Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anyone Built Pete's New Designs: Apollo / Ares ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Anyone Built Pete's New Designs: Apollo / Ares ?

    Pete's designed some new kits with Erich at DIYsoundgroup, and was curious if anyone's built them yet, any frequency response graphs, etc. Very interested to build them, and I'm just waiting on flatpacks for them, which Erich hinted should be available soon.

    I've always wanted to build one of Pete's designs.

  • #2
    I've posted response plots for both in the original build threads.

    http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...hy-wavecor-mtm

    The Apollo is below, left and right channels. The scale is 1dB/division. That's in-room at 1m, and I have a fairly lively room.



    Ares: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/fo...erless-tm-ares

    Here's a measurement I took yesterday from about 0.7 meter in line with the tweeter. 1/6th octave smoothing. Distortion is the lower plot.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	untitled.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	64.3 KB
ID:	1365363

    R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

    Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


    95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
    "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Pete Schumacher ® View Post
      I've posted response plots for both in the original build threads.
      Pete, both of these designs look really awesome.

      Can you compare/contrast the Ares and Apollo lines?

      I'm hoping to build a kit for my brother in law in the coming year. He's really enjoyed the TM Overnight Sensations I built for him a few years back, so I want to take it to the next level.

      Thanks for all the talented work you do and your presence on these forums!


      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by JohnBooty View Post

        Pete, both of these designs look really awesome.

        Can you compare/contrast the Ares and Apollo lines?

        I'm hoping to build a kit for my brother in law in the coming year. He's really enjoyed the TM Overnight Sensations I built for him a few years back, so I want to take it to the next level.

        Thanks for all the talented work you do and your presence on these forums!

        The real difference between the two is the ability to scale. Apollo looks like a smallish MTM but sounds like a large floor stander. A pair of them will pressurize a room unlike any 7" two way stand mount speaker. The Anarchy woofers are game changers in that respect. With double the available excursion of other 7" woofers, that translates directly into peak capacity. And that doesn't go unnoticed, especially during very dynamic passages. So if you ever really like to turn it up, Apollo is the way to go.

        Ares delivers big sound in a small package. The little Anarchy is obviously smaller, and it has less Xmax than its big brother, but it's still well in excess of other 5.5" woofers at 9mm one-way. The parameters allow it to hit mid 30s in the right cabinet, something unusual for a 5.5" woofer. Of course it's easy to drive it to its limits compared to the Apollo, but for someone who never turns it up to concert level Ares will deliver full range music to reasonably high levels: over 102dB from 40Hz on up in .5cf tuned to 42Hz. That's pretty special for a 5.5" driver.
        R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

        Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


        95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
        "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

        Comment


        • #5
          Awesome, thanks for the links to the threads Pete.

          One thing: On Erich's site, the description for both MTMs says they can be turned onto their sides for use as a center with no issues. Is that just a convenience thing, or do they really also work well when laid flat? Does the little wavecor guide help with dispersion?

          Or will they suffer from the classic MTM lobing issues from horizontal placement?

          Curious if I could use 3 for a front stage.

          Thanks!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ScenesFromAHat View Post
            Awesome, thanks for the links to the threads Pete.

            One thing: On Erich's site, the description for both MTMs says they can be turned onto their sides for use as a center with no issues. Is that just a convenience thing, or do they really also work well when laid flat? Does the little wavecor guide help with dispersion?

            Or will they suffer from the classic MTM lobing issues from horizontal placement?

            Curious if I could use 3 for a front stage.

            Thanks!
            Great question. With any MTM, the lower they can cross the better to alleviate lobing. That said, get far enough off axis and yes, lobing will be an issue even with these MTMs. But if you're sitting within 15 degrees or so I doubt you'd notice any response anomalies.

            Personally, I'm going to add the Apollo MT as the center channel and just stand it up. Working up the XO for it right now. Be starting on the Ares MTM as soon as Erich gets the baffles done.
            R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

            Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


            95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
            "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

            Comment


            • #7
              Makes sense, thanks. I wish i had the approx 15" height needed for the Apollo TM as my center! But, sadly I'm stuck with 10.5" height.

              The seating in my living room goes out to about 30 degrees in each direction off center, so looks like I might be out of luck. Maybe I'm just hoping beyond hope, but do you think it'd still be worth a shot?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Pete Schumacher ® View Post

                The real difference between the two is the ability to scale. Apollo looks like a smallish MTM but sounds like a large floor stander. A pair of them will pressurize a room unlike any 7" two way stand mount speaker. The Anarchy woofers are game changers in that respect. With double the available excursion of other 7" woofers, that translates directly into peak capacity. And that doesn't go unnoticed, especially during very dynamic passages. So if you ever really like to turn it up, Apollo is the way to go.

                Ares delivers big sound in a small package. The little Anarchy is obviously smaller, and it has less Xmax than its big brother, but it's still well in excess of other 5.5" woofers at 9mm one-way. The parameters allow it to hit mid 30s in the right cabinet, something unusual for a 5.5" woofer. Of course it's easy to drive it to its limits compared to the Apollo, but for someone who never turns it up to concert level Ares will deliver full range music to reasonably high levels: over 102dB from 40Hz on up in .5cf tuned to 42Hz. That's pretty special for a 5.5" driver.
                Oh man. First, thank you for the thoughtful reply!

                If it was for me, the choice would be easy... I'd save until I had enough for the Apollo MTM. It truly sounds like a game-changer. =)

                For purposes of this gift, it sounds like maybe one of the smaller kits might fit the bill... and the budget, since he's going to need some new amplification.

                I think the choice might wind up coming down to the Apollo MT or Ares MTM (or maybe Paul's S2000 MTM)...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Pete, based on the dimensions on DIYSoundgroup the Apollo looks like it is a little bigger than 1.0cuft (1.171 without bracing figured in.) I was thinking the Dayton 1.0 cuft box would look great (better than the simple box I could make) but it is slightly smaller at 1.010 ft³. The baffle would also be 0.5” narrower.

                  This would also be even bit less if I used damping material (bitumen) on the walls.

                  Would this mess up the design?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Inaudible in my book.
                    Builds - C-Killa - Speedsters - LithMTM - Talking Sticks - Pocket Rockets - Khanspires - Dayton RS Center - RS225/28A - Kairos - Adelphos - SEOS TD12X - Dayton 8 - Needles - 871S - eD6c - Overnight Sensations - Tritrix (ported) - Lineup F4 - Stentorians - The Cheapies - Tub Thumpers - Barbells - Tuba HT - Numerous subwoofers - probably missing a few...... :p

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Alternatively, what about using the 1.16cubic foot floor-standing enclosure? I know the baffle will be different (much longer vertically). Would that have fairly obvious reflection issues? Sorry for the dumb question.

                      And Pete, when used horizontally, do you think I could get away with great coverage up to 15 degrees and "good" coverage for a living-room seating arrangement up to 25-30? Or will it start having issues? People who aren't sitting center would be family that don't particularly care about frequency responses anyway lol, but they still appreciate good sound.

                      Thanks so much for your help!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I really doubt anyone would have trouble hearing dialogue even 45 degrees off axis from the horizontal MTM. Might have a slightly different sound, but should still be OK.
                        There will be a drop out in the crossover region, as though the tweeter were inverted.

                        As for the tower, I'm sure that would work just fine. I even have a 2.5-way crossover for the TMM arrangement if you'd rather go that route.
                        R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

                        Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


                        95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
                        "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Pete Schumacher ® View Post
                          I really doubt anyone would have trouble hearing dialogue even 45 degrees off axis from the horizontal MTM. Might have a slightly different sound, but should still be OK.
                          There will be a drop out in the crossover region, as though the tweeter were inverted.

                          As for the tower, I'm sure that would work just fine. I even have a 2.5-way crossover for the TMM arrangement if you'd rather go that route.

                          Oh, no way! That would be awesome. 2 TMM towers and the MTM as a center would make a pretty epic living room theater, I'm thinking.

                          If it'd be asking too much, though, I'm totally fine with MTMs for all 3

                          Have you heard the TMM arrangement? As the designer, what would you recommend for a little theater? If i had a dedicated listening room, would you go with 2 TMMs in the 1.16 cuft floorstander or a pair of the MTMs on stands?

                          I hope I'm not asking too many questions or infringing on your generosity. I really appreciate your replies and help. I'm excited to make these happen!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Did not build the TMM or try out the XO. I just took the measurements for the Apollo since I have a separate measurement for each woofer and applied a 2.5-way crossover to it so that the on-axis response was the same for both the MTM and TMM.

                            To be completely honest, I'd opt for the Apollo MT as the center channel so that the lobing issues are completely avoided. Again, not an issue if you're always sitting well between the left and right mains.
                            R = h/(2*pi*m*c) and don't you forget it! || Periodic Table as redrawn by Marshall Freerks and Ignatius Schumacher || King Crimson Radio

                            Byzantium Project & Build Thread || MiniByzy Build Thread || 3 x Peerless 850439 HDS 3-way || 8" 2-way - RS28A/B&C8BG51


                            95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong
                            "Gravitational systems are the ashes of prior electrical systems.". - Hannes Alfven, Nobel Laureate, Plasma physicist.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Do you think the (vertical) TMM would have better off axis sound, or the (vertical) MTM?

                              Center channel agreed, the TM would be best. For a 2 channel listening room/area, would you envision a floor-mounted 2.5-way TMM or stand-mounted 2-way MTM, or would it basically be a wash?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X