Originally Posted by Erich H Higher End SEOS Speaker Design Questions:
For anyone interested in the higher end (more expensive component) designs, there are some questions how they should be designed.
What should set the Alpha or Reference Line apart from everything else? Should they all be full range? Should all the woofers have demodulation rings? Should they all be 3-way designs or maybe tower speakers?
Anyone have recommendations for the price point we should be shooting for on the 8", 10", 12", and 15"?
The 3 way idea is interesting to me, but some might not think it's needed.
Thanks for all the hard work, and asking the questions to keep this moving for the past 3+ years.
Originally Posted by ChopShop1
I agree 100% guys, just thought he wanted to keep the numbers lower. If they can head up to that 1500 range or more, the potential would be unlimited. My 4 woofer version of the seosr is a total of about 2k of components or just less with all discounts from group buys.
TD15M-$275 each (assuming group pricing) x4
xover comonents for coax $15-$50 each depending on choice of caps/coils
So like $1900 each for 4 15s and like $1350 for duals....
I love this design. I can't even imagine the output these things have in an enclosed space, when fed enough power to really push them all.
That said, I don't than may others would even have the space for a full set of these monsterrrrrrrs. Though I sure wouldn't mind a set. (But my wallet would not be so grateful)
Originally Posted by rajacat
I vote for beryllium diaphragms for the uber CD. Perhaps the BA 750 could be offered with beryllium diaphragms.
I haven't heard much about the BA or seen any builds with it, at least that I recall. I remember reading about it before it was completed.
Wasn't it supposed to be about as clean as the DNA-360 and reach a good bit lower, (For a lower X-over point)?
Originally Posted by Anthony_Gomez
Reference doesn't mean bigger and doesn't mean full range. You can have a reference sub, monitor and full range. Reference in my eyes is one of two things: 1) take a category and don't compromise. 2) take a platform and don't compromise any more.
Example of 1: If you want full range, you are going to end up with a large multi-way system. Sure, you can do a 24" seos with a big 18" two-way, but that in itself is a compromise at getting those two to integrate.
Example of 2: take something popular like the 12" seos platform, and use the best, most appropriate CD and 12" driver you can to have the best response (power/directivity/phase) you can. Sure, it has some compromises just by having a 12" 2-way, but within that confine, you do the best you can.
Cabinets is a whole different issue and is largely cosmetic.
Then how about an SEOS 15 / 18 with the BA (Though I don't think it will fit the 15) With a 12 or 15 on the bottom, and then do an option to make it an MTM version.
Keep the standard single speaker as a cheaper alternative, that still gets you into "SEOS Reference" at a little lower price point.
Originally Posted by Scott Simonian
Very interested in a high end line!
Full range? That depends. Think about what the product is intended for. I'll jump ahead and claim that the majority are looking for these built for HT purposes and music. This is the most realistic situation and in that case these should be designed with a subwoofer system as an intended supplement for their total frequency response. You'll end up throwing away too much possible capability trying to get these to be fully 'full range'. Now if they are tuned in the 30-40hz range then it's up to the operator if they want to set them as 'large'. Anyway, blah blah. No. Full range should not be the goal. Not for this particular line. More on that in a second.
Price point? For the 15", depending on chosen components should never exceed $1k per speaker. Even that is too much, I think. Somewhere in the $500-700 sounds right. Again, depends on components.
3-way. No. Not on this line. You should concentrate on making this line the 'high end' version of what your best products are now. Not that they aren't nice speakers.
Going off that... a 3-way design would be fun but it is in so many magnitudes more complex overall that I think that demands it's own thread to break down all the variables and nail down a design goal. So going off how damn complex it would be (and that you have enough on your plate as it is) this should be dealt with as a later product.
But that's just my opinion.
Though the ability to turn off the subs, and go pure stereo and still get low enough to cover my favorite records, (Which some play pretty low) would be pretty stellar.
I'm not asking for the output of a dedicated subwoofer, but I know for a fact that most of the 12 and 15" drivers that people are using for these should get deep enough with either enough power, or drivers, or both.
2xTD15x would be way overkill, but the bassheads would rejoice. 2x2512's would be ultra clean, and (from what I can read, as I don't one them) appear to reach low enough to be "Mostly" full range.
I have read about some epic builds, seen lots of people with good measurements, and currently, we have a multitude of good information about the current standard builds, as well as quite a few of the fun builds.
(Such as the SEOSR, Tux's Build, etc.)
No need to "Reinvent the wheel" per say, let's just take what we have, and refine the hell out of it. (Though at this point we are talking about really tweaking the last 5%) As we have a basis of comparison for so many models etc.
Simply pull what we like best out of all of these builds, and go with that.
Speakers Every Owner Supports
Time to chime in.