or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › 7 SEOS12's, 7 Cel 15's, 6 Dayton UM's, Build Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

7 SEOS12's, 7 Cel 15's, 6 Dayton UM's, Build Thread - Page 5

post #121 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martycool007 View Post

Have you, or anyone else, thought about doing a cheap thrills build utilizing the DNA-360 as opposed to the DNA-350? I realize that it would require a new crossover design, but I personally think that this would be a terrific idea!

actually the crossover for the cheap thrills was DESIGNED around the 360. the 350 was just a drop in cheaper replacement due to the crossover point.
post #122 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by wormraper View Post

actually the crossover for the cheap thrills was DESIGNED around the 360. the 350 was just a drop in cheaper replacement due to the crossover point.

What crossover point does the 350 become a good alternative to the 360? I'm asking because I have 3 350's and Seos 12's from the pre-order, and was thinking about making some Fusion 12 Tempests with them. Unfortunately, I don't think I have room for the Cheap Thrills to be toed in properly.
post #123 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike-ht View Post

What crossover point does the 350 become a good alternative to the 360? I'm asking because I have 3 350's and Seos 12's from the pre-order, and was thinking about making some Fusion 12 Tempests with them. Unfortunately, I don't think I have room for the Cheap Thrills to be toed in properly.

The only reason the 350 is an alternative is to save the 20 bucks difference. Cost ignored, 360 wins in every aspect, but it's barely better.
post #124 of 406
Thread Starter 
I expect to gain 5 to 7db's per watt above 1khz, from all 7 tweeters.

That's a lot of treble, considering that it is already painful to be within 12ft of the existing speakers with my clone blasting 4 bars of tweeter power.

At 3 bars my B&W show no sign of strain or distortion, I doubt I will ever get out of 3rd gear with the SEOS's, it will be too loud for my tastes or 98% of the population.

If the SEOS's "impress" me... that what be something extraordinarily-special from my perspective eek.gif.
Even for me to simply "tolerate" them, they'd have to be of a pretty solid design.

I'm hoping for a middle-ground of "liking them" at least (free of all coloration\distortions)... and in order for them to "impress" me they'd also have to reveal details I've never heard before or do the same as B&W but in a more-realistic way.
I have high hopes and expectations for them, guess we will find out! biggrin.gif
post #125 of 406
I am afraid you are setting yourself up for failure. You are expecting cheap speakers to better your expensive ones? There is a reason you love your speakers and if the SEOS don't sound exactly like them you won't like them. They will absolutely play cleaner and louder but I am afraid that is not enough for you. I would expect them to sound like your other horns and when they don't be very happy what you can achieve for so cheap and wonder what if I actually put some higher quality drivers in them what could happen.
post #126 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWagstaff View Post

The only reason the 350 is an alternative is to save the 20 bucks difference. Cost ignored, 360 wins in every aspect, but it's barely better.

I'm sorry, but that's a pretty worthless reply. For one thing, I already have the 350's, so I'm not looking save $20 but instead a good application to use them. Everything I see says the 350 is the same in most aspects, but doesn't have the low end extension of the 360. Fortunately I found the information I was looking for in one of Erich's posts. With the Tempest crossover at 1300 Hz, the DNA-350 should sound the same as the 360.

"The difference between the DNA-350 and DNA-360 is mostly on the lower end. The 350 doesn't go as low. If the speaker is crossed over around 1250hz+, I don't think you would be able to hear any difference at all. Basically you could say both models are nearly the same and could be switched out with the DE250 as well." - Erich H
post #127 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike-ht View Post

I'm sorry, but that's a pretty worthless reply. For one thing, I already have the 350's, so I'm not looking save $20 but instead a good application to use them. Everything I see says the 350 is the same in most aspects, but doesn't have the low end extension of the 360. Fortunately I found the information I was looking for in one of Erich's posts. With the Tempest crossover at 1300 Hz, the DNA-350 should sound the same as the 360.

"The difference between the DNA-350 and DNA-360 is mostly on the lower end. The 350 doesn't go as low. If the speaker is crossed over around 1250hz+, I don't think you would be able to hear any difference at all. Basically you could say both models are nearly the same and could be switched out with the DE250 as well." - Erich H

you just restated exactly what I said. The 360 is barely better than the 350. I'm saying it's a good replacement because it performs nearly identical, and costs $20 less, but upgrading a 350 to a 360 is an improvement or the same in every area. There is no negatives going from a 350 to 360 other than price. I did not say it would sound different.
post #128 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWagstaff View Post

you just restated exactly what I said. The 360 is barely better than the 350. I'm saying it's a good replacement because it performs nearly identical, and costs $20 less, but upgrading a 350 to a 360 is an improvement or the same in every area. There is no negatives going from a 350 to 360 other than price. I did not say it would sound different.

Except you didn't say it was a good replacement, you said the only reason to use the 350 is to save $20. I wasn't asking about going from a 350 to a 360, but about using the 350 in a kit designed for the 360. For a design with a low crossover point, substituting a 350 for a 360 will probably not work well, since it will have a dip around the crossover point. The question was at what point is the crossover high enough, which you also didn't answer.
post #129 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike-ht View Post

Except you didn't say it was a good replacement, you said the only reason to use the 350 is to save $20. I wasn't asking about going from a 350 to a 360, but about using the 350 in a kit designed for the 360. For a design with a low crossover point, substituting a 350 for a 360 will probably not work well, since it will have a dip around the crossover point. The question was at what point is the crossover high enough, which you also didn't answer.

oh yeah my bad I didn't see that part of the question. I thought we were talking about going from 350 to 360 not from a 360 to 350.
post #130 of 406
I dig these SEOS threads.

I can appreciate your sub system.

I don't question your enthusiasm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BassThatHz View Post

I'd say my acoustics are better than all but the professionally tuned rooms (more or less); and by professional I mean that that is their primary job and that they have been doing it for at good 10 years or more; or some such...

This, I question, but maybe I'm wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BassThatHz View Post

I mean, I demoed my system to my brother in-laws friends and 10 seconds into "Imagine Dragons - Radioactive" he was jumping up and down and giving my high fives... and I don't even know this dude; and that's just on the "small" 7inch B&W mains yet smile.gif

I don't question this a bit, I can see it now. cool.gif


Best of luck
post #131 of 406
Thread Starter 
I heard some powered Mackie tweeters the other week (I think that's what they were, I was drunk so hard to say for certain...) It was a powered 2-way (15 or 12"), they couldn't have had more than 500watts going to them (at most).
Room was 65000cubic feet and even at 70ft away I was slowly going deaf.

If these tweeters are comparably loud, then I can't seem myself even using half of their output. Especially considering that my room is only 3000cubes, and there will be 7 of them not just 2 (in movie-mode) eek.gif

My rear channel amp is 200w x5 @ 4. (Movie-mode only)
Center amp is 1000w x1 @ 4. (Movie-mode only)
Mains amps 5300w x2 @ 4. (Music or Movie-mode)

So biggrin.gif
post #132 of 406
Thread Starter 
I should be able to test the 7 new tweeters this weekend.


you know how it is...
post #133 of 406
Don't test them without some type of crossover in place.
post #134 of 406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

Don't test them without some type of crossover in place.
I was thinking of briefly using an active crossover -48db/oct @ 1khz until I can finish soldering the real deal.
post #135 of 406
I test each one prior to shipping. So I'd wait and wire them up to the actual crossover once you have them soldered up. In other words........get building! biggrin.gif
post #136 of 406
Thread Starter 
This is the largest DIY project I have EVER undertaken.
I have to route 20 holes, across 3 different styles of cabs, and I have to measure, cut and glue 53 panels, and solder 14 XO boards, consisting of 220 parts. eek.gif

and let's hope I get all that correct.... on the first try! eek.gifeek.gifeek.gif
post #137 of 406
You should be extremely proficient by speaker #6 wink.gif
post #138 of 406
Thread Starter 
HO vs HF vs Cel

LCR's





Rears




HF = winning.
~100hz HP filter for the Cel and HF it is then...

WOW my mains will be 118db each at full power bandwidth, and over 100db's until 14hz... SCARY!!!!! eek.gifeek.gifeek.gif

All 3 LCR's will handle 900watts RMS before blowing, good thing I have the jiggawatts to actually do that without clipping.
post #139 of 406
What are you routing an extra 20 holes for?
post #140 of 406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

What are you routing an extra 20 holes for?

My center channel will be 4 feet wide and 2 feet tall. A coffin big enough to stuff a green alien inside.
I'm making something better than the standard "Cheap Thrills" design.

The normal "Cheap Thrills" boxes are too small and bass-weak for my listening habits, so I'll be making my own much bigger completely customized ones.

The LCR will be 3-way passive/active, and each capable of the above 14hz @ 100db & 118db @ 900watts RMS target.
LR and side and rears will be full-height floor-standing models.
Even the "small" sides and rears will stand 43inches tall, the mains will be around 4.5 feet tall.

20 holes for 20 drivers.

Seems excessive but that's how many drivers I currently have in my non-horn system; and my current speakers aren't "too much" smaller than that as-is, so I'm looking to replace them like-for-like, but beefier... biggrin.gif
post #141 of 406
wow that's a big center, next upgrade:



Will you just be keeping your B&Ws in the room once you get all your new speakers so you can just listen to either speaker?
post #142 of 406
I could have had custom baffles made for you for pretty cheap instead of the standard ones I sent with the kit. You should still be able to use those baffles for the outer layer of the speaker though, even if the box size is bigger.

If you cut your own baffles, you should keep the depth of the components the same as the original design, and also the spacing between the woofer and waveguide. If you were going to go through all of this altering to get more low end bass, it makes me wonder if the more expensive 15" B&C model would have ended up being cheaper for you in the long run.

Why don't you build one speaker the way it was originally designed, and then decide if you need to modify it? Testing a pro woofer outside of a box to see how much bass it will have isn't the best way to assume you'll need to alter the design.
post #143 of 406
Why do I feel that the SEOS will not be given a fair shot here. I remember when I listened to my very first DIY sub and the bass was very weak. It was not setup or placed properly at that time and it was out of phase. If I would have based the results on that I would have never gone DIY. When you say lacking bass, at what frequency? They need to be built correctly and then crossed to a sub.
post #144 of 406
I agree that they should be built like they were designed. Worst case, if more bass is wanted after they're built, bass bins could be added.
post #145 of 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

I could have had custom baffles made for you for pretty cheap instead of the standard ones I sent with the kit.

This ^ ... very nice, and a great idea.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

If you cut your own baffles, you should keep the depth of the components the same as the original design, and also the spacing between the woofer and waveguide.

+1, designed as a system, the relative elements must maintain their physical relationships.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

Why don't you build one speaker the way it was originally designed, and then decide if you need to modify it?

+1

Seems like the prudent way forward.

A typical pro sensitivity design, possesses some significant capability within their designed pass-band. Hell, I've done clubs with single 12" two-way Meyer tops per side, w/subs. Point being, in a bass managed system, maybe Erich is right and the stock config is ample. Typical hi-fi drives can't compare to pro-audio drives.

I know your stated goals, listening habits and SPL levels are way up there. But I'd suspect these would be robust enough.

A couple years ago, I was in discussions with Dr. Earl Geddes about ordering some new mains. I needed three identical fronts, and inquired about his designs and how he custom voiced his centers for axial listening (his L&R are to be toed in aggressively). I wanted to order his Summas, which are his 15" design. He said the 12" version was more than anyone could ever need in any HT. Although I think his work is superb, I ended up going a different, ... yet equally superb route. I think he makes a compelling argument wrt his cabs, one piece synthetic resin, inert, low diffraction, sweet.

---

BassThatHz,

You're right, the center is a vital component, and all too often is poorly executed. But since it's so crucial to get right, I'd have some concern about disparate sources, incongruous and overly large baffle, affecting diffraction. I'd really be careful in what aspects of the design are changed.

That initial throw of the recorded energy from the center channel needs to be executed in a way that recreates the image information captured in the recording. The overall acoustic energy and SPL capability are important,..for sure. However that's a secondary concern relative to low diffraction, phase integrity, point source emulation. Any smearing of the propagated energy in time, negatively affects both the FR and the image and realism.

Those earliest reflections are the most important. Included are diffractive elements of the baffle, to other components up around the loudspeakers that pull, tear and distort the image as it's being thrown. Also, boundary interactions (SBIR), and excessively high levels of uncontrolled lateral, ceiling and floor reflections. These elements contaminate the all important ITD gap. When this is poorly executed, no amount of SPL capability can help.

I get it, you want that visceral, tactile feel that accompanies the effortless power of low distortion/high SPL loudspeakers. I would just be careful altering any aspect of the design that could negatively impact the final result. I have the utmost respect for Bill Waslo's design acumen, and wouldn't hesitate to blind buy anything he was involved with.

I've not heard the Celestion based "Cheap Thrills" design, however do I own four Celestion 8" two-ways (QSC K8). Prior to rigging them up as surrounds, I placed them up front as LCRs for a brief test. Wow, quite impressive, even stock right out of the box. What was intended to be a brief audition and listening session, turned into a few months of them staying right where they were! Over time I performed comparos to models from JBL, Klipsch, and ultimately my new Seaton Catalysts. These powered 8" plastic box two-ways are amazing what they offer. Now that's an entirely different discussion, but suffice it to say, Celestion makes some very capable LF drivers, and I guess the output would be sufficient for you.

Remember, in a situation like yours, you want maximum acoustic power and coupling into the space. Unless appropriate steps are taken, boundary interactions and cancelations can easily impact the region of interest, .. the punch and power region at the lower end of the mains region. Bass management helps, but unless they're flush mounted in a baffle wall, or properly placed way off the boundary, there's oftentimes some serious cancelation somewhere in the 60hz-200hz region, unless the front wall is treated properly. A 4' spacing can null @70hz, 3' spacing @95hz, 2' spacing @140hz, etc, etc. So careful placement, and some front wall treatment can lessen the magnitude of the null. Any attenuation of the incident energy at the wall, lessens the amount of cancelation out front.


An ambitious build,
Good luck
post #146 of 406
Thread Starter 
I unboxed the tweeters. Everything arrived safely (from what I can tell by looking at it).

However, I'm missing about 42 screws so I can't assemble them tonight, I'll have to go to the hardware store tomorrow.
What screw types should I be looking for?
I don't suppose they'd be hiding inside the 100lbs of packaging someplace that I haven't yet looked(?)



Those 7 tweeter magnets weigh almost as much as an LMS-18, I should almost change my name to TrebleThatHz biggrin.gif
My system is starting to look more like the matterhorn with each passing day. LOL
post #147 of 406
Those screws are probably in there. Did you get them from diysoundgroup or PE? Erich hides them very well!
post #148 of 406
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post

Those screws are probably in there. Did you get them from diysoundgroup or PE? Erich hides them very well!

Sound Group
post #149 of 406
Thread Starter 
I searched high and low, I found some machine screws amongst the peanuts, that must be the ones.
post #150 of 406
Thread Starter 
I got all 7 assembled now. 3 of the 14 washers didn't fit, I'll have to fix that.


Now it's time to fire up a pair smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › 7 SEOS12's, 7 Cel 15's, 6 Dayton UM's, Build Thread