Car audio home audio ?

 Building a good set of speakers is much more than just selecting mids and tweeters and crap-shooting the crossover design.  To design it right you need some pretty expensive test equipment, software, and a great deal of knowledge and experience of what works and what doesn't.  Honestly for your first time I would suggest looking at kits instead.  They supply the speakers and crossover parts and you build them from there. 

Now if you still want to build your own, there is a forum dedicated to it with many VERY smart people there.  Check out www.diyaudio.com and just start searching.  Good luck!   BTW, if you have any specific questions please feel free to ask. 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

kfr01] wrote:

---

Steven, I'm pretty dead-set on building my own. I understand that kits are an easy way to start, probably the better way in terms of an end-product, but I frankly don't think that the kits will help me learn anything.

---

That's no problem.  I just wanted to be sure that everyone understood the complexity of what they are getting into.  Of course all the great speaker engineers had to start somewhere.  

kfr01] wrote:

---

 What do you (everyone out there) recommend as the best way to proceed? What do I need to buy?

---

Well first I recomend doing some serious research.  There are many different drivers out there in many different price ranges.  And price doesn't necessarily dictate the quality of the driver. 

kfr01] wrote:

---

he Soundeasy + Boxcad package seems to be fairly full-featured for the price. Does anyone have any experience with this software? Is it adequate, or do I need to shell out the full price for Leap?

---

I'd recomend LSPCad.  It seems to be very accurate and has some great features.  It has a good crossover modeling section in it, and is one of the more accurate enclosure design softwares on the market. 

kfr01] wrote:

---

nbsp; Anyway, as long as the drivers are of similar sensitivity and have sufficient flat frequency response overlap are there any other major considerations regarding driver selection?

---

Actually similar sensitivity isn't critical as you can always adjust the differences in the crossover network.  Just remember the lower in frequency you run the speakers, the less overall output you can get from them.  Also look closely at the frequency response of the mid.  A lot of times you will see cone resonances that cause dips in the response early which means you will have to roll off the speaker early.  This can also mean that you will have to run the tweeter lower and thereby hurt your peak output.  You should also check out the response of the speakers at different axis points.  Otherwise you might have good results on axis, but have a very narrow sweet spot. 

You should also understand how we hear things.  Sometimes something will measure badly, but will sound just fine.  A perfect example of this is doppler distortion.  It measures very bad in some speakers, but when you actually listen it is either inaudible or isn't objectionable. 

kfr01] wrote:

---

nbsp;After the enclosure the next step seems to be crossover development. As I understand it, ideally this involves modeling the actual driver response characteristics in software, selecting a crossover point, watching what happens to the combined response, and then correcting / tweaking for abnormalities caused by the crossover and box. Is this a correct summary of the steps necessary?

---

What my boss usually does is first select the speakers.  He then has me build test enclosures for the speakers.  He then tests each speaker in it's place, with the microphone hooked up to his computer.  Next he uses LSPCad to design a crossover for the speakers using that collected data.  Then the computer is connected to an amplifier and the amplifier feeds the speakers.  LSPCad allows him to play music that is then fed through his similated crossover network and into the speakers.  He can actually hear the crossover before he builds it.  From his listening tests he can determine whether to modify the design or not.   After that he hands me the crossover scematic, I build it up and we test it. 

kfr01] wrote:

---

Finally, I'm thinking of creating active filters instead of passive. It seems like a much more workable system. I've heard nothing but positives about 'going active' from the internet and the short blurb in the cookbook. Are there any major drawbacks to 'active' that these have skimmed over?

---

Well I think having to amplify each speaker seperately is a major drawback.  Honestly unless you are going with digital crossovers, I don't see any benifit.

kfr01] wrote:

---

Anyway. Basically I want to learn what else there is beyond selecting the drivers and "crap-shooting the crossover design." Is my brief summary accurate?

---

Sorry, I hope that didn't sound rude.  It's just that I've seen people do this before and they never get good results.  I just wanted to make sure you knew not to do it.

I do want to add one more thing.  The crossover is the most important part of a speaker system.  It is what gives the speakers their voice.  Second in importance is the speaker selection.  And finally a distant thrird is the enclosures. 

I hope this helps!

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

BTW, I thought I should add that I've never designed speakers myself.  I'm just going based on what I've learned from my boss by helping, observing, and asking questions.  So if you guys (Dyon) see anything questionable in my posts, please point it out.

BTW, we have a free downoad of LspCAD on our website if you want to try it out.  Here's the link: https://www.adireaudio.com/TextPages/FreeSoftwarePageFrameText.htm  There's also a link to a site where you can buy the full version of the software.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

       $980 for a program? 

You might want to check out this site it has a lot of info on speaker building.

https://www.speakerbuilding.com/

Check out the software page, lots of software some free. Also you might want to request the Parts Express catalog, they have all the stuff you will need for the crossovers and the cabinets( some of this stuff is kind of difficult to find on their site). Not to mention all the drivers they have . And like Steven said a driver doesn't have to be expensive to be good.

Ps. Can you tell I'm cheap? lol

Well for what you are doing, I'd recomend an MTM design.  The Extremis 6 has some crazy excursion, and uses our XBL^2 motor so you know it will be very clean excursion.  Proof of this is in the distortion measurements.  In a ported enclosure they should do just fine playing from about 4k all the way down to around 50 Hz (a larger enclosure you should be able to drop then down even further without a problem).  The 4's do pretty good down low, but the 6's will destroy them.  And honestly I don't see a need to do a 3-way set.  It will greatly complicate the crossover design and really isn't needed IMO.  As for tweeters, I'm not sure what the tbd is.  My guess is it is a Tang Band tweeter? I was actually thinking one of their tweeters would work great for you.  Here's a link: https://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=264-822 

One of our dealers was comparing his Kit 81's to some $2k Paradigm speakers.  He actually did an A/B comparison in the store (he knew the owner) and the owner told him that he would be crazy to choose the Paradigms over the 81's.  What's nice is that the 81's are a great deal less money.  Going DIY is a great way to save money. 

What I suggest doing is comparing our Kit 81 design to our Kit 81C (center channel) and see the differences in response, crossover design, etc.  Hopefully that will help you in your design.  Also if you are near the Seattle area, you should stop by and audition some of our speakers as well.  We have some good engineers here that should be able to give you some pointers in your design.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

Wow, this is a great discussion.  I agree with most of what's been said already.

Yes, in HT, the center channel is IMO the most important.  A good MTM design seems to be in vogue right now, although for the past ten years I've used a simple 2-way I made from a 7" midbass and a good silk dome tweet.  I am almost finished with the replacemnt, which is an MTM design.

I believe the biggest mistake people make when beginning on the speaker building hoby is to skrimp on the crossover.  Yes, a pre-fab crossover can do a nice job, but using a $14 pre-fab off eBay after spending $350 on your drivers and 24 hours building a nice enclosure is like ripping the V8 out of a Corvette and sticking in a Scion 4-banger.  Hey, it will go, and it looks nice, but it will fail miserably to meet its potential.  I have often spent more on the crossover components for a system than I spent on everything else put together.  Don't skrimp - and don't be afraid to experiment.  The MTM center channel I mentioned above is using 2 $250 Revelator mid-bass drivers and a $150 Morel tweeter, and the crossover components are costing about $300 (all Solen.)

On the other hand, I put toegther a system for a friend and spent a total of less than $100 on four woofers, three tweeters and all crossovers buying special sale items off Parts Express (Tang Band tweeters and Vifa woofers and pre-fab 2-way Dayton Xovers.)  We made 2-way mains and an MTM center channel.  He built the cabinets and was very happy with the results.

About the drawbacks of that ribbon tweeter.... Umm.. the price? ;)

Ribbon tweeters are a big fad right now.  They are very pricey, but can sound very good.  I just don't kow if they are worth the cost.  From what I understand they don't offer any real advantage.  You can probably get regular tweeters that sound just as good for cheaper.

Also, I wouldn't suggest dropping the tweeter down too low.  If you do, you will limit the output level you can run them at.  That's kind of why I suggested an MTM design so you can get some low extention with authority without early breakup.  The Extremis drivers are good up to 4k, so that should open your tweeter choices up a little bit. 

Unless you want to spend a great deal of money on amplifiers for each speaker, I don't think active is the way to go for the crossover.  I'd recomend sticking to at least polypropolene capacitors and air core inductors and you should be fine.  Just be sure to watch the way you mount the inductors.  You want them to be at right angles from each other to prevent interference unless they are mounted a good distance apart.  Here's a tech paper on that: https://www.adireaudio.com/Files/TechPapers/Crosstalk.pdf 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

I'm not familiar with that Fountek ribbon.  I have used THIS one recently with fantastic results, and it can be safely crossed as low as 600Hz although I'd recomend no less than 1200 or so for power handling reasons.  My favorite ribbons are the Heil Air Motion Transformers... hard to find these days and kind of pricey at around $600, but the best sounding high end going IMO.  Carver, Ravens and Infinity make some excellent ribbons.

Ribbons have a couple of advantages over dome or cone transducers in that they have wider frequency reaponse and better horizontal dispersion making them less colored off-axis, although they lack vertical dispersion much beyond their length so speaker placement is more critical.  It's also why most designs with ribbons use multiple drivers - making the ribbon longer increases vertical dispersion.  They tend to be more efficient, although they also distort more easily at the limits of their power handling.  They are not well suited for near-field monitoring use.  Ribbons are about twice as expensive to manufacture as conventional tweeters, as I recall...

The sound of ribbons is different from that of conventional tweeters.  Most people describe it as more open and airy.

Conventional wisdom, however, will tell you to use dome tweeters for most average listening uses because you get much better overall performance for the price.  If you want to try some of the best conventional tweeters available, try a Scan Speak 9800 or 9900 (metal or soft dome versions of the same motor) or a Seas Millenium.

Stereo powered subs can work great in large rooms.  Adding them into the tower is, as you say, an interesting design... but it can limit your room flexibility in several important ways.   To extend the bass response of an MTM you could try a transmission line tower with the 6's similar to the Thor.

As far as the specific questions you have asked above concerning Adire drivers, I'll let Steven tackle them except to say that all else being equal, a single Shiva should outperform dual Koda 8's as a subwoofer.

I will comment more on the tweeter situation.  Morel makes excelent tweets,  highly recomended for overall quality.  I love them.   But do not try a top mount with an MTM desaign. D'Appolito's work best with dome or cone tweeters placed equidistant between the woofers and on either the same physical axis or the same acoustical time-aligned axis.  Top mounting makes this next to impossible.  If you are using two woofers and a top-mount tweeter, it is no longer an MTM design it is simply a design with two wooferes.  I also cannot recomend ribbons in general with an MTM design.   Ribbons in an MTM would be too limited in soundfield coverage as you'd have to use only one driver.  Ribbons are best in a 2-way configuration with two to three drivers stacked on the same vertical axis for best room coverage.

Bottom line, actually, is to go for it.  Try different things.  If you hate the results, you're only out time and a little MDF as you can build new cabinets or modify the ones you make.  Dirvers are always movable from one enclosure to another (your should see my garage littered with picked-over carcasses of failed enclosures!)

First of all, thanks Dyon for the information on the ribbons.  It was most enlightening.  I kept my comments more open ended as I wasn't sure if I was fully correct.  Your comments definitely clarified the parts I did not know.

kfr01] wrote:

---

Also, here's another one for you. I know separate subwoofers are also the fad right now. How do you all feel about placing a powered subwoofer in each front tower.

I was thinking sealed Extremis MTM on top playing down to 100hz, then having a powered Shiva column of the tower seated below that. Not that this is a good comparison, heh, but something along these lines:
https://www.wilsonaudio.com/products/maxx/index.html

My concern / root of the question is this:

Is it better to port the Extremis MTM portion of the tower to play as low as possible then have a separate subwoofer located elsewhere in the room pick up only the low bass frequencies...
OR
Seal the Extremis MTM portion of the tower and place it on top of a bass column?

I was also thinking of possibly a couple Koda 8's in the bass column instead of the Shiva. Opinions? 

---

That will depend on your intended application.  For music listening, a full range tower works great as you only usually need extention down to about 30 Hz.  But for theater you need some serious bass to really give that "movie theater" experience.  The Extremis driver will have as much extention and impact as our AV8 that is used in the Kit 281.  Those kits are well known for their extention, and the Extremis drivers should have similar performance.  For music listening, a ported MTM design should work just fine, giving you that extention.  Match that with a Shiva and you will get a good balance for music and movies.  But if you really want the ultimate HT, then I recomend either a Shiva/Tempest in a large ported enclosure, or better yet step up to the Tumult.  I'm willing to bet with that setup you could easily blow away the sound at any movie theater.

The Koda 8's will definitely have more extention.  But I don't think they add anything to the design.  They will greatly complicate the crossover design and the Extremis drivers will play plenty low to match up with a sub.  I think for your first attempt it would be wise to go with a two-way setup (mids,tweet).

kfr01] wrote:

---

Since the larger drivers are probably 'slower' drivers than the Extremis will I loose some speed and accuracy this way?

Thanks again 

---

Uh oh, we are getting into one of those popular misconceptions here.  The speed and accuracy of a driver is not based on the size or mass of the driver.  Transient response is effected by inductance.  Here's a very informative tech paper on this topic: https://www.adireaudio.com/Files/TechPapers/WooferSpeed.pdf

The Extremis mid uses a pretty short coil for the excursion it has (one of the benifits of XBL^2) and also has copper in the gap (you can see this in the pictures on our site).  This greatly reduces inductance.  in fact the inductance of the Extremis mid is a tiny .13 mH.  Tweeters usually have about .08-.09 mH, so you can see how low this really is. 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

DYohn] wrote:

---

My favorite ribbons are the Heil Air Motion Transformers... hard to find these days and kind of pricey at around $600, but the best sounding high end going IMO.

---

My very first set of speakers were ESS Tempest with the Heil Air Motion Transformer tweeter.  It was a 2-way configuration, and they had 3 sizes of cabinets, each with the same tweeter but 8", 10" or 12" woofers, sealed.  Wonderful highs... this was in '75 and my Air Force buddies all said they liked the sound from that set.  I had the small pair first, then traded for the larger model (there may have been only 2 sizes).  The ESS Tempests had this rediculous foam grill on them, though, that had a velcro-backed aluminum bar that stuck onto them, and it would always fall off or get crooked.  I have no idea at all what happened to those speakers....like a lot of things they just became a memory.  They would be a lot more valuable to me nowadays.  DYohn, you jogged my memory.

And oh yeah, jeffchilcott......thanks!

uthinkuknoaudio wrote:

---

My memory is jogged as well ... Who's isn't lol?

---

Mine is kind of lazy.  All I can manage is to get it to walk fast.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

Steven, thanks for your input.  I've ruled out doing a 3-way with Koda's bringing up the bottom.  The article on inductance was fascinating, I'm even more sold on the Extremis than I was to begin with.

I'll let you all know if I have more questions as I get closer to building this thing.

check out my stereo that i built from some stuff i ripped out of my sister's car. it was just a boring day and i tried something new. it was great until my mom told me to turn it down cause her wall was vibrating. now obviously you wouldn't want this set up like the way it is, but for me it's pretty cool, not to mention it flippin rocks my dorm room and pisses off the RA's.

 i hope that picture works. it's too big to upload

anyways, it's 2 12" infinity reference subs with some lame-o 4 inch kenwood speakers.

I'm too lazy to read this whole thread :D but I will tell you this: Get Peerless, Scan Speak or Vifa drivers.

haemphyst wrote:

---

Steven... I'm surprised at you... LOL Ribbons are way more than a fad! Ribbons are the most accurate and airy sounding drivers readily available on the planet! OK, I jest, there are others, just as revealing, out there, but as far as frequency response, there is nothing in the dynamic world to touch them. There are many experts that believe that there are many psychoacoustic cues in music, that live at frequencies well above 20K. Now, being as old as I am, and having abused my hearing as much as I have, I am admittedly at a bit of a disadvantage to hear everything up there... (probably not much beyond 16K, truth be told) but I have to say with all honesty, when I hear a very nice system, with ribbon tweeters, there is just something about the "feel" and the "emotion" that is revealed. It is difficult to explain... Imagine a diet chocolate bar, and a real chocolate bar... they taste the same, there's just a little something "extra" in the real chocolate... OK, bad correlation... but you know what I'm saying right?

---

I think it's a matter of strengths and weaknesses.  As this is going to be their first project, I thought it would be best to go with a standard driver instead.  Think of it as similar to a manual transmission and an automatic.  Sure a manual transmission can provide better performance in skilled hands.  But the Automatic is much easier to learn to drive on.

haemphyst wrote:

---

Anyway, I think I'm done now... Anybody on this board thinking about going to the CES in January? PM me and let's see about getting together there! I'd like to meet some of the brainpower here!

---

I will be there.  But I will probably have to work during most of the show.  You definitely should stop by our room though.  We will have a lot of stuff to look at and hopefully listen to.  I'm really hoping Acoustic Visions brings their Everest again as I really want to experience that monster.  Using dual Tumults and quad PR's, you know that thing will be loud.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

haemphyst wrote:

---

However the driver you linked to, the BG NEO8, is NOT a ribbon driver. It is a planar magnetic driver.

---

Ah yes, a difference only an engineer could love!  They sound very good, and have the kind of extended high-end response usually associated with a "real" ribbon.  A highly recomended driver.

haemphyst wrote:

---

You are correct, in regards to the D'Appolito design and ribbon drivers, but do not be fooled! Ribbons can be VERY successfully integrated into an MTM design with very specific dispersion patterns in mind. If it is placed vertically, you will get a SPECTACULAR, deep, three dimensional image, BUT you must plan the tweeter height to be at EXACTLY your ear's height. If you place it on the horizontal axis, you can improve the vertical dispersion of the system, but your HF sweet spot will become vanishingly small, due to the vertical dispersion characteristics of the ribbon (or PM).

---

Precisely what I was trying to say.  :)

kfr01] wrote:

---

p> I'm even more sold on the Extremis than I was to begin with.

---

Sorry for bringing this one back from the dead.  But I thought of one other fun "selling" point for the Extremis mids.  About a month ago I did an excursion video with one and thought you might enjoy watching it.  Here's the link: https://www.adireaudio.com/Files/Extremis6.AVI

I'll bet you have never seen a mid move that far before.   That's what they call speaker porn.  We have one of a Brahma 15 on our website as well.  Once we get the files downsized, we will finally have up the one's I did of the Brahma 10 and Tumult as well.  Man it's fun abusing expensive speakers without concern.

BTW, all those videos were shot with at the most 250 watts of power. 

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

kfr01] wrote:

---

br>
1st) The UcD amplifier module is intriguing to me. I've never built an amp. Do you have a sense for how much money, outside of the enclosure, it usually takes to get a UcD up and running? Power supply, slowstart, etc.? Also, after browsing pages and pages of UcD topic on that forum I learned that everyone seems to be connecting their UcD differently. Do you know if there is a reference design?

---

Contact our tech department about that one.  I know our engineers were working on ways to connect them and know the strengths and weaknesses.  In fact I believe they will have a multichannel solution complete with casing available for resale in the future.  That may save you the headache.  Here's the link: https://www.adireaudio.com/TextPages/UCDFlexAmpsPageFrameText.htm

kfr01] wrote:

---

br>2nd) How do you all feel about a pro-audio amplifier from a company like QSC? They seem to be low priced and reasonably clean. Something like this combined with the behringer would make a digital crossover easy to implement. I really like the fact that SoundEasy software, LspCad too I think, interface directly with the behringer.

Thoughts?

---

We actually have a QSC amplifier here at the shop.  We use it to power speakers for testing purposes.  It seems to work great.  I think the biggest problem with using pro-sound amplifiers for home audio use is the fan noise. 

BTW, I talked it over with our sales guy, and I found out that I was wrong earlier.  It turns out that SoundEasy is just as accurate as LspCad.  The difference is that LspCad is MUCH easier to use.  I guess it's a real pain to figure out how to use SoundEasy, but once you get it you will have a great piece of software available to you.

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio

In general, pro-sound amps have lower S/N ratios and higher distortion numbers than home amps, simply because they are designed for long-throw installations where the noise and distortion from the speaker systems will far outweigh any amplifier shortcomings.  Plus they are often used outdoors...  Home theatre gear has to be much quieter as it is designed for near-field usage.  That being said, I also like QSC amps and have two of them in my lab.  I love BGW pro line and of course Crown (I have used these in theatre setups many times) and some Furman gear, and have also had some good success recently with Rane amps and pre-amps, believe it or not.  The advantage to using pro-line gear is you generally get balanced inputs and often can run 70V outputs if you want to.  Community makes some of the best pro-sound speakers available IMO.  And don't underestimate Alesis and Mackie.  These brands are surprisingly good given their relatively low price points..

Beheringer makes great gear, altghough they can be a bit overpriced, depending on what you need.  I use one of their mics and microphone pre-amps for my RTA.

Ok, I found some more info on our UCD module project, which includes pictures.  Here's the link: https://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=13993

Steven Kephart

Adire Audio