Interested in SEOS 12 / DNA360 / AE TD12M - have some questions - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 30 Old 11-29-2013, 07:32 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Let me start by saying that I built a pair of Wayne Parham's Theater 4 Pi speakers (a now-discontinued model) years ago, and I fell in love with the dynamics. I always figured I'd build the fully upgraded JBL version when I got around to building a theater. Well, many years have gone by, and there are now a lot more options.

I've been eyeing the SEOS builds for over a year now (especially the Tempest), but I kept wondering how they'd compare to the JBL/B&C 250 4 Pi speakers. Now it looks like the AE mids are the drivers to beat.

Anyway, whatever I build will be used as LCRs behind an AT screen; about 80/20 movies to music. I'll likely power them off a receiver (Denon, Marantz...?) with Audyssey XT32. I understand that they couldn't really be run full range, and I'm fine with that. I plan to run them with four SI 18s each in a 16 cuft enclosure tuned to 16 hz. Lastly, the room is about 6000 cuft. On to the questions.

1. I haven't seen anyone who heard both the Tempest and the DNA360/TD12M. Any comparisons? The price difference isn't too much for me to be concerned about, but is it worth the difference in price and hassle (since I can get the Tempest as a complete kit with assembled crossovers).

2. One thing I really like about Erich's offerings are the CNCed baffles and flat packs. How would this setup work with the 2 cuft flat pack? I'm guessing it would net about 1.5 cuft after the CD, mid, and bracing (unless the bracing is already figured into the size of the flat pack).

3. John Janowitz recommended somewhere around 60 hz tuning if crossing over with the subs at 80. Does that sound appropriate? Would you recommend something different assuming I use the 2 cuft enclosure? I'd probably use three round ports (like the Tempest) for the sake of ease. What length would those port tubes need to be based on that tuning?

4. Anyone happen to have some leftover TD12Ms from the group buy? biggrin.gif

5. Is there anything else I should consider? Any help is appreciated.

Thanks.
trancemitr is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 30 Old 11-29-2013, 11:50 PM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
MrSmithers built the Tempest and the TD12M design. He mentioned the differences he observed between the designs privately, moreso between the Eminence in the Tempest and the AE TD12M in Bill's design, but you contact him to elaborate.

Agreed. Erich's baffles are very nice, I used his blank SEOS baffles and cut my own recess to mount the AE's. Actually, if you have basic wood working skills, the enclosures are fairly straightforward and the schematics are equally manageable as well should you decide to go with Bill's design.

I tuned mine to 50Hz in 1ft^3 as this provided a steep transfer function curve, -3db at 80Hz.

When I ordered my drivers from John (not the GB), the manufacturing time gave me the time I needed to build the enclosures. I haven't seen any GB TD12M's floating around, but if you're ordering 5, there is a discount. If you need assistance, lmk.
robotbunny is offline  
post #3 of 30 Old 11-30-2013, 04:13 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
RB, thanks for the input. I'll PM MrSmithers to get his thoughts.

I saw your thread previously, but after looking again I thought it was pretty interesting to do a separate "chamber" for the CD. I played around with your 1 cuft / 50hz idea. Unless I entered something wrong, WinISD shows the driver exceeding Xmax around 85hz with anything more than about 100W. Has that been a problem, or can I expect it to be a problem if I end up with a decent amp and want to feed it more?
trancemitr is online now  
post #4 of 30 Old 11-30-2013, 06:22 PM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Sure thing.

Thanks. With the waveguide in its separate chamber, you don't have to worry about keeping that section air tight. Only a tiny dab of silicon for the speaker wire coming from the woofer section of the xo. Following Bill's acoustic offsets as measured, it also ensured that the acoustic offset (z-axis) remained unchanged with using gasket tape on only the woofer, I accounted for this on the recess of the woofer cutout.

Ya, you've entered a parameter incorrectly at some point. 1ft^3, 50Hz, slot port 1"x12"x10", F3 ~80Hz, cone excursion at 100 watts is ~33Hz. Crossed at 80Hz (highpass filter) they will never encounter those frequencies anyway.

You'll see that the TD12M in 1ft^3, 60Hz, 2"x12"x14.5", F3 ~75Hz. will yield better results with ~3dB higher spl. I would have done this at the expense of a deeper or taller enclosure and a slightly more complicated port running up the back wall internally. Just worked out that way for my needs, you'll see these trade offs as you model it in various alignments.

-Nate
robotbunny is offline  
post #5 of 30 Old 12-01-2013, 06:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Nate,

Okay, hopefully you can tell me what I've messed up with WinISD. First, I'm using the Pro Alpha version. It won't let me enter all of the parameters, but following the instructions I found online here's what I get.


The green text is what I entered, the blue text was automatically calculated. Trying to correct any of the blue stuff just messes things up, but it all appears pretty close anyway.

Below shows what I get using your 1 cuft, 50 hz tuning.


F3 of 81.84 hz.


As I said, the driver appears to be just under Xmax with only 100W.

Any thoughts as to what may be wrong?
trancemitr is online now  
post #6 of 30 Old 12-01-2013, 08:33 PM
Advanced Member
 
John_E_Janowitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Green Bay, WI USA
Posts: 849
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Xmax is actually 6mm on the TDM's. It is listed wrong in a few places on our site when we pulled a bunch of parameters off the old Lambda Acoustics site from 10 yrs ago. 25mm coil in 19mm gap gives 3mm overhang but based on the Bl curve there is 6mm one way Xmax. That changes things a lot.

John E. Janowitz
Acoustic Elegance, LLC
"Learn from the mistakes of others... you can't possibly live long enough to make them all yourself"
John_E_Janowitz is offline  
post #7 of 30 Old 12-01-2013, 09:14 PM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
John beat me to it. Change that parameter and you'll be golden. These will take 300+ watts input power. The final design is ~94dB sensitive iirc (need to measure), which will get you close to 120dB at 12 feet. cool.gif

TD12M-8ohm
Fs: 38.1 Hz
Qms: 2.99
Vas: 140 Liters
Cms: 0.35 mm/N
Mms: 50 grams
Rms: 4 Kg/S
Xmax: 6 mm (peak)
Xmech: 10 mm (peak)
Sd: 531 cm2
Qes: 0.27
Re: 6.6 ohms
Le: 0.2 mH
Z: 8 ohms
Bl: 17 T/m
Pe(max): 500 Watts
Pe(transient): 1000 Watts
Qts: 0.25
"no": 2.73 %
1W Spl: 96.5dB
2.8V SPl: 97.34dB

Here: http://www.aespeakers.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2377
robotbunny is offline  
post #8 of 30 Old 12-02-2013, 04:42 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Aha! Thanks for the response, guys. That certainly will change a lot. Back to WinISD....
trancemitr is online now  
post #9 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 05:09 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Alright, RB; I like your 1cuft 60hz tuning suggestion. Very flat with a smooth roll off. Here's what I'm thinking on an enclosure. Please verify my math.

I would have separate chambers for the CD and mid like you did. Internal size for the mid would be 15Hx13Wx11D (2145 cubic in) with a 1.5Hx11.5Wx10D slot port. I would use Erich's front baffle and just cut down the height.

The slot port would have 3/4 MDF for its top and each side, use the bottom of the enclosure as its bottom, and it would go through a double front baffle. So the internal space it would actually take up would be 2.25Hx13Wx8.5D (248.625 cubic in).

From what I've read the TD12M takes up roughly 0.10 cuft (172.8 cubic in).

I'm assuming I wouldn't need any additional bracing as the top of the chamber should work for that.

So, 2145 - 248.625 - 172.8 = 1723.6 cubic in ≈ 1 cuft.

Then the outside measurements of the TD12M portion of the enclosure would be 16.5Hx14.5Wx13.25D. If I mount the TD12M pretty high within that space it should leave me room at the bottom for the slot port.

I really wish Erich's 1 cuft flat pack was taller. I'm guessing the SEOS and CD only take up about .05 cuft, so the net cuft for the enclosure would work out fine; there's just no room for a port on the front. I did look at the idea of a round port on the back of that enclosure, but that's no good if I end up wanting to put the speakers close to a wall.

So what do you think?
trancemitr is online now  
post #10 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 05:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Erich H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cincinnati OH
Posts: 5,435
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 648
Port out the side.
Erich H is online now  
post #11 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 08:42 AM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Sounds good trance. Since the enclosure is small, delineations in internal design and treatments can have an impact on how the driver performs. You'll want to add some dampening material to the back wall to absorb frequencies coming off the back of the cone. It would be regrettable to employ a driver of this caliber, and then introduce the opportunity for intermodulation. I used 1" bonded Dacron and adjusted the depth of my enclosure so the material didn't interfere with the port mouth. You may want to double check, but it looks like there will be exactly 1" from the internal port mouth and the back wall. Although, I suppose you wouldn't have to run the dampening all the way down...

Here's what mine looks like internally (not scale).


More importantly though, since this vent will sum correctly with the woofer with the vent located on the front baffle (within 1/4 wave at 50-60Hz) it's important to lessen the possibility of frequencies escaping the port which would amount to reduction of higher frequencies. Bringing this damping material downward would absorb this before it escapes potentially. If you were building a tower with the port really low, for instance, the possibility of exceeding the 1/4 wave would bring the vent out of phase with the woofer.

As far as the bracing, the top chamber and port top will provide enough structural reinforcement. If you want to add a 1-2" cross sectional brace side-to-side, this will help to couple the enclosure sides to reduce panel resonance. Go ahead and add that piece to the net volume. Edit: Rest some material along the cross sectional piece to absorb internal waves as well, a la Parham's 4Pi.

-Nate
robotbunny is offline  
post #12 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 07:12 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

Port out the side.

Erich, not a bad idea. It doesn't give me a lot of port options to cut down on port velocity, though. I think the best I could do is one 4" port about 7" long. That would give me a port velocity of about 13 m/s at 80hz (crossover to subs) with 150W, 21 m/s with 400W (assuming I got a bit crazy). Is that acceptable? With the slot port described in post 9 I'd get about 9.3 m/s with 150W, 15 m/s with 400. Would these differences be noticeable?

While I've got your attention, on your site it lists the 1cuft box as being a net 1.15cuft if used for a sealed design. What all is being accounted for to get to that "net" number? I assume the bracing, and maybe the waveguide and CD. I'm guessing it doesn't (but hope it does) account for the woofer. Is that correct? I'm just trying to figure it all out so I can get as close as possible with the modeling and know how much volume I have to work with for the port(s).

Thanks.
trancemitr is online now  
post #13 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 07:25 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by robotbunny View Post

You may want to double check, but it looks like there will be exactly 1" from the internal port mouth and the back wall. Although, I suppose you wouldn't have to run the dampening all the way down...

Actually, with the double front baffle the port should only extend 8.5" into the enclosure. That would leave me 2.5" to the back wall. Should be plenty. I would definitely want to use at least some dampening material.
Quote:
Originally Posted by robotbunny View Post

More importantly though, since this vent will sum correctly with the woofer with the vent located on the front baffle (within 1/4 wave at 50-60Hz) it's important to lessen the possibility of frequencies escaping the port which would amount to reduction of higher frequencies. Bringing this damping material downward would absorb this before it escapes potentially. If you were building a tower with the port really low, for instance, the possibility of exceeding the 1/4 wave would bring the vent out of phase with the woofer.

Okay, I'm not following 100%. It sounds like if I built as described with the slot port and dampening all the way down there'd be no problem. Would I have the problem you describe if I did the round port out the side as Erich suggested?
trancemitr is online now  
post #14 of 30 Old 12-06-2013, 09:15 PM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by trancemitr View Post

Okay, I'm not following 100%. It sounds like if I built as described with the slot port and dampening all the way down there'd be no problem. Would I have the problem you describe if I did the round port out the side as Erich suggested?

You'll be fine building as described, no problem. What I was describing was the phase relationship between driver and port. With a port and driver in phase, as most front baffle ports are, higher frequencies can escape and a port out of phase with a driver can result in lower frequency loss. It just depends on port frequency and the 1/4 wave distance of that port from the driver. I wasn't suggesting that there is a problem, rather, that higher frequencies would be at play in this design should damping material be absent.

You're good to go. smile.gif
robotbunny is offline  
post #15 of 30 Old 12-07-2013, 05:45 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Thanks, RB. That makes more sense. So if I did the side-ported enclosure, the port and driver would be out of phase, and I could lose lower frequencies. How low are we talking? Would it be in the audible range or below the 80hz crossover?
trancemitr is online now  
post #16 of 30 Old 12-07-2013, 07:42 AM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
No, you can port it front, side, or rear and still be in phase. A port tuning of 100Hz, for instance, the 1/4 wave is close to 6 feet. No worries.
robotbunny is offline  
post #17 of 30 Old 12-07-2013, 08:48 AM
Senior Member
 
mrevo2u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 202
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Not to semi Hijack, but Since we're talking changing the dimensions of the SEOS speakers; what is the minimum depth you could build one and not affect the driver? I'm asking because I want to put behind an AT screen and depth (although width/height isn't) an issue.
mrevo2u is offline  
post #18 of 30 Old 12-07-2013, 09:21 AM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
So long as the baffle width doesn't change and the depth of the waveguide and woofer are on the same axial plane as bwaslo's measured system, it's fine. The nice thing about the TD series woofer, there is no pole vent and could be mounted with the back plate touching the enclosure back if the design warranted it. You can go as shallow or as tall as you want, especially in a sealed alignment. A port in a very shallow enclosure might make it more complicated internally.
robotbunny is offline  
post #19 of 30 Old 12-11-2013, 11:27 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
RB, I never heard back from MrSmithers about the SEOS/TD12M vs. the Fusion Tempest, but I was also interested in the JTR 228. Since you're in the KC area is it safe to assume you've heard them? If that is the case, how would you compare your speakers to them? I was very interested in them for a while (and would still love to hear them), but I figure I can build 7 of the SEOS/TD12M for the price of 3 228s.
trancemitr is online now  
post #20 of 30 Old 12-11-2013, 11:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Martycool007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Liked: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by trancemitr View Post

RB, I never heard back from MrSmithers about the SEOS/TD12M vs. the Fusion Tempest, but I was also interested in the JTR 228. Since you're in the KC area is it safe to assume you've heard them? If that is the case, how would you compare your speakers to them? I was very interested in them for a while (and would still love to hear them), but I figure I can build 7 of the SEOS/TD12M for the price of 3 228s.

I would also be interested in knowing how these Seos-12/DNA360/TD12's would stack up against the JTR's. I am personally interested in building a pair of Seos-15/BMS-4550/JBL2226's that I plan to start on in January, and I would assume that either of these will sound great, and have comparable sound quality to the JTR-228's, but stepping up to the JTR-212's might be a different story!

I already have a single JBL-2226, two BMS-4550's, and am anxiously awaiting the Seos-15's to become available!
Martycool007 is offline  
post #21 of 30 Old 12-11-2013, 05:20 PM
Senior Member
 
robotbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Olathe, KS
Posts: 445
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by trancemitr View Post

RB, I never heard back from MrSmithers about the SEOS/TD12M vs. the Fusion Tempest, but I was also interested in the JTR 228. Since you're in the KC area is it safe to assume you've heard them? If that is the case, how would you compare your speakers to them? I was very interested in them for a while (and would still love to hear them), but I figure I can build 7 of the SEOS/TD12M for the price of 3 228s.

Unfortunately, I have not heard them. I had the opportunity to hear carp's 212's, but I had my son's b-day party the weekend they had the GTG. I think MrSmithers brought his Tempests to the GTG, I'm not for certain, buy he did say the 212's were the best speakers he's heard for both music and movies. At the time of that review, it was noted that he was the owner of the Tempests, but did not make reference to his TD12M's. So, whether or not this was before or after he built the TD12M design is not clear, but I do know what he told me privately as far as the differences between the Bagby and Waslo designs, that the two there were distinct and audibly different in the way the AE driver performed.

Nate
robotbunny is offline  
post #22 of 30 Old 01-02-2014, 10:29 PM
Member
 
jkkwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 25
I've decided on a SEOS design and was trying to decide between the tempest and the SEOS12/TD12M that are being referenced here. Anyone have any idea what differences Mr. Smithers noted? I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to the specs...can someone attempt to explain in a subjective way what the differences/advantages would be of one over the other?
jkkwaz is offline  
post #23 of 30 Old 01-03-2014, 03:51 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
jkkwaz,

Here is what Mr. Smithers told me specifically about his views on the Tempest vs. SEOS/TD12M:

The Tempests are "a large percentage of the AE version's performance with a chunk of savings. Sometimes it's hard to notice the difference between the two, sometimes it's easy to pick it out but it's by no means a "Huge" difference. I do prefer the AE anytime I can tell a difference, but again, not by a lot. I'm sure even this would be different for different people. If you go SEOS it's really about what size you need/can fit and what budget/price range you're looking at, they all use the same or similar components and all the XO work was done by some sharp guys."

I hope that helps. I've decided to go with the SEOS12/TD12M when I get to the point in my theater build for the speakers. I only wish that were sooner... tongue.gif
trancemitr is online now  
post #24 of 30 Old 01-03-2014, 05:38 PM
Member
 
jkkwaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 199
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 25
Thanks! That totally helps! I'm thinking that the simplicity of being able to have the flat packs and assembled crossovers for the Tempests would make it worth it. Does anyone know if the front baffle for the tempest and the flat pack will work with the td12m or does that driver require different box dimensions?
jkkwaz is offline  
post #25 of 30 Old 01-03-2014, 05:49 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Using the TD12M you really want to go with something more around 1 cuft (tuned ~ 60hz), whereas the flat pack for the Tempest is 2 cuft. I've been thinking of going with what Erich calls the AE sealed front baffle and the 1 cuft flat pack. There's not a lot of room for a port on the front of that baffle, however, so you'd have to figure out a port. Like Erich said earlier in this thread, a side port may be a good way to go.
trancemitr is online now  
post #26 of 30 Old 01-22-2014, 03:55 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Well, I went ahead and ordered the drivers from AE (2-4 weeks for those), the crossover parts from PE, and the CD, horn, and 30" front baffle from Erich. I'm pretty sure I'm going to build the separate chamber design like robotbunny, but I'm not positive on dimensions and such yet.

I'm looking forward to the build, but it may be put on the back burner for a bit while I finish the basement. It was recently finishing my subwoofer build that pushed me over the edge to order the parts for these LCRs. It should be a fun project. I'll start a build thread when I get it started.
trancemitr is online now  
post #27 of 30 Old 01-22-2014, 06:49 PM
d_c
Advanced Member
 
d_c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: KCMO
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 103
I'm just a little bit behind you. I still need 2 td12m and the xo parts. Everything else has been ordered or is collecting dust. These are some amazing speakers - we are in for a treat. Have you heard a set yet?
d_c is online now  
post #28 of 30 Old 01-22-2014, 06:57 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
No, I haven't heard them yet, which has me a little nervous, but from all accounts they sound like exactly what I'm looking for. I was kind of curious about a SEOS 15 / TD15M combo, but I'm not sure what that would get me except a little more efficiency.
trancemitr is online now  
post #29 of 30 Old 01-22-2014, 09:04 PM
d_c
Advanced Member
 
d_c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: KCMO
Posts: 750
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Robotbunny demoed his for me and I was sold. They look like very nice pa speakers, but sound incredible. Very true sounding, which I liked most. We listened to only music, but I think they will really shine for ht. I can't wait to build mine.
d_c is online now  
post #30 of 30 Old 02-17-2014, 07:54 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
trancemitr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Bellevue, NE
Posts: 232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Alright, the last of my parts arrived this week. After looking at the baffle (without a woofer cutout) I've got some questions. The pic below explains what I'm looking for. Sorry if this is pretty rudimentary stuff.



First, "A" is the distance between the baffle cutouts for the waveguide and the woofer. What is this supposed to measure? Is this the "z offset" Bwaslo mentioned? "Z axis correction (as measured) is: -48.5mm... set woofer Z to 6.3mm-48.5mm= -42.2mm." That would give 1.66".

Second, "B" is the depth difference between the waveguide and the woofer. Bwaslo said "Tweeter is about 0.25" further out than woofer front... for design, move woofer forward 0.25"." Since the waveguide is flush with the baffle, Does this mean the woofer should stick out 1/4", or does it mean they should be even?

Thanks.
trancemitr is online now  
Reply DIY Speakers and Subs

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off