Dayton Esoteric MTM

[monoiz15]

Has anyone tried designing an MTM with the new series yet? It'd be a thousand dollar build, but I want to try it, with the 7" inchers. I've been off the board for a while, but I'm hoping to get back into building. My first build was the Dayton 8 classic MTM, and I'm looking to step up the game. I've also thought about working with the bigger neos and the AMT mini, but I figured I'd just start this thread in case there isn't already one out there.

Just looking to start a discussion, take it wherever you like. I'm sure people will be playing around with these, so let's talk about it!

[Jay1]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

I think Jon Marsh is working on a few designs with them.

[jonasz]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

I think Jon Marsh is working on a few designs with them.

I believe Jon will use the 5".

[JRS]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

I was like so ready to do so--but then I did the sims from the PE T-S data and the efficiency didn't add up. Software suggested that the PE spec was 3dB too optimistic. No longer made sense $$ wise.

[speedle]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

We'll know more once Jon is further along with the testing phase of his design process.

[Paul K.]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

I did some TL modeling for both the ES180 and ES140 and both had modeled sensitivities of right at 86 dB for a 2.83v/1m reference, which is 1 dB lower than spec for the ES180 and 1.5 dB higher than spec for the ES140 IIRC.
Paul

I was like so ready to do so--but then I did the sims from the PE T-S data and the efficiency didn't add up. Software suggested that the PE spec was 3dB too optimistic. No longer made sense $$ wise.

[JRS]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

I did some TL modeling for both the ES180 and ES140 and both had modeled sensitivities of right at 86 dB for a 2.83v/1m reference, which is 1 dB lower than spec for the ES180 and 1.5 dB higher than spec for the ES140 IIRC.
Paul

Interesting, I could have sworn the spec was a couple of dB higher (for the ES180) when I looked a couple weeks ago--but 86 is certainly believable. I've noticed that before with some Dayton products so maybe it was just a case of being too sensitive on my part.:rolleyes:

[Paul K.]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

There were some data entry errors for these drivers on their originally published spec sheets which have since been corrected, but that was much longer than a couple of weeks ago.
Paul

Interesting, I could have sworn the spec was a couple of dB higher (for the ES180) when I looked a couple weeks ago--but 86 is certainly believable. I've noticed that before with some Dayton products so maybe it was just a case of being too sensitive on my part.:rolleyes:

[JRS]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

No worries, may be that the particular implementation I was looking at using 2 ES 180 MTM, each in a small sub cabinet, wasn't adding up to what I had hoped.

Then I looked at a bunch of 8" drivers, and now waffling back and forth and liking the idea more and more of saying what the heck and giving a single 180 TM a go. If it turns out wanting, I'll sell em or add another 180/side. Sometimes less is indeed more...

There were some data entry errors for these drivers on their originally published spec sheets which have since been corrected, but that was much longer than a couple of weeks ago.
Paul

[JRS]

Re: Dayton Esoteric MTM

No worries, may be that the particular implementation I was looking at using 2 ES 180 MTM, each in a small sub cabinet, wasn't adding up to what I had hoped.

Then I looked at a bunch of 8" drivers, and now waffling back and forth and liking the idea more and more of saying what the heck and giving a single 180 TM a go. If it turns out wanting, I'll sell em or add another 180/side. Sometimes less is indeed more...

There were some data entry errors for these drivers on their originally published spec sheets which have since been corrected, but that was much longer than a couple of weeks ago.
Paul