or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy - Page 137

post #4081 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans View Post

What in the world is that?

That is a marketing ploy to increase the WAF of the diminutive P3s biggrin.gif
post #4082 of 4611
smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Dang--that's the guy who dropped the PhilharMonster cabinets off. I didn't get his license number.

OK, I will fess up. I dropped off the PhilharMonster. I actually was debating calling them "clear thunder" but had been also leaning toward "thunderbolt" after the A-10 or "spectre" after the AC-130 since I am in the USAF.

I came up with the driver choices independent of Dennis but he VERY KINDLY helped me out by agreeing to come up with the crossover design. I think he just took mercy on me and he was probably compelled by morbid curiosity as well.

Here is a quote from the Parts Express Tech Talk forum where I have posted a build thread for this speaker.

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?236783-Active-3-way-pro-sound-drivers


"By way of retroactive introduction I am a physician by trade and have been a sound freak since high school. I have built DIY speakers as kits only in the past (Seas Embla and the AV1 from Danny Ritchie). I've built several home and prosound subwoofers. I enjoy live sound reinforcement which I get to participate in at our fairly large church. Anyway on to the subject at hand.

I, like I assume many of you here, am not a tweaky audiophile type. I appreciate good quality sound but I don't spend tons of time sitting and critically listening for how some nuance of a recording changed because I am now sitting 10 degrees off axis. For me it is more about being enveloped by the music and drawn into it by a system that sounds right and doesn't distract me by doing annoyingly wrong things. In any case my design goals for this speaker are the following.

1) Full range with as flat/even/smooth of a magnitude response as possible. By full range I mean as close as possible from 20hz all the way to 20khz (I fully realize at 40 I don't really hear 20khz anymore).
2) Low distortion. Part of the reason I chose a 3 way is to avoid having to push drivers into ranges where their distortion starts to rise. That is tough to avoid with a 2 way design. 2 way designs can obviously sound excellent but there are limitations with a 2 way that a 3 way avoids. A different set of tradeoffs I suppose.
3) Dynamics need to be excellent. To this end I wanted relatively high efficiency coupled with good power handling to result in very high output capability (for a home system that is). If a speaker is operating 30 db below it's max continuous output then there is plenty of room for all the dynamic range of almost any movies or music while avoiding any compression of the transient peaks...for example if playing at a relatively loud average level of 80 or 85 db on a system capable of 115db cleanly there is really not much likelihood at all that dynamic peaks will be compressed or have their impact lessened.
4) In less specific terms I want a system that is at once powerful, authoritative and dynamic but also with the ability to do all of that with clarity and subtlety when needed."

So that summed up my design goals. I had seen Dennis's Philharmonic line of speakers previously and thought the truncated pyramid on top of a bass bin design made a lot of sense so I copied it. My driver choices and the reasons for them are detailed at the post linked above but I will touch on them here.

So the woofer is the B&C 15BG100 as already mentioned. B&C drivers are very excellent and I have experience with them so I trust them. This isn't a typical prosound woofer; it is less efficient and has much better bass extension. It also has useful excursion of 14.5 mm one way per B&C's Klippel testing backed specs. The bass cabinet is 138 liters net and is tuned to 21.5 hz. That results in some very gentle rolloff from 45 hz down to 21 hz or so after which it rolls off quickly gut not as quickly as a standard reflex alignment . It is probably 5 db down anechoic at 21 hz compared to 45 hz. This gentle rolloff from 45 hz down to Fb is what Dennis is hearing when he states the Phil 3 goes lower. The Phil 3 probably has an F3 20 hz lower than the Philharmonster, but with 450 watts this B&C will put out 111 db from 19 hz and up without exceeding excursion limits or (obviously thermal limits). I chose this alignment for the vented cabinet based on an assumption that it would match well with room gain in many rooms (most imp:)ortantly in my room). I could certainly shorten the vents for a flat response down to about 25 hz with a rapid rollowff below that, but I am planning to use these for a fair bit of home theater so I think I will stick with this alignment with its increased VLF capability. I can add some EQ assistance to the vented alignment if needed. The B&C spec is 94.5 db, but I think Dennis would agree that this is more like 90.5 or 91db 1w/1m as implemented. This agrees with the calculated sensitivity from Unibox and I think the B&C sensitivity spec is hiigh because it includes some peaking response higher in the frequency range that B&C includes in the useable frequency range spec of the driver.

The mids are the 18Sound 6ND430. It is really a prosound midbass. Plain paper cone, neo motor, very low distortion per Zaph's measurements here http://www.zaphaudio.com/6.5test/ The pair of 8 ohm mids had to be wired in series to match the sensitivity of the woofer without requiring dramatic padding which would have dropped the impedance way too low if they had been wired in parallel. I chose MTM mainly to match the output capability of the woofer and the tweeter as well as to try to narrow the vertical directivity in the midrange some since the tweeter has very narrow vertical directivity.

The tweeter is the Beyma TPL150-H seen here. http://www.usspeaker.com/beyma%20tpl150h-1.htm It is a 6" long AMT loaded on an 70 x 30 horn. 102db 1w/1m and it is supposed to sound very good. I wanted the output and sensitivity but didn't want to go with a CD/horn solution because I generally haven't thought they sound as nice as hifi type tweeters. Hopefully this is the best of both worlds. I unfortunately haven't heard it yet.

Actually all I have heard is the bass section so far. It will be 10 days before I get to listen to the final product with the crossover Dennis SO GRACIOUSLY provided.

I never had any intention of doing anything besides building a pair of excellent speakers for myself that were unique in many ways and that fit my unique desires. I think it would be super cool if Dennis would include something like this in the Phil lineup, but I'm sure that would be wildly impractical. The drivers alone are pretty pricey, so the final cost would be quite high but perhaps not prohibitively so.

Loren Jones
post #4083 of 4611
Thanks Loren,

We look forward to your comments on these unique speakers. I also hope you will allow Dennis to comment on what worked better than he thought on these works of art.

I guess you could call them your 'warthogs' then, after the A-10 'warthog'. I got to sit in a warthog a few years ago. I liked it. I am not a pilot, but it was fun at the airshow.
Edited by D54Smith - 5/2/13 at 8:54pm
post #4084 of 4611
Dennis is welcome to comment on any aspect of these that he wants to. He can post the measurements or anything else he would like to as far as I am concerned. They will be at Dennis's for the next two days but I am going to pick them up in about 10 days. After that they will be with me in VA beach.

I will post here as soon as I get the chance to hear them.

I was thinking of the possibility of going active triamped on them but I am betting hearing Dennis' crossover may quickly cure me of that thought process.

Oh, one other name I had considered was "Ultimatum". The rationale was that the WAF was so low that you might get an ultimatum to get them out of the living room...then you have an excuse to create a theater room (or just a dedicated listening room).

Loren Jones
post #4085 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by snotdoc View Post

smile.gif
OK, I will fess up. I dropped off the PhilharMonster. I actually was debating calling them "clear thunder" but had been also leaning toward "thunderbolt" after the A-10 or "spectre" after the AC-130 since I am in the USAF.

Not a fan of the AC-47? Both nicknames would be fun.

As for the speakers themselves, that is quite the load out on the drivers. This should be a very impressive speaker when its done. Please share the results when it is all buttoned up.
post #4086 of 4611
Thank you Dr. Jones for clarifying for us. Please forgive our silliness. Sometimes crowd-sourced marketing works well, we're obviously the wrong crowd. wink.gif

Good luck with your project, and congrats to you for getting Dennis involved. I look forward to your final review.
post #4087 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

Thank you Dr. Jones for clarifying for us. Please forgive our silliness. Sometimes crowd-sourced marketing works well, we're obviously the wrong crowd. wink.gif

Good luck with your project, and congrats to you for getting Dennis involved. I look forward to your final review.

No apology needed for the naming silliness. I really like PhilharMonster smile.gif
I will look forward to giving you all my final review (and more to the point, Dennis' final review once he gets to listen to the pair side by side with Phil 3's and some Soundscapes).

I just ordered the crossover parts last night and can't say how pleased I am to have someone of Dennis' caliber involved in this project. He is a totally generous and genuine guy.

Loren Jones
post #4088 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by snotdoc View Post

He is a totally generous and genuine guy.

Loren Jones

+ ONE!

Dennis is the most generous and genuine person I have perhaps ever known...and certainly so in the audio world which is filled with some great people.

Your A-10's (or whatever the final pick will be) seems a wonderful adventure in HT sound. Please give us a review when you've lived with them for a while.
post #4089 of 4611
Mudslide,

Nice avatar. YB35...you are either a huge airplane geek or a fellow USAF member.

Have a great day.

Loren Jones
post #4090 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by snotdoc View Post

smile.gif

1) Full range with as flat/even/smooth of a magnitude response as possible. By full range I mean as close as possible from 20hz all the way to 20khz (I fully realize at 40 I don't really hear 20khz anymore).


I don't think there's anyone who hears 20Khz over the age of 12.

Ever hear an 18Khz signal? Not much there anyway.
post #4091 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by charmerci View Post

I don't think there's anyone who hears 20Khz over the age of 12.

Ever hear an 18Khz signal? Not much there anyway.

Well, it's 2 octaves above the highest note on the piano, so it's purty high. So--is response beyond 18k, relevant? Some say the brain processes those frequencies even if you don't hear them directly, but that sounds a little mystical to me. If reproduction of extremely high frequencies is important, the logic is probably more like: A tweeter that can reproduce those frequencies smoothly is probably very well engineered and has very low moving mass, and therefore may do a better job with the frequencies you can hear directly.
post #4092 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

That won't stop Monster from suing. They think they hold rights to the word monster no matter how applied. I think they even sued this guy to force him to change his name:


No, they do not have the rights to the word monster no matter how the word is applied.




EDIT:

Sorry I mis-read that. Perhaps their managers THINK they own the rights to the word, but I would hope their lawyers know better.

They would probably take a huge PR hit if they actually tried to sue - as they got laughed out of court. tongue.gif
Edited by Goride - 5/3/13 at 10:52am
post #4093 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goride View Post

No, they do not have the rights to the word monster no matter how the word is applied.




EDIT:

Sorry I mis-read that. Perhaps their managers THINK they own the rights to the word, but I would hope their lawyers know better.

They would probably take a huge PR hit if they actually tried to sue - as they got laughed out of court. tongue.gif
You mean like if they sued a car repair shop? http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/09/monster-cable-learns-nothing-sues-monster-transmission/
Or how about a mini-golf chain? http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/26/monster-cable-at-it-again-sues-mini-golf-company/
post #4094 of 4611
Quote:

Those are actually apples to oranges comparisons to the Philharmonster issue here (Though I am not going to get into the nuances of trademark law in Dennis' Philharmonic thread).

But, as another note, Monster did take quite a PR hit with those filings.
post #4095 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

Well, it's 2 octaves above the highest note on the piano, so it's purty high. So--is response beyond 18k, relevant? Some say the brain processes those frequencies even if you don't hear them directly, but that sounds a little mystical to me. If reproduction of extremely high frequencies is important, the logic is probably more like: A tweeter that can reproduce those frequencies smoothly is probably very well engineered and has very low moving mass, and therefore may do a better job with the frequencies you can hear directly.


Oh, I'm not denying it's good to deal with HF's for designing audio equipment. I'm only referring to the hearing aspect of it.

I'm pretty sure if someone was pumping a 100db 18khz signal into your room for many hours, it would have some physical/emotional effect whether you heard it or not.
post #4096 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by D54Smith View Post

Thanks Loren,

We look forward to your comments on these unique speakers. I also hope you will allow Dennis to comment on what worked better than he thought on these works of art.

I guess you could call them your 'warthogs' then, after the A-10 'warthog'. I got to sit in a warthog a few years ago. I liked it. I am not a pilot, but it was fun at the airshow.

Warthog might not be bad. Warthog is the unofficial nickname for the A-10. A-10's are awesome airplanes. That 30mm cannon is a fearsome thing. The official name is the A-10 Thunderbolt II. Just like F-16 Fighting Falcon is the official name, but the pilots call it Viper.

Loren Jones
post #4097 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by charmerci View Post

Oh, I'm not denying it's good to deal with HF's for designing audio equipment. I'm only referring to the hearing aspect of it.

I'm pretty sure if someone was pumping a 100db 18khz signal into your room for many hours, it would have some physical/emotional effect whether you heard it or not.


I have wondered that myself..........could hearing be damaged by loud high frequencies even though we cannot hear them?!?
post #4098 of 4611
I don't know about that. I haven't seen any specific research on it. There isn't a lot of medical research on that specific question as far as I know. The sensitivity of the ear to such VHF signals is so low that I would be surprised if there was a very high chance of hurting your hearing with loud sounds at such a high frequency. You know the standard audiogram only goes out to 8khz. Occasionally you can find an audiologist who will test to 12khz if you ask them to for a specific reason but 8khz is the standard.

There is some research into overall deleterious health effects of exposure to loud LF noise. This is things like subsonic rumble from an air handling unit on the roof etc. Things that you are exposed to constantly and almost subconsciously. It can create mental and physical malaise, but I don't think you are likely to hurt your ears hearing capability with VLF sounds either.

4khz is the frequency on the hearing spectrum that is most correlated with noise induced hearing loss. We call a notch in the audiogram at 4khz a "noise notch". Hearing loss of old age by comparison is like a hi shelving filter that progressively lowers the HF with a gradual increase in the severity of the reduced sensitivity at HF and a gradual decrease in the corner frequency at which the loss goes into effect.
post #4099 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by snotdoc View Post

Mudslide,

Nice avatar. YB35...you are either a huge airplane geek or a fellow USAF member.

Have a great day.

Loren Jones

Well, not a huge one. I might be rated as a Geek Third Class. smile.gif

I just happen to love the YB35 in all it's past, yet brief, semi-glorious incarnations. Yeah...I'm that old....
post #4100 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by M S View Post

I have wondered that myself..........could hearing be damaged by loud high frequencies even though we cannot hear them?!?

Over 20 years ago when I used to go to computer shows with large hallways and hundreds of computers, I used to get horrible headaches after a time. All those CRT's were putting out a very loud 14khz noise that I could hear. Ssssssssssssss. Couldn't stand it.
post #4101 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by charmerci View Post

Over 20 years ago when I used to go to computer shows with large hallways and hundreds of computers, I used to get horrible headaches after a time. All those CRT's were putting out a very loud 14khz noise that I could hear. Ssssssssssssss. Couldn't stand it.

I used to be able to hear that tone from the old black & white tv when I walked into the house. Can't hear it anymore, tho'. tongue.gif
post #4102 of 4611
Dennis,

I have a question for you…. but a little background first.

Back in the mid 90's I bought my 'Dream' speakers at the time. Thiel CS1.5. Ok, they aren't perfect… but far above the half dozen other speakers I had owned up to that time. Around 2000 I bought a Theater system for my 'man cave' in the basement. It has NHT SuperOnes for LCR and SuperZero Xu for the surrounds and a Velodyne CT-120 Subwoofer.

Recently we decided to downsize our house. At first I moved the 2-Channel Thiel system into the bedroom. But, it just wasn't getting used much there. So I decided to create this hybrid system that violated every audiophile rule. I hooked up the Thiel's to the Onkyo Receiver and replaced the L/R mains with the Thiel's. I ran Audysey and it crossed the sub over at 50Hz, the Center SuperOne at 80Hz and the surrounds at 100 Hz. I am a very happy camper… I have more bass… but it still has the quality that I liked about the Thiel's alone.

I don't notice huge problems with the center channel mismatch. But, I also know that it doesn't have the clarity or the detail of my main speakers. I see on your web-site that you have measured the SuperOne and liked it for the price and are at least a little familiar with it.

Do you know of any mods that can be done with the SuperOne to push it up a level? I assume the same mods could also be done with the Stereo pair of SuperOnes in my bedroom now. I would also consider doing a DIY kit for a center channel. I suppose your Philharmonitor on the side might be an option as well. My listening area is about 15 x 18 ft, so not real large. I am probably 70% music, 30 HT. BTW, I am listening to Bella Fleck-Tales from the Acoustic planet and hoping it never ends right now.

Thanks for your contribution to the music community!
post #4103 of 4611
^^^^
While waiting for Dennis to reply have you considered a Salk center?
post #4104 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by D54Smith View Post

Dennis,

I have a question for you…. but a little background first.

Back in the mid 90's I bought my 'Dream' speakers at the time. Thiel CS1.5. Ok, they aren't perfect… but far above the half dozen other speakers I had owned up to that time. Around 2000 I bought a Theater system for my 'man cave' in the basement. It has NHT SuperOnes for LCR and SuperZero Xu for the surrounds and a Velodyne CT-120 Subwoofer.

Recently we decided to downsize our house. At first I moved the 2-Channel Thiel system into the bedroom. But, it just wasn't getting used much there. So I decided to create this hybrid system that violated every audiophile rule. I hooked up the Thiel's to the Onkyo Receiver and replaced the L/R mains with the Thiel's. I ran Audysey and it crossed the sub over at 50Hz, the Center SuperOne at 80Hz and the surrounds at 100 Hz. I am a very happy camper… I have more bass… but it still has the quality that I liked about the Thiel's alone.

I don't notice huge problems with the center channel mismatch. But, I also know that it doesn't have the clarity or the detail of my main speakers. I see on your web-site that you have measured the SuperOne and liked it for the price and are at least a little familiar with it.

Do you know of any mods that can be done with the SuperOne to push it up a level? I assume the same mods could also be done with the Stereo pair of SuperOnes in my bedroom now. I would also consider doing a DIY kit for a center channel. I suppose your Philharmonitor on the side might be an option as well. My listening area is about 15 x 18 ft, so not real large. I am probably 70% music, 30 HT. BTW, I am listening to Bella Fleck-Tales from the Acoustic planet and hoping it never ends right now.

Thanks for your contribution to the music community!

If you're looking to keep cost to a minimum, see if you can find a used NHT Audiocenter 2. I bought one new many years ago when they were still in production and it has been an excellent center for me. It has worked well with my ADS L1290, Salk HT2-TL, and Soundfield Audio Monitor 1 speakers.

http://www.nhthifi.com/site/pdf/Audio%20Center%202%20Owners%20Manual.pdf

Btw, I also use NHTs for surrounds as well.
post #4105 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by jima4a View Post

^^^^
While waiting for Dennis to reply have you considered a Salk center?
Probably a little more money than I want to spend now…. although most of the time when I try to go cheap… it costs me more in the long run.
post #4106 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saturn94 View Post

If you're looking to keep cost to a minimum, see if you can find a used NHT Audiocenter 2. I bought one new many years ago when they were still in production and it has been an excellent center for me. It has worked well with my ADS L1290, Salk HT2-TL, and Soundfield Audio Monitor 1 speakers.

The only speaker out of that group that I have heard is the Salk HT2-TL. It was really nice with those female vocals… but I don't have a lot of female vocals in my collection. It would go lower and louder than my speakers. But, they didn't leave me with the feeling that I MUST own them. I would like to own them. wink.gif But to be honest they were too big for my room… I have a friend who should be getting his SCST in a month or so…and. I hope to do some serious listening with them. To really listen, in my mind… it takes at least a couple weeks to be sure that you are hearing what you think you are hearing...

I spent a little time trying to find used NHT centers… They seem to be holding their value pretty well. Thanks!
post #4107 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by D54Smith View Post

The only speaker out of that group that I have heard is the Salk HT2-TL. It was really nice with those female vocals… but I don't have a lot of female vocals in my collection. It would go lower and louder than my speakers. But, they didn't leave me with the feeling that I MUST own them. I would like to own them. wink.gif But to be honest they were too big for my room… I have a friend who should be getting his SCST in a month or so…and. I hope to do some serious listening with them. To really listen, in my mind… it takes at least a couple weeks to be sure that you are hearing what you think you are hearing...

I spent a little time trying to find used NHT centers… They seem to be holding their value pretty well. Thanks!

Hi. Sorry-I've been out playing concerts. The NHT Super One is a perfectly OK speaker--no real coloration. I've never done a mod on one, because I never had one in the house long enough. I could probably improve the clarity a little, although they will never sound better than their drivers, which are decent. The tweeter doesn't have a lot of dispersion at the high end, however. I did mod a Super Zero by replacing the tweeter with a Hiquphon 0W1, but that's a very expensive move. They cost over $100 a piece, and the crossover would have to be replaced. You would probably be better off starting over. One of my monitors would work with the tweeter rotated if you have to place the center on its side because of height restrictions. That would be $450. It's definitely a step up from the Super One, but I'm not going to claim it would be a night and day difference. Salk sells the center that I designed to match my Philharmonics, but that's getting close to twice as expensive as one of my monitors. I'm afraid I don't have a perfect option for you. Cheers
post #4108 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Murphy View Post

I'm afraid I don't have a perfect option for you. Cheers

Hey, thanks…. It's hard to get something for nothing in audio… But, I thought I would ask. smile.gif

I'll be considering your monitor… I assume there would be shipping on top of that price.
post #4109 of 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by D54Smith View Post

Hey, thanks…. It's hard to get something for nothing in audio… But, I thought I would ask. smile.gif

I'll be considering your monitor… I assume there would be shipping on top of that price.


Unfortunately, I would have to charge shipping because I have to have it in hand to rotate the tweeter (it involves cutting away some of the mdf in the drill hole). Otherwise it could be shipped directly to you from across the Pacific free of charge.
post #4110 of 4611
So Dennis, any chance you want to throw together a smallish sealed center with the tang band, fountek, and a pair o them SB 18s for those of us (read: me) with wide off axis listening positions??

biggrin.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Speakers
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Speakers › Philharmonic Audio - Dennis Murphy