or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Looking to Outperform Extremely Capabable Commercial Offerings for my LCR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Looking to Outperform Extremely Capabable Commercial Offerings for my LCR - Page 3

Poll Results: With all things equal, which would you choose for your Ultimate Performance LCR setup?

 
  • 34% (14)
    JTR Noesis
  • 4% (2)
    Klipsch Jubilee
  • 19% (8)
    JBL 4722
  • 14% (6)
    Other Commerical Offering
  • 26% (11)
    DIY (w/suggestions)
41 Total Votes  
post #61 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

i don't really disagree with your points.
i'm just asking what the faults are with the bms coaxial or what the tradeoffs are with running a horn to the point where it becomes omnidirectional that you mentioned.
the only thing that i see to complain about is the on-axis frequency response. but that can be fixed because of the well controlled off-axis behavior of the horns.

The issue with the BMS coax is how it gets fairly rough above 6khz due to how the phase plug combines the mid and HF. Not a deal killer, but it is downside relative to a smaller CD like a DE250 or 4550.

Measure a compression driver without a horn and you will see what a mess it is. A similar effect occurs with using a horn that is too small for the range intended. Some fudging isn't a problem but running this horn down to 400-500hz is pretty excessive. That is why 18Sound specs it as only usable above 800hz. They aren't listing this as some sort of pro sound safe guard like you will see with many CDs. This is because it is less than ideal below that point. Frankly I'm not the best at explaining how or why this is an issue. There are papers supporting this and threads of infinite length on DIYAudio discussing it. It is one of the reasons the roundover is used on the SEOS and Geddes horns along with roundovers on the cabinet. Things get really messy when discussing horn theory stuff. Play around with Hornresp and the wavefront simulator a bit. That is a good way to visualize what happens.

I'm also not suggesting that it will sound 'bad' per se, as much as it is less than ideal. Of course, ideal is impossible in some sense. JTR has to design speakers that will sell. I think they do an awesome job of minimizing tradeoffs and have created a product that will work for many people.
post #62 of 73
"Frankly I'm not the best at explaining how or why this is an issue."

no worries. i was just curious.
post #63 of 73
Which BMS co-ax are you guys referring to in the JTR? Has anyone ever tried using a similar BMS co-ax in a DIY type build, and, if so, how did it turn out? I have looked at some of the BMS co-ax drivers, but they are pretty expensive. I am getting ready to build some Seos-12's for my LCR's, just waiting on Erich to get back with me. I am considering using the BMS 4550 in leu of the DNA-360. While we are on the topic of BMC drivers, how do you guys feel about the BMS 4550 used in a Seos-12 build, versus the DNA-360 or DE250?
post #64 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martycool007 View Post

Which BMS co-ax are you guys referring to in the JTR? Has anyone ever tried using a similar BMS co-ax in a DIY type build, and, if so, how did it turn out? I have looked at some of the BMS co-ax drivers, but they are pretty expensive. I am getting ready to build some Seos-12's for my LCR's, just waiting on Erich to get back with me. I am considering using the BMS 4550 in leu of the DNA-360. While we are on the topic of BMC drivers, how do you guys feel about the BMS 4550 used in a Seos-12 build, versus the DNA-360 or DE250?

Tough driver to work with. You would also need a crossover design. I would stick with the SEOS waveguide in either a 12" or 15" TD driver. Not much out there in the commercial offerings that are going to be able to beat those speakers. They are large compared to most commercial offerings. Even my SEOS-12's with TD12M's are large compared to commercial speakers and they are small compared to many of the designs here.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 73
Hey FOH, did you get your Seaton system set up? How did it work out?

Bill
post #66 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwaslo View Post

Hey FOH, did you get your Seaton system set up? How did it work out?
Bill

It's set up, but not fully optimized. Regarding the Seaton Cats, ...they're a lot of fun, no doubt. I'm still experimenting with several things, and I've been struggling with the LF integration, I recently purchased a made to order processor to help in that regard. Looking forward to having it all sorted, ...asap. I've changed a lot more than I initially intended.
post #67 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by coctostan View Post

If you want Danley's tech which IMO is peerless, the SM series is the best bet. Someone who is a serious buyer could contact Danley and I'm sure they would give guidance on the specific model that would work best for the specific room and budget. A Danley SM60M in an MTM with a TD18H woofer above and below crossed with a MiniDSP PWR2 amp would be awesome. Not cheap though for sure. Danley's tech is expensive for good reason.

How difficult would it be to implement this type of setup. Would it be as easy as adjusting settings in the MiniDSP PWR2 or are we talking a whole new crossover design?
post #68 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by bodhisafa View Post

How difficult would it be to implement this type of setup. Would it be as easy as adjusting settings in the MiniDSP PWR2 or are we talking a whole new crossover design?

Well, you would need to measure the response for starters. The SM60M would be passive from Danley (although I believe he will sell them with active DSP too but I don't see any reason in this case). You would then use a 2-way active DSP to mate the dual TD18H's to your SM60M. It would take a little bit of work to get things right because the crossover would be in the 200-400hz range which is more difficult to measure in room.

There isn't much advantage to having the bass drivers in a synergy configuration for home use. It isn't a bad thing per se but the primary advantages in pro applications are the insanely small footprint and ability to array. The SM60M is only the mid/HF section and has an F3 of 270hz.

If I were in the business of setting up uber-theaters this is what I would put in for no budget guys. The room's would look like Paul W's Octagon which IMO is the holy grail of theaters. Three SM60M/TD18H's across front with L/R in corners. Subwoofers everywhere else to fill up front baffle wall.
post #69 of 73
Quote:
Originally Posted by coctostan View Post

Well, you would need to measure the response for starters. The SM60M would be passive from Danley (although I believe he will sell them with active DSP too but I don't see any reason in this case). You would then use a 2-way active DSP to mate the dual TD18H's to your SM60M. It would take a little bit of work to get things right because the crossover would be in the 200-400hz range which is more difficult to measure in room.
There isn't much advantage to having the bass drivers in a synergy configuration for home use. It isn't a bad thing per se but the primary advantages in pro applications are the insanely small footprint and ability to array. The SM60M is only the mid/HF section and has an F3 of 270hz.
If I were in the business of setting up uber-theaters this is what I would put in for no budget guys. The room's would look like Paul W's Octagon which IMO is the holy grail of theaters. Three SM60M/TD18H's across front with L/R in corners. Subwoofers everywhere else to fill up front baffle wall.

I was asking because I have the chance of purchasing several SM 96 across the front and was wondering what advantage I would have going in a different direction.

I tried to find several posts by someone on this forum that tried a similar approach using the SM 60M mated to his empire subs( inorder to create a full range cabinet) IIRC...the end result he mentioned would be better just going with the full range unit (SM 60F).
post #70 of 73
Well, mating to the Epik's was likely the issue IMO. I would want something that plays very well up to at least 300hz. There are many options outside of the TD18H's of course. I was just listing an optimal setup.

The SM96 is great. It offers a wider pattern which may be useful in your situation. The SM60M would be easier to put in a corner due to its cabinet shape. It also happens to be about 20" wide which would work well with a top quality pro 18" woofer. You also wouldn't have to use dual woofers. A single high sensitivity woofer would work great. B&C 18SW115 would be an option. There are many that would work.

The SM96 or SM60F would be easier of course since it would be ready to use out of the box and could even be driven by a receiver. I also don't know what the price difference is. If they made an SM96M you could use dual 15" woofers below and get 90deg coverage. 60deg coverage will work for most people though. I would suggest doing a mockup of your room with speaker placement and see if it will cover your seating.
post #71 of 73
Both 60 and 90 degree angles work in my room. This needs tobe my last LCR upgrade and would like to have the most capable system possible. I originally had JTR Triple 12 across the front and Iam now switching to Danley in order to take advantage of the constant directivity that their designs offer. Which is why Iam thinking about the SM 96 (all the components are in the horn). But if I can create something even better using their design it is of obvious interest to me....

I was able to audition a single SH 50 in my room several months ago, and enjoyed the bass that it was able to create. The SM is not in the same category (Ive been told) but was hoping to increase the level of performance (bass) by incorporating a woofer too bring the lower end up.

I have never done this before but if the process involves a simple box underneath an SM 60M with a quality 18 driver, Behringer amps, quality crossover to the top then I may just try it, if the gain is minimal than I would just rather stay with the SM 96. My dealer is waiting on my decision.

I dont have measuring equipment.
post #72 of 73
^^^^
Forgot to mention that this is a strictly movie watching setup. Not sure what advantage I would get from 60hz to 300hz considerering both setups mentioned.
post #73 of 73
The lack of measuring equipment is a deal killer. Do you have a laptop? If so, Parts Express is selling a mic that will work and just plugs into a USB port. You can use free software and I'd be willing to assist.

There is no way to quantify the benefit for something like this. You might want to contact Danley or Ivan Beaver to get their opinion on the two routes. I'd bet they would give you an honest answer. They have little to gain with you buying a SM96 vs a SM60M. They know their products better than anyone.

You could definitely use a single Behringer iNuke DSP for each speaker. You would gain the benefit of being able to shape your response with DSP which is nice. I really like using a hybrid of DSP and passive with passive on the mid/HF crossover portion. The DSP can tweak things to suit your room and ear. It also helps you clean up stuff around the schroeder frequency where room modes get funky.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Looking to Outperform Extremely Capabable Commercial Offerings for my LCR