MTMWW and Statements

[dumaresq]

I am building the statements and I am very sure I can't afford to build the MTMWW after that, I am just wondering if anyone has done a side by side of these two designs, what's your opinion which ones do what better? the MTMWW is quite a bit more expensive, is it much better, or are they just different?

[Jed]

Do you mean the mini-statements? In which case it is a TMWW design. I'm not aware of a MTMWW Statement design.

In any case, the advantage of the dual mids is lower distortion etc. and the RS225s will have more slam down low. You get what you pay for.

[cjd]

The other option are the Dayton MTMWW's that are still not named... RS270, RS180, RS28A.

In which case, they're WAY better. No seriously, I have no idea. The Khanspires are the little brothers of the bigger 3-ways in many ways, but I think the MTMWW's will have slightly more laid back sound and of course they reach deeper if you compare sealed to sealed. That's the closest comparison I think you'll find though.

[dumaresq]

I am asking about the statements (full) compared to the MTMWW RS 3-way cjd's.

[dumaresq]

The other option are the Dayton MTMWW's that are still not named... RS270, RS180, RS28A.

In which case, they're WAY better. No seriously, I have no idea. The Khanspires are the little brothers of the bigger 3-ways in many ways, but I think will have slightly more laid back sound and of course they reach deeper if you compare sealed to sealed. That's the closest comparison I think you'll find though.

I think you should call them "The Monsters" at least until someone builds a bigger speaker

[cjd]

Most important: I updated my previous comment to clarify which speakers were more laid back.

"The Monsters"... no no, that's Trademark territory...

"The things you feared that lived under your bed when you were a kid"

TTYFTLUYBWYWAK?

hmm. no, that doesn't ring right either.

C

[impala454]

the "OMG"s?

[dumaresq]

Most important: I updated my previous comment to clarify which speakers were more laid back.

"The Monsters"... no no, that's Trademark territory...

"The things you feared that lived under your bed when you were a kid"

TTYFTLUYBWYWAK?

hmm. no, that doesn't ring right either.

C

I wouldn't want to step on anyone's trademark...

[Hdale85]

BFG's and no thats not a trademark It's used in many many games.

[Dennis H]

BFG's and no thats not a trademark It's used in many many games.

Close..... BFS maybe? (it's a speaker not a gun)

[---k---]

I am building the statements and I am very sure I can't afford to build the MTMWW after that, I am just wondering if anyone has done a side by side of these two designs, what's your opinion which ones do what better? the MTMWW is quite a bit more expensive, is it much better, or are they just different?

I've heard my Khans almost side-by-side with the Statements. The Khans sound very similar to the OMG, Monster, Divorce-Makers. Both are great. I don't think I really was able to listen long enough to make a fair comparison. The Statements have a more open airy sound. The Khans can sound somewhat boring next to them, but to me they just sound really natural. Everything sounds exactly the way I expect. In my short time, I prefered mine, but that is to be expected.

That isn't saying the Statements aren't natural. Lots of very happy owners. If you can't afford the big Statements, consider the MiniStatements.

[Hdale85]

If powered properly it could be considered a gun Or maybe a sound wave gun

[Jonasz]

Most important: I updated my previous comment to clarify which speakers were more laid back. "The Monsters"... no no, that's Trademark territory... "The things you feared that lived under your bed when you were a kid" TTYFTLUYBWYWAK? hmm. no, that doesn't ring right either. C

The REX's? ;x(

[Brian Bunge]

So my big speakers are more laid back than the Khans? Wow! Yeah, we need a name. I think something to do with dynamics and big drums because that's where they impress me the most. But that's also what I like the most in most musical pieces.

I guess we could use my last name and call them the Bunges. It actually fits. Bunge was the occupational name in Germany for a kettle drummer in an orchestra. I just found this out a couple of years ago. Ironically, I've always been partial to drums and other percussion instruments.

[Jonasz]

TOP Tower Of Power :B

The SledgehammeRS 8)

[Jim Holtz]

So my big speakers are more laid back than the Khans? Wow! Yeah, we need a name. I think something to do with dynamics and big drums because that's where they impress me the most. But that's also what I like the most in most musical pieces.

I guess we could use my last name and call them the Bunges. It actually fits. Bunge was the occupational name in Germany for a kettle drummer in an orchestra. I just found this out a couple of years ago. Ironically, I've always been partial to drums and other percussion instruments.

Brian,

Did you and Wade ever get a chance to get together? The real comparison is in a listening room, listening to music you're familiar with, rather than listening at a DIY event. DIY events give you a real sense of the speaker charachter but the true test is at home.

IMHO, the W4-1337SA's offer some of the best midrange I've ever heard. Add the open back and it's an Excel, Revelator and Accuton competitor or dare I say, killer? I've not even mentioned how sweet the ribbons sound. :T

All my opinion of course. YMMV....

Jim

[maynardg]

Khan's and Statements

My impression of the two is that if your preference goes toward detail, choose the Statements, if you have a preference for smooth, you may prefer the Khan's.

Both are very impressive - and very big.

[cjd]

My impression of the two is that if your preference goes toward detail, choose the Statements, if you have a preference for smooth, you may prefer the Khan's.

Both are very impressive - and very big.

That's the opposite of what I have heard before (or at least, understood from what I've heard before.) Interesting. I suspect a lot of it plays into what kind of detail you listen for.

Brian: I'm not talking a dramatic difference - it's subtle - but yes, the RS180 is a more laid back midrange than the RS150 (if you want to think of it another way, there's a little less energy from ~1000-2kHz ish).

Jim: you DO like your distortion don't you.

[Brian Bunge]

Chris,

OK, gotcha!

So no comments or ideas on the name? Come on Mr. Classical Music Man!

Or should I say Mr. Classically Trained Musician?

[Jim Holtz]

That's the opposite of what I have heard before (or at least, understood from what I've heard before.) Interesting. I suspect a lot of it plays into what kind of detail you listen for.

Jim: you DO like your distortion don't you.

Chris,

I can't stand distortion which is why we optimized the Statements drivers to all be used in their ultra low distortion range.

Here's where I get beat up. I'm of the opinion that every driver has a sonic signature unique to it's design and perhaps, more importantly, to the cone material. More specifically, how that cone material was implemented in the driver design. I'm also of the opinion that measured distortion is important but it's just one of the tools used in driver selection, "not the only one".

Tweeters are a whole different discussion. If you notice, we used the ribbons in the Statements designs where they are very low distortion. Curt obviously considered distortion in the design process and used the NeoCD3.0's where they shine.

All of this discussion is about looking at graphs and numbers. What really matters is what does it sound like when it's implemented? There is a difference in the sound quality of the RS drivers and the W4-1337SA's. Both are excellent drivers but I prefer the W4's by a significant margin. They have the clarity, detail and natural sound that I've found to not quite be there in "every" RS design I've built (many) and heard. I also find ribbons to be much more "real" sounding than the domes I've heard. Ribbons have a finesse that domes simply miss, IMHO.

I didn't make those comments to start a pissing match or mine's bigger than yours argument. I'm just stating an opinion. Of course, opinions are worth exactly what it cost to hear them. $0.00

YMMV... :B

Jim

[ahaik]

Hi,
I'll start by stating that I never had the chance to listen to any of the dayton
3 ways.
I do own the Modula MT and the RS52 microbes. My brother has the Modula MTM's and I have listened to them extensively.
Although I really like all three very much, IMHO the statements in the mid area are much more refined and the margin is NOT slim.
I am assuming that due to the 2 way designs, the woofer needs to work much harder and that may account for some difference.

Asi.

[Jed]

There seems be a false assumption that the TB W4 1337 has high harmonic distortion. This is not the case at all. In fact it is one of the best drivers I've seen. Pretty close to Accuton C79 performance. Not quite as good, but it also has such a flat frequency response, people tend to somehow forget the importance of that. Here's the most recent test I did of the W4 1337 at about 90db 1 meter. Pretty dang good if you ask me, not much odd order harmonic distortion through the critical 2-5k region. No wonder those who have heard it often prefer it over the RS drivers in similar applications. The TB W4 1337 has a fantastic cone as well. It is very lightweight and the incredible "quickness" is clearly audible and special. Dispersion and off axis response favors the smaller driver as well. No problem crossing these as high as 4k.



I was also pleasantly suprised after I tested a fairly recent sample of the Fountek CD3.0M tweeter. Where most will cross at 4K, it also has excellent performance. So, this idea that all RS systems have much lower distortion is not based on fact or real comparison testing because although it might have a bit lower levels of some harmonic distortion, my money is on the W4 1337 because of the attributes I outlined above. Gotta look at the complete picture and SYSTEM and sum of the parts and how the strengths of each driver are utilized over generalizations about trends of product lines.

Fountek CD3.0M latest sample:

[Jim Holtz]

Now that's what I was talkin' about..... :rofl:

Thanks Jed! :T

Jim

[mikela]

Jed,

Thanks for the objective information.

Mike

[Saurav]

Did you measure the CD3.0 to lower frequencies? I'm curious about how low you can go before distortion starts to become a problem. I think I've seen some projects where these are used with ~2k crossovers.

Also, does anyone know the difference between these tweeters and the older JP2.0/3.0 models?

http://www.fountek.net/products_jp_30.htm

http://www.fountek.net/products_neo_30.htm

[dumaresq]

Wow I opened a big can of worms To bad I have nothing useful to add

[Jonasz]

Bought a couple of 1337's before moving to Sweden, happy to see the good plots! :T :B

[Jim Holtz]

Did you measure the CD3.0 to lower frequencies? I'm curious about how low you can go before distortion starts to become a problem. I think I've seen some projects where these are used with ~2k crossovers.

Also, does anyone know the difference between these tweeters and the older JP2.0/3.0 models?

http://www.fountek.net/products_jp_30.htm

http://www.fountek.net/products_neo_30.htm

The only difference is the ribbon element and they are interchangeable with no crossover changes, I'm told.

Jim

[Jed]

Did you measure the CD3.0 to lower frequencies? I'm curious about how low you can go before distortion starts to become a problem. I think I've seen some projects where these are used with ~2k crossovers.

Also, does anyone know the difference between these tweeters and the older JP2.0/3.0 models?

http://www.fountek.net/products_jp_30.htm

http://www.fountek.net/products_neo_30.htm

I wouldn't use the CD3.0 much below 3K 4th order and I didn't test it lower than what I did because it wasn't my ribbon that was tested. I didn't want the risk of ruining them. JP3.0 has a slightly different ribbon element and from I understand it was less durable.

[Jed]

Bought a couple of 1337's before moving to Sweden, happy to see the good plots! :T :B

Also it looks like they are backordered till July!

[Saurav]

I wouldn't use the CD3.0 much below 3K 4th order and I didn't test it lower than what I did because it wasn't my ribbon that was tested. I didn't want the risk of ruining them.

Thanks, that makes sense. I currently have mine crossed at 4.5K LR4, and was considering trying to lower it to 3.5K. Looks like that should be within its capabilities.

[cjd]

Actually, I just like giving Jim a hard time about his driver choices and the amount of energy he puts into promoting his projects. Also, it's not the driver, but the implementation in this case (at least, with the W4's - ribbon is a different thing) that will change a little of its sonic signature (which is to say, distortion).

He has the option of responding very simply "And you like yours" - something with which I can only agree. Both of us gravitate to very low distortion systems in the first place, which makes this whole discussion silly, in the grand scheme of things.

C

[Jim Holtz]

Actually, I just like giving Jim a hard time about his driver choices and the amount of energy he puts into promoting his projects. Also, it's not the driver, but the implementation in this case (at least, with the W4's - ribbon is a different thing) that will change a little of its sonic signature (which is to say, distortion).

He has the option of responding very simply "And you like yours" - something with which I can only agree. Both of us gravitate to very low distortion systems in the first place, which makes this whole discussion silly, in the grand scheme of things.

C

Chris,

I knew that you were making a tongue in cheek comment but I couldn't pass up the opportunity to spar a bit. Simply saying "and I like yours" is just to darn easy. Truth be known, I do like the Khans. Of course, I am biased and like the Statements better but that is to be expected.

However, if I were going to build a RS design, The Khans would be my 1st choice. Of course, I'd harass you about changing the tweeter to a 27TBFC/G. :rofl:

All in good fun with a spirited and enlighting discussion.

Jim

[Jed]

Actually, I just like giving Jim a hard time about his driver choices and the amount of energy he puts into promoting his projects.

C

I wonder how much stock in TangBand Jim owns?

[cjd]

I can do the TDFC, which would probably translate to the TBFC/G

Actually, just on paper I would expect the Statements to be low distortion as far as crossover and driver choice goes. There's no denying the extended flat response of a ribbon or the excellent quality of the W4. The RS150 isn't near ideal, I just seem to get lucky with it (though of course, it is superb driver as well - I guess I'm getting picky in my old age!) That open back though, bound to do funky things to presentation. Something most people really like, I think, tweaking timing and thus dimensional characteristics, among other things.

I may still use a ribbon in my next personal project, in fact. I hate padding drivers down though so that'll take some work to get that kinda sensitivity elsewhere! I really want to try to get full range dipole though, so maybe not. Some year. Or decade...

C

[Saurav]

I may still use a ribbon in my next personal project, in fact. I hate padding drivers down though so that'll take some work to get that kinda sensitivity elsewhere!

There's the PHLs and B&Cs that people have been looking at, if you're thinking of a 3-way, but that still leaves the woofers. Not sure what would work in a 2-way and match the ribbons for sensitivity. Maybe a pro 8" or 10", but then you might have a big change in dispersion at the XO frequency.

[---k---]

Boys, boys, boys....



How about this, Jim's should be better, it costs a ~$100 more.

[Jim Holtz]

I wonder how much stock in TangBand Jim owns?

I can't even get a damn discount at PE. :cry:

Jim

[impala454]

Shoot they need to... I bet you've made them $15-20k off the Statements series alone.