Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MTM advantages - is the only benefit increased sensitivity?

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

  • MTM advantages - is the only benefit increased sensitivity?

    Hi everyone, I saw a post online about someone who bought the original Overnight Sensations MT kit, and then bought the OS MTM kit. He said that the bass not only sounded louder on the MTM, but also sounded fuller when played at the same apparent volume as the MT. He made it seem like the quality of the bass was improved - not just the loudness/sensitivity. This was all his subjective opinion with no data to back it up, but I have read similar things elsewhere for other MTM designs. Of course, this could be due to other variables like placement in room, or the amp he used.

    On the other hand, I have seen posts about how the only reason to do an MTM build is for higher sensitivity. And recently I read Paul Carmody's writeup for his OS MTM build. In it, he only mentioned the increased sensitivity when going with an MTM design. He didn't mention anything about improved quality or fullness of the bass (perhaps because he tried to voice the MTM to sound exactly the same as the MT?). Paul didn't explicitly state that there were no other benefits to the OS MTM design, but if the MTM design did in fact provide a better or more full sounding bass, I find it strange that he wouldn't mention it in his writeup.

    What are your thoughts? I know there are many discussions on the disadvantages of MTM designs, but I want to know what the potential positives are. Idk if experts like Paul respond to noobs like me, but I'd love his opinion if he sees this.

  • #2
    MTM desgns have a more direct narrower vertical lobe and reduced ceiling and floor reflections due to the layout of the drivers. Horizontal dispersion is typically very good. Higher sensitivity of course is a plus to counteract the baffle step that the TM can't do in the same way.

    I've heard the TM, MTM, and TMM. I think all are a great get what you pay for result at this budget price point.

    Wolf
    "Wolf, you shall now be known as "King of the Zip ties." -Pete00t
    "Wolf and speakers equivalent to Picasso and 'Blue'" -dantheman
    "He is a true ambassador for this forum and speaker DIY in general." -Ed Froste
    "We're all in this together, so keep your stick on the ice!" - Red Green aka Steve Smith

    *InDIYana event website*

    Photobucket pages:
    https://app.photobucket.com/u/wolf_teeth_speaker

    My blog/writeups/thoughts here at PE:
    http://techtalk.parts-express.com/blog.php?u=4102

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Wolf View Post
      MTM desgns have a more direct narrower vertical lobe and reduced ceiling and floor reflections due to the layout of the drivers. Horizontal dispersion is typically very good. Higher sensitivity of course is a plus to counteract the baffle step that the TM can't do in the same way.

      I've heard the TM, MTM, and TMM. I think all are a great get what you pay for result at this budget price point.

      Wolf

      Wow, thanks for replying, Wolf! I've seen a ton of your comments and they have been super helpful. I'm not looking at the OS MTM myself, I was just using it as a specific example of something I read online. I'm personally using the S2000 MTM, and may consider downsizing to the MT in the future.

      My question is more about MTMs in general. Do you find that adding a second woofer generally adds to the "fullness" or quality of the low end? i.e. if you listened to an MT design in it's sweet spot, and then listened to the MTM version in its sweet spot, do you notice a difference in sound quality, especially on the low end/bass?

      Maybe you already answered this with you lobing/reflections comment, but I'm not experienced enough to fully understand it.​

      Comment


      • billfitzmaurice
        billfitzmaurice commented
        Editing a comment
        He already touched on the main advantage, which is wider horizontal dispersion using two smaller midbasses with the same total cone area as one larger midbass. A second midbass doesn't add to the low end, other than two having 6dB more maximum SPL than one. But that's not why you use two drivers, as you can get the same maximum output from one larger driver. It's all about dispersion.

      • Momma's Big Boy
        Momma's Big Boy commented
        Editing a comment
        Ok gotcha, thanks for the helpful info! I need to look into dispersion more, but it's good to know that the second woofer doesn't drastically change the sound of the low end on-axis.

      • billfitzmaurice
        billfitzmaurice commented
        Editing a comment
        It won't change the sound down low on or off-axis, because dispersion down low is omni-directional. It narrows as frequency goes higher. The larger the radiating plane the more it narrows. Preventing beaming is the main reason why midranges are smaller than woofers, and tweeters smaller than midranges. https://blog.soton.ac.uk/soundwaves/...a-loudspeaker/
    Working...
    X