideration, the only real issue is the cabinet depth, would like to keep it as shallow as possible due to the poor placement options for my Front Left speaker. See picture.

Thanks so much.

Spencer

[cjd]

There's no way you can take an MTM, put it on its side, and say "the lobing pattern is identical"...

What're you calling "loud"? If the RS150 doesn't get loud enough, the WR125 definitely will have some issues. Sealed they'll handle a bit more, but you'll be needing to cross pretty low with down-firing subs.

Next step up in size is going to be the Natalie P - its power handling is more likely tweeter limited rather than mid-woofer, since the RS180 has twice the excursion plus more Sd.

I'm doing 3-way in-walls with 2 RS180's, 1 RS150, and the Seas tweeter. And a center for Ryan with the same driver set. The goal was more power handling and the ability to cross lower than the pure RS150 based designs offer.

No answers for you yet, but we'll get there.

C

[---k---]

As long as you're not going for rock concert levels and pants flapping bass, I bet CJD's MTMs will be plenty loud for you. There not going to be house party speakers, but I think in the typical living space, they'll be more than adequate. Look at how many people are using much smaller speakers and are happy.

Like CJD said, if his RS150 MTM won't do it for you, then the kit wouldn't.

Thomas, I thought, bought one of those kits. Maybe he can comment on the quality. But, remember that you have to pay to have them cut the baffle and put all the parts in a boxed kit. If apples = apples, the a kit will always be more expensive. That isn't to say a bad thing. If you don't want to cut the baffles, then maybe the kit is the better deal.

We can give other project suggestions, but the designs around here just keep getting more expensive. Jed's Lineup D44 is a smaller MTM that may help you meet your size goals, but only has 2-4" drivers so I would expect it to play a little less loud than CJD's. NatP's are a bigger design and will play louder, but are bigger and will want to be out in the room some. Stepping up to 3-ways, it starts to get expensive at ~$500, but maybe the original RS TMWW would work for you. But really, I think you'll be happy with the output of CJD's MTMs.

[spentit]

Thanks for the quick response Chris, I would like to reach 105db, although I won't be listening at that level much, I do like to become submerged in movies. The fireplace I just finished putting in has central heating blower that draws the air off the fireplace and distributes it through the central heating ducts. The fan isn't loud (it's well insulated from the rest of the room), but the 650cfm of air drawing past the stove into an 8" duct does cause a bit of noise.

Maybe it is too much to expect from a 1 cu/ft MTM. I was trying to come up with something that would cross over to the subs around 60hz, does that sound reasonable? Would like to build system with matching speakers, I can't build matching floor standers because of the front left speaker placement. I also built the TV stand 32" high, with the idea that an MTM hight between 18-22" high would put the tweeters at the approx. ear level while sitting on our couches.

I have read so much and don't remember where, but I think your RS150's played up to mid 90's was that right? Maybe I should just build them and see how I like them, only problem is I have the wife's blessing to build the speakers, wanting to build another set in 6 months will be a tough sell, she'll ask why I didn't build the right ones first!! Arghh.

I'll guess I will wait and see if someone can come up with a suggestion.

Do you think the SDX7 (Extremis Replacement) would offer anything over the RS180's regarding output.

[cjd]

I would like to reach 105db

cross over to the subs around 60hz

105dB is fine with the RS150 sealed, crossed at 100Hz. Actually, even ported I think they're ok crossing at 100Hz. I have that currently in my HT. I *can* still bottom out the 150's, haven't paid attention to SPL. Feeding them low frequency content ported they'l bottom out mid-90's SPL-wise.

60Hz = 8" sealed for best results, IMHO. I'll be experimenting with the dual 180's sealed at 60Hz. Some days I realize I probably should have gone with a TMW, single RS225 instead of 2 180's. Mark K did a very nice 2-way with the RS225, not sure where the tweeter maxes out SPL-wise.

My thoughts: Natalie P for mains, my MTM for center. If your receiver supports different crossover frequencies, cross the center a little higher than the mains: 80Hz to start.

C

[spentit]

Chris,

Instead of focusing on MTM would I get better results from a higher end MT, such as John's new ZA-SR71, ZD5 or Seas L18. I could buy the components for two pairs of any of them for less than 1k. I would be stuck on a CC, as I haven't had much luck searching for anything with those drivers.

[Brian Bunge]

A standard TM will provide you less SPL capabilities than Chris' MTM. If you just wanted a standard TM what you could do is build the Modula TM's which use the 7" RS180 woofer and still use Chris' RS150 based MTM for a center. It may not be a perfect match, but would probably be pretty close.

[spentit]

Thanks for all the feedback, I was wondering why there aren't many 2.5 or 3-Way mini tower designs? The only one I can find is the Lyra at

http://www.speakerbuilder.net/web_files/Projects/Lyra/lyramain.htm

Would such a design not allow for an easier transition to the large subs that people seem to be building for HT. I don't claim to understand speaker design, but logically I thought there would be something with an 8" running 60-400hz, 5.5" 400-2k and a tweeter for the rest, all in a MTM sized enclosure.

Is there some way the Dayton RS TMWW could be modified to a TMW with a cabinet size of around 24" high, 10.75" wide and 12" deep? I know it is an odd size, but it would allow me to place it correctly in that front left position. I could then build the WMTW CC to match.

Sorry for my ignorance, I have surgery on my hand next week, I think I will spend my down time reading as much as I can and maybe try designing something myself. That is unless I am missing something about the 2.5 and 3 way designs.

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks for all the feedback, I was wondering why there aren't many 2.5 or 3-Way mini tower designs? The only one I can find is the Lyra at

http://www.speakerbuilder.net/web_files/Projects/Lyra/lyramain.htm

Would such a design not allow for an easier transition to the large subs that people seem to be building for HT. I don't claim to understand speaker design, but logically I thought there would be something with an 8" running 60-400hz, 5.5" 400-2k and a tweeter for the rest, all in a MTM sized enclosure.

Is there some way the Dayton RS TMWW could be modified to a TMW with a cabinet size of around 24" high, 10.75" wide and 12" deep? I know it is an odd size, but it would allow me to place it correctly in that front left position. I could then build the WMTW CC to match.

Sorry for my ignorance, I have surgery on my hand next week, I think I will spend my down time reading as much as I can and maybe try designing something myself. That is unless I am missing something about the 2.5 and 3 way designs.

Spendit,

The Lyra is a very old design that is pretty crappy by today's standards. Selah Audio and I teamed up at the time and came up with a better, more cost effective design called the JH3 which is posted at audioDIYcentral.com but it too has been far surpassed with the RS driver designs now available.

Jon's Modula M/T's combined with CJD's MTM as a center works quite well. I built these for one of my sons. This is a far better choice than the Lyras or JH3 in my opinion.

However, there is in fact a TMW version of Dennis Murphy's RS 3-way design. It's buried somewhere in the thread I think but I'll attach the cabinet drawing and crossover here. I don't think a BOM was ever created for it. It was posted by Dwaro I believe. These could be used with the very large W-T/M-W center, CJD's MTM, Jon's Modula MTM center or the latest W-M/T-W Neo speaker. The large W-T/M-W would be the best match of drivers and voicing. I find voicing to be a more critical factor for matching a center than an exact driver compliment. YMMV...

This will be a very nice speaker but not a very sensitive one so it will take a few watts to power them.

HTH

Jim

[spentit]

Jim,

Thanks so much!! Wow, exactly what I was looking for. Sealed, can cross @ 60 or even 50hz with my subs, not too big and lots of options for center.

Power may be low with my Onkyo 605, but I will hopefully be able to upgrade to a separate amp(s) soon. Do you know what the impedance is roughly? The 605 will drive 4ohms, so the spec says.

Thanks again,

Spencer

[Jim Holtz]

Jim,

Thanks so much!! Wow, exactly what I was looking for. Sealed, can cross @ 60 or even 50hz with my subs, not too big and lots of options for center.

Power may be low with my Onkyo 605, but I will hopefully be able to upgrade to a separate amp(s) soon. Do you know what the impedance is roughly? The 605 will drive 4ohms, so the spec says.

Thanks again,

Spencer

Hi Spentit,

I don't have any idea what the impedance is but I'd guess that it is well above 4 ohms on average so it shouldn't be a problem powering it with the 605.

Check out Emotiva when you get ready to upgrade. It'll be a substantial step up in sound quality, IMHO.

Good luck! We do require pictures of projects.

Jim

[cjd]

Significant step up over the Onkyo?

Which Emotiva have you been listening to?

C

[Jim Holtz]

Significant step up over the Onkyo?

Which Emotiva have you been listening to?

C

Hi Chris,

Actually, my Onkyo isn't representative of the current offerings since it's 10 years old and I've had separates for many of those years. It's been in my daughters bedroom since then. It is a decent receiver but certainly not separate sound quality, IMHO. My son has a 705 and wishes he'd bought Emotiva after hearing my setup.

If you go to the Emotiva forum you'll find many, many posts by people who have switched from receivers to separates and proclaim the sound quality difference. Sefferdog (Wade) who posts here and has built all of the Statements series, went from a receiver to Emotiva separates and said the same thing.

Emotiva electronics are over achievers that rival the mega buck separates sound quality. They are very, very nice! :T

Check them out!

Jim

[JonP]

Just to add another thing to the fray...

Zaph's just published his floorstanding RS TMWW 3.5 way that he's been holding on to for a while. About 9" wide, 12.5" deep, 42" or so tall...

[cjd]

Thanks Jim. I was genuinely curious. I've heard Emotiva but with a bunch of other stuff in the mix too and I was incredibly underwhelmed with the sound. Just flat, no low level detail, and mushed complex passages. Behringer's crossovers in the mix. High end drivers.

I just snagged a 705 (and got an 8222 free?!) but am pondering a 3 channel amp up behind my front wall and long IC runs vs long speaker cable runs. Wish the 705 output balanced signal, but... Get what you're willing to pay for. Amp sounds good though, and is rock solid on lower impedances (even that free 2 channel has a 4ohm mode!)

[Jim Holtz]

Thanks Jim. I was genuinely curious. I've heard Emotiva but with a bunch of other stuff in the mix too and I was incredibly underwhelmed with the sound. Just flat, no low level detail, and mushed complex passages. Behringer's crossovers in the mix. High end drivers.

I just snagged a 705 (and got an 8222 free?!) but am pondering a 3 channel amp up behind my front wall and long IC runs vs long speaker cable runs. Wish the 705 output balanced signal, but... Get what you're willing to pay for. Amp sounds good though, and is rock solid on lower impedances (even that free 2 channel has a 4ohm mode!)

Hi Chris,

I wasn't sure whether you were baiting me or not. I remember some conversation about the Emotiva amp at a show (?) in Chicago and it wasn't well received. Honestly, I can only vouch for the LPA-1 which is a class A/B design rather than the class H used in many of their other amps. My LPA-1 is extremely neutral with a hint of warmth to the sound which sounds a heck of a lot like my friend $5K Plinius full class A amp. The LPA-1 is very, very clean and detailed. It has exceptional clarity. I really couldn't be happier.

That said, they have a model coming out called the XPA-5 that is a 5 channel 200 watt per channel amp priced at $699 with the same topology only on steroids. I don't need the extra power but you can never have too much. :T

They have a 30 day no questions, money back guarantee. Hard to beat that.

Jim

[peter_m]

I've been eyeing the LPA-1 since the end of December. I know this is not very scientific, but there is something about the 63 pounds of weight behind the LPA-1 that just impresses me 8O

Peter

[Jim Holtz]

They are extremely well built. :T

Jim

[---k---]

That said, they have a model coming out called the XPA-5 that is a 5 channel 200 watt per channel amp priced at $699 with the same topology only on steroids. I don't need the extra power but you can never have too much. :T

Jim

The XPA-5 looks like a great deal. I've been eying amps lately (ever since CJD said he heard an issue with mine that I haven't heard yet ), and I would be all over the XPA-5 if it were balanced. I've promised myself that the next amp I get is going to be fully balanced. I was really getting annoyed that it seems like there are very few (reasonably priced, great bang for the buck) 5-channel solutions on the market - everything has gone to 7-channel.

[Jim Holtz]

Ryan,

The XPA-5 does have balanced outputs.

Jim

[---k---]

uuuuh-ooooh.

I was about to purchase an Outlaw RR2150 Stereo Receiver for my office. I may have to delay that purchase...... Dang you Emotiva!

[CupCak3]

The XPA-5 looks like a great deal. I've been eying amps lately (ever since CJD said he heard an issue with mine that I haven't heard yet ), and I would be all over the XPA-5 if it were balanced. I've promised myself that the next amp I get is going to be fully balanced. I was really getting annoyed that it seems like there are very few (reasonably priced, great bang for the buck) 5-channel solutions on the market - everything has gone to 7-channel.

I am in a similar situation. I only need 5.1 and do not want to pay for the extra channels of 7.1 which I will never use do to my listening room size.

Emotiva has now raised the price of the XPA-5 to $799 which does not include shipping. I'm currently trying to decide b/t the LPA-1 and XPA-5, but due the price increase and the current sales, I'll probably go w/ the LPA-1 unless I decide to go w/ a turd reciever (cheap-o onkyo or similar) which I"ll move to the bedroom or office when there is a good sale on the XPA-5 and LCM-2

[spentit]

Seeing as my thread has changed topics somewhat, I might as well jump in.

I too would like to go with separates but unfortunately I cannot find a processor that supports the same feature set as the Onkyo 605, 705, 805 etc. for any money less than 1k, so logically you buy a receiver such as the 605 for $400 (best bang for buck available IMHO) until the emotives and outlaws develop a processor that can provide support for the newer formats, decode PCM over HDMI, provide several HDMI 1.3 inputs and at least two outputs, support satellite radio, provide full OSD, etc.

If anyone knows of a company that offers such a pre/processor without having to re-mortgage my house, please let me know as I would much prefer to go with separates.

[CupCak3]

spentit: The LMC-2 from Emotiva will have all the features you want. I believe the 605 only has two HDMI inputs while I *think* the LMC-2 will have at least 3. This will not be available until around spring. A combo LMC-2 with an LPA-1 should be around $1k or less.

Accessories4less has refurbed 605s on sale for $350. I've got my eye on one right now and maybe take the upgrade path in my previous post in a year or so when they have a good special, especially since eventually I'll need another receiver anyways...

[cjd]

Keep your eye on shoponkyo.com for a refurb 705. Got mine for $460 to my door, and happened to hit a promotion that also delivered a 2-ch 8222 at no additional cost. The 705 is more stable with low impedances, has more EQ channels on the Audessey, and better support for various encodings.

Just add power amp in the future. Sounds very good as it is.

[cjd]

Ryan,

The XPA-5 does have balanced outputs.

Jim

Amp or receiver?

Amp would need balanced inputs...

Does anyone make a 3 channel amp? I'd love to see a pre-pro with balanced outputs and a 3ch/4ch amp setup. I'm probably the oddball wanting amps near the speakers, not in some rack. :P

[Jim Holtz]

Amp or receiver?

Amp would need balanced inputs...

Does anyone make a 3 channel amp? I'd love to see a pre-pro with balanced outputs and a 3ch/4ch amp setup. I'm probably the oddball wanting amps near the speakers, not in some rack. :P

Chris,

You are correct. It is an amp and the balanced are in fact inputs. ops: Honestly, I've never understood the need or desire for balanced in/out puts unless you're into pro audio and have 100' cable runs. A 3'-6' interconnect works quite well in audiophile systems, IMHO. I'd rather focus on having a very high quality connection through the electronics and on to the speakers.

I know a lot of folks think balanced makes a difference in a home system, just not me.

Jim

[spentit]

[QUOTE=CupCak3]spentit: The LMC-2 from Emotiva will have all the features you want. I believe the 605 only has two HDMI inputs while I *think* the LMC-2 will have at least 3. This will not be available until around spring. A combo LMC-2 with an LPA-1 should be around $1k or less.

Where can i find info. on the LMC-2? Nothing on Emotiva's website (that I could find).

[cjd]

Chris,

You are correct. It is an amp and the balanced are in fact inputs. ops: Honestly, I've never understood the need or desire for balanced in/out puts unless you're into pro audio and have 100' cable runs. A 3'-6' interconnect works quite well in audiophile systems, IMHO. I'd rather focus on having a very high quality connection through the electronics and on to the speakers.

I know a lot of folks think balanced makes a difference in a home system, just not me.

Jim

I have 25 foot runs from pre to amp in my main rig. I'd like to do the same in my HT (though my receiver doesn't support balanced of course, so that's currently a moot point there). Short speaker wires, long balanced IC runs.

C

[Jim Holtz]

I have 25 foot runs from pre to amp in my main rig. I'd like to do the same in my HT (though my receiver doesn't support balanced of course, so that's currently a moot point there). Short speaker wires, long balanced IC runs.

C

Chris,

You just qualified. You are a balanced kind of guy.

Jim

[DeanP]

Where can i find info. on the LMC-2?

Info here: Emotiva Forum

And here: Same Forum

[harrison.kroeker]

hmm, not sure if you've reached a conclusion, of if i've skipped over something in one of the posts.

i live about 20min away from css, and 15min away from the person who designed the crossovers for the kits used with the wr125 speakers. not sure if it's the same kits sold by your vendor, but they look very similar.

anyhow, the guy who designed the crossovers for the el3 (2x ws125s, 1x hi-vi ss1 II) kits sold by css has offered to work with me to build an appropriate crossover to use as a horizontal center.

i'm not sure if this plays into your decision process at all, but figured i'd let you know.

[CupCak3]

[QUOTE=spentit]

spentit: The LMC-2 from Emotiva will have all the features you want. I believe the 605 only has two HDMI inputs while I *think* the LMC-2 will have at least 3. This will not be available until around spring. A combo LMC-2 with an LPA-1 should be around $1k or less.

Where can i find info. on the LMC-2? Nothing on Emotiva's website (that I could find).

All the information you'll find about the new products is in the forums. Here's the main thread about the LMC-2. You can search around for more info.

http://emotivalounge.proboards54.com/index.cgi?board=preamps&action=display&thread=1200092323

[spentit]

hmm, not sure if you've reached a conclusion, of if i've skipped over something in one of the posts.

i live about 20min away from css, and 15min away from the person who designed the crossovers for the kits used with the wr125 speakers. not sure if it's the same kits sold by your vendor, but they look very similar.

anyhow, the guy who designed the crossovers for the el3 (2x ws125s, 1x hi-vi ss1 II) kits sold by css has offered to work with me to build an appropriate crossover to use as a horizontal center.

i'm not sure if this plays into your decision process at all, but figured i'd let you know.

Thanks for the heads up harrison, I am about 85% sure that I will start building Dennis Murphy's TMW RS-3 Way as per post #9. I have a better feeling about the XO designed by Dennis, it also gives me a chance to make a center with similar drivers and hopefully voicing with a XO specifically designed for horizontal placement. Jim pretty much hit the nail on the head, finding a design that satisfies my wants/needs.

Hopefully I don't find any other options while I am off recovering from surgery as I could search for the perfect speaker forever while listening to nothing.

[69Stingray]

Has anyone heard these?



I assume that tweeter is D26NC55, which be a great match with the CSS 4.5" I would think.

This was actually in my "project to do list", which gets longer not shorter.

Sorry for the hijack.

[spentit]

Has anyone heard these?



I assume that tweeter is D26NC55, which be a great match with the CSS 4.5" I would think.

This was actually in my "project to do list", which gets longer not shorter.

Sorry for the hijack.

Those are the speaker kits from www.occamaudio.com. If you go to the "part" tab they list the drivers used in each kit. I'm not sure about the crossover design for them, but if your able to design your own or tweak what they provide in the kits you may end up with good results. The new SDX7 is available in the same configuration, but at $100 each they are pricey drivers (maybe not compared to performance) and add up fast when building matched MTM's for HT use. I actually think the prices for the kits with routed front baffle are a bargain when you look at the cost of the individual drivers on Creative Sound Solutions website.

[dawaro]

Thanks for the heads up harrison, I am about 85% sure that I will start building Dennis Murphy's TMW RS-3 Way as per post #9. I have a better feeling about the XO designed by Dennis, it also gives me a chance to make a center with similar drivers and hopefully voicing with a XO specifically designed for horizontal placement. Jim pretty much hit the nail on the head, finding a design that satisfies my wants/needs.

Hopefully I don't find any other options while I am off recovering from surgery as I could search for the perfect speaker forever while listening to nothing.

Being that I was actually the one that got Dennis to do this design I am not looking to talk you out of the design but thought I would mention the new Zaph Design. It might be worth looking at since there are both main and center configurations for it. The cost of the two project is going to be very comparable. The added bonus is the smaller footprint for Zaph's center. Just a thought.

[spentit]

Being that I was actually the one that got Dennis to do this design I am not looking to talk you out of the design but thought I would mention the new Zaph Design. It might be worth looking at since there are both main and center configurations for it. The cost of the two project is going to be very comparable. The added bonus is the smaller footprint for Zaph's center. Just a thought.

I would except it doesn't meet my original need of a stand mounted speaker. If he modified the design with only one woofer instead of two, then it would be a valid option. What i am looking for is a 3Way TMW in the same footprint of the standard MTM.

Sorry, just looked at the actual drawing for Zaph's speaker and see that each woofer is in its own enclosure. I wonder if the XO can easily be modified to accommodate only one woofer. It wood be a nice package if you could just build the top portion.

[cjd]

why stand mounted?

a small tower or a stand mounted, matters little, except you often lose sensitivity limiting box dimension

C

[Jim Holtz]

I would except it doesn't meet my original need of a stand mounted speaker. If he modified the design with only one woofer instead of two, then it would be a valid option. What i am looking for is a 3Way TMW in the same footprint of the standard MTM.

Sorry, just looked at the actual drawing for Zaph's speaker and see that each woofer is in its own enclosure. I wonder if the XO can easily be modified to accommodate only one woofer. It wood be a nice package if you could just build the top portion.

Hi Spentit,

I don't know what your time frame is or what you're looking for beyond a monitor size speaker. I thought I'd toss out that Curt and I will have a monitor sized Statement published by early summer. It'll use the same ribbon and TB W4-1337SA mid open transmission line that the rest of the Statements series uses but with a single RS180-4 woofer. F3 should be in the upper 30's in a 28 liter cabinet, 22" tall. There is a matching Statements center too. Look in the mission accomplished section for all the gory details.

The monitors are not posted yet. It'll be a while but they'll be done by summer. Sound quality should be comparable to the rest of the Statements, just smaller.

EDIT: They will require a minimum of a foot clearance with 1 1/2' being better behind them. Sitting them flat against the wall or on a book shelf will not work very well and isn't recommended. The Dennis Murphy TMW design would be better for a bookshelf mount.

Jim