Modula MT-XE - You didn't ask for it... it's coming anyway

[BretH]

Have to share one of my favorite sites - it's all about using the smaller flashes (as opposed to studio ones) to their advantage: portability, placement, versatility, *cost*!). There's tips, techniques, tutorials, DIY, examples, videos - really an amazing resource:

https://www.strobist.com

[cjd]

Get the flash off the camera and it may be useful.

I think where flash is nearly useless is if it's built right into the camera, and you can't put it anywhere else. With a little care and a good understanding of how lighting works you can sometimes "trick" that into working...

[ch83575]

I have done some photography in my time. I shot professionally for about 5 years and had a really nice little downtown studio for about 2 years, but unfortunately I wasn't included in the bailouts when everything went to hell at the end of 08, so no more studio for me.

The problem with photographing something reflective is that you have to control the color of the background AND the color and brightness of what the object is reflecting. Unfortunately if the object is curved it is probably reflecting everything that isn't the background. What you want with mettal is contrast with the background, so if you want a black background you need the surroundings to be white and well lit. I find that a black background with white reflections is the most legible for such photos, unless of course you don't like the back background. If I didn't have very much equipment (after the studio closed I realized I actually have more equipment than any sane man should) this is how I woud do it:



If your speaker still looks kind of dark against the black background you can put small lights behind the white sheets to lighten up the reflections. With metal it is all about lighting the studio, not the object. By the way... the after taking a second look at my crappy drawing it is probably scaled as if you were photographing a wilson Maxx or something of that nature, if your speaker is smaller you actually want to get the white sheets relatively close to the speaker with just enough room for you to be inside. If you are really tricky you decide on a camera angle, then cut a hole in one of the sheets and shoot through that, so you don't have a dark blob in the center of all of your reflections, at the very least it helps to wear white.

Hope that helps
-Chad

[numberoneoppa]

I love where this conversation is going. :3

How are those PDFs coming along, Jon?

[evilskillit]

I took some pictures earlier today after reading this thread. I do use a tripod and the timer so the camera is holding totally still when the picture snaps. Man its amazing what just doing that will do for your photos. Beyond that, I used a flash and left the camera settings on auto. I'm really jealous of some of the fantastic pictures people take of their projects (why I got the tripod) but I already have 1 expensive and time consuming hobby without picking up another one to take pictures of the results of my first one.

It is pretty interesting to see what you all have to say about taking pictures of your subjects. If any of you have any advice for somebody who isn't interested in using something more than their current samsung $80 point and shoot digital camera (other than throw it away and buy a real camera) let me know

[spadez]

Quick questions for Jon. If I were to build these TMM's, and would be forced to put them so the back was pretty near to a wall (0.5-1ft), is there anything I can do with the crossover to help counter this, or is it not too much of a problem.

Also, if I already have a sub corssing over at 80hz, am I going to see any difference between a TMM and a TMW?

[JonMarsh]

I have measured the TM in that position, and you get the usual boundary effects- some lift at some frequency in the upper bass, some drop at others; the exact frequencies depends on how far from the other boundaries you are (floor, side wall) and what the ratios are- the TMM would be less sensitive because there are two bass sources spaced part.

This post illustrates the issues with location with respect to boundaries that apply to any speaker:

https://www.htguide.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138262&postcount=2

The difference between the MT and the TMWW is playback level versus distortion in the 80-400 Hz area, as well as smoothing the boundary behavior somewhat, an increasing the voltage sensitivity; 3 dB more output for the same distortion level (that's twice as loud), and 6 dB more voltage sensitivity (halving the load impedance and output of two drivers coupled).

In practice you may not be driving a system all that hard most of the time, but it also means that you'll have lower distortion at moderate listening levels- speakers have distortion plots somewhat like old tube amps; with the correct driver design, pretty clean down at 1 watt, but steadily rising as you push them harder. TMM would have a sensitivity after baffle step comp of about 88 dB/watt.

IMO, the main reason to use the MT version is when you're space limited, and can't handle the larger enclosure. Of course, for HT, it would be reasonable to use the TMM for mains, and the MT for surrounds.

Also, the TMWW concept I have in mind for this would be very adaptable to to a center channel, I think, even though it is just a 2.5 way, not a full three way. But best not to count the chickens before they're hatched!! I want to build the tower TMWW before jumping off to any variants of it. (though I'm optimistic..) The TMWW will have the same drivers for the TM, but dual RS225-4 in series for the WW/0.5 drivers, in a sealed flux capacitor alignment, with toggle switch adjustable bass Q.



Not necessarily needed in all situations, but I think will be useful for tuning system behavior. And also it allows using much smaller enclosures for the W drivers. The RS225-4 T/S parameters are amenable to this configuration. Using two and wiring them in series keeps the load impedance up for the amplifier, and doubles output level. This 8" woofer has close to twice the SD (cone area) of a 6-1/2" woofer. The ER18RNX will be tuned even lower in ported mode, or just sealed, so that with it's Qts it will have a drooping low end and not doing that much work down there- most would be done by the 8's. The tower version of this will have a footprint of about 10" wide, 12.5" deep, and somewhere between 44-50" tall, depending on how final details work out. Would probably be a good idea to put some sort of feet/stand on the side so it's a little less potentially tippy- like some of the European tower style speakers.

Something to think about- the driver cost for the TMWW is only a little higher than for the TMM- two RS225-5 are about $100, versus $78 for the second ER18RNX. Crossover cost will be higher, though, due to the "flux tuning capacitors". Close to double the LF/low mid output of the TMM.

[JonMarsh]

Xtreme? Perhaps...

Fabrication feasibility being evaluated... looks good so far.






Yes, that's an original Seas Millenium Excel, and yes, that's a flush match to the tweeter copper ring waveguide.

I have hopes for this one, but who knows.... by next weekend, I should. (reserved Friday off plus Monday a holiday for the first time this year at work). A little fiberglass and epoxy reinforcement on the back might be in order.

And yes, this is what I'm pinning hopes on for a Modula Xtreme - mated up with an Accuton C173N-T6-90 on the mids, and dual SS 26W woofers on the bottom.

[JoshJK]

it is just a 2.5 way, not a full three way. ... The TMWW will have the same drivers for the TM, but dual RS225-4 in series for the WW/0.5 drivers. ... The ER18RNX will be tuned even lower in ported mode, or just sealed, so that with it's Qts it will have a drooping low end and not doing that much work down there- most would be done by the 8's.

Jon, by "2.5 way, not a full three way" do you mean you're not going to apply an HP filter to M (ER18RNX)? Maybe I miss something, but this does not sound right. If you do not high pass the M, the system's power handling will be only slightly higher than TMM's because M's distortion will be masked somewhat by WW's response. Tuning the ER18 lower or using it sealed will help a bit, but it cannot overcome the lack of displacement. The ER18RNX will be excursion limited way before the WW, anyway. I do not see a reason to do 2.5 way with this driver combo and waste the output capability of dual RS225-4's. Three way seems to be the right way. Do I miss something?

Josh

[evilskillit]

Looks pretty sharp. I bet I know how you milled them down now. Like I did except with the waveguide above the table in a jig and move it around. Let us know how it turns out.

In regards to Josh's question, I am a bit confused about that. I figured a system that used 3 different drivers was a 3 way. Does it have to do with the crossover topology, instead of having a bandpass for the mid and a low pass for the woofer you're doing a full pass for the mid and then just attenuating the high frequency portion of that filter on the woofer?

Seems like that would trade off the advantage of a mid in a 3 way that it does not have to reproduce bass frequencies for lower distortion bass due to the fact that the midrange driver is assisting the woofer with bass.

[JonMarsh]

Jon, by "2.5 way, not a full three way" do you mean you're not going to apply an HP filter to M (ER18RNX)? Maybe I miss something, but this does not sound right. If you do not high pass the M, the system's power handling will be only slightly higher than TMM's because M's distortion will be masked somewhat by WW's response. Tuning the ER18 lower or using it sealed will help a bit, but it cannot overcome the lack of displacement. The ER18RNX will be excursion limited way before the WW, anyway. I do not see a reason to do 2.5 way with this driver combo and waste the output capability of dual RS225-4's. Three way seems to be the right way. Do I miss something?

Josh

It comes down to the voltage sensitivity of the driver arrays, relative to the applied voltage. If the 8's and the ER18RNX are reaching close to Xmax at about the same time, then all is well.... with the alignment I'm working on, I expect the 8's to hit Xmax a bit earlier.

[JoshJK]

It comes down to the voltage sensitivity of the driver arrays, relative to the applied voltage. If the 8's and the ER18RNX are reaching close to Xmax at about the same time, then all is well.... with the alignment I'm working on, I expect the 8's to hit Xmax a bit earlier.

Now I figured it out. Generally, when a 2.5 way TMW (TMWW as a special case) is possible, a three way will not have higher max SPL capability than TMW unless the W (or the WW) can output 6 dB higher max SPL than the M. For example, if the W is the same driver as the M, a three way will lose 6 dB of system max SPL compared to the 2.5-way counterpart. Then why TMWW in your case rather than TMM with two ER18RNX's? I agree that by using unique box alignment (e.g., by sacrificing the bass strength of the M a bit and compensating for it with RS225-4's suitable alignment), you may be able to take advantage of the 3 dB gain from the larger Sd of RS225. Not sure if you can utilize the full 3 dB, though. This approach certainly has a merit, but only slightly higher max SPL capability than TMM with two ER18RNX's. Perhaps a good choice with only slightly higher costs as well. But the cabinet size? Not a perfect world

[JonMarsh]

Looks pretty sharp. I bet I know how you milled them down now. Like I did except with the waveguide above the table in a jig and move it around. Let us know how it turns out.

In regards to Josh's question, I am a bit confused about that. I figured a system that used 3 different drivers was a 3 way. Does it have to do with the crossover topology, instead of having a bandpass for the mid and a low pass for the woofer you're doing a full pass for the mid and then just attenuating the high frequency portion of that filter on the woofer?

Seems like that would trade off the advantage of a mid in a 3 way that it does not have to reproduce bass frequencies for lower distortion bass due to the fact that the midrange driver is assisting the woofer with bass.

Perhaps what I should have called this system is a TMMM 2.5 way. Or a TWWW 2.5 way. Most folks know the concept behind a 2.5 way TMM, where in only one driver handles the full midange, and the other driver just provides the low range with an additional roll off from the full midwoofer output; generally that can be looked at as the baffle step woofer, as then the midwoofer run up through the midrange doesn't need to have baffle step compensation applied in the crossover, except possibly for baffle diffraction effects, depending on width and shape.

Well, if you stop and think about it, there's no real reason you can have even a bit more flexibility than that, WITH the right choice of drivers and crossover points.

The ER18RNX is a good choice to apply this kind of thinking to, because it has a rising response in the midrange all the way to it's upper end cutoff, especially when used on a typical baffle of 10" wide. On the other side, while just the same driver can be used with it to make a 2.5 way, there's no law that says you have to go that way- taking the 0.5 part to it's logical conclusion, why not use more enclosure volume, and more voltage sensitivity, and a different low frequency alignment, and configure it for about a 3:1 to 4:1 difference in LF output?

How to do that might take a bit of mulling and driver research- especially since the Modula series is normally built for cost/performance, and has always been designed around using off the shelf enclosures as an option, so that DIY without a full wood working setup is possible.

RS225's are popular in many of the HT oriented builds by CJD, Kurt, and others- but generally just the RS225-8. It's usually used ported, which requires a largish enclosure to get a nice alignment and good LF response, but is rewarded by nice sensitivity and output levels.

Well, I like the idea for this Modula series to bend the rules a bit- the RS225-4 has T/S parameters that make it less than popular for the usual sort of LF thinking in DIY- but it has pretty much exactly the T/S parameters I would like to use it in the more diminutive sealed "flux capacitor tuned" alignment. And I believe two of them in series will still provide 90 dB voltage sensitivity, in a relatively compact configuration with tunable bass response for room position. That's the kind of value and "thinking sharp inside the box" that I'm looking for, in this series. Solid tunable response to the 30's is the target, and for a music speaker, or an HT used with subs, I suspect that will be fairly satisfactory. The proof will be in the pudding, of course; I have drivers on the way and will be doing more testing next weekend. Two RS225 per side are only about $20 more expensive than one ER18RNX. Therein is the value proposition. Plus still using a 2.5 way crossover, not a full three way.

Yes, this is an experiment, but I've thought it out pretty carefully, and done some preliminary tests and simulation, mostly with Scanspeak drivers to date. But I wanted to bring the cost down, and RS225's are certainly more affordable than 22W's. Of course, for a more Xtreme version, SS is possible.

That's why I'm also working on a true three way concept within this Modula family idea, the Modula Xtreme.

[JonMarsh]

Now I figured it out. Generally, when a 2.5 way TMW (TMWW as a special case) is possible, a three way will not have higher max SPL capability than TMW unless the W (or the WW) can output 6 dB higher max SPL than the M. For example, if the W is the same driver as the M, a three way will lose 6 dB of system max SPL compared to the 2.5-way counterpart. Then why TMWW in your case rather than TMM with two ER18RNX's? I agree that by using unique box alignment (e.g., by sacrificing the bass strength of the M a bit and compensating for it with RS225-4's suitable alignment), you may be able to take advantage of the 3 dB gain from the larger Sd of RS225. Not sure if you can utilize the full 3 dB, though. This approach certainly has a merit, but only slightly higher max SPL capability than TMM with two ER18RNX's. Perhaps a good choice with only slightly higher costs as well. But the cabinet size? Not a perfect world

Well, here's how I see it Josh- for the 0.5 woofer, one the one hand I could have another ER19RNX - 6 mm Xmax, Sd of 136 cm2. Requires an additional volume of 20 liters. Regardless, we're looking at a tower design, and a floor footprint of about 10" wide and 12.5" deep.

On the other hand, the alternative design for the 0.5 woofer is two RS225-4, total Sd of 420 cm2 (over 3X) and same Xmax, 6 mm. So, compared with the single 0.5 woofer, about 4.5 dB more output. It would take 4X to hit 6 dB. That's not "huge", but it's a fairly significant difference. The tower has to be taller, but the height for the TMM configuration cabinet, about 34-45", would likely require stands, anyway, so making it 45" tall is not really a biggie in my book- same foot print.
'
I've already tested a lashed up TMM with 2.5 way, and will include that crossover in the Modula MT MkII plans, but I don't plan to build a pair- for me, this other approach is more interest, as I expect I won't need more than 40 liters for the two 8's (consider that the ported RS225 in the M8ta is in a 65 liter enclosure).

This is an experiment- and it will be the final tasting of the pudding that determines whether the tradeoffs are interesting or not. I have a feeling it will be, as the taller source in the 100-400 Hz area also usually helps overcome floor bounce issues that arise in single driver or dual driver arrays.

[JonMarsh]

Looks pretty sharp. I bet I know how you milled them down now. Like I did except with the waveguide above the table in a jig and move it around. Let us know how it turns out.

In regards to Josh's question, I am a bit confused about that. I figured a system that used 3 different drivers was a 3 way. Does it have to do with the crossover topology, instead of having a bandpass for the mid and a low pass for the woofer you're doing a full pass for the mid and then just attenuating the high frequency portion of that filter on the woofer?

Seems like that would trade off the advantage of a mid in a 3 way that it does not have to reproduce bass frequencies for lower distortion bass due to the fact that the midrange driver is assisting the woofer with bass.

Documented this for the write-up, have described it before, but I suppose no picture yet in a thread. Pretty straightforward, move the fixture in an orbital motion around the opening, while cranking the router up a turn at a time, until you get the needed finished depth- 1-1/4" for the D2608/9130, 1.0" for the Millenium Excel.

[Mark K]

Documented this for the write-up, have described it before, but I suppose no picture yet in a thread. Pretty straightforward, move the fixture in an orbital motion around the opening, while cranking the router up a turn at a time, until you get the needed finished depth- 1-1/4" for the D2608/9130, 1.0" for the Millenium Excel.

Hey thanks! that's a pretty smart way of doing it.

[JoshJK]

On the other hand, the alternative design for the 0.5 woofer is two RS225-4, total Sd of 420 cm2 (over 3X) and same Xmax, 6 mm. So, compared with the single 0.5 woofer, about 4.5 dB more output. It would take 4X to hit 6 dB. That's not "huge", but it's a fairly significant difference.

Note that the whole system does not benefit from the 4.5 dB gain in this configuration since that's not the only bass source in the system. So it's not like 4.5 dB louder than TMM. Yes, the WW will surely play 4.5 dB louder than the M given the same voltage input, which means about 1.7 times as loud as the M acoustically. When combined with M, however, the whole system's bass will be about 8.6 dB louder than the single M's, which is only 2.6 dB louder than the 6 dB gain of two M's in TMM. Not to nitpick, Jon. I just wanted to check on the math. Now I better understand the concept. Sure, the 2.6 dB extra headroom can be fairly significant depending on a person's need. Still, I'm not comfortable with the fact that the two RS225's will have remaining xmax to go when the M reaches its limit, though. They don't reach the same excursion with the applied voltage as you may assume apparently. Note that the input voltage is divided half for each RS225 if they are wired in series. Recall that a 4 ohm driver requires 0.707 of the voltage needed by its 8 ohm sibling to reach the same excursion, not half of it. When the ER18RNX hits 6 mm, each RS225 will reach only 4.24 mm.

Anyway, you're right. The RS225 is not expensive. Can still be considered to be a good design choice with extra 2.6 dB gained. But if it's Scan-Speak ...

By the way, some people may prefer to have a narrow cabinet---the TMM can be as narrow as 8". The ER18RNX can provide excellent bass in 16-17 liters per driver, too. But if you think a traditional TMM is boring...

Josh

[JonMarsh]

How it models

For anyone curious, my decision to proceed on this is based on basic modeling with the equivalent drive power of 40W/8 ohms, 80W/4 ohms; Xmax is obviously not constant with regards to power or frequency, but for the RS225 alignment it actually stays pretty constant over the 30-50 Hz because of how the response profile is shaped. This is for an output level that runs up to about 80% of Xmax in the low end for any of the drivers; these are constant voltage sweeps.



No boundary reinforcement in this model, it's just anechoic, so in room for a stereo pair I expect pretty solid performance with a cabinet 10" wide (narrow seems verging on the tippy to me), 12-1/2" deep, and about 45" tall. A smaller, lighter, poor man's Ardent. Which of course suggests doing something like this but as a true three way, with the 10F_4424G Discovery series midrange. But somewhere I have to get realistic about how many speakers I'm likely to build this year!

[Paul W]

Jon,
What is the throat diameter for the Excel? The modified WG appears to be very close to a conical throat...is it?

[CraigJ]

But somewhere I have to get realistic about how many speakers I'm likely to build this year!

Your Modula MT MkIII dipole would also be fantastic over a pair of RS270s or RSS315s open backed.

Good luck.

Craig

[JonMarsh]

Jon,
What is the throat diameter for the Excel? The modified WG appears to be very close to a conical throat...is it?

The gods smile on the young and the crazy- obviously, I only fall in the latter category.

The milled waveguide opening for the Excel is 1-11/16", which results in a finished waveguide depth just a hair over 1". It will look pretty conical in the throat area (considering both the tweeter and waveguide construction and matching) and for a little ways beyond until the bell out for the mouth.

It should be easy to use with a 1" thick front panel (tweeter rebated into mounting panel or a 1-1/4" panel (tweeter not rebated then, into mounting panel. Will be using 1" for first test panel (MDF) next weekend, then an LBL panel for cabinet build (3/4" + 1/2").

Got my fingers crossed. :W

[Deward Hastings]

Be still my beating heart . . . an inexpensive waveguide on my (still) favorite tweeter. ;x(

Is (was) that a "H-65"? Does it "work"? And would it work on the (less pricey) RS28?

[JonMarsh]

Your Modula MT MkIII dipole would also be fantastic over a pair of RS270s or RSS315s open backed.

Good luck.

Craig

Obviously ET has not been successful at rooting out all the Bothan spies, as there are a couple of concepts on the drawing board along that line, one Modula MT MkII derived, one Nascent derived, all leaning towards something I'm not sure what to call- 3.5 way? With a reverse half twist? Think waveguide tweeter, 2.5 way midrange (full mid and low mid drivers), and woofers. Just to annoy people, I've got lots of NOS Aurasound woofers, too.

That will be a complicated beastie, though, requiring more afore thought and planning - must postpone thinking about that; and I've still got to wrap up the Ardents and get these two new Modula projects done- will probably take a week off in March to work on them. Taking a four day weekend next weekend.

[Jonasz]

That thing would look good between my W22's... :P

Another interesting tweeter to try would be the RS28F wich Curt already tested crossed at 1kHz without a WG! :E

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=215821

[CraigJ]

Just to annoy people, I've got lots of NOS Aurasound woofers, too.

So you're the one that nabbed the last four NS10s with my name on them. :evil: Well, you did offer to buy them from my if I didn't use them, just didn't have time to run over and get them without an actual design.

So, I switched back to the SS D2608-9130 with MCM waveguide with SS8545s in the Phoenix clone. I'm still getting used to the sound of the 8545s, but gotta say, very nice choice in tweeter/waveguide combo. Almost sounds as good as the DDS/BMS combo in the Isiris Jr., though not quite the dynamics, but a lot less money in drivers and crossovers.

Thank you to what will be a popular design. Off to enlist Evil Twin on a dipole revolution. :heh: Modula MTkIII dipole with upcoming WW.

Young Padawan

[JonMarsh]

That thing would look good between my W22's... :P

Another interesting tweeter to try would be the RS28F wich Curt already tested crossed at 1kHz without a WG! :E

https://techtalk.parts-express.com/s...d.php?t=215821

That's pushing that puppy alright!


Well, look at how my pair of Milleniums test on distortion (just at 90 dB, but still not bad) - very good LF behavior and nice balance of HD2 and HD3.



That's without waveguides, on 9" wide baffle. We'll see next weekends how things fare- the blend from the copper mini-waveguide to the modified MCM is essentially perfect, so I'm hoping for good behavior, at least comparable to the D2608/9130.

I'll be crossing over the Milleniums at about 2400 I expect.

[JonMarsh]

So you're the one that nabbed the last four NS10s with my name on them. :evil: Well, you did offer to buy them from my if I didn't use them, just didn't have time to run over and get them without an actual design.

So, I switched back to the SS D2608-9130 with MCM waveguide with SS8545s in the Phoenix clone. I'm still getting used to the sound of the 8545s, but gotta say, very nice choice in tweeter/waveguide combo. Almost sounds as good as the DDS/BMS combo in the Isiris Jr., though not quite the dynamics, but a lot less money in drivers and crossovers.

Thank you to what will be a popular design. Off to enlist Evil Twin on a dipole revolution. :heh: Modula MTkIII dipole with upcoming WW.

Young Padawan

Well, glad you were able to adapt the D2608/9130 + H65 combo to your Phoenix clone! Not surprised that you like it! That's a pretty sweet behaving combo, both in measurement and the listening I've been able to do. Milled another set of waveguides this weekend for those, for the TMWW trial. Wish I hadn't had to deliver the MT set so quickly, but the outlaws are happy.

Spent much of Sunday messing around with the modded Pioneer player and my digital audio workstation. Got a couple of SACD's captured in 24/176.4 to play around with on the Mac- James Taylor "Hourglass" and Five for Fighting "American Town". Hopefully I will be able to transfer all my SACD collection this way to my music server. It reminds me of taping records in the 70's, as it has to be done in realtime. A little bit different techology, though, with 24/176 on SPIDF, into an RME Fireface 800 hooked up to my Mac Pro running Wave Editor.

[JonMarsh]

Be still my beating heart . . . an inexpensive waveguide on my (still) favorite tweeter. ;x(

Is (was) that a "H-65"? Does it "work"? And would it work on the (less pricey) RS28?

That is a milled down H-65. I'll have time to finish the front panel fabrication and test it this coming weekend, Deward.

Based on the throat configuration, I think it will work well- just as well as the D2608/9130 did. We'll see. Film at 11 - maybe Friday, probably Saturday.

[kvardas]

Jon,

I know you are a very busy person and have contributed tremendously to this forum and are the sole reason why I have such great sounding speakers, but be that as it may, I was wondering if you are planning to add a few details to the forum on how you modded your Pioneer player. I have a 24/96 DAC and would like to venture to better audio sources.

Thanks

Kris

[JonMarsh]

Jon,

I know you are a very busy person and have contributed tremendously to this forum and are the sole reason why I have such great sounding speakers, but be that as it may, I was wondering if you are planning to add a few details to the forum on how you modded your Pioneer player. I have a 24/96 DAC and would like to venture to better audio sources.

Thanks

Kris

Hi Kris,

Send me an email and I'll give you a data dump. It's a bit off topic, and somethings would be better discussed offline. The big incentive for what I did was having access to my SACD library in a format compatible with my Berkeley DAC and RME Fireface. If you don't have SACD's, this may not be so interesting. It will upsample CD's, with pretty high quality, but there are other ways to do that with less effort! (Like Wave Editor from Audiofile Engineering- great tool!)

BTW, "Phase 2" has been entered and seems 100% successful regarding goals. ThomasW has now bought a DV79AVi to have modded also. It's possible to do with some other players, but it's very much tied into specific playback chipsets on the market.

PM or email me; email might be better. I think I have your email somewhere, would have to check; mine is posted in my profile (amazing that has never caused any problems!)

[spadez]

Hi Jon,

What is the status on the Modula TMM MKII? From what I understand you are testing the configuration this weekend, or have I missed the boat? I'm getting quite confused with all the talk of different designs!

[JonMarsh]

I've tested a single box, will be publishing the design in the same PDF as the MT, delayed due to illness. Probably this coming weekend.

This weekend I'm working on the TMWW/TWWW or whatever you want to call it, plus the Modula Xtreme. Oh, maybe the Ardents too, if I can work that in- it's a four day weekend for me, starting Friday!

[spadez]

Sounds good, I envy your four day weekend. What driver configuration is the Modula Xtreme (TM/TMM/etc)?

[savage25xtreme]

Just curious, will the 2.5 way way TMWW Modula Xtreme be a Dueland style crossover? Is that even possible?

I like the way you spell Xtreme too by the way! :T

[JonMarsh]

Sounds good, I envy your four day weekend. What driver configuration is the Modula Xtreme (TM/TMM/etc)?

IF the Seas Millenium Excel pans out in the waveguides prepped for it (to test this weekend), then that will be the tweeter (I'm going with drivers I have on hand). The Accuton C173N-T6-90 is the midrange (7" Accuton), and dual Scanspeak 26W (12867) on each side. This is planned to be a Duelund style three way, center frequency about 800 Hz, nominal crossover points about 250 and 2400 Hz. That could wind up getting tweaked depending on how emulation sounds, but this is pretty likely. Might wind up with a slight spread on the actual Fc of the mid and tweeter points in order to get a small presence range dip if needed to match the dispersion difference between the mid and the waveguide.

Just curious, will the 2.5 way way TMWW Modula Xtreme be a Dueland style crossover? Is that even possible?

I like the way you spell Xtreme too by the way!

Well, the 2.5 way configurations are still based on LR2, as the MT, but that was Steen Duelund's favored two way configuration, though not what results from using his 3 way equation devolved to a two way by low aleph value. I don't see any need to change that. So, the answer is no, but spiritually, yes. :B

[villastrangiato]

With the high end drivers you're using for the Xtreme, you must be hitting an all time high or close to it in budget ($2500-3000?). Wouldn't mind hearing it up against the cost no object Magicos, YG's, and Wilsons at the next CES, though. I'm predicting if you were to rent out a booth, there'd be a lot of red faces on some folks who peddle $100K speakers at such events. :B

[Bear]

With the high end drivers you're using for the Xtreme, you must be hitting an all time high or close to it in budget ($2500-3000?). Wouldn't mind hearing it up against the cost no object Magicos, YG's, and Wilsons at the next CES, though. I'm predicting if you were to rent out a booth, there'd be a lot of red faces on some folks who peddle $100K speakers at such events. :B

If you saw the cost of a booth at CES, then you would know that it would quickly drive Jon's speakers into that price range. :E :T

[villastrangiato]

If you saw the cost of a booth at CES, then you would know that it would quickly drive Jon's speakers into that price range. :E :T

I've seen the cost. That's why a lot of manufacturers rent rooms across town while the show is going on rather than pay several thousand for a cramped noisy niche.

[JonMarsh]

That's why we just try to get together with friends during RMAF over at ThomasW's. I even drove out there from CA with a full system, including the Ardent's in development last fall.

The Modula Xtreme is an experiment to see how good something I can throw together quickly might turn out, as it will just use modifed PE boxes, rather than the scratch built Ardents. I know because of the way things are going at work I'd never have time this year to try building an ISIS klone, and I have too many other project ideas going on, too. This way they might be done by the time our divisional president comes over from Munich in late spring, and he can hear first hand that while I like his Kharma Mini Exquisites, there's reasons I'm not bowled over by them. :B

The Modula Xtremes will incorporate "Ardent" technology, including LBL in front baffles, some of the crossover techniques, including a Duelund based crossover design. (something a few folks didn't think was really possible, until I showed them the drivers measured individually). The target here was doing something a bit nicer in some regards in than the Avalon Indra, similar esthetics, but improve on the woofer complement and crossover integration. I'm really hoping to finalize the crossover tuning on those this weekend, too. It's pretty close, but there's a few specific things I want to evaluate- and I have a BIG box full of the Mundorf wirewound resistors. Hope I picked the right values! :W

[igy137]

Jon, you already have measured the 26w's? Can you share the results with us? Finally, what's going to be the tweeter? Any comments on the Be tweeter listening? I'm still hesitating on it, probably just go with the 6600 or 6620...
Sorry for the lots of questions

[Face]

This weekend.

[JonMarsh]

Jon, you already have measured the 26w's? Can you share the results with us? Finally, what's going to be the tweeter? Any comments on the Be tweeter listening? I'm still hesitating on it, probably just go with the 6600 or 6620...
Sorry for the lots of questions

The tweeter/waveguide combo for the Modula Xtreme isn't finalized yet- per the posts above, this weekend I'll be testing the Millenium Excel with a waveguide.

I'm also mounting the Be tweeters in the Ardents and testing/fine tuning the crossover this weekend. If all goes to plan... :B

And I'll post some data on the 26w's, too. (should I put a list up on the 'frig so I don't forget anything? )

It's going to be a busy weekend, needless to say- especially if the RS225-4's get in on time tomorrow.

[igy137]

Sounds great, hope you'll have time for all that stuff on the weekend
On my side, I was happy enough last Sunday to half-make (with my 2 and a half year old son) an ugly mdf box for t/s measurements ... probably in 20 years or so, I will finish this

[JonMarsh]

We have a saying from the former leader of our development group in Munich: "Slow work takes time". Any kind of serious work takes time...

When your son is older you can be more productive working together! I did one speaker project with my daughter for her, so she has a little experience, but it's not her thing...

Good news, the RS225-4's came in, so I will be able to do the test case for the low frequency alignment of the TMWW 2.5 way concept I'm working on! This is good...

[---k---]

leader of my group says, "under-promise and over-perform."