 |
 |
|
|||
|
Senior Member
C'mon, Quinn...
The operative phrase is well-designed (not "typical") 3-way speaker. I have no doubt that if DaveF were to design such a speaker, the midrange would be properly isolated in a sub-enclosure, and the described issue simply wouldn't arise.
Forum Founder
Me four...but I would need a new room too.Originally Posted by bikeman
Me three.
David
Yeah...I'm sure Dave would do it right.C'mon, Quinn...
The operative phrase is well-designed (not "typical") 3-way speaker. I have no doubt that if DaveF were to design such a speaker, the midrange would be properly isolated in a sub-enclosure, and the described issue simply wouldn't arise.
-curtis
Administrator
Great stuff GaryB!
Very well thought out and when and *IF* the time comes to release a floorstander, you can be sure it will be done right.
I will say this, there are some very exciting things planned for 2007
Elite Member
I will say this, there are some very exciting things planned for 2007
Like new products exciting, or new babies exciting?
As always, I'm rooting for a more full range speaker and a wood veneer option.
I find it interesting that the assumption about a 3-way seems focused on a smaller mid. Why not the existing M-T-M or T-M supplemented with a woofer or two?
Advanced Member
I'm with Brad. More of a full range model with the pretty stuff for the WAF. I'd like something that would play down in the 30's with authority. Something that could be used for 2 channel and also would really belt it out as fronts for HT crossed over around 60-80HZ. Since a crossover isn't a brick wall, the extra displacement would be used to get you up around Dolby ref level without strain.
- EVH III
Senior Member
Thanks, Dave.Great stuff GaryB!
Very well thought out and when and *IF* the time comes to release a floorstander, you can be sure it will be done right.
I will say this, there are some very exciting things planned for 2007(...closest I could come to a "blushing" smilie...) I knew I was sticking my neck out when I made that post and appreciate your not chopping my head off! As always, I'm looking forward to any and all new developments from Ascend.
Hi, Brad. I certainly did consider the possibilty of essentially adding two more 6-1/2" woofer cones to the existing CBM-170 SE drivers and crossing over at ~200 Hz. I have seen variations on this theme from other manufacturers (I think Onix is doing something similar with one of the 17 upcoming variations of the x-series... you should knowI find it interesting that the assumption about a 3-way seems focused on a smaller mid. Why not the existing M-T-M or T-M supplemented with a woofer or two?
OTOH, the possibility of a 3-way center in a slim cabinet is very compelling to me and requires a smaller midrange driver. Once I had made that decision, the prospect of matching drivers in the center and tower became irresistible.
A variation for the tower would be a MTMWW array (top-to-bottom) using the smaller mid, as you suggest for the larger mid. This would require a taller cabinet to keep the tweeter at the same height, however, and I'm not sure that the results would justify the added expense and complexity.
Elite Member
I can see Dave just sitting back, taking it all in and letting out a big "Muh-wahhahahahahahaha!!!
Ed
* Sierra-2EX's W/V2 crossover upgrade
* (2) Rythmik F12's
* Parasound Halo P6
* Audio by Van Alstine DVA-M225 Monoblock Amps
* MiniDSP 2x4HD For Sub calibration
*World's Best Cables Canare 4S11 speaker cables
Elite Member
I don't know anything more about these products than anyone else who reads the AV123 forum.(I think Onix is doing something similar with one of the 17 upcoming variations of the x-series... you should know
I'm missing how this would require a taller cabinet. It shouldn't be any taller than the 340's on stands since that's already an MTM with large M's. Did I miss what you meant?
Senior Member
Fair enough. You do have quite a presence there, and I have seen in posts at AVSforum that you seem to have a cordial relationship with Mark Schifter. I really wasn't implying anything sinister... sorry if it came across that way.
My proposed tower design specified a height of no more than 40'', since I'd like the tweeter at ~36". And you're right, adding another 4" driver above the tweeter would increase the height to just about exactly match the CMT-340 on its stand (45"). Not a biggie, but I prefer a 38"-40" height for my compact tower.I'm missing how this would require a taller cabinet. It shouldn't be any taller than the 340's on stands since that's already an MTM with large M's. Did I miss what you meant?
Last edited by GaryB; 11-21-2006 at 03:43 PM.
Elite Member
Ah, I missed that you had a target height of 40". I think that would only be realistic in something like a TMW or TMWW design.
begin long aside.....
BTW: Mark and I definitely know each other and we only live 2 miles apart, but it's not like we get together or even talk much. I saw him at the RMAF last month, but it was the first time I'd seen him since the RMAF last year. It's a fun forum (lots of activity, but not crazy like AVS) and I know the folks at their office from events and from stopping by to pick things up on occasion. I've done a bit of work with Mark (or rather, other folks working on projects for him) on a couple of items, but not currently. I learned quite a bit from several folks (designers and engineers of various types) at the couple of AV123 events in town (held a mile from my house), which has been cool.
Of course, the RMAF has been a great event for meeting designers/engineers. It's very interesting to get each person's different take on the same type of products. My favorite this past RMAF was probably Frank VanAlstine - very smart guy who's been designing electronics for my entire lifetime. He's very anti-audiophile fluff and was at a show with a lot of it. He went into details on his amp designs and how he was able to use a wider bandwidth than most - it was cool.
I think the only thing all of them had in common was that they all had an opinion (or five or six).
end long aside....
Posting Permissions
