Natalie P build

[bbcmp1979]

Hello all, i've been reading the forums the last couple of days and I'm loving what you guys have to offer here. I'm now debating between the Natalie P and the Mini statement for my HT setup. I know that the Natalie P is much simpler to build but would I be begging for more in the future???

thanks all

[dumaresq]

Make sure you keep in mind placement issues, the mini statements need to sit at least 18" from the rear wall, this can cause issues in many rooms. I think the Nat Ps are more forgiving.

I built the full sized statements as my first build so it isn't impossible to do

In terms of which is the better speaker I've never heard either so I can't help there The mini statements will have a very unique sound though.

[---k---]

Even if you build the Mini Statements, you'll be begging for more in the future. This isn't a comment on the quality of either, it is a comment about the sickness that is speaker building. Technology moves on. Give any design 3 years and there will be something better and tempting to build.

[fjhuerta]

The Nat-Ps are excellent speakers - I built them some time ago. I haven't heard the Statements, but I've made two designs with the Tang Band titanium 4", and I believe the midrange will be better on the Mini Statements than the Nat-Ps. The RS-180s can't beat a dedicated midrange, and the T-B is a stellar performer.

[Kidsrapain]

LOL on what ---k--- said I second that.

[dumaresq]

Even if you build the Mini Statements, you'll be begging for more in the future. This isn't a comment on the quality of either, it is a comment about the sickness that is speaker building. Technology moves on. Give any design 3 years and there will be something better and tempting to build.

Here's to that... I just got my statements up and running and now I kinda wish I'd built the ZRT 2.5-Way (course it's not a 3-way so that's no fun)

[bbcmp1979]

Does any one know if the natalie can be modded to incorporate the tang bang W4 mids?

[evilskillit]

I hear there is a mod for the NatalieP that incorporates the Tangand mid and The NeoCD3 ribbon tweeter. Otherwise known as the Mini Statements. Just messing with you. Chances are no matter how happy you are with this thing, unless you just find that you hated building it you'll want to build something else later so you might go with an easier, smaller, cheaper design your first time around to cut your teeth, like the tritrix, or microbe, or something and then after you get those knocked out sit on em for a while and see what design really tickles your fancy, then go with statements, or natalie p or just cut straight to the zaph revelator 2.5way design. Heh

[BeerParty]

Even if you build the Mini Statements, you'll be begging for more in the future. This isn't a comment on the quality of either, it is a comment about the sickness that is speaker building. Technology moves on. Give any design 3 years and there will be something better and tempting to build.

I'll second (third, forth?) what K said. No matter how good they sound, once you start there is no turning back. I have the Statement Monitors (which sound fabulous), and I am already thinking about what comes next.

EDIT - now that I think about it, you could probably start with a pair of the Monitors in your HT, and just build some stands to get them to the right height. You'll love them and it gives you the option to start "small". :P

[fbov]

Hello all, i've been reading the forums the last couple of days and I'm loving what you guys have to offer here. I'm now debating between the Natalie P and the Mini statement for my HT setup. I know that the Natalie P is much simpler to build but would I be begging for more in the future???

thanks all

That all depends on your needs. You can get higher SPL out of a 3-way than a 2-way, but if my set is any indication, you'd need an awfully large room to exceed NatP capabilities. In terms of sound quality, I don't see much of a disadvantage; I've compared them to 3- and 4-way systems at DIY events and they hold their own at normal listening levels, but they only do ~106dB @ 1m at max power. If your space needs more, build the 3-way.

One other thing in the RS MTM's favor is that it's a very popular design. You have a choice of 5 different crossovers by several designers, and Jon Marsh included both stand-alone and on-wall/in-wall XO designs for NatPs. This gives you options to tailor the sound; I used base NatP XOs in L and R, but found I needed the in-wall design for the CC - it's in an entertainment center and so accoustically wall mounted.

No, you can't modify the design to use 4" mids, plus what would you do for bass? In general, you can't modify the drivers or the baffle size and driver placement on it. Those are input variables to the XO design process; the optimum XO would change if you swapped drivers or even moved them around.

Also ask yourself how deep you want to go into this hobby. Most posters here are not unlike ---k---'s description. If you think you might get hooked, I'll recommend downsizing and starting with something very basic, a learning step if you will before deciding what's best for you long term.

Have fun,
Frnak

[bbcmp1979]

ok, my bro just emailed me about a sale for a set of Edesign audio A6-6t6 for $400shipped. Any one what the a6-6t6 is comparable to?

http://www.edesignaudio.com/product_info.php?products_id=792

[numberoneoppa]

ok, my bro just emailed me about a sale for a set of Edesign audio A6-6t6 for $400shipped. Any one what the a6-6t6 is comparable to?

http://www.edesignaudio.com/product_...roducts_id=792

Errr, can't a whole lot without ever having listened to those, but I'd say both of the speakers mentioned in the original post would perform better that these, at least if harmonics and sound quality are of interest/priority.

[bbcmp1979]

I'm actually more interested in SQ at the moment. This weekend i'll look at the BOM list for the Natalie P. Possibly picking up some MDF too and start building the box first.

[bbcmp1979]

Natalie P parts ordered, I'm definitely heading to the Dark Side now!!! :-)

[dumaresq]

I am pretty sure you will be happy with what you built Which of course will make you want to build something else (as we mentioned)

[bbcmp1979]

I'm sure you are right that I'll be pretty happy with the end results over what I currently have. I have a set of Emptek EF30C as my LCR at the moment. W/o the subs the highs are very neutral and laid back. With the subs on, I practically have to move 3ft closer to hear all the (HF) detail.

[fbov]

Now, how are you planning to build them?
- sealed 28 liter box (my CC)
- ported 28l box (Evil Twin's build)
- ported 65l box (my L/R build)

https://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php?p=406597#post406597

The enclosure is the one part of the NatP design that you can change, I think for the better. Large boxes tuned low give you great low end extension, at the risk of bottoming the drivers at max power. Since I never intend to send a 100W, 30Hz sine wave into the speaker, why design for it, especially if I can get bass response below 30Hz as a result.

That said, I wanted towers, making the box volume easy to achieve. YMMV.

Have fun,
Frank

[bbcmp1979]

Fboy, I'm leaning toward a larger enclosure possibly from 50L up but hasn't decided on how large I want to go yet. I'm currently drawing the template for the baffle and have the template made in 5mils SS301 material. This way I can just slap the template on draw an outline for the drivers, and not have to worry about measurement.

[Dave Bullet]

Probably obvious... but.... If you don't have stands (or don't want the hassle of making them) - put them into a tower (maintain the same baffle width dimensions, driver placement and offset from the top and sides of the baffle), then use a false partition to divide up the tower and provide the volume you seek.

[bbcmp1979]

Dave, i'll probably stick with the baffle dimension speced out on the Natalie thread, and raised the height to a desired length. At the moment I haven't made up my mine yet. However, I did made a template already in Stainless. I'm overdoing it, but I trust the cad measurement a lot more then what I can measure with my hands. Pic of template'll be up tonight.

[bbcmp1979]

9"x22" template that'll be using for the baffle. There'll be very little measuring if any at all.



Next question is how big do I want it.

I currently have a ED 12" sub tune to 18hz crossover at around 60hz. For the Natalie P, I would prefer to tune it low and deep so I don't have to have the sub on all the time. I remember seeing people building their tower up to 65L(2.29 ft^3)? Or am i imagining up this number?

Anyhow, here's a quick calculation for box volume



I would prefer to stick with 48" or 49" height because it would be easier to cut out of a 48" x 96" MDF or BB ply. Still deciding on what to use.

1st sheet of 48"x96"
(6) 48"x9" for front and back
(4) 48"x10" for sides

2nd sheet of 24"x48"
(4) 7.5" x 10" for top and bottom
(6) 7.5" x 10" for cabinet bracings

This would yield a 2.02 ft^3 or 57.2L box

[---k---]

Several of my wood projects have been designed or re-designed based to fit a 48", 24" or multiples there of. :T

Jon recommends on the front page a tower of 50L, with a tuning 28 hz. I don't think you can go wrong with following Jon's recommendations. Just figure out the ear height, make the tower high enough to put the tweeter within an inch or two of ear height, then adjust the depth to get 50L.

Remember to subtract out a little volume for your port, drivers, and crossovers.

[fbov]

...Next question is how big do I want it....

I haven't seen a mention, so let me recommend getting some box simulation software. I use Unibox, others like WinISD, and then there's Jeff Bagley's new box designer.... All of them allow you to predict the sub-1K Hz frequency response of your driver in the enclosure you design.

Lots of choices, but in all cases, you either input Theile/Small parameters (I had to for RS180s) or select the driver if it's already listed. They'll start you with a reasonable design, then you can play with the parameters to see how it changes response, or how your ideas should sound.

A couple things to consider, room gain and tuning. Closed rooms all have increased gain at low frequencies due to energy storage. If you design anechoically flat, your woofer will be boomy in the room. That's why, regardless of box size, make your port at least slightly adjustable. I made mine over long so I could shorten it, but I've seen ways to add length, too. The idea is that port tuning depends on length, so you have a way of adjusting your response after the box is built.

Have fun,
Frank

[bbcmp1979]

I have Winisd but I couldn't pull up the complete T/S parameter for the RS180 at the moment. Here's are the transfer function and spl graph from winisd. Blue is the RS180 with a 55L box and 60w

[bbcmp1979]

Picked up some MDF and got done cutting.

Here are some pics

[bbcmp1979]

Dammmm, MDF is some nasty stuff to route. I might have to use a smaller bit, or pick up an spiral up cut bit to reduce the dust.

[---k---]

Yep. Wear a good N95 dust mask.

[numberoneoppa]

Haha, babies. :P

bbcmp, looks good so far! Keep em coming.

[bbcmp1979]

Just got back from shopping. I'll snap a few pics as soon as I get a chance. NOt much is done though.

[BOBinGA]

bbcmp1979,
I think you have the box tuning too low for the RS180. Your tuning will sound very bass shy. I think a tuning of 36 to 38 would be better:



The first gray line is the WinISD recommended volume and tuning. That will likely sound a bit boomy. Notice the small peak just before low end roll off. That's the clue that you could have boomy bass. The last blue curve is your tuning. IMHO, I think that gives up too much bass. It will sound weak and you will think "Where's the bass?" I think the middle orange curve is what you want. Plenty of bass, yet not boomy.

You can get this tuning with your box by using two of PE's ready made ports. Use two of the 2.5 X 8.5 ports with the curved ends. I am planning a box with a single RS180 and I plan on using this tuning.

-Bob

[bbcmp1979]

Thanks Bobinga, the orange curve make sense, The box volume is set now but the tuning can be change easily at this point. I've simulated to 28hz since I already have a sub. Tuning to 36hz allowed me to listen to music w/o the sub??? I might do just that and turned off the sub til the weekend. I guess I can go green while having fun too. :-)

bbcmp1979,
I think you have the box tuning too low for the RS180. Your tuning will sound very bass shy. I think a tuning of 36 to 38 would be better:



The first gray line is the WinISD recommended volume and tuning. That will likely sound a bit boomy. Notice the small peak just before low end roll off. That's the clue that you could have boomy bass. The last blue curve is your tuning. IMHO, I think that gives up too much bass. It will sound weak and you will think "Where's the bass?" I think the middle orange curve is what you want. Plenty of bass, yet not boomy.

You can get this tuning with your box by using two of PE's ready made ports. Use two of the 2.5 X 8.5 ports with the curved ends. I am planning a box with a single RS180 and I plan on using this tuning.

-Bob

[BOBinGA]

You might still want the sub for some music and most movies. Tuned to 36, the RS180s will play the lowest notes on a bass guitar without any drop off and sound great on 95% of music. But once you get used to a sub that goes into the low 20's, you will never turn it off.

-Bob

[---k---]

Bob, I don't disagree with you. But, I wanted to point out again that JonMarsh's recommendation is tower of 50L, with a tuning 28 hz. I think it is a lot of personal preference and what type of music you listen to. Tuning flat can give you a little bit of rise after room gain - which if you want to feel your bass can be nice.

[bbcmp1979]

In any case, I was able to reduce the volume a bit down to 52L last night. I'll probably end up tuning it from 35-38hz range by the time I finish with it.

[bbcmp1979]

Clamp and glue...

[bbcmp1979]

parts arrived today. I'm a happy camper. Please excuse my poor camera skilled.

[---k---]

Looks like you got a good project for over the holidays. :T

[bbcmp1979]

Yeh, hopefully the weather will turn warmer this weekend after X-mas. Merry Christmas everyone.

[Curt C]

In any case, I was able to reduce the volume a bit down to 52L last night. I'll probably end up tuning it from 35-38hz range by the time I finish with it.

If I recall correctly, the Ministatements used a tuning of 35 Hz, and sounded quite good in my listening room. The predicted f3/f6 was 40 Hz/32 Hz respectively. For most music this low end extension will leave little to complain about. Jon's tuning would provide even more extended bass, albeit with a more polite presentation. Depending on the room size and speaker placement either tuning will work well.

C

[evilskillit]

Thats a pretty picture. I hope after Santa comes by I can take a similar picture except with Seas drivers. Good luck on your project.

You can always try different port lengths and see which one appeals to you most. Try a longer port, then cut it shorter. Wost case scenario you have to buy another longer one, but it probably won't break the bank.

[bbcmp1979]

Evilskillit, Santa comes by too early for me and I couldn't help myself to it. My wife was telling me she was gonna wrap them, but she knew I was gonna open them....L-). I probably pick up some 3" pvc from HD later this weekend.

[bbcmp1979]

Curt, I would definitely aim for a tune of 35-38hz, but with a big enclosure would it be ok to use 3" pvc? :-)

[evilskillit]

I'm guessing 3" is more than big enough. Modeling might show airspeed being a bit high at max volume, but I doubt you'll ever sit around listening to sine waves at max volume

[Curt C]

With a 3" rear port, you should be OK, -but a flared port would be better. If you have a router, I'd put a 3/4" roundover at each end to make your own flare. You can use a couple of scap pieces of MDF to double up on the rear baffle around the port, and as a 'donut' at the inside terminus of the port.

C

[bbcmp1979]

Got some routing done today for one baffle. It look like I didn't go deep enough on the flush mount ring.