Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Overnight Sensations Center Channel

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

  • #16
    Re: Overnight Sensations Center Channel

    Originally posted by Dewmiester View Post
    Thanks buddy, just ordered one. Robert.

    Comment


    • #17
      Paul and Gents,

      I wonder if anyone build/design the OS CC with B4N for lower bass instead of B3N?

      Thanks

      Ken

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Kenny_Yapper View Post
        Paul and Gents,

        I wonder if anyone build/design the OS CC with B4N for lower bass instead of B3N?

        Thanks

        Ken
        Different drivers would require a different size cabinet and different crossover.

        Comment


        • #19
          a4eaudio understand different different cabinet size and even cross over. I wander if Paul Carmody or any cool folks here modify OS MTM -> OS MMTMM Center with B4N ;p


          Would be interesting see performance/tradeoffs/etc for MMTMM w/ B4N vs cute MMTMM w/ B3N ?

          Comment


          • #20
            Not exactly what you want, but this 'CENTER' has m5 and m6 in it...


            SwopeHT

            https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/swope-ht


            https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/swope-ht
            Click image for larger version  Name:	Porter%20CC%20Rough.jpg Views:	0 Size:	74.0 KB ID:	1459055

            My Studio Music Production Gear: http://equipboard.com/spaker
            Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube DJTT Soundcloud

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Kenny_Yapper View Post
              Would be interesting see performance/tradeoffs/etc for MMTMM w/ B4N vs cute MMTMM w/ B3N ?
              Using the smaller 3" B3N instead of the 4" B4N will probably cost about -4db of headroom, but allow it to reach similar lows in a box that's about 3/4 the internal space along with the potentially narrower baffle (if you're aiming for skinny soundbar height).

              I think the larger B4N's extra headroom means the simpler 2way B4N-MTM version can mostly keep up with the larger and more complex 2.5way B3N-MMTMM allbeit in a slightly taller box.
              My first 2way build

              Comment


              • Kenny_Yapper
                Kenny_Yapper commented
                Editing a comment
                Great points LOUT !

                I was mainly dreaming about Pual's cute B3N-MMTMM <> (Maybe B4N MMTMM) <> M5N Swope Center like Spaker mention.

                Seems like a OS MTM as center can be an excellent performance upgrade of the cute B3N-MMTMM without extra hassle? lol

            • #22
              This just got me wondering about a center channel I am cooking up. I have been on a kick with these, and I now have it in my head that I want to make a 2.5 center. Probably.

              I have four Dayton ND64-4 : 2 1/2"
              and some tweeters I could choose from to make a "MMTMM" of sorts. Kind of weird calling a 2.5" full range a "Midwoofer."
              Tweeters: AMT MINI-8, ND20FA-6, DC28F-8, a few MCM 4ohm cheap ones,

              I was thinking (not that hard) that I could wire up the four ND64-4 into series / parallel to retain the 4ohm load, but I forgot about the crossover and that I have no idea how to go about planning out a 2.5 at all. I haven't ever even put one together. A 2.5 that is.

              Where do I go to learn / figure this out / find the shaman to guide me?
              My Studio Music Production Gear: http://equipboard.com/spaker
              Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube DJTT Soundcloud

              Comment


              • LOUT
                LOUT commented
                Editing a comment
                I learned a lot of crossover stuff from playing around in VituixCAD after seeing a youtube video from KirbyMeetsAudio about designing your own crossover. The video helped guide through the slight learning curve (for a total newbie that I am) for loading FRD and ZMA files into the Vituix, and the video kind of pushed the idea of fooling around with parts and values in that virtual space to see what things do.
                Sadly, the newer versions of VituixCAD, while still free and more flexible than ever, are a little less newbie-friendly with the crossover building than the old version that I started on.....not a huge difference, but I can imagine it being more daunting if you're as new to it as I was.

                I like that the program keeps most of the important graphs/information all in view at-once, making it easier and more intuitive to see changes in real-time whenever you tweak things a little.
                At first I was making beautiful smooth frequency response lines, but quickly realized the impedance graph was falling way too low....feeding a largely 1ohm load into most amps will make them overheat (hopefully turning off before breaking something).
                The old version 1.1.33.0 (from 2018) has a lot of pre-configured crossover parts you can easily plug-n-play with...I think the newer versions replaced that with a very free-form drag-n-drop part by part system that's fully flexible, but the old preconfigured parts were a good learning tool. :(

                Do you kind of have a rough understanding of regular crossover stuff like first-order and second-order LowPass and/or HighPass builds?
                I didn't, and I'm not making fun if you don't either. Just trying to get an idea where you're at right now.

            • #23
              Man, from the reading I have done it seems a lot of experimentation is required to balance the boomyness of the lower woofer against the upper one and that just tossing an inductor in series with the lower one isn't going to work well.

              Paul Carmondy is the guys' writing I would initially suggest . . .

              What are you looking to do with the lower of the two mid-woofers and why?

              Seems to me that the sub should handle that portion of the work but I am way open to your thoughts.



              Comment


              • #24
                Originally posted by Steve Lee View Post
                Man, from the reading I have done it seems a lot of experimentation is required to balance the boomyness of the lower woofer against the upper one and that just tossing an inductor in series with the lower one isn't going to work well.
                Doh.

                This is exactly what I thought was what I would have to do.

                Originally posted by Steve Lee View Post
                Paul Carmondy is the guys' writing I would initially suggest . . .

                What are you looking to do with the lower of the two mid-woofers and why?

                Seems to me that the sub should handle that portion of the work but I am way open to your thoughts.


                So there is no point to this other than seeing it in other cabinets as MMTMM with 2.5 crossovers with that inductor on two of the four midwoofers. Thinking about it now, it's probably pointless doing this inside a center. I've been goofing around with these for a couple weeks.

                I am still going to build a center with the four ND64-4's and a tweeter

                My Studio Music Production Gear: http://equipboard.com/spaker
                Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube DJTT Soundcloud

                Comment


                • #25
                  Originally posted by Steve Lee View Post
                  Man, from the reading I have done it seems a lot of experimentation is required to balance the boomyness of the lower woofer against the upper one and that just tossing an inductor in series with the lower one isn't going to work well.
                  Actually a series inductor is the method Paul used for the outer two drivers for the OS MMTMM center.

                  https://sites.google.com/site/undefi...bipolewhatwhen

                  Comment


                  • Steve Lee
                    Steve Lee commented
                    Editing a comment
                    What are you trying to say?

                    Did he arbitrarily place that value inductor in series or did he calculate its value and then experiment with different values to arrive at his final documented design?
                Working...
                X