AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › SEOS12/2512 Build
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SEOS12/2512 Build - Page 11

post #301 of 353
8/30/12 at 5:06pm
can you take a picture of the whole crossover? i like to see it for future reference

thanks
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #302 of 353
8/30/12 at 8:00pm
One thing to note is that when you window your measurement, your low frequency measurement becomes unreliable (and usually downright nonsensical). Typically the lowest frequency data you can start to believe is about 2/(window time) in Hz. i.e. with a 2msec window, you could believe down to maybe 1kHz.

That said, it does look like the response is pretty flat. BUT, I think I might bring the high end down a little, that's bound to sound pretty bright in most rooms and with most material unless you have a well-damped room. If your receiver has EQ, then no problem, you can do it there with a "house curve". Or you can do it in the "L-Pad" section of the crossover (yeah, I know, you'd probably not want to go into the itchy stuff again... I never use fiberglass fill anymore for that reason!). You could change R8 to about 5 ohms to make the speakers sound warmer to do that if you wanted. Also, using with a subwoofer helps also - odd thing is that speakers with flat high end will sound more balanced if low bass response is improved.

Glad the crossover issues got worked out, though. Your center channel measurement does look like the gating is off or the measurement system has latched onto a reflection rather than the main impulse response.
Reply
Reply
post #303 of 353
8/31/12 at 7:01am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by datranz View Post

can you take a picture of the whole crossover? i like to see it for future reference
thanks

Sorry. I should have taken a full shot of the "fixed" board before I closed up the boxes. Below are a full shot of the "old" board and partial shot of the "fixed" board. Hopefully you get the picture with both.

"Old" Board



"Fixed" Board
Reply
Reply
post #304 of 353
8/31/12 at 7:13am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwaslo View Post

One thing to note is that when you window your measurement, your low frequency measurement becomes unreliable (and usually downright nonsensical). Typically the lowest frequency data you can start to believe is about 2/(window time) in Hz. i.e. with a 2msec window, you could believe down to maybe 1kHz.
That said, it does look like the response is pretty flat. BUT, I think I might bring the high end down a little, that's bound to sound pretty bright in most rooms and with most material unless you have a well-damped room. If your receiver has EQ, then no problem, you can do it there with a "house curve". Or you can do it in the "L-Pad" section of the crossover (yeah, I know, you'd probably not want to go into the itchy stuff again... I never use fiberglass fill anymore for that reason!). You could change R8 to about 5 ohms to make the speakers sound warmer to do that if you wanted. Also, using with a subwoofer helps also - odd thing is that speakers with flat high end will sound more balanced if low bass response is improved.
Glad the crossover issues got worked out, though. Your center channel measurement does look like the gating is off or the measurement system has latched onto a reflection rather than the main impulse response.

Hey, Bill

They sound great. Thanks for all your help!!!

On the high end, my AVR's EQ (MCACC) trimmed some of the high end off of the mains. I'm working on acoustic treatment, so that should help, too. To me, they don't sound so bright. I'll get input from other/younger ears this weekend.

As odd as it may sound, they didn't sound that bad with the wonky tweeter setup I did. Now they sound phenomenal. Night/Day improvement over my Paradigms.

To your point, they blend very well with the sub and provide a full sound. I only have a 12" paradigm sub, but it with the 2512's give a healthy kick to the chest. I'm extremely happy.

On the center, maybe it's because it's picking up the screen wall reflections? I measure the left and right at an angle to the front/side walls but just pulled the center straight forward. I'll try some re-testing.

Thanks, again
Reply
Reply
post #305 of 353
8/31/12 at 8:37am
Good job Java. Anyone who has wired up a crossover has mixed up a few things.

What you heard when they were "mixed up" is about what people will hear when they a newb tries to implement a DSP crossover without proper design. You can't always tell something is off without a frame of reference. I've seen commercial speakers that measure that poorly and people thought they were great.

I'm not suggesting that a DSP is inherently bad, but in the wrong hands you end up with that kind of response.

With those components and Bwaslo's design you are in good hands. It should be night and day.
Reply
Reply
post #306 of 353
9/1/12 at 2:30pm
Thread Starter 
Surrounds. Decisions...

I think I have the mains sorted out so it's time to move on to the surrounds.

I've been bouncing between two BWaslo designs. The Malcolm and Designer 10.

I already bought the waveguide (glossy, this time), DNA-350, and Designer 10 woofers. I was all set until I saw Erich's Malcolm baffle and discussion about kits.

On the one side, I like the Malcolm since its shape (short/wide), seems like it a good fit for on the wall. I also think they look cool. But, the crossover (i.e., 4 tweeters, etc.) is kinda scaring me given my goof on the mains' crossover.

On the D10 side, they are pretty similar to the mains I just built and I have got the bulk of the gear ready to go. The downside is they won't look as good on the wall (may be wrong on that) and looking at the pre-made baffles, I don't think I can use them. The baffles have the woofer cutout at 10.15 and designer 10's are 10.625.

I was concerned with the height of the D10 boxes being too big to get the full tilt needed (-20 degrees), but I played around with the mounts I'll be using: http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?partnumber=182-392, and found that mounting them in the center gives around 13 degrees tilt, but mounting it on the bottom quarter can provide up to 25 degrees tilt. Given these mounts are heavy duty, I'm thinking this is doable.

So, I'm thinking to "custom" build an 18" BWaslo D10. Again, I already have the drivers/WG and the pre-made baffles don't look like they will work.

Thoughts?

This "Modified BWaslo Designer 10" modified (lose the fins)


Tilt Test. Using 19" board mounted on the lower 1/4 yield a tilt range up to -25 degrees
Reply
Reply
post #307 of 353
9/2/12 at 7:24am
Thread Starter 
Final Outcome Page

I updated the 2nd post of this thread with the final outcome for future readers. http://www.avsforum.com/t/1417294/seos12-2512-build#post_22162851

Please let me know if you think I need to add anything.

Thanks again to all that have helped me. I could not have done this without you. Thank you.
Reply
Reply
post #308 of 353
9/4/12 at 4:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Java View Post

Surrounds. Decisions...
On the D10 side, they are pretty similar to the mains I just built and I have got the bulk of the gear ready to go. The downside is they won't look as good on the wall (may be wrong on that) and looking at the pre-made baffles, I don't think I can use them. The baffles have the woofer cutout at 10.15 and designer 10's are 10.625.

It may be possible to enlarge the opening to 10.625 using a 1/4" rabbeting bit and flush trim bit. Having it in hand would help clarify. Another option, probably easier and less prone to goofing would be to cut your own 10.625 template and clamp it down over the pre-cut baffle and use that to cut the larger opening. Or you could talk Erich into selling SEOS templates so you could cut your own baffles to size.
Reply
Reply
post #309 of 353
9/4/12 at 5:10am
Java-

I would go with the Malcolm's if it fits your space better. The performance differences will be negligible. If anything, I'd give the edge to the Malcolms. The shorter Malcolms do have the advantage of wider null spacing due to their shorter center-to-center distance. This is an advantage with surrounds given their needed dispersion pattern.

You will get the crossover right. Just post pictures and let the guys on the forum confirm if it is wired properly.
Reply
Reply
post #310 of 353
9/4/12 at 5:21am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobeer4don View Post

It may be possible to enlarge the opening to 10.625 using a 1/4" rabbeting bit and flush trim bit. Having it in hand would help clarify. Another option, probably easier and less prone to goofing would be to cut your own 10.625 template and clamp it down over the pre-cut baffle and use that to cut the larger opening. Or you could talk Erich into selling SEOS templates so you could cut your own baffles to size.

Depending on the route I go, if I need a different woofer cutout I think using Erich's blank baffles would be best. I forgot he has the blanks already made up with the SEOS cutout (the PITA part): http://www.diysoundgroup.com/speaker-baffles/seos-19-tall-baffle.html. I can just use a circle jig to cut out the woofer cut outs.
Reply
Reply
post #311 of 353
9/4/12 at 5:34am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by coctostan View Post

Java-
I would go with the Malcolm's if it fits your space better. The performance differences will be negligible. If anything, I'd give the edge to the Malcolms. The shorter Malcolms do have the advantage of wider null spacing due to their shorter center-to-center distance. This is an advantage with surrounds given their needed dispersion pattern.
You will get the crossover right. Just post pictures and let the guys on the forum confirm if it is wired properly.

I'm so confused... wink.gif

I'm bouncing all over the place on the surrounds. Here's the sub-thread in the Rally thread: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1291022/hey-guys-we-need-a-little-rallying-here/5130#post_22365524

Erich raised a good point on the difference in efficiency between the designers and the eminence drivers. I'm now leaning heavily toward using Tuxedocivic's Delta 10A design.

Looking at the Designer 4 sensitivity (SPL: 85.5 dB 2.83V/1m) versus the Delta 10A (SPL: 98.8 dB 1W/1m), the difference is like 10dB, right? Given my fronts are slightly higher, don't you think the Delta 10A are a better fit?

I'm barely keeping my head above water with single drivers. Dealing with 4 drivers is confusing. Is the sensitivity changed with multiple drivers? Also, how do 4 4" drivers compare sonically with 1 10" driver? Low end? I'm crossing at 80hz to sub, but I'm concerned/confused on how the 4" drivers will reach down.

Thanks for the input and help, Coctostan
Reply
Reply
post #312 of 353
9/4/12 at 6:28am
When I mentioned efficiency, I was thinking along the lines of your DS-10 versus the Delta 10A. Not sure on the four 4" woofers compared to those other designs.

At some point in the near future I'm going to shut the site down for a few weeks so it can be updated with much more information on each design.
Reply
Reply
post #313 of 353
9/4/12 at 6:41am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

When I mentioned efficiency, I was thinking along the lines of your DS-10 versus the Delta 10A. Not sure on the four 4" woofers compared to those other designs.
At some point in the near future I'm going to shut the site down for a few weeks so it can be updated with much more information on each design.

Understood. The Designer 10 (SPL: 90.1 dB 2.83V/1m) is more efficient than the Designer 4 (SPL: 85.5 dB 2.83V/1m), so your point is amplified. Still don't know how multiple drivers impact those numbers, though.
Reply
Reply
post #314 of 353
9/4/12 at 7:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Java View Post

Still don't know how multiple drivers impact those numbers, though.

 

Like 3db for every doubling of drivers or like 6db increase for 4 drivers v/s 1 but its rarely exactly that much, 3-6db increase is prob inclusive of the actual increase as it depends on response shape and what has to be done with crossover to keep flat or slightly tilted through crossover range.....

Reply
Reply
post #315 of 353
10/19/12 at 3:07pm
Hey Java, which black paint did you use? Did you prime?
Reply
Reply
post #316 of 353
10/19/12 at 3:50pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokarz View Post

Hey Java, which black paint did you use? Did you prime?

Hey Smokarz,

I used Rustoleum oil based flat black. I used it with a foam roller. I tried it with a rattle can, but it looked like crap.

Yes. Definitely prime. The mdf soaks up the paint, especially the edges. I did 2-3 coats each box. I found Zinsser Cover-Stain worked the best for me.

Here are my "tips":
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1417294/seos12-2512-build/210#post_22318116
Edited by Java - 10/19/12 at 4:06pm
Reply
Reply
post #317 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:00pm
There was a guy on the PE forums that gave a good tip about sealing mdf with diluted wood glue. He diluted 50/50 with water, then rolled it on. I used that method with my NHT clones and it worked really well.
Reply
Reply
post #318 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:13pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

There was a guy on the PE forums that gave a good tip about sealing mdf with diluted wood glue. He diluted 50/50 with water, then rolled it on. I used that method with my NHT clones and it worked really well.

Was this it? http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?219784-What-is-the-best-way-to-paint-mdf/page2

or http://techtalk.parts-express.com/entry.php?22-My-quot-canned-quot-spray-paint-methods

When I was "in the search", I found some threads on some of the "piano finish" experts that used a sealer before primer. Didn't you do a mirror finish on one of your builds? I seem to remember a reflection shot of a gum pack. Very nice!!
Reply
Reply
post #319 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

There was a guy on the PE forums that gave a good tip about sealing mdf with diluted wood glue. He diluted 50/50 with water, then rolled it on. I used that method with my NHT clones and it worked really well.

That's what I did on my cabinets, Titebond II thinned about 2 parts water to 1 part glue, then brushed it on over the rounded edges, worked well for me.
Reply
Reply
post #320 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:27pm
Thanks Java.

I was somehow thinking you've used Duratex.

My builds will probably be with Ply.
Reply
Reply
post #321 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:33pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokarz View Post

Thanks Java.
I was somehow thinking you've used Duratex.
My builds will probably be with Ply.

Nope on the duratex. I thought about it, but it looks like it might have too much texture and sheen. I wanted a "black hole" given they are right below my screen and subject to light from the front projector.

I've seen some really nice finishes done with Duratex, though.
Reply
Reply
post #322 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:44pm
Duratex, smooth foam roller, lightly sanded first coat.

DSC03501.jpg

DSC03541.jpg
Reply
Reply
post #323 of 353
10/19/12 at 4:52pm
Now that is nice.

What do you get Duratex? Doesn't look like it's available at the local HD and Lowes.
Reply
Reply
post #324 of 353
10/20/12 at 6:16am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGmouthinDC View Post

Duratex, smooth foam roller, lightly sanded first coat.
DSC03501.jpg
DSC03541.jpg

Ah. Your build was the one I had in mind when I said I've seen some nice finishes with Duratex. Your speaker finishes look awesome and was my mental benchmark for mine.

A question though. I sense from Smoke's comment on using ply that he is looking for some filling capabilities from duratex. I believe you get the filling from the bondo and priming, correct. Your boxes at the priming stage looked better than most do at the final stage. What did duratex add to the equation? Durability?
Reply
Reply
post #325 of 353
10/27/12 at 10:02am
Thread Starter 
Quick Update

Yes. Still loving the LCRs. Going to have a showing of Avengers tonight for friends. Should be a blast.

I'm starting to work on my surround build (SEOS12, DNA-350, Delta 10a) and will start a seperated build thread when I get cranking.

The reason for the update, was I re-ran the MCACC autoEQ last night and noticed how much of an imbalance I have between the LCR and the surrounds. Not like I didn't already know this, but now I saw the hard numbers. A full 10 db difference.

My surrounds are Paradigm ADP-170 v2. Back in the day, they were considered "highly efficient" (I couldn't find any numbers).

MCACC is trimming the mains 7 db and boosts the sides 3 db. If I remember correct, each 3db is equal to double the loudness. So the mains are 3x louder?? I'm assuming the MCACC is mainly balancing the efficiency vs size difference.

Anyway, this is why I leaned toward the Delta 10's over the Designers. I wanted to get as close as I could in the efficiency of the mains, so I ran them run at full.

More to come...
Reply
Reply
post #326 of 353
10/27/12 at 12:30pm
Think about it this way Java.

If your LCR is 10dB more sensitive that means your surrounds need 10 times the power (if same impedance) to equal the same SPL level.

Or if put another way going to speakers 10dB more senstitive is like upgrading your amp to one 10X more powerful. smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #327 of 353
10/28/12 at 6:36am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtg90 View Post

Think about it this way Java.
If your LCR is 10dB more sensitive that means your surrounds need 10 times the power (if same impedance) to equal the same SPL level.
Or if put another way going to speakers 10dB more senstitive is like upgrading your amp to one 10X more powerful. smile.gif

Wow!! 10X

Well there is the advertising tag line: "I got 10 times the power than my Paradigms for less than $1k".
Reply
Reply
post #328 of 353
10/28/12 at 8:16am
10db is a serious difference. 3db can be serious. But 10 eek.gif
Reply
Reply
post #329 of 353
10/29/12 at 8:15am
For sure, but think of it this way, if you have 87db sens. surrounds right now and the mains are 97dB's sensitive, this is a HUGE disparity, that I would more than likely work towards fixing, however, once MCACC ends up doing its thing, all the speakers should be withing 1 dB of each other. Having the lower sens surrounds at +3 and the mains at -7 might be what it takes for all them to measure to 75dB's at your main seat. This most certainly doesnt or at least SHOULDNT mean the mains are playing 10dB's hotter than the rest...
Reply
Reply
post #330 of 353
10/29/12 at 8:32am

What amplification do you have?  AVR power?  I would put my most capable amplification on the lower sensitivity speakers......

Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › SEOS12/2512 Build