Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

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

  • Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

    Can anyone compare these two, both excellent-looking designs? One seems the epitome of simplicity (Jeff B.'s), while the other, the Natalie P, seems the complete opposite, with a (series?) crossover that's nearly undecipherable to me. I know there's more than one way to make an omelette, but these are polar opposites! Jeff B., for instance, doesn't make any mention of the supposed "dark side" of the RS180.

    I'm drawn to both, but for different reasons. I'd like to build an RS180 MTM, and both seem like solid, well-thought-out designs. Can anyone comment on one or both, especially regarding the differences in crossover complexity?

    Also, does anyone have any suggestions for implementing the non-shielded RS180 in any of the many existing MTM designs?

  • #2
    Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

    Originally posted by Applesauce View Post
    Can anyone compare these two, both excellent-looking designs? One seems the epitome of simplicity (Jeff B.'s), while the other, the Natalie P, seems the complete opposite, with a (series?) crossover that's nearly undecipherable to me. I know there's more than one way to make an omelette, but these are polar opposites! Jeff B., for instance, doesn't make any mention of the supposed "dark side" of the RS180.

    I'm drawn to both, but for different reasons. I'd like to build an RS180 MTM, and both seem like solid, well-thought-out designs. Can anyone comment on one or both, especially regarding the differences in crossover complexity?

    Also, does anyone have any suggestions for implementing the non-shielded RS180 in any of the many existing MTM designs?
    I doubt you'd be disappointed with either design. Do note this: The 2 designs use a different tweeter. I believe the concensus is that the new RS180's are virtually drop-ins for the old shielded version. Not so with the RS28A(S).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

      And the tweeter for Jeff's design is out NLA, according to the thread.

      www.rjbaudio.com/projects.html has a comparison of several crossovers for this speaker. A bit dated, but you may find it interesting.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

        I believe there are more than just those 2 out there...

        Natalie P
        Dr. K
        Jeff B (For shielded RS28)
        RJB MTM and 2.5 MTM
        John Marsh's RS28 Modula MTM
        Dave Brown's MTM

        See this linky:
        http://www.rjbaudio.com/RS180MTM/rs180-rs28-mtm.html

        Later,
        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


        • #5
          Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

          Huh.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

            I's be interested in hearing about any comparison as well. Hopefully someone will give a shot and try both XOs since there are so many RS180 MTMs out there. I built the Modula MTMs as well as a simpler XO by Jay Kim and they sounded more alike than not.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

              C'mon, kids, here we are, more than a decade into the twenty first century, and you're arguing which is better, a '36 Dodge or a '37 Chevy.

              The RS180 and the RS28 are, at least, still very good drivers . . . very difficult to beat for the price. But those crossovers? Archaic, almost barbaric, every one of them. Straight out of the dark ages. Put a MiniDSP, or any other good active crossover, on those drivers (LR4, notch the breakup, delay the tweeter, baffle step if you wish) and you will easily have a better loudspeaker than any of those mentioned in the posts above. And that's before you start tweeking . . .

              History is fine, history is fun, but history class is not the place to design loudspeakers . . .
              "It suggests that there is something that is happening in the real system that is not quite captured in the models."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                Isn't it bedtime, Grumpy?!:p

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                  Could I have a MiniDSP tutorial with RS180 + RS28F? Any takers? Wusu..... :D (Sorry to call your name but you wrote such excellent tutorials...)

                  Originally posted by Wushuliu View Post
                  I's be interested in hearing about any comparison as well. Hopefully someone will give a shot and try both XOs since there are so many RS180 MTMs out there. I built the Modula MTMs as well as a simpler XO by Jay Kim and they sounded more alike than not.
                  Originally posted by Deward Hastings View Post
                  C'mon, kids, here we are, more than a decade into the twenty first century, and you're arguing which is better, a '36 Dodge or a '37 Chevy.

                  The RS180 and the RS28 are, at least, still very good drivers . . . very difficult to beat for the price. But those crossovers? Archaic, almost barbaric, every one of them. Straight out of the dark ages. Put a MiniDSP, or any other good active crossover, on those drivers (LR4, notch the breakup, delay the tweeter, baffle step if you wish) and you will easily have a better loudspeaker than any of those mentioned in the posts above. And that's before you start tweeking . . .

                  History is fine, history is fun, but history class is not the place to design loudspeakers . . .

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                    Originally posted by Deward Hastings View Post
                    C'mon, kids, here we are, more than a decade into the twenty first century, and you're arguing which is better, a '36 Dodge or a '37 Chevy.

                    The RS180 and the RS28 are, at least, still very good drivers . . . very difficult to beat for the price. But those crossovers? Archaic, almost barbaric, every one of them. Straight out of the dark ages. Put a MiniDSP, or any other good active crossover, on those drivers (LR4, notch the breakup, delay the tweeter, baffle step if you wish) and you will easily have a better loudspeaker than any of those mentioned in the posts above. And that's before you start tweeking . . .

                    History is fine, history is fun, but history class is not the place to design loudspeakers . . .
                    Build, document in detail and publish that and you may get a following. I for one would be too much of an idiot (and maybe too lazy) to go in cold.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                      Originally posted by turn2 View Post
                      Build, document in detail and publish that and you may get a following. I for one would be too much of an idiot (and maybe too lazy) to go in cold.
                      Ha! I'm with you. A far cry from smart enough, that's for sure. I got my masters... But not in anything related to anything that might be useful here.

                      Thanks for all the info, everyone else. I'd seen all those links - more I was hoping for a clearer explication of why there might exist such very different crossovers to do much the same job.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                        Originally posted by turn2 View Post
                        I believe the concensus is that the new RS180's are virtually drop-ins for the old shielded version. Not so with the RS28A(S).
                        Right. I'd caught that. It looks like Solen still has some of the RS28A-S in stock, so I might go that route (although I have no need for shielded drivers). Conversely, I might go with one of the designs using a Seas tweeter... Open to suggestions here, too! I guess all I've really settled on is that I want to build a stand-mounted MTM with the RS180, and I'm still open to a tweeter (and thus, filter).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                          The active crossovers still use the "archaic" topology . . . LR4, notch, etc.
                          Seems like it requires similar work to learning PCD, plus requiring bi/tri/etc amping.

                          Originally posted by turn2 View Post
                          Build, document in detail and publish that and you may get a following. I for one would be too much of an idiot (and maybe too lazy) to go in cold.
                          I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
                          OS MTMs http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=220388
                          Swope TM http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=221818
                          Econowave and Audio Nirvana AN10 fullrange http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=216841
                          Imperial Russian Stouts http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...=1#post1840444
                          LECBOS. http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...ghlight=lecbos

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                            Originally posted by fastbike1 View Post
                            Seems like it requires similar work to learning PCD,
                            Much easier, since almost all the complexity goes away when you "normalize" driver impedance and acoustic centers . . . and you can model it all on the right hand side of PCD if you wish.
                            "It suggests that there is something that is happening in the real system that is not quite captured in the models."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Natalie vs. Jeff B.'s RS180 MTM design?

                              Originally posted by Deward Hastings View Post
                              C'mon, kids, here we are, more than a decade into the twenty first century, and you're arguing which is better, a '36 Dodge or a '37 Chevy.

                              The RS180 and the RS28 are, at least, still very good drivers . . . very difficult to beat for the price. But those crossovers? Archaic, almost barbaric, every one of them. Straight out of the dark ages. Put a MiniDSP, or any other good active crossover, on those drivers (LR4, notch the breakup, delay the tweeter, baffle step if you wish) and you will easily have a better loudspeaker than any of those mentioned in the posts above. And that's before you start tweeking . . .

                              History is fine, history is fun, but history class is not the place to design loudspeakers . . .
                              Everytime I look at how much I spend in passive elements, and the cost of a pair of MiniDSPs, I wonder... why bother anymore? I may just get two Class-D 4 channel amps, two MiniDSPs, and forget about passive elements and their losses.
                              Line Array: IDS-25 Clone, FE-83.
                              2-2.5 Way:
                              Zaph Audio's winning entry: ZA5+SB29. - Microliths: RS125+RS28. - Small Bangs: TB W4-1658SB+SEAS 27TBFC/G. - Monoliths: Peerless 830884+SEAS 27TBFC/G.
                              3-3.5 Way:Miniliths: SEAS P21/CA21REX+Neo8 PDR+Neo3 PDR. - Megaliths: 2xDayton RS270+2xT-B W4-1337SB+SB29. - ZDT3.5 +: 2xDayton RS180+Dayton RS52+Vifa DQ25. Reflexos: OB 4xDayton RS150 + Neo3 PDR.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X