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 297

post #8881 of 9847



As little size comparison for the 8's vs. the 12's.
post #8882 of 9847
Nice perspective. I will be interested in what you think of this system, particularly the center. I am considering doing the Tempests for L & R with the Fusion 8 MTM center to replace my Klipsch reference LCRs.
post #8883 of 9847

Are those the Minon's vs. the Tempests???  I guess I didn't realize how much bigger the Tempests were....bigger is better right?!?

post #8884 of 9847
no thats fusion 8's and the Tempests, however the minion is in the same size box as the Fusion 8
post #8885 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpilk View Post




As little size comparison for the 8's vs. the 12's.

Thanks for the pic! That really does put it in perspective.
post #8886 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpilk View Post




As little size comparison for the 8's vs. the 12's.

Off topic:
Is that a Lite Cylinder in the bottom right?

I run 33# tanks in my offroad vehicle and love being able to see my fuel level. They make them about 10 miles from me. Super neat process to make them.
post #8887 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sibuna View Post

no thats fusion 8's and the Tempests, however the minion is in the same size box as the Fusion 8

Correct...it give some perspective to the size difference.
post #8888 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnDean View Post

Off topic:
Is that a Lite Cylinder in the bottom right?

I run 33# tanks in my offroad vehicle and love being able to see my fuel level. They make them about 10 miles from me. Super neat process to make them.

Those are not mine...just a pic I pulled off another thead to show the size of the 8's vs. the 12's.
post #8889 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpilk View Post




As little size comparison for the 8's vs. the 12's.

If the Fusion 10 Pure was a 10" waveguild and a smaller baffle it would be the perfect compromise between the two.
post #8890 of 9847
The Pure with a 10" waveguide has been designed. If Erich wants to produce it, it'll be made into a kit. If not the XO is available if someone is interested. It is a really nice size IMO.
post #8891 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

The Pure with a 10" waveguide has been designed. If Erich wants to produce it, it'll be made into a kit. If not the XO is available if someone is interested. It is a really nice size IMO.

Ok..me wants it. Of course I have zero skills so I'd have to have some help. rolleyes.gif Erich...are you reading this? Tux...is the box design on paper somewhere? I'd bet it would be a pretty good seller.
post #8892 of 9847
Those will be done. Just remember, the waveguides have only been here about 12 days or so. And I'm still packaging other things and working on all the preorders. It's a lot to do by myself.

There are changes coming to the site and the way things are currently done to streamline things.
post #8893 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

The Pure with a 10" waveguide has been designed. If Erich wants to produce it, it'll be made into a kit. If not the XO is available if someone is interested. It is a really nice size IMO.


Can you tell me what this would do instead of the 12" waveguide it already comes with?
post #8894 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

Those will be done. Just remember, the waveguides have only been here about 12 days or so. And I'm still packaging other things and working on all the preorders. It's a lot to do by myself.

There are changes coming to the site and the way things are currently done to streamline things.

Ok..hey do me a favor Erich and stop everything you're doing and design me a flatpack and baffle, crossover (assembled of course) and ship me out 3 Pure-10 kits with a 10" WG. Dual slot ports, 12" wide, 21" high.... biggrin.gif
Just kidding of course.

I wish I was closer...I'd come over, bring my 5 boys with me, and do the grunt work so you could take care of all the finer details...it looks like a large undertaking for any one person and I appreciate it.
post #8895 of 9847
Well, to be honest its a step back for the added benefit of size. Thankfully though its very minor. What it really amounts to is that the SEOS 12 has a solid grip on directivity at the cross over point whereas the SEOS 10 starts to lose directivity a hair below the XO. This amounts to a technicality more than anything.

Another draw back is the seos10 doesn't have as much output, so the filter is a little less protective on the CD. Again, minutely less.

Both very reasonable trade offs for the size IMO. But the SEOS 12 is really good. And I should say, subjectively, I thought they were identical. The above is all paper talk.
post #8896 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

Well, to be honest its a step back for the added benefit of size. Thankfully though its very minor. What it really amounts to is that the SEOS 12 has a solid grip on directivity at the cross over point whereas the SEOS 10 starts to lose directivity a hair below the XO. This amounts to a technicality more than anything.

Another draw back is the seos10 doesn't have as much output, so the filter is a little less protective on the CD. Again, minutely less.

Both very reasonable trade offs for the size IMO. But the SEOS 12 is really good. And I should say, subjectively, I thought they were identical. The above is all paper talk.


Well count me in too!!!!
post #8897 of 9847
Dunno if people are interested in reading interviews, but here is one with Speaker Dave littered with great information about horns and speaker design in general:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/intervis/david_smith_e.html
post #8898 of 9847
What would be a good sub to pair with the fusion 10s if using 3 in the front for LCR and possibly fusion 8s or rumored 6s for surrounds?
post #8899 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claybe View Post

What would be a good sub to pair with the fusion 10s if using 3 in the front for LCR and possibly fusion 8s or rumored 6s for surrounds?
Martysub smile.gif
post #8900 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by chalugadp View Post

Martysub smile.gif

Yes I have been looking at this but that thing is a beast! I don't have the room but would like to build a minimarty if one exists!
post #8901 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

Well, to be honest its a step back for the added benefit of size. Thankfully though its very minor. What it really amounts to is that the SEOS 12 has a solid grip on directivity at the cross over point whereas the SEOS 10 starts to lose directivity a hair below the XO. This amounts to a technicality more than anything.

Another draw back is the seos10 doesn't have as much output, so the filter is a little less protective on the CD. Again, minutely less.

Both very reasonable trade offs for the size IMO. But the SEOS 12 is really good. And I should say, subjectively, I thought they were identical. The above is all paper talk.

So Tux you've been around and behind some of these designs. What happens, in real terms, when you step down from the Tempest 12's to the Fusion or Alpha 8's (or Achemy-8). I'd assume the upper end has got to be very similar, correct? Is there much of a difference in dynamics through the midbass region. I'm thinking of the lower piano and guitar ranges down into the upper bass guitar stuff. I get a kick out of feeling that stuff. I've done some size measurements and frankly the 12's are borderline too big to put up front. The 8's...no problem. Maybe I'll wait to see if the Fusion 10 w/ 10" WG develops.
post #8902 of 9847
Kpilk

The biggest downside to downsizing, is mid bass output capability, and lowest frequency of directivity control.

The first part. I've kind of bantered about my thinking on mid bass "slam or punch". Personally, I don't get that. If the system needs more mid bass (100 to 200hz) then eq it. Now, what's the big deal the? Well, mid bass is the most difficult band to produce for the loudspeakers we're interested in (the type that cross to a subwoofer at 80hz) which is probably why there's so much talk about it. The reason its difficult for the speaker is the typical spectal content we see in most playback material, and the baffle step losses really influence this region. Another complexity to add to the situation is that more often than not, the room robs SPL from this region, which I usually blame on the vertical (floor and ceiling) reflections. So we have a demanding source, a demanding room, and a demanding law of physics all at play right in the mid bass. How do we over come that?

1. EQ the speaker the way we like the mid bass to sound and turn down the volume.

2. EQ the speaker the way we like the mid bass to sound and increase the speaker capability.

3. Try to find magic drivers and amplifier combinations to give us great mid bass.

Well, 3 is tongue and cheek on my part. And nobody actually does this in the literal sense. What they do is number 2, and when they find a more capable speaker they praise it's mid bass. And really there's nothing wrong with that.

So what does stepping down from the tempest to the Alchemy do to the mid bass? Reduce the capability to reproduce mid bass - significantly. That is entirely SPL dependent however! IF you listen at -15 dbMV like I do (unless I'm testing stuff) then the 8" should have the guts. The 10" certainly does for me, crossed at 80hz.

Ok, so what about this lower directivity thing. This one is more simple. The larger the speaker diameter, the lower in frequency it "beams". That is, it starts to become directional lower in frequency. For the 12", you might see real world beaming at 500hz whereas the 8" more like 800hz. What this means is there will be a smoothing directivity transition to the 90 degree horn/waveguide, and it'll keep more sound off the walls from say 500 to 800hz. And all the other benefits of directivity that gets talked about.

One last thing. A larger woofer inherently has higher sensitivity and usually better TS parameters for getting bass. All that is driver dependent though. The mid bass capability and directivity are faithful laws of physics you can be sure of just by looking at the speaker.

Hope that helps.
post #8903 of 9847
Awesome post, Tux!! Thanks!!
post #8904 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

Kpilk

The biggest downside to downsizing, is mid bass output capability, and lowest frequency of directivity control.

The first part. I've kind of bantered about my thinking on mid bass "slam or punch". Personally, I don't get that. If the system needs more mid bass (100 to 200hz) then eq it. Now, what's the big deal the? Well, mid bass is the most difficult band to produce for the loudspeakers we're interested in (the type that cross to a subwoofer at 80hz) which is probably why there's so much talk about it. The reason its difficult for the speaker is the typical spectal content we see in most playback material, and the baffle step losses really influence this region. Another complexity to add to the situation is that more often than not, the room robs SPL from this region, which I usually blame on the vertical (floor and ceiling) reflections. So we have a demanding source, a demanding room, and a demanding law of physics all at play right in the mid bass. How do we over come that?

1. EQ the speaker the way we like the mid bass to sound and turn down the volume.

2. EQ the speaker the way we like the mid bass to sound and increase the speaker capability.

3. Try to find magic drivers and amplifier combinations to give us great mid bass.

Well, 3 is tongue and cheek on my part. And nobody actually does this in the literal sense. What they do is number 2, and when they find a more capable speaker they praise it's mid bass. And really there's nothing wrong with that.

So what does stepping down from the tempest to the Alchemy do to the mid bass? Reduce the capability to reproduce mid bass - significantly. That is entirely SPL dependent however! IF you listen at -15 dbMV like I do (unless I'm testing stuff) then the 8" should have the guts. The 10" certainly does for me, crossed at 80hz.

Ok, so what about this lower directivity thing. This one is more simple. The larger the speaker diameter, the lower in frequency it "beams". That is, it starts to become directional lower in frequency. For the 12", you might see real world beaming at 500hz whereas the 8" more like 800hz. What this means is there will be a smoothing directivity transition to the 90 degree horn/waveguide, and it'll keep more sound off the walls from say 500 to 800hz. And all the other benefits of directivity that gets talked about.

One last thing. A larger woofer inherently has higher sensitivity and usually better TS parameters for getting bass. All that is driver dependent though. The mid bass capability and directivity are faithful laws of physics you can be sure of just by looking at the speaker.

Hope that helps.

Somehow you put things in words that I understand. A lot of days I stumple around here and get lost by some of the genuis talk the other designers use.

I'd like to order a LCR but I keep telling myself to let Erich get caught up. If I don't watch it, Spring will be here and I know how the grass business gets in April. Well that and I haven't decided what I want.
post #8905 of 9847
Ha, ok good. Sometimes I still feel like, 'does this make sense'.
post #8906 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

Ha, ok good. Sometimes I still feel like, 'does this make sense'.

I think you just sold me on your fusion pure speakers for my fronts. I will have two big subs and I like the size/price compared to tempest . I like the 205 cd and with second sub don't have room for 30" tux 1099.
post #8907 of 9847
Speaking of the 1099, do we have any final dimensions of the cabinets?
post #8908 of 9847
Thanks for taking the time to respond Tux. Very helpful. It all makes sense to me and confirms what I was thinking (although my thought processes are pretty neanderthal compared to yours. Something like, "Big speaker better than small speaker...me like."

I guess if there's no downside to the Tempest and the size is not an option, they would be the 'go for it and never regret it' speaker. The Pure is a great option too. Going to pull the trigger as soon as the assembled XO's are ready. Thanks again.
post #8909 of 9847
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trepidati0n View Post

Speaking of the 1099, do we have any final dimensions of the cabinets?

I posted them somewhere. I think it was 12x38 iirc.
post #8910 of 9847
Not sure if this is the best thread for my question, but any advice on setting up seos waveguides? I read the paper at the beginning of this thread about the exaggerated toe-in. Are people putting these in the front corners of their room and toed-in at 45 degrees or more? What about with an AT screen; should they be behind the screen or still in the corners? Minimum distance from front (sound treated wall)? My dedicated room is 19' wide with a 150" scope AT screen. Lp is 13' from screen (1x screen width more or less). I can place the seos15's anywhere from about 8' apart to 17' feet apart. My seos 15's are still on their way, but trying to design/layout my false wall.
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...