Ardent Speaker Camp

[Jcake5]

It was not that long ago the Minneapolis had open air walk ways to the regional planes. Specifically with the Saab 340's. CRJ's are a step up and need better attention.

Cheers,
Eric

[gbegland]

More bamboo

Did these with cutting boards several years ago....you guys are late to the game.

Look @ Ross or TJMax for these cutting boards with prices MUCH lower than regular retail stores.

[JonMarsh]

Did these with cutting boards several years ago....you guys are late to the game.

Look @ Ross or TJMax for these cutting boards with prices MUCH lower than regular retail stores.

Well that's pretty cool! Why don't you post a write up with info about your builds using cutting boards, why you chose them and how the designs worked out?

[Cdub]

I helped an acquaintance assemble a system using the 8945A some years ago. Never seen the P version personally.

That acquaintance would be me Jon was generous enough to help me out with a project of mine. Thanks again ;x( (I'm always lurking, but rarely post :T)

I still have the speakers and could bring them to the Nor Cal DIY if there is any interest.

[augerpro]

I have big hopes for these SS Be tweeters.

Just listening to an interview with Kevin Voecks of Revel, and he mentioned that all of the drivers are made in house EXCEPT the tweeter of the top of the line Ultima/Salon speakers. Instead they contracted with Scanspeak for it. I wonder how close this is to the Be tweeter available to DIY'ers? Of course the real question is if SS can make tweeters with small waveguides why don't we get any?!?!? I want, I want...

[JonMarsh]

The Salon 2's tweeter/waveguide construction reportedly increases the output 6-7 dB in the region around and above the crossover frequency, matches the directivity to the midrange in the crossover region, and increases the dispersion above 9 kHz.

Hmmmm, gee, something about that combination sounds familiar....

I suppose if one were really rabid, one would figure out how to take the Be tweeter apart and match it to a custom faceplate/waveguide.

Well, I suppose we need to save some challenges for the coming years, eh Brandon? Of course, you've got more years left for those challenges than I do, but there might be a few interesting things left to try. :W

[augerpro]

Well, I suppose we need to save some challenges for the coming years, eh Brandon?

Yeah I think the real challenge will be affording the Be tweeter in the first place :W

BTW looking forward to building some Nascent's, probably this summer. I have all the parts already and it will be nice to let someone else do all the work for a change, and I won't sit and obsess about the sound & measurements for months afterward Just listen to the music...

[JonMarsh]

I hear you about that... I gulped a bit and had a bit of a discussion/argument with myself before clicking the "confirm order" button. Well, I guess I had to do something weird with my year end bonus...

Should that be my new signature...

"Just listen to the music... leave the obsessing to me!"

I wish I'd have them ready by the Northern CA DIY, but I think that's pushing the boundaries of optimism. Just started a new set of test baffles for them.

[Hdale85]

So there is going to be an Ardent center channel as well?

[numberoneoppa]

So there is going to be an Ardent center channel as well?

I was under the impression that the Ardent was a "stereo purist" loudspeaker. If not, it should be!

[JonMarsh]

well, I've got an extra C79, a variety of small form factor tweeters with low distortion, and some ideas for a compact bottom end in smallish cabinet- seems like that's just begging to make a "statement"... Oops, wrong moniker! Semi-heroic construction and Duelund crossover, of course.

[Hdale85]

Yeah I was under that impression as well numberoneoppa, but in his signature it states Coming soon, Ardent CCX (Compact Center Xtreme)

[JonMarsh]

Extremism in the defense of audio reproduction is no vice, even if it's a center channel... If you've heard HT with a good music speaker setup, you probably wouldn't go back to what some companies pawn off as HT speakers- centers, which are harder to do well, seem to be the worst in fidelity and dispersion control, too.

The NeoD CC started as just a center design, but probably 90% of the ones built are used as music mains. With the appropriate stands, I suppose that would be possible with these, too.

[Hdale85]

Yeah I had been pondering building the Ardents and then getting some help designing some surrounds and a center that would match.

[JonMarsh]

The 6640 is the "Bee's wax"

I think it's definitely a keeper. Of course, all things considered, it ought to be!! Best highs I've had at home, more detailed and "there" than the D26NC55, more articulation, more holographic, but without the extreme top end edge I was hearing with the 6620-01. Whether it's worth the money is certainly a judgement call... I'm sure many would be happy with the 6620.





Got a bit more tweaking to do, but it's getting close.

One thing that doesn't fail to amaze me is how different two ER18RNX's sound in this cabinet (40 liters total, tuned to 34 Hz) than in two 20 liter cabinets (PE) also tuned to 34 Hz. Very different transient impact, articulation, and extension. And yet the stuffing concept is quite similar, if anything I'm using more on the Ardents. Weird, unless you thick really stiff baffles and that kind of thing makes a difference.

More later, time permitting.

[numberoneoppa]

No... Jon... the felt is so ugly and the Ardents are otherwise so beautiful. Isn't there another way?

[JonMarsh]

A necessary part of the grille panel... just ask Avalon... in fact, while the grille per se is not necessary, the diffraction control is.

Don't worry, I'll figure out a way to get rid of the blue tape.... :rofl:

[Hdale85]

YIKES! 540 bucks a pop! Man.....I hope they are THE best cause thats big bucks for a single driver lol. Might shoot me way over the 3k budget I was thinking these would take.

[numberoneoppa]

A necessary part of the grille panel... just ask Avalon... in fact, while the grille per se is not necessary, the diffraction control is.

Don't worry, I'll figure out a way to get rid of the blue tape.... :rofl:

Find a way to mill out 1/8-1/4 inch of wood where the felt will go, then you can just adhere it directly without the edges looking too poor.

How much of the felt needs to protrude from the surface and would this change if some were below the surface?

[cjd]

I'm more concerned about "contains berylium. return to manufacturer for recycling" and the "do not throw away" sticker :P

[cjd]

Find a way to mill out 1/8-1/4 inch of wood where the felt will go, then you can just adhere it directly without the edges looking too poor.

How much of the felt needs to protrude from the surface and would this change if some were below the surface?

it needs to be above the surface-mounted drivers... tweeter in particular. Having the outer edge raised above the baffle to allow the felt to flush-mount at the edge may or may not work, you'd get reflections off it but the felt may fix that. Certainly that's the theory with a grill + felt...

[---k---]

Jon,
At what point when using felt does the edge treatment no longer matter? Those facets were a lot of work. You must be getting better edge diffraction than most. I look forward to seeing some graphs w/ & w/o the felt. It would also be interesting to see w/ felt but on a test baffle w/o facets.

[JonMarsh]

YIKES! 540 bucks a pop! Man.....I hope they are THE best cause thats big bucks for a single driver lol. Might shoot me way over the 3k budget I was thinking these would take.

My thought based on measurements and the issues that I'm concerned with, is that for most people, the D3004/6600 is the best choice- the original air circ. Doesn't seem to have the same degree of the top end bubble in the HF response as the 6620.

6600


vs

6620


The 6600 front plate design and the 6640 are essentially identical.

Here's the 6640 response on the same test baffle.

[JonMarsh]

Jon,
At what point when using felt does the edge treatment no longer matter? Those facets were a lot of work. You must be getting better edge diffraction than most. I look forward to seeing some graphs w/ & w/o the felt. It would also be interesting to see w/ felt but on a test baffle w/o facets.

Well, I think edge treatments don't matter with a good waveguide. Or with a very rounded transition. The sharp transition of this style cabinet is another matter- it raises the frequency of the diffraction, as well as the intensity- but if you can deal with the intensity, than at lower frequencies the response is quite clean, and you get better polar response in the lower pass band of the tweeter and upper of the midrange.

That was my feeling when we first tried this back in the 70's. Most everything since then is just refinement and trade-offs.

Even the M8a box system with a well controlled grille design benefitted; cleaned up a lot of garbage on and off axis in the 3 kHz and up area. Less comb filtering resulting from the diffraction as you attenuate it.

[JonP]

One thing that doesn't fail to amaze me is how different two ER18RNX's sound in this cabinet (40 liters total, tuned to 34 Hz) than in two 20 liter cabinets (PE) also tuned to 34 Hz. Very different transient impact, articulation, and extension. And yet the stuffing concept is quite similar, if anything I'm using more on the Ardents. Weird, unless you thick really stiff baffles and that kind of thing makes a difference.

More later, time permitting.

Hmmm... if the pair were higher up on the Ardent boxes, I might wonder if some kind of MLTL type effects are in play. Then again, I don't really know if there WOULDN'T be such effects with the woofers in the middle, rather than near an end...

Though I'd guess a stiff, thick baffle helps too...

[cjd]

One thing to remember: facets like this (and in general) can lower the intensity of diffraction artifacts, but a round-over is still much much smoother on diffraction. Felt also helps smooth out the bumps, often significantly.

So, while a 3/4" 45 chamfer has lower swing on the diffraction, if you push to a 1.25" roundover you'll notice similarly low variance but less hash.

C

[JonMarsh]

Quite true- with the roundover, one could probably eliminate most of the felt without issues.

Then, you have products like diffraction horns and the DXT tweeter...

[Hdale85]

The 6640 definitely looks the nicest but it's twice the price. The 6600 looks nice, funny how the 6620 has the bump up there. For the money the 6600 looks pretty darn nice. But the Ardents are supposed to be a top end speaker I suppose lol. Do you think the 6640 is a huge improvement over the 6600? Adds another 500 bucks or so to the cost of drivers.

[JonMarsh]

The 6640 definitely looks the nicest but it's twice the price. The 6600 looks nice, funny how the 6620 has the bump up there. For the money the 6600 looks pretty darn nice. But the Ardents are supposed to be a top end speaker I suppose lol. Do you think the 6640 is a huge improvement over the 6600? Adds another 500 bucks or so to the cost of drivers.

I expect the only way to know for sure would be to build and listen extensively to both versions. Or just save the $600 and go with the 6600.

For me, I really wanted to a 2nd chance to listen to a good Be tweeter (first experience was Yamaha NS1000- used to sell those!- great drivers, mediocre crossover). The natural question is can it offer performance close to a diamond Accuton but at lower price.

So far, listening to it on the cheap electronics at home, my inclination is that the answer is yes. Of course, I only have about 10-12 hours time logged with Accuton diamond tweeters, and we all have opinions about aural memory. Clearly a decision for each to make for themselves. I expect most will take the less expensive path with the 6600, but I have to say I really like what I'm hearing with these. Probably too neutral for those who like the "airiness" of ribbons, but I'm diggin' it.

[TacoD]

YIKES! 540 bucks a pop! Man.....I hope they are THE best cause thats big bucks for a single driver lol. Might shoot me way over the 3k budget I was thinking these would take.

The Scanspeak ringradiator was also very expensive in the beginning (450 euro's or so) So if you wait a year, it will still be the best tweeter they offer but it will be reduced in price.

There are other good tweeters, and there also more expensive one's all claiming there are the best .

[JonMarsh]

I hope so... you never know, it's hard to know how much of the price is tied up in the actual cost of the Beryllium dome. Or if they've got it priced the way it is because of agreements with OEM's they're selling it to that want the prestige level maintained.

Realistically, to compare it to other tweeters in other systems I'm working on woud be difficult, especially if there's any possibility that using the Clairty MR cap makes a difference. OTOH, that's the same cap that was in the crossover with the 6620 that I wasn't so keen on the sound. Now it seems like everything is coming together.

[Hdale85]

What if I don't want to wait a year :B

I wonder how logical it would be to do the 6600 and later upgrade the crossover and tweeter the the 6640. Who know's I guess if you are spending 3k might as well spend a bit extra and go all out Then at least you have nothing to question later.

Yeah I bet a good portion of the cost has to do with the rare metal used in the dome.

[ColoradoTom]

A necessary part of the grille panel... just ask Avalon... in fact, while the grille per se is not necessary, the diffraction control is.

Don't worry, I'll figure out a way to get rid of the blue tape.... :rofl:

Hey Jon.... one thing I was looking at with my M8ta's was routing the area around the tweeter up to within 1/2 inch of the edge of the baffle on the top and sides and within an inch of the woofer below. This would create a trapazoidal depression where the felt could be fitted creating a "flush felt surface with the surrounding area (hope that makes sense). This would give you the option playing the speaker "nude" and not have to worry about building a frame...... just something I'm toying with. Might still have some "edge" problems, but it should minimize the propagation of waves across the surface.

Tom

[ColoradoTom]

Hey Jon.... one thing I was looking at with my M8ta's was routing the area around the tweeter up to within 1/2 inch of the edge of the baffle on the top and sides and within an inch of the woofer below. This would create a trapazoidal depression where the felt could be fitted creating a "flush felt surface with the surrounding area (hope that makes sense). This would give you the option playing the speaker "nude" and not have to worry about building a frame...... just something I'm toying with. Might still have some "edge" problems, but it should minimize the propagation of waves across the surface.

Tom

Whoops.... guess I should have waited and read numberoneoppa and cjd!!

[Hank]

Don't worry, I'll figure out a way to get rid of the blue tape

NOOO! The blue tape actually aids the felt in smoothing the artificacts - no time to go into it here, but keep buying blue tape.

[Hdale85]

And your cables are supported by solid blocks of maple I'm guessing as well

[Hank]

Well, IF we sold maple blocks, you bet my cables would be elevated and sounding better :W

[JonMarsh]

Actually, the best cable block supports are made from the hardwood boxes used for packing an importing premium tequilas, I hear...

[evilskillit]

Actually, the best cable block supports are made from the hardwood boxes used for packing an importing premium tequilas, I hear...

Woo! Well if you buy the blocks I'll dispose of all that pesky old tequila for you. :B

[Hank]

Jon knows I'm a tequila fan. Got a new Austin company to check out:

http://republictequila.com/main.php

[---k---]

Well, I think edge treatments don't matter with a good waveguide. Or with a very rounded transition. The sharp transition of this style cabinet is another matter- it raises the frequency of the diffraction, as well as the intensity- but if you can deal with the intensity, than at lower frequencies the response is quite clean, and you get better polar response in the lower pass band of the tweeter and upper of the midrange.

One thing to remember: facets like this (and in general) can lower the intensity of diffraction artifacts, but a round-over is still much much smoother on diffraction. Felt also helps smooth out the bumps, often significantly.

C

Thanks Professors. :T

[JonMarsh]

Finalizing? Close?

I don't know what it is about finalizing speaker projects, or at least the crossover tuning- it seems like my confidence is in inverse proportion to the expense of the project.

Since Sunday I've been doing things a little different, using LSPCAD just to be sure that the transfer function changes and levels are what I think I want (listen, simulate, then implement and listen again), but just listening. This evening I think I've about got the balance I want (just listening to one speaker still), so I figured, OK, time to go back and measure and see if I screwed something up or if we're on the right track. I also pulled the measurement distance back to two meters (much closer to where I listen, which is 2-1/2 to 3 meters. Of course, this is just the primary design axis, but hey, that's where I listen. 100 msec gate, may as well see how the room setup is mucking with the bottom end.



No surprises, in a sense- I've found in the past that by ear I seem to prefer a distance medium gate response (100 msec in this case) that has a 2-3 dB tilt down between 100 Hz to 10 kHz, and it looks like that's what I've wound up with again. Shades of Flyod Toole?

Now I just have to figure out what kind of bass trap/room treatment I need to get rid of the dip in the 45 Hz area. Other than that, it sounds pretty credible. Standing or sitting at 3M, practically no discernible change balance. Neutral but lively and detailed. Just listening with the Mac Mini and measurement setup right now.

One more graph tonight- 90 dB distortion sweep.



I'd say the Accuton C79 mid and Scanspeak 6640 play pretty nice together!

[---k---]

Now I just have to figure out what kind of bass trap/room treatment I need to get rid of the dip in the 45 Hz area.

Floyd Toole would tell you to put an active crossover in place and use multiple subwoofers.

[Jed]

I don't know what it is about finalizing speaker projects, or at least the crossover tuning- it seems like my confidence is in inverse proportion to the expense of the project.

Since Sunday I've been doing things a little different, using LSPCAD just to be sure that the transfer function changes and levels are what I think I want (listen, simulate, then implement and listen again), but just listening. This evening I think I've about got the balance I want (just listening to one speaker still), so I figured, OK, time to go back and measure and see if I screwed something up or if we're on the right track. I also pulled the measurement distance back to two meters (much closer to where I listen, which is 2-1/2 to 3 meters. Of course, this is just the primary design axis, but hey, that's where I listen. 100 msec gate, may as well see how the room setup is mucking with the bottom end.



No surprises, in a sense- I've found in the past that by ear I seem to prefer a distance medium gate response (100 msec in this case) that has a 2-3 dB tilt down between 100 Hz to 10 kHz, and it looks like that's what I've wound up with again. Shades of Flyod Toole?

Now I just have to figure out what kind of bass trap/room treatment I need to get rid of the dip in the 45 Hz area. Other than that, it sounds pretty credible. Standing or sitting at 3M, practically no discernible change balance. Neutral but lively and detailed. Just listening with the Mac Mini and measurement setup right now.

One more graph tonight- 90 dB distortion sweep.



I'd say the Accuton C79 mid and Scanspeak 6640 play pretty nice together!

Some of your best work Jon! Congrats on the phenomenal measurements! :T

[JonMarsh]

The real payoff is the music...

and how Kate Walsh's "Tim's House" is sounding tonight- very intimate and detailed, like I'm sitting right next to her and the guitar- definitely must be that Accuton midrange resolving power!



Oh yeah, that's not Kate Walsh the actress, but Kate Walsh, the British singer.

Thanks for the kind words- can you believe how long this has been in progress? I can't until I check all my files for the project on the computer.

I guess that comes from a lack of strict focus, and all the other things going on. Busy since March last year, and I still have some veneering and finishing to do. Good thing I've got a week of vacation scheduled the end of the month.

But you know this really piques me to see how the big Accuton mid paired up with a couple of SS 26W per side is going to sound. And whether I can tame the Millenium Excel in a waveguide or not- Paul W has dropped some good hints... we'll see. It's amazing how well the 26W's measure in their optimum range.

But now, back to the music....