or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Hey guys...we need a little rallying here...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hey guys...we need a little rallying here... - Page 224

post #6691 of 9844
The Z-10 moniker will work fine. All of in the know realize is was named after the Z-28 Camaro which was famous for providing high performance at low cost wink.gif
post #6692 of 9844
To the "OLD GUARDS":

Get with the time. If you can't adapt, extinction is in your near future (take a look at reccent history - Blockbuster, Tweeter etc.Circuit City).

Who really cares who invented the internet. What I care about is I am paying $40 a month for 16/2 speed. If someone else comes along with a better value, they will have my cash and business.

So my suggestion to you 'old guards', build some SEOS while it's still here. And perhaps you will then feel the need to donate a few bucks to Erich so he could enjoy a late night drink while bustin' his ass to pack up your oders.



cool.gif
post #6693 of 9844
Tux - I know you have pretty good experience with in wall design. We have a new DIY'er looking for some help and would be an easy sell for some SEOS components:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1443078/new-to-diy-faqs-in-here/30#post_22862348
post #6694 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by CZ Eddie View Post

Is there an in-wall or on-wall crossover design anywhere for the Alpha-8 Minion kit?

There's an in wall design for the Fusion-10 Pure and I'm trying to figure out how to get that baffle cut properly. But you would have to contact MTG-90 about how to turn his Minion into a inwall design.
post #6695 of 9844
Please stop any fighting before the people helping us all like erich decide its not worth the trouble
post #6696 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

I have some bad news guys.

Last night I posted the Zilch kit because someone asked about it. .... But I just received an email telling me that I had to remove his name from the site, and that:

"Using Zilch's name in advertising on your website is disingenuous at best and insulting to the vision of the man at worst."


Erich,
Who was the letter from? Are Zilch's designs considered public domain?
post #6697 of 9844
Thanks Mrkazador! That build thread was exactly what I've been looking for.
GZ
post #6698 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by goonstopher View Post

Please stop any fighting before the people helping us all like erich decide its not worth the trouble

Yes. I for one appreciate LTD02's effort to find common ground and relate perspectives. That's often where conflict comes from: a difference of perspective and the difficulty in understanding another's. Let's make this more bipartisan and less "Red Team vs. Blue Team."

 

Both groups and leaders made high performance DIY speakers so much more accessible to more people. They could be considered inflection point, disruptive events/movements...only time will tell. 

post #6699 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwaslo View Post

I see the SEOS designs as more derived from Geddes' stuff than from Ewave. though Ewave certainly got diy interest in waveguides churning.
As LTD, this is not a simple question, but I do find a lot of irony in it. In another forum where Geddes participated, many forum members appear to turn on him in one manner or another when they felt he was not giving away all of his IP to the DIY community, and these same critical members would question the motives of any criticisms he raised about cheaper/alternative (to his) products. At some point I remember Geddes being a little frustrated by some of the commentaries against him because some of those parties seem to be getting some financial benefits from them (i.e. they offered cheaper alternatives to Geddes' kits). Now we have a new party, offering a more refined product (i.e. SEOS vs QSC waveguides), numerous designs, financially very beneficial to the DIY community, all at the expense of the new party (time and financial),.. and the arguments against him are...

Ironic indeed


As Clare Boothe Luce is supposed to have stated, No good deed goes unpunished
post #6700 of 9844
Geez, Yeah call it whatever. The donation is a classy move, nice job.


The "old guard" can keep carrying their torches and beating their chests in Zilch's name all they want.......
post #6701 of 9844
I'll add my 2c to this.

I think Erich's intentions with the Zilch speaker are good, but what I think about that doesn't matter. I think it is appropriate for Erich and DSG to respect the wishes of Evan's estate. Evan's estate has its opinions on how the Zilch moniker should be used and they simply don't coincide with Erich's. Sadly, we can't ask Zilch himself.

I think that Erich can still sell the design because IMO it is public domain. The issue is with the use of the name. The wishes of the estate must be respected IMO.

I am a friend of Erich's and a SEOS contributor. I'm also a friend of Wayne and many in the "old guard" as LTD put it. The fact is that the two groups are quite separate beyond some similar principles like constant directivity and high sensitivity speakers.

I think that at this point it would be best to simply eliminate any formal ties or references between the two groups unless the official stakeholders (Erich with DSG and Chris with ZilchLabs) can come to a peace in private. Short of that, I think we need to move on.

I don't recall Zilch partaking in much drama and we should all honor him by following his example (that goes for all sides...myself included). We are all able to honor Zilch's memory simply by building speakers and helping others enjoy this hobby...which was Zilch's real contribution. I don't think anybody would argue that he would object to that.
post #6702 of 9844
Quote:
I don't recall Zilch partaking in much drama and we should all honor him by following his example

Amen. The times Zilch did employ drama are memorable...drama can serve a purpose just as any tool...often the intent was to put a stop to the drama.

Erich, continue the quest. Thank You for your service.

More data, less Wank. wink.gif
Edited by bg40403 - 1/22/13 at 10:32am
post #6703 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by coctostan View Post

think that at this point it would be best to simply eliminate any formal ties or references between the two groups......I think we need to move on.[n.

.



+1

Let's just march on. Those that want to live in the past, let them be.
post #6704 of 9844
Erich - Any plans for kit(s) using the DE750 driver? Any 2 way compression drivers in the works from Denovo? It would be cool to see a monster kit out there - something like 2 15's and a >1.4" exit compression driver. biggrin.gif
post #6705 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorilla83 View Post

Erich - Any plans for kit(s) using the DE750 driver? Any 2 way compression drivers in the works from Denovo? It would be cool to see a monster kit out there - something like 2 15's and a >1.4" exit compression driver. biggrin.gif

Hahaha...I just sent you a message about this like 15 minutes ago. I have a feeling that we may get each other in a lot of trouble. biggrin.gif

I would love to take on project like this..
post #6706 of 9844
Thread Starter 
gorilla, do you mean the ba-750?

has anybody posted a measurement of that one yet?

also, minor point, erich, there is a typo on the 750 page. the description has 3" voice coil, while the bullet points indicate 2".
http://www.diysoundgroup.com/drivers/tweeters/ba-750.html
post #6707 of 9844
I would think when using the BA-750 you should be using the SEOS15. At that point you're way up there in cost. So you're also using a very expensive woofer. So that would be for very high end builds. In that case, I don't think a kit is a good idea. If going that high end, a custom designed cross over should be used. Whether you can do it yourself, or you hire someone to do it, or follow someone else who has done it for themselves. For instance, I don't use the cross overs in my kits because I can do things like adjust an inductor by 0.1mH at a time to adjust for baffle step losses for their in-situ positioning. Or pad the tweeter exactly where I want it. Or lower the cross over point with lower power handling. At the BA-750 level, this should be happening, imo.
post #6708 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

gorilla, do you mean the ba-750?

has anybody posted a measurement of that one yet?

Bill measured it with the SEOS18

http://www.diysoundgroup.com/forum/index.php?topic=31.0
post #6709 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChopShop1 View Post

I have a feeling that we may get each other in a lot of trouble.

I think that goes without saying. biggrin.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

gorilla, do you mean the ba-750?

has anybody posted a measurement of that one yet?

also, minor point, erich, there is a typo on the 750 page. the description has 3" voice coil, while the bullet points indicate 2".
http://www.diysoundgroup.com/drivers/tweeters/ba-750.html

Yes, my mistake, I was referring to the Big-A$$ 750. tongue.gif I haven't seen any measurements yet though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

I would think when using the BA-750 you should be using the SEOS15. At that point you're way up there in cost. So you're also using a very expensive woofer. So that would be for very high end builds. In that case, I don't think a kit is a good idea. If going that high end, a custom designed cross over should be used. Whether you can do it yourself, or you hire someone to do it, or follow someone else who has done it for themselves. For instance, I don't use the cross overs in my kits because I can do things like adjust an inductor by 0.1mH at a time to adjust for baffle step losses for their in-situ positioning. Or pad the tweeter exactly where I want it. Or lower the cross over point with lower power handling. At the BA-750 level, this should be happening, imo.

This discussion is purely conceptual for me at this point as I haven't even finished my Sentinel builds. wink.gif Always the one to 'look ahead', I was just curious what the steps would be to take the next significant step up. I would agree a crossover would have to be designed for a decent blend. I would also assume that this type of "kit" wouldn't be a big seller as it would be overkill for 99.1% of the guys out there so I can understand not wanting to tie up lots of R&D. Thinking about it all one would really need would be a custom front baffle and the rest could be refined and built by the owner. I also would expect the costs to be higher, but probably on par with the performance one would receive. biggrin.gif
Edited by Gorilla83 - 1/22/13 at 11:35am
post #6710 of 9844
Thread Starter 
that looks pretty darn good.

with the right network, i wonder how low that thing could actually be crossed. in a home a 3" diaphragm is pretty large.

maybe there is a noesis-like possibility with that big driver to just let a smaller horn (even a seos12) "run out" of directivity, transition to omni, and then cross to whatever woofer you want around 400-500hz?
Edited by LTD02 - 1/22/13 at 11:39am
post #6711 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by antisuck View Post

Bill measured it with the SEOS18
Even though it seems to have decent extension on the high frequencies, my guess is if one is going this route it would be worth considering a 3 way with a smaller CD handling the high frequencies.
post #6712 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

that looks pretty darn good.

with the right network, i wonder how low that thing could actually be crossed. in a home a 3" diaphragm is pretty large.

maybe there is a noesis-like possibility with that big driver to just let a smaller horn (even a seos12) "run out" of directivity, transition to omni, and then cross to whatever woofer you want around 400-500hz?
This comment intrigues me - I haven't seen or heard the Noesis, or seen any detailed specs, but at a glance their waveguide doesn't look wide enough to hold a CD pattern down to where one might cross that pricey coax compression driver. Do you think what you described is how the Noesis behaves? Or am I just way off in my estimation?
post #6713 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by antisuck View Post

This comment intrigues me - I haven't seen or heard the Noesis, or seen any detailed specs, but at a glance their waveguide doesn't look wide enough to hold a CD pattern down to where one might cross that pricey coax compression driver. Do you think what you described is how the Noesis behaves? Or am I just way off in my estimation?

Interesting for sure...amking me wonder as well. If so, one would think that with the right design, we could get similar sound and better coverage with this project.
post #6714 of 9844
Info/images on the Noesis
post #6715 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by antisuck View Post

This comment intrigues me - I haven't seen or heard the Noesis, or seen any detailed specs, but at a glance their waveguide doesn't look wide enough to hold a CD pattern down to where one might cross that pricey coax compression driver. Do you think what you described is how the Noesis behaves? Or am I just way off in my estimation?

The pics of the noesis are deceptive. That horn is just about the same width as the SEOS12, it just looks not wide enough because it is taller as well.
post #6716 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"Do you think what you described is how the Noesis behaves?"

the xr1464 performance is listed on 18sounds website. it is a 60 degree nominal horizontal horn and it holds primary directivity to about 1300hz, which is consistent with its width.

this measurement runs down to about 550hz where the pattern is -6db out at about 60degrees. a 15" woofer is going to be down about -3db or a little more at 90 degrees (so less at 60 degrees) off axis at around 550hz, so it won't be a perfect match off axis, but maybe good enough.

post #6717 of 9844
My $.02.

An OS (or conical) style waveguide profile is use to provide constant directivity to as high a frequency as practically possible. However, this profile provides virtually no loading of the bottom end of the pass band. This means in most cases the WG can be used down to 1khz plus or minus some depending on the size of the WG.

When the woofer is chosen judicially, the near directivity of the woofer, which starts at omni at its lowest range, narrows to match the directivity of the WG at the woofers upper end making a matched directivity handoff. Note the woofer itself does not have constant directivity throughout its passband.

With the above in mind, if a three way speaker is the goal, there are likely better options for the midband channel then OS IMO. Keep the CD of the OS WG up top, keep the widening directivity of the woofer down below and choose an appropriate horn with "some" loading, i.e. not OS, but directivity matching the other two elements near where you want to cross. This isn't easy to design! The benefit of the loading of the horn are many at this freq range as the horn will be much smaller than an equivalent OSWG, which will make the crossover design and polar pattern much easier to deal with.
post #6718 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"When the woofer is chosen judicially, the near directivity of the woofer, which starts at omni at its lowest range, narrows to match the directivity of the WG at the woofers upper end making a matched directivity handoff. Note the woofer itself does not have constant directivity throughout its passband."

right. this is just letting the horn cover the territory where the driver would normally go from omni to beaming.

instead of letting the woofer cover the range where it goes from beaming to omni, which for a 15" is say from 1khz to 500hz, just let the horn do the same thing, it will go from beaming (holding its nomnal pattern) to omni (losing directivity control).

i think the reason that it isn't done this way more frequently is that a 500-600hz crossover point is a litle low for something like most 1" c.d.'s such as the dna360 and 3" diameter diaphragm compression drivers used to be EXPENSIVE, but with the ba750, the cost makes it a possibility for more folks to experiment with and it should be fine to cross in that low range (I THINK).
post #6719 of 9844
An interesting idea LTD.
post #6720 of 9844
This is fascinating to me, thanks to all who contributed links/pics/knowledge. I'm sure I've never heard a speaker done this way, probably because the compression drivers are mostly so darned expensive like LTD said - mainly TADs and high-end JBLs I'd guess - but speakers done with bigass compression drivers crossed low seem to garner huge amounts of praise from the few fortunate enough to own, say, Everests and K2s and, well, the big JTRs.

Didn't one of the more famous (among audio geeks, anyway) studies done by Harmon or some such entity conclude that people generally prefer the sound of splashy midrange/treble over more tightly controlled dispersion up high, at least decades ago when the study was done? My memory is hazy.

Someone with skill and equipment and time (not to mention the driver and waveguide) would probably need to run distortion sweeps on a BA in a waveguide appropriate to the task, as a next step to see if this might really work. Dunno if it will ever get to that point, but it's fun to think about. biggrin.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Hey guys...we need a little rallying here...