Further Considerations with AMT

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 5194 times.

tasar

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 368
Further Considerations with AMT
« on: 13 Sep 2014, 02:20 am »
What are expectations for a near future AMT design ?  Just heard the "Dreams" aboard the  M&D Apollos.....  Oh, my !

Danny Richie

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #1 on: 13 Sep 2014, 01:19 pm »
What are expectations for a near future AMT design ?  Just heard the "Dreams" aboard the  M&D Apollos.....  Oh, my !

I had a sample come through that I had some high expectations for but it didn't cut the mustard. They went back to the drawing board.

Early B.

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #2 on: 13 Sep 2014, 03:26 pm »
I had a sample come through that I had some high expectations for but it didn't cut the mustard. They went back to the drawing board.

Danny --

Are you referring to your AMT project with Hawthorne Audio? If so, what happened? 

SoCalWJS

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #3 on: 13 Sep 2014, 04:01 pm »
I had a sample come through that I had some high expectations for but it didn't cut the mustard. They went back to the drawing board.
I'm hopeful, but not surprised. Based on what I've heard, AMT is difficult to get right.

Danny Richie

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #4 on: 13 Sep 2014, 04:46 pm »
The larger tweeters used in the Hawthorne models worked out well in those applications. But there were issues with the shorter one I was having them make.

DeeJayBump

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 167
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #5 on: 13 Sep 2014, 08:11 pm »
So how does this affect the ETA of the designs that will (were going to?) use the AMT tweet like the X-Optima/X-Otica, etc. Will you wait for the AMT tweeter redesign to see if it then meets your needs/desires/requirements or will the Optima/Otica/etc models be tweaked for use with a different tweeter instead?

Thanks.

Danny Richie

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #6 on: 13 Sep 2014, 11:40 pm »
So how does this affect the ETA of the designs that will (were going to?) use the AMT tweet like the X-Optima/X-Otica, etc. Will you wait for the AMT tweeter redesign to see if it then meets your needs/desires/requirements or will the Optima/Otica/etc models be tweaked for use with a different tweeter instead?

Thanks.

I think I will drop an open baffle Neo 3 pdr into those designs. They are pretty tough to beat anyway.

tasar

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 368
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #7 on: 14 Sep 2014, 01:52 pm »
Yes a lot of work. The M & D site has a thorough read on design considerations. Having heard the natural articulation of these drivers, and having listened extensively to my PDRs, this vote goes to well executed ribbons.

nickd

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #8 on: 15 Sep 2014, 07:31 pm »

Quote
I think I will drop an open baffle Neo 3 pdr into those designs. They are pretty tough to beat anyway.

Now we're getting somewhere  :singing:



tasar

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 368
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #9 on: 22 Sep 2014, 01:45 am »
Since work has been done with Hawthorne's AMT 700s or 500s, with a working range thru 700 HZ, what midrange possibilities would sync these to servos in OB ?

Danny Richie

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #10 on: 22 Sep 2014, 03:22 pm »
I am still looking for a shorter one that will have improved vertical off axis response and work well in a waveguide that is not so deep that pushes the acoustic center of the driver behind that of the woofer. I like for the drivers to be in phase on both sides.  :green:

tasar

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 368
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #11 on: 22 Sep 2014, 05:33 pm »
Thanks for update Danny. Curious if one of the potential designs include baffle sizing to house the 12" servos ?

wshuff

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #12 on: 1 Jul 2015, 04:00 pm »
Just to revive a sleeping thread . . .

I'm seeing so many speakers now that use an AMT, and every company calls it a proprietary design and gives it a new name.  Every review describes the AMT as working like an accordion.

My question is how does an AMT compare to the Neo3?  Any benefits to the design, or just another way to skin the same cat?

steve f

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 682
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #13 on: 1 Jul 2015, 04:25 pm »
I've used both. My AMTs were ESS Heils. My BGs were Neo3 with backs removed. In a nutshell, both are excellent.
The Heils play a bit lower. Their problem is very limited vertical dispersion, more than I like.
I love the Neos good efficiency has both good vertical dispersion and excellent horizontal dispersion. And much cheaper, and easier to use. And as far as I know they are unavailable.
I've yet to get better results with ribbons.

steve

wshuff

Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #14 on: 1 Jul 2015, 09:21 pm »
So here's hoping that Christie's gets the BG Neos back on the market.

mlundy57

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 3566
Re: Further Considerations with AMT
« Reply #15 on: 1 Jul 2015, 09:56 pm »
They sure are taking their sweet time though