L-R version of 2RCC or Sealed Statement without tunnels

[snmhanson]

It seems that there has been quite a bit of talk about the statements lately on this site as well as the PE Tech Talk forum. It's got me back on track to build something with more displacement than my Statement Monitors and still be a good fit for my 2RCC center. Up until recently I figured I'd build the sealed Statements because they use the same drivers as the 2RCC and they can sit on top of my bass boxes. However, I'm just not sure that I have the spacing behind and to the sides of them to allow the mid-tunnel to work properly. My speakers sit near the edges of an alcove that houses the media center and components. I am attaching a picture that shows the current setup. Sorry, just a low quality iPhone pic, but it should illustrate what I am dealing with.

Now, I know that the Statement series is a done deal and there aren't going to be any new designs coming out from Curt or Jim. Nevertheless, does anyone have an idea for some sort of a tunnel-less sealed Statement to replace my Monitors? What if I basically built a 2RCC, using the same crossover, but change the configuration of the drivers so that they are in a vertical array like the sealed Statements? Or a sealed Statement but without the tunnels? If I am out of luck in terms of a tunnel-less Statement, assuming that I was able to get the speaker about 18" from the rear wall of the alcove, would the side walls of the alcove create a problem if I did just stick with a sealed Statement? The back of the speaker would probably be about even with where the 45 degree wall starts to flare out from the alcove. I really want to stick with the 2RCC as my center, so I prefer not to deviate from a Statement-based design for the L-R speakers if possible.

Thanks for any help,

Matt

P.S. I know that putting speakers on top of my subs isn't ideal. I just don't have any other options for that room.

[BOBinGA]

Have you asked Jed at Clearwave? If I remember correctly, he used to use the ribbon tweeter in his towers, but it looks like he switched to a dome now. I'll bet he can help you with a build using the ribbon.

-Bob

[Jim Holtz]

Hi Matt,

A couple questions:

1. Are the Monitors the close or far wall version?
2. What percentage of the time do you listen to music and is it multi-channel or 2-channel?

Thanks!

Jim

[snmhanson]

I thought about contacting Jed at Clearwave, but I'm sure he has better things to do than to design a new speaker and crossover for me. Maybe starting with the 2RCC crossover would make it an fairly easy process though...

The Monitors are the close wall version. They sound great, although I probably wouldn't realize if they didn't actually sound exactly as they are supposed to. I am just thinking something with a bit more displacement and matching drivers might be a better fit for the 2RCC. I will have no problem finding a new location for the Monitors. I could pull things out a bit more if necessary but not far enough to take the angled side walls of the alcove completely out of the picture. I listen to music probably about 20% of the time - sometimes more sometimes less. Typically stereo but I wouldn't count out multichannel.

Thanks,

Matt

[fbov]

If you really want to match the 2RCC's, talk to Jed. If he used the ribbon in your CC, he may have the XO for the tower version already done, just not for sale as a kit at this time. He's very reasonable....

However, why do you want to upgrade? Is there a specific goal in mind, or just "something with more displacement." While I understand the latter, it's always good to have a goal in mind.

HAve fun,
Frank

[Jim Holtz]

I thought about contacting Jed at Clearwave, but I'm sure he has better things to do than to design a new speaker and crossover for me. Maybe starting with the 2RCC crossover would make it an fairly easy process though...

The Monitors are the close wall version. They sound great, although I probably wouldn't realize if they didn't actually sound exactly as they are supposed to. I am just thinking something with a bit more displacement and matching drivers might be a better fit for the 2RCC. I will have no problem finding a new location for the Monitors. I could pull things out a bit more if necessary but not far enough to take the angled side walls of the alcove completely out of the picture. I listen to music probably about 20% of the time - sometimes more sometimes less. Typically stereo but I wouldn't count out multichannel.

Thanks,

Matt

Hi Matt,

If you're mainly interested in home theater, one of Jed's designs with the same mid and ribbon would be great. I'm not implying that Jed's speakers are just for home theater. He does great designs as the mid you're listening to proves.

I'm with Frank and Bob. I'll bet Jed has a design that would blend perfectly with his center that would give you the extra displacement you're looking for. I'm not trying to talk you out of the Statements but based on what I see in your picture, they aren't the best choice for your room.

Jim

[Titan05]

That's funny I was recently very interested in the exact same question! I had bought the Tang Band drivers a while back to build some of Jed's R44's, however before I got to build them, my girlfriend moved in and we realized we were going to need a bigger house. Well finally found the bigger house and could start to justify larger statement size speakers, but really wanted to do something in wall or on wall, but could only find the 2RCC that used the same drivers and didn't have the open back mids. A L/R version or an in wall version combined with the small R4 for surrounds would be a great sounding package and aesthetically pleasing for those who have fortunate others who don't want to look at large speakers.

I'm very interested and will keep an eye on the thread.

[Jed]

Hey guys,

I did the 2RCC for Frodaddy, who built the Statements for mains, but he wanted sealed mids for placement issues with his CC. I don't have a tower version of it because that's Jim/Curt's design, so I didn't want to venture into that territory.

One thing that I might suggest is building 2 more 2RCCs for L/R channels in the current horizontal format might work fine in that room. I've seen this done before and the owner was very happy. That being said, I bet the 2RCC crossover might work well for an WMTMW vertical array as well (with same volume sealed mid chamber). As you can see, the crossover I did for this layout is very similar to the original tower design except for a change in polarity and a cap on the tweeter, IIRC.

Regards,

Jed

[snmhanson]

Thanks for the reply Jed. I will do some experimenting by putting my 2RCC on its side in the left or right position. I actually did that once before and it sounded pretty good, though I was checking something else at that time, not how it would work as a LF or RF speaker. If I decide to stretch it out a bit to a vertically oriented WMTMW design, is the vertical spacing between drivers critical? I should be able to stretch out and adjust the volume of the mid enclosure just fine, though I would possibly have to stretch the entire speaker just slightly. In any case, would using the driver arangement and spacing from the sealed Statement do the trick?

Thanks,

Matt

[Jed]

Thanks for the reply Jed. I will do some experimenting by putting my 2RCC on its side in the left or right position. I actually did that once before and it sounded pretty good, though I was checking something else at that time, not how it would work as a LF or RF speaker. If I decide to stretch it out a bit to a vertically oriented WMTMW design, is the vertical spacing between drivers critical? I should be able to stretch out and adjust the volume of the mid enclosure just fine, though I would possibly have to stretch the entire speaker just slightly. In any case, would using the driver arangement and spacing from the sealed Statement do the trick?

Thanks,

Matt

I'd do the MTM section aligned in the center line on the vertical axis.

Jed

[Titan05]

Jed,

Could you do the same thing to the 2RCC, stretch it horizontally and put all the speakers inline centered on the horizontal axis? Reason I ask is a longer shallower speaker would kind of fit under a large flat screen a little better. I know we are deviating away from the intended design, but I think for the average Joe (ME) who doesn't have a trained ear and just wants stuff better than Best Buy w/o paying an arm and leg, it would suffice.

Matt, another option I've been thinking about is for the L/R is just building Jed's R44's and adding bass bins. The bass bins could still be 2 of the RS225's or you could jump up to a single larger driver. There is an old thread here where someone used an AE TD12 if I remember correctly. Only thing is its hard to do that with the center unless you are using a projector. So, you may have to stick with the 2RCC and they just wouldn't match exactly. Plus it also requires some more equipment and more amplification.

I keep going back and forth on whats going to be easiest to implement into the house and not deviate too far from all of the great designs that these guys have shared!

[Jed]

The short answer is no because the tight spacing is needed between the mids on the horizontal axis to eliminate lobing off axis in that same plane, which is critical for maintaining good stereo imaging.

[snmhanson]

I am going to briefly revive this thread as I have been able to clear a few things off my plate and I can hopefully get started on a non-tunnel version of the sealed statements. Reviewing this thread, I think I would do a vertical oriented MTM section and use the driver spacing from the sealed Statement. I do have a few things I need to determine though before I get started. Hopefully I can get a bit more input here.

First, what crossover should I use? As Jed pointed out, the 2RCC x-over is not much different than the Statement x-over so I could probably switch between the two if necessary - though I would prefer to not have to mess with it too much. It seems the changes in the crossover between the two are only in the tweeter circuit, which I assume is because of the MTM configuration in the 2RCC. If I was going to go with the sealed Statement driver configuration would it make more sense to use the sealed Statement crossover (in which case I guess would simply be building the sealed statements without the tunnels)?

Width-wise, the 2RCC is 1" narrower than the sealed Statements. Once again, since I would use the vertical alignment of the sealed Statement should I go with the sealed Statement width?

Now, to get the proper volume in the MTM section, the back will only be ~3.75" from the back of the baffle (compared to 5.75" in the 2RCC). There will be a little over 2" between the back of the W-4 mids and the back wall of the chamber. The volume will be the same as in the 2RCC though as the chamber is simply being stretched out. Is that going to be enough room for the mids to breath and function properly? If it isn't, this could be a major road block to this project.

Those are the three main issues I have to resolve before commiting to this project. Any input or advice would be great. And I realize this is taking the Statement series into somewhat uncharted territory so there are no guarantees concerning the end result. However, my 2RCC sounds great so I am hoping that these changes to the sealed Statements will work also work well. In any case, it will be a fun experiment. Worst case, I can either add some tunnels after the fact, or I can salvage the parts for another build if necessary.

Thanks,

Matt

[Jim Holtz]

Hi Matt,

There is no difference between the sealed version and ported version crossovers. Jed told me the change he made in the crossover was to accommodate the mid/ribbon configuration for a side orientation. A center channel looks more at width than height of the cabinet until it is wide enough to be considered an infinite baffle. The closer you can stay to the original design dimensions, the better it'll be. So, there is no correct crossover for what you're doing. :W

I have a problem with shallow mid chambers. IMHO, they are better off narrow and deep than wide and shallow. The narrow/deep compartments will better handle rear sound wave reflections.

Also, the net volume for the shielded RS225's should be 100 liters after you factor out the mid compartment. The new unshielded work well with as little as 70 liters net. These are for the ported version. The center was designed as a compromise size wise which impacts the F/3. the F/3 of the sealed Statements is about 50 Hz. and the ported version will get down to the low 30's. I'm not sure what the F/3 of Jed's center design is.

I can't really add much more but I do agree you are in uncharted waters. 8O

Jim