or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › 4 Pi vs DIY Sound Group's Fusion Sentinel 15"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

4 Pi vs DIY Sound Group's Fusion Sentinel 15" - Page 2

post #31 of 297
Yes, I have. After my research and several emails, Wayne agreed to let me audition them in his home. I was convinced. They are easily the best speakers I have ever heard.

Pi Speakers reputation is well deserved. Parham put his best work in his speakers. He's been doing it a long time, and it shows.

I understand they'll be at a trade show in Dallas in a couple weeks. You might want to go and listen to them there, if possible.

http://lonestaraudiofest.com
post #32 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash R View Post

Bill Waslo is a well respected designer of measurement gear so I don't think I would dismiss his measurements as contaminated by reflections. I expect he would do a better job than that. Besides, it doesn't show up in just one of his measurements. The 5db ripple shows up in all his measurements:

Comprehension is key here. You'll notice that Bill clearly said: "The measurements were made on different days, probably with different drivers. Maybe at different angles, too ".


"Ash R", your new alias name doesn't hide your antagonistic behavior. To say the SEOS line cloned the Pi speakers is just typical trolling to stir the pot. rolleyes.gif Hopefully at some point you'll just sit back, relax, and enjoy whatever speaker you built. No reason to start bashing things.

If there's anything I can do to help out, just let me know.
post #33 of 297
First, Brads measurements were wrong, period. Whether it was a reflection, or electrical, I still can't tell you. Something went wrong and its easy to see its so. If Wayne says there is some internal reflection in the waveguide, he is wrong. Tell him to come here and say it himself. Of the many SEOS measurements floating around, all you've done is point to the obscure few that are bad examples. If you want to see its true performance, you don't have to look very far.

BTW. The SEOS isn't a clone of the H290C, look at the rallying thread. It was a QSC clone to begin with and evolved from there. A lot of geddes thrown in. And how much Pi in there, I can't recall any. Besides, if I'm not mistaken the SEOS came before the h290c.

I don't know what the deal is with the Pi vs SEOS crap floating around. How much nicer can I be about it. I should just come out and say it: SEOS >>> Pi. There. It looks better, cheaper, performs better, ya that's right, performs better, better dimensions. Ah, I'll give the H290C bonus points for being easier to flush mount. But I'd take looks over simplicity most of the time.
post #34 of 297
It's not about bashing things although when I first started reseaching waveguides, I saw you and some others here arguing about whether you could take a trademarked name to market your kits. That was not a good introduction to DIYsoundgroup, to be honest.

A small legal mistake though that maybe you just didn't know. It didn't dissuade me but it was a red flag that made me raise my eyebrows.

I did consider buying a SEOS kit. In the end, however, I think Pi Speakers are better, higher quality designs.

There is the matter of the waveguide, which I think we've already argued. There is also the matter of confidence. Most of the SEOS designers are people I've never heard of before, unknown in the trade. They are probably great guys but I am not aware of any prior work. There are only two that I have even heard of before and both admit they have never designed a waveguide before.

Parham, on the other hand, has designed speakers like this all his life and is well respected. His statements carry a lot of clout. He makes a very good case that the H290C is a better waveguide. That plus the fact that his speakers sound great cinched it for me.
post #35 of 297
Bill has designed around waveguides before. So have I. So has Matt. You probably haven't heard of Matt or me, but you yourself noted Bills expertise.

Doesn't matter. Glad you like your choice. It isn't the first time the SEOS crowd has said this, Pi speakers are great. Zheka went with Pi and I think he's quite proficient with technical audio attributes of different speakers. He's happy with his choice. And I like zheka a lot. I doubt there's any reason you would dislike your build as I trust zheka's opinion. I also know Wayne is a good designer.

As for the trademark thing, I can't recall what you mean. Possibly whether or not the designs were trademarked? I think that's more an IP thing. Either way, we're a bunch of DIYers having fun. If that doesn't suit you, know big deal. Just please don't go around saying the waveguide doesn't perform well based on 3 bunk measurements out of, I dunno, a hundred measurements of the SEOS that say its amazing. I'd personally take it over the H290C, Geddes OS waveguide, the QSC, and many more. And its available in a bunch of sizes. But it suits my requirements, so what ever right.
post #36 of 297
I appreciate your zeal and I'm sure we would agree on many things but as you've rightly said, I don't know you. I placed my confidence in the designs of a man I know has been doing this far longer than anyone you've mentioned.

As I said, Pi Speakers do sound great and that's what I wanted to say here: To anyone else reading this thread, I would suggest most emphatically that they audition Pi Speakers. I am having a cabinetmaker build custom cabinets using bubinga for 4pi fronts with 3pi flanking subs and 2pi surrounds. I listened to that combination and it was the best system I ever heard.
post #37 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozziedog View Post

I think filtor1 pointed out an important point, which is that the 4pi comes with an assembled crossover. But, the sentinel has an available flat pack. So, I think it just depends on if you are more comfortable with wood work or assembling the crossover. I believe the Sentinel is probably the better value but the 4pi kit is still one hell of a good value also.

You can assemble a dozen crossovers quicker than you could build one cabinet and that does not include finishing the cabinet. With a schematic, a crossover is pretty easy to build. With a picture, showing the layout, anybody can put one together. It takes a whole lot less skill than building the cabinet. Also a whole lot less tools to build a crossover.
Edited by AV Science Sales 5 - 4/21/13 at 3:09pm
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

As for the trademark thing, I can't recall what you mean. Possibly whether or not the designs were trademarked?

IIRC, it was over the Zilch tribute design that Erich ended up just removing entirely. Can't use the Zilch name nowhere, other folks own it. Good times.
post #39 of 297
Matt Grant has briefly listened to my 4Pi speakers when we were setting up the subs he built for me. He said that they sounded very much like the 2226H version of the Sentinel he designed for Luis. I think Matt is uniquely qualified to make the judgement. whatever the differences are they must be very subtle.
Edited by zheka - 4/21/13 at 3:28pm
post #40 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash R View Post

I appreciate your zeal and I'm sure we would agree on many things but as you've rightly said, I don't know you. I placed my confidence in the designs of a man I know has been doing this far longer than anyone you've mentioned.

As I said, Pi Speakers do sound great and that's what I wanted to say here: To anyone else reading this thread, I would suggest most emphatically that they audition Pi Speakers. I am having a cabinetmaker build custom cabinets using bubinga for 4pi fronts with 3pi flanking subs and 2pi surrounds. I listened to that combination and it was the best system I ever heard.

The words you use and the way you say them sounds like someone I've seen around the forums wink.gif

Glad you like Pi speakers.
post #41 of 297
Here's hoping I remind you of an old friend. Cheers!
post #42 of 297
not the same thing.... but I'm not that far off from doing a head to head with Zephyrs versus Parham 3Pi speakers.... I have all the crossover parts to build the Zephyrs totally stock and build a second set of boards with upgraded parts to compare/contrast. Internal wiring will be JPS Labs Ultraconductor2 in both speaker setups. I'm cutting up some runs to use in each speaker. The 3Pi speakers will be with the upgraded drivers (AE TD12S w/ black phase plugs and DNA360/DE250 CDs) as well as stock crossover and upgraded crossover boards to compare/contrast... I'm waiting on cabinets to be built.... 1.5" thick baltic with extensive bracing and special attention paid to box dimensions and internal path lengths to limit standing waves... boxes will also use something very similar to Von Schweikert Audio's triple layer cabinet technique to eliminate resonances.... Zephyrs are going to a buddy down the street... the 3Pi speakers will likely go to our nanny as a present to replace her crap speakers unless they totally blow me away when I listen... but before the speakers head off to their new owners, I get to give them a listen first with the same gear in the same room and see how they compare to one another.... assuming I can find time to do it! frown.gif it should be fun....
post #43 of 297
Wow. The nanny must be doing a great job.
post #44 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by hometheaterdoc View Post

the 3Pi speakers will likely go to our nanny as a present to replace her crap speakers

I can be a nanny. biggrin.gif
post #45 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by moxxy*mig View Post

IIRC, it was over the Zilch tribute design that Erich ended up just removing entirely. Can't use the Zilch name nowhere, other folks own it. Good times.

Yes, it was one design Zilch did that used an 18 Sound waveguide, no SEOS. None were sold. It was listed at less than cost with money to be donated from myself and the DIY community to the Lung Cancer Association. Someone asked me to take the Zilch name off or any mention of it. At that point I just took the whole kit down because myself and others thought it wasn't worth debating, even though a good deed was trying to be done. rolleyes.gif

For clarity, I talked to a lawyer and I did not have to take the kit down because there was nothing wrong being done. However, there were some interesting claims and statements made that could have gotten some in hot water. But I decided to just let it go and move on.

Like you said.....good times. biggrin.gif
post #46 of 297
So has this thread turned into an advert for Pi Speakers? Or just SEOS bashing?

I smell an SP or something.....

JSS
post #47 of 297
Just my opinion. This thread should be deleted. The OP can try again to get an answer to their question. I hope to one day here them both properly implemented at a GTG and be able to judge them both for myself.

Maybe Ash R can post their results of their 4pi build thread with impressions and measurements? Or maybe not.
post #48 of 297
I would say the OP should build a pair of both and listen for himself. I bet they will be close enough where he could use one as a center and build more for surrounds. He can pick the cheaper one for surrounds. I have heard the 2226's vs eminence drivers but in 12's, 10's, and 8's. as for sound quality too close too call but the larger woofs had more Midbass impact.
post #49 of 297
I plan on taking pictures of the build as the shop makes progress. Hopefully they will start next month.
post #50 of 297
Hometheaterdoc, I am interested to hear your impressions too. Please report back.
post #51 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by dheflin83 View Post

I looked thru the specs for the kits offered on diysoundgroup, and only the Karma-8 and Sentinel showed polar response plots, although they were horizontal polars only and were heavily smoothed. Parham shows on his website both horizontal and vertical polars without any smoothing for the 3pi and 4pi. It's not enough to show polars for the SEOS waveguide by itself when discussing a complete speaker system since the crossover effects need to be included.

Erich is still updating thing on the web but most of that info can be found on the diysoundgroup forum in the design threads. Or you can ask the designer.
post #52 of 297
this one is pretty similar to the upgraded 4pi:

http://www.diysoundgroup.com/forum/index.php?topic=141.0

four pi performance data here:

http://www.pispeakers.com/Measurements/fourPi.html

as for commercials for 4 pis, who cares? they are good.

as for seos bashing, who cares? they are good too. :-)~


has anybody put together a td15m / seos12 / 360 combo yet?

that might make for a nice alpha model for the series.
Edited by LTD02 - 4/22/13 at 12:27pm
post #53 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post



has anybody put together a td15m / seos12 / 360 combo yet?

that might make for a nice alpha model for the series.

I'm in the middle of putting the TD12X in towers. Not sure how much they differ, except my build takes advantage of the extra excursion from the higher xmax tuned to ~32hz. should make a really nice full range tower hitting in the 20's.
post #54 of 297
Have you heard any complaints about AE woorfers, specifically unit-to-unit consistency? I think Parham stopped offering TD upgrade option for the 3Pi because of this.
post #55 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post


has anybody put together a td15m / seos12 / 360 combo yet?

I'm building/subletting biggrin.gif a TD15m/SEOS12/4550 combo right now which should be really close.
post #56 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka View Post

Have you heard any complaints about AE woorfers, specifically unit-to-unit consistency? I think Parham stopped offering TD upgrade option for the 3Pi because of this.

That's what he told me too. He showed me his 3pi speakers with TD woofers and measurements while I was at his place. They were amazing. However, he showed me examples of TD woofers with a lot of breakup too, weird.

They are using Definimax woofers now in that model. Sounded good but I was partial to the 4pi w/2226, myself. Those are the cream of the crop, IMHO.
post #57 of 297
Quote:
Originally Posted by dheflin83 View Post

That's not to say SEOS designs with the right drivers can't be just as good (I have not heard them). Its just that Parham takes into account an almost endless number of details in the overall system design that took years to optimize (see his FAQ pages). Maybe a lot of these details are a nit and don't matter much in most applications and environments, but if I'm going to spend the time and money to build a pair of high-end DIY speakers, I want the peace of mind knowing that everything is as good as it can be.

Just curious, what makes you think the speaker designers for the SEOS did not do the same thing?
post #58 of 297
...and the cabinet - DIYsoundgroup knocks out boxes of just about any size whereas Pi Speakers are carefully sized.

Also the time spent on the designs. SEOS speakers haven't been fully vetted out yet. Dheflin83 said "Parham takes into account an almost endless number of details in the overall system design that took years to optimize". It has gone through years of improvements.

Look, nobody is saying one is great and the other is terrible. However, I do think Pi Speakers are more highly refined.
post #59 of 297
Bills plots are smoothed. Mine and Matt's are not. The Pi guys really ought to brag about the performance of their preferred product and stop trashing something they're obviously not familiar with. I even posted a plot in this thread. Unsmoothed and outdoors. I'd post more but I'm away from my computer. Personally I hate smoothing so I understand where you're coming from. But smoothing doesn't guarantee a problem.
post #60 of 297
Years to optimize? His waveguide just came out. Better not use it till he's had some more time with it.

Oh and the box sizes are not as important as you think. The flexibility is more important. As long as you're running subs.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › 4 Pi vs DIY Sound Group's Fusion Sentinel 15"