[nograveconcern]

So I have clearance from the keeper of the funds to spend about $900 of our tax refund. My thinking is to build a pair of Fusion 10's and a pair of Volt 8's. Go phantom center, 4.1 surround

In the back of my mind is the nagging thought that I should just build a pair of 1099's and keep using my existing surrounds for now, but I'm not sure I'll really see the benefit over the F10's.

What I have now are 7 speakers in the 86db sensitivity range running off a Denon 1912 AVR. The 1912 has no pre-outs so I will continue to run off the AVR for the foreseeable future.

Room is 11'4" x 15' 3" x 8 = 1382 cu ft. MLP is 10' from the mains.

I want reference with extremely low distortion and power compression. I may also occasionally play music a bit over reference. I'm also hoping for an audible improvement in imaging, and high frequency detail over my current FS52 LCR setup. And I'm hoping for more of that big-theater-impact.

Question is, will the 1099's be noticeably better in my space. Both seem capable of doing what I want.

Current setup:

 

[muzz]

Other folks with more experience with the DIYSG speakers will chime in, but I just built a pair of Pure 10's(Fusion 10).
Unfortunately I cannot tell you how clean they are at high volume, as a family member just had surgery, so cranking them loud is a no-go right now .
Everyone says they sound great, all I can say is they sound great at low/moderate volume.
With that being said, because of all the talk that the bigger variants are so much better, I will tell you that the Pure 10's are larger than folks think, 12.5w X 12d x 20" tall, and that pic you posted looks like narrow, shallow speakers almost right to the edge of the screen already, so the Pures will be tight IMHO.
Can obviously be done, just wanted to point that out is all, ya may wanna measure out from those Bass traps to see if the clearance is there without impinging on the screen.

There is a DIYSG Subforum here- use the drop down box, it's near the bottom with the rest of the Vendor stuff.

 

[asarose247]

Had you considered measuring the room -REW- and first find out what is "missing" objectively


you didn't mention a sub. . .

 

[muzz]

Looks like he has a couple of smallish subs under the screen, and as you know, he'll need them with any of these speakers.
Hope the subs can keep up!

 

[nograveconcern]

lol muzz, yes the subs are 4 sealed 15's on an NU3000DSP. I'm at the point that more LF isn't usable without more capable mains.

From 5hz to 75hz I'm +-3db with no eq. I have a big suck out at 80hz & another at 120hz at the MLP. That's all on the LFE channel though. asarose, I'll post up a full range measurement at some point once I have time to set everything up and take one.

You are also right in noticing that I am width limited. Hence either the Fusion 10's or the 1099's. 88 specials have been ruled out due to width. Fusion 8 towers are out cause I would prefer something with a full SEOS waveguide.

I've built some bass cabs in the past, so I've got a good idea of the size of these DIYSG speakers.

There's about 2' of width either side of the screen. I'm not ruling out a wider screen in the future, though sound is more important.

 

[muzz]

lol muzz, yes the subs are 4 sealed 15's on an NU3000DSP.

From 5hz to 75hz I'm +-3db with no eq. I have a big suck out at 80hz & another at 120hz at the MLP. I'll post up a full range measurement at some point once I have time to set everything up and take one.

You are also right, I do have limited width. Hence either the Fusion 10's or the 1099's. 88 specials have been ruled out due to width. Fusion 8 towers are out cause I would prefer something with a full SEOS waveguide.

Hard to tell the size of them NGC, no offense meant- bet they sound great.
Did you try to adjust the distance of your subs to bring up that suckout?
I'm assuming you cross at 80hz.

I had a dip at XO of 80, and adjusting the sub distance took care of that in my room.

 

[nograveconcern]

Hard to tell the size of them NGC, no offense meant- bet they sound great.
Did you try to adjust the distance of your subs to bring up that suckout?
I'm assuming you cross at 80hz.

I had a dip at XO of 80, and adjusting the sub distance took care of that in my room.

It's modal. I've played with delaying the rear pair and it really just makes things worse. LFE is 120 Hz. Fronts are 100. Surrounds are 150.

 

[djkest]

If space is an issue the Fusion 8s are pretty affordable. You could build 4 fusion 8s and a fusion 8 CC for $900....

Almost sounds too good to be true, right on budget and matching all around.

 

[Mfusick]

So I have clearance from the keeper of the funds to spend about $900 of our tax refund. My thinking is to build a pair of Fusion 10's and a pair of Volt 8's. Go phantom center, 4.1 surround

In the back of my mind is the nagging thought that I should just build a pair of 1099's and keep using my existing surrounds for now, but I'm not sure I'll really see the benefit over the F10's.

What I have now are 7 speakers in the 86db sensitivity range running off a Denon 1912 AVR. The 1912 has no pre-outs so I will continue to run off the AVR for the foreseeable future.

Room is 11'4" x 15' 3" x 8 = 1382 cu ft. MLP is 10' from the mains.

I want reference with extremely low distortion and power compression. I may also occasionally play music a bit over reference. I'm also hoping for an audible improvement in imaging, and high frequency detail over my current FS52 LCR setup. And I'm hoping for more of that big-theater-impact.

Question is, will the 1099's be noticeably better in my space. Both seem capable of doing what I want.

Current setup:

Looks like a lot of absorption on the front side walls so I would look at a waveguide which could work well in that. You'll have a smaller sound stage on 2 channel- but should have awesome dynamics for movies. Fusion 10 / 1099 both would work. As would FUSION 8 towers, or even FUSION 15. Do you have a serious space issue?

 

[nograveconcern]

Do you have a serious space issue?

Only that I need to be able to toe-in the L&R within that 2' width. So, as log as the diagonal measurement across the top of the cabinet is less than 24" I'm good.

More info: AT screen is probably out of the question. That's a curtain covering a window behind the screen so there would be some light leak through.

 

[tuxedocivic]

Cinema 10s would bring the cost down a bit from the 1099, and offer more output than the Pure. Though at a 10ft listening distance the Pures should do 105db peaks without strain. But it'll be at the limit and only if your amp can deliver over 100watts. The Cinema 10 is going to cut the amp power required in half, and the speaker will be stressed half as much. That said, I do think the Fusion 10 would get you what you want. Just that if you're questioning the 1099, there is an in-between option.

 

[nograveconcern]

Cinema 10s would bring the cost down a bit from the 1099, and offer more output than the Pure. Though at a 10ft listening distance the Pures should do 105db peaks without strain. But it'll be at the limit and only if your amp can deliver over 100watts. The Cinema 10 is going to cut the amp power required in half, and the speaker will be stressed half as much. That said, I do think the Fusion 10 would get you what you want. Just that if you're questioning the 1099, there is an in-between option.

Thanks for weighing in. Looking at the specs they are both 98db though, so what you are saying is that the cinema 10 will use the same amount of power for a given spl as the Fusion 10, but divide it between 2 drivers stressing each half as much? I guess I don't understand the bolded part.

 

[tuxedocivic]

Ya that's an understandable confusion. Sensitivity specs are always so simplified it doesn't totally tell the story. From about 500hz and up, both of them would actually be over 105db/w/m, but only 98db/2.83V. The Cinema 10 also has more baffle step compensation built in. Actually it has the most out of the Fusion 10, Cinema 10, and 1099. When Erich says "what do I list the sensitivity to be" I give him the woofer sensitivity I've measured minus 1 or 2db depending on how much the XO sucks out of it or adds to it (by dropping impedance down to 6ohms in the low ranges). It's not a very good way to do it unfortunately, but it's the simplest to do on a single line spec sheet. The reality is though, the Cinema 10 is an honest 3db more effecient even though the sensitivity will be close on both due to voice coil impedance, baffle step compensation, etc.

Hope that makes sense, I don't feel like that's very clear.

What would ultimately tell you which is more efficient is a 2.83V frequency response AND an impedance chart of both speakers. Those 4 charts would tell you the real comparison from 80 to 20,000hz.

 

[genofive0]

Thanks for weighing in. Looking at the specs they are both 98db though, so what you are saying is that the cinema 10 will use the same amount of power for a given spl as the Fusion 10, but divide it between 2 drivers stressing each half as much? I guess I don't understand the bolded part.

More of what I think tux is saying is at 105db the Cinema 10 will be drawing only 60-80 ish watts and will have more head room overall. Nevermind what he said LOL

 

[nograveconcern]

So, the takeaway is that the Cinema 10 is 3-ish db more efficient and you think that would be a benefit even in my little space.

I do like the big MTM. How are they in comparison to the 1099, SPL and cost not being the only factor? It's only another $50 each after all.

 

[nograveconcern]

Edit: Ignore these and see post #23.

asarose247 asked for some sweeps...not sure why it's so bad from 60-300. Ouch

3 position avg

all 3

 

[tuxedocivic]

So, the takeaway is that the Cinema 10 is 3-ish db more efficient and you think that would be a benefit even in my little space.

In practical terms they are 3db more effecient. As for your space, I suggested it only cause you were talking about the 1099 and because you want reference level or even higher for music. There are some other advantages the mtm will provide possibly cleaning up the room response.

I do like the big MTM. How are they in comparison to the 1099, SPL and cost not being the only factor? It's only another $50 each after all.

Ya they are fairly close in cost, so that isn't really the selling point. The Cinema 10 is a lot simpler to build. It's also got more baffle step compensation like I mentioned, so it will be more full sounding. The 1099 was originally meant to be used against large non-AT screens or LCDs, so it naturally had a lot of low end reinforcement. Sorry if this is all technical mumbo jumbo. The 1099 has a dedicated midrange section which I found provides a slight more clarity/detail. I think this is a very small amount though. The Cinema 10 would probably sound better if pulled away from boundaries like a large non-AT screen. If you want the matching center sometime down the road, the 1099 would make a little more sense, though matching the 1099 with the Cinema 10 is totally fine also.

 

[Mattcc22]

Cinema 10s would bring the cost down a bit from the 1099, and offer more output than the Pure. Though at a 10ft listening distance the Pures should do 105db peaks without strain. But it'll be at the limit and only if your amp can deliver over 100watts. The Cinema 10 is going to cut the amp power required in half, and the speaker will be stressed half as much. That said, I do think the Fusion 10 would get you what you want. Just that if you're questioning the 1099, there is an in-between option.

Hope you don't mind me asking in this thread, but if placing the Pure 10 over a MBM and crossing over higher (say around 225hz), effectively making it a 3 way design, does it allow the Pure10 to play louder/cleaner over its now shortened bandwith?

 

[tuxedocivic]

Yes, way louder. You may have seen my MBM thread in the DIYSoundGroup subforum.

Before the hole I shot in my foot gets any bigger, let me say that the Fusion 10 goes incredibly loud. Maybe you've seen one of mtg90's videos where he zooms out from the speaker and he's over 100ft away. The Fusion 10 can do that too, that's not unique to mtg90's speakers. It goes insanely loud. But reference level is also insanely loud and when you want that to be low distortion, uncompressed, and from

 

[nograveconcern]

In practical terms they are 3db more effecient. As for your space, I suggested it only cause you were talking about the 1099 and because you want reference level or even higher for music. There are some other advantages the mtm will provide possibly cleaning up the room response.

Due to the controlled vertical dispersion of the MTM? The 1099 would do this as well though correct?

It's also got more baffle step compensation like I mentioned, so it will be more full sounding. The 1099 was originally meant to be used against large non-AT screens or LCDs, so it naturally had a lot of low end reinforcement. Sorry if this is all technical mumbo jumbo. The Cinema 10 would probably sound better if pulled away from boundaries like a large non-AT screen.

No, I want as much mumbo jumbo as possible.

So the 1099 is supposed to be flat up against, or presumably inset into, a wall to reflect out more of the low end by effectively extending the baffle to the entire wall because the crossover compensates less for baffle step?

The 1099 has a dedicated midrange section which I found provides a slight more clarity/detail. I think this is a very small amount though. If you want the matching center sometime down the road, the 1099 would make a little more sense, though matching the 1099 with the Cinema 10 is totally fine also.

Very small as to be overshadowed by the difference in baffle step? This is the reason I was drawn to the 1099 in the first place. Without hearing the two it's hard for me to quantify the gain in midrange detail with the 3 way.

Adding in a center at some point is not out of the question. I don't think I'll miss it though. Stereo imaging sounds really good right now, and I tend to be distracted by a lower center speaker.