My turn!!

[rickcraig]

Re: My turn!!

To DoubleTap: I actually didn't have an idea of what I wanted to build that is why I asked for input.
While I was keeping an eye on responses here, I did look at other designs for inspiration hence my nod to Rick's latest design.
The differences are a larger sub and different drivers for the array.
But again, I would like to thank everyone for their input.

To Rick Craig: Am I in any violations by using your idea?

It doesn't bother me; afterall, it's impossible to design anything that doesn't borrow at least a little from what has been done before.

[Scott L]

Re: My turn!!

Jerrald:While I was keeping an eye on responses here, I did look at other designs for inspiration.

Scott L: In my opinion, based on 30+ years of speaker building, an approach that has worked for me.......

1)A single fine ribbon tweeter (such as the RAAL)mounted in it's own housing; physically separate from the rest, yet built such that close proximity to the mids is possible.
2) If you like MTM arrangement, flank said ribbon with some high resolution/hi-efficency drivers of your choice; otherwise use a "and a half-way" type dual mids such that only the top driver carries the upper frequencies just before crossing to the ribbon tweeter. BSC might be figured here, unless you opt for a di-pole mid, which is what I suggest. Still, some bsc, if you like rich sound.
3) A superbly built low-mid/ upper bass section; say a pair of 12" professional woofers; maybe some nice Emminence from Parts Express. The mid range section can NOT sit atop this section as to avoid doppler effects. Build a stand that drapes over this low mid section.
4) Ultimately, the deep bass section should be an infinite baffle design. Check out the "cult of the infinitely baffled". If this is not possible, you can do a manifold type-opposing driver arrangement in a healty sized vented enclosure.
I'd use at least a PAIR of 15" (say the RSS390HF) per channel.
*) This entire system to be driven via electronic crossover system(s). You'll need about 5 high quality audio amplifiers; each chosen for their applied frequency section. Eg: a tube amp for the ribbon; high power SS for the deep bass, etc. Not a light undertaking, but you can really enjoy the music.

[Jim Griffin]

Re: My turn!!

Jerrald,

I have sent you a private message via the Tech Talk system. Let me hear if you do not receive it today.

Jim

[jerrald]

Re: My turn!!

To DoubleTap: I actually didn't have an idea of what I wanted to build that is why I asked for input.
While I was keeping an eye on responses here, I did look at other designs for inspiration hence my nod to Rick's latest design.
The differences are a larger sub and different drivers for the array.
But again, I would like to thank everyone for their input.

To Rick Craig: Am I in any violations by using your idea?

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: My turn!!

I have response plots on the smaller ribbons but not the 140-15D. They all measure very well and only differ in terms of crossover points and top octave horizontal dispersion based on the dimensions of the element. We can do Linkwitz-style testing if that's what you're looking for. The 140-15D is most suitable for arrays but I don't have one on hand right now.

I'd love to see the IMD results, Linkwitz style. Multiple tone tests are the best way to mimic what's going on during music and what kind of "hash" is generated. Without those, it's tough to really make a call on where they can cross without strain.

[rickcraig]

Re: My turn!!

I'm curious to see if you have some data on the RAALs, like response and distortion plots.

I have response plots on the smaller ribbons but not the 140-15D. They all measure very well and only differ in terms of crossover points and top octave horizontal dispersion based on the dimensions of the element. We can do Linkwitz-style testing if that's what you're looking for. The 140-15D is most suitable for arrays but I don't have one on hand right now.

[DoubleTap]

Re: My turn!!

I'm curious to see if you have some data on the RAALs, like response and distortion plots.

I can't post it because it's the OEM version, and you have to sign a non-discolsure ... and I did agree to the NDA terms to Alex personally at RMAF. But it measures flat and clean for sure. IMO what's special about the RAAL is what it does in the time domain. I can sure hear that it's special, and the only measurements I can see that indicate anything exceptional is in the impulse and energy storage data.

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: My turn!!

Seems like you knew what you were going to do already, why did we go through this exercise of recommendations?

If budget really is no consideration, the RAAL ribbons are in a totally separate league.

I'm curious to see if you have some data on the RAALs, like response and distortion plots.

[rickcraig]

Re: My turn!!

Seems like you knew what you were going to do already, why did we go through this exercise of recommendations?

If budget really is no consideration, the RAAL ribbons are in a totally separate league.

I agree, the RAAL ribbons are excellent. Another driver to consider is the Raven Line Source ribbon. I have one here and it's exceptionally good. :D

[DoubleTap]

Re: My turn!!

Seems like you knew what you were going to do already, why did we go through this exercise of recommendations?

If budget really is no consideration, the RAAL ribbons are in a totally separate league.

[Wolf]

Re: My turn!!

Jim Holtz had those. He was the one who commissioned the design. Big TC subs on the bottom too.
Later,
Wolf

[jerrald]

Re: My turn!!

Hey, Jim! I haven't heard from you in a while.
The arrays will be mounted on top of the sub enclosure.
As far as using AC's vs Founteks, I'm not concerned about cost.
The EQ will be used not only for speaker correction but also room correction. I know you used the DEQX at the Great Plains Audio Fest here in Tulsa when you brought your arrays. I chose the DEQ2496 because it has more bands to work with and I feel the modified version will net better performance/SQ than a stock unit.
I must say, however, after reading so many debates of domes vs ribbons I may (just may) design an array using the Morel MDT40's I asked about in another post. The debate I have to think about is comb filtering from the domes vs the distortion from ribbons. After all, it has been shown that domes have less distortion than the even the best ribbons.

[Jim Griffin]

Re: My turn!!

Jerrald,

Rick's design is close enough to what you have in mind I would suggest that you contact him and just build his design vs. going it alone with your plan. Rick's design would get you farther along toward high sound quality vs. rolling your own. I would also stack the line array cabinets atop the sub cabinets to elevate the array and get more floor to ceiling integration. You will notice the sound falloff of the array as you walk around the room vs. a sitting position.

At any rate a line of eight Fountek Neo 2 ribbons would cost a lot less than the Aurum Cantus ones you have in mind. You might also consider a plate amp/crossover for the subwoofers as a passive crossover would be a chore otherwise. I suggest that you first try it without the equalizer as you might not need to EQ the entire frequency band but rather use a feedback destroyer to help room correct the subs.

Jim

[jerrald]

Re: My turn!!

Rick Craig of Selah Audio did one for a customer but I don't remember the name he gave it.
It was called the Omegarray. It used (10) Aurum Cantus AC-130MKII's, (8) Fountek CD2.0's, and a single 12" (AE Speakers?).
Since I don't watch movies that much I won't spend too much time/money on a surround system (at least that's what I say now). But for the most part the electronics will mainly come from Bryston with a modified DEQ2496 from Audiosmile (U.K.).

[JustinG]

Re: My turn!!

I only have 2 words- Holy Crap!:eek:


Ok..another 2 words- Build Thread!

I think someone has already built something similar to this, at least I know someone has a line array with the AC130-MKII.... can't quite remember who though.