AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Owner's Circles => Vapor Audio => Topic started by: EdRo on 12 Aug 2016, 10:47 pm
-
Okay guys...I have another question. I've had this irrational urge to build an over-the-top twin 15" Nimbus style world beating skull crushing megalithic speaker. I know it would be heavy, expensive, difficult to finish... but it would be AWESOME!!! What do you think? I respect everyone's opinion; I've learned tons from reading everyone's threads and talking to people as they listen to Vapor and other speaker designs. I've had this idea pinned in my brain for 2 years now, so I have to try. The layout would be a normal Nimbus Whites center section with a 15" below and a 15" above. The lower and upper sections for the 15s would be seperate, and lock together. Then the center section with the mids and RAAL would slide in and lock down in the center.
Opinions?
-
Another thing to think about was a name. Because of Ryans atmospheric fixation, (and it was shark week when I initially had this brainstorm) I thought "Sharknado" could work.
-
hi EdRo
dont keep the idea too long in your head it will vaporise :lol:
all jokes aside
I think you got what it takes
mho is go ahead with it and look where it will take you
all the best my friend :thumb:
-
Since you asked....
no.
rather consider Something like
a 4-way 15",10 +/-, 5"x2 & ribbon
maybe a DUELAND XO topology.
Deep bass is fine
...but focus on the upper bass,
or put another way Lower midrange
the POWER range of most music
Or with Vapors' Accuton relationship
Consider Lotsa Cell technology & a Boat load
of Passive radiators. no Volume eating Ports.
No resonances. Look at TIDAL
quad of AS190's, C90 and go from there....
Avoid or minimize MDF...look to Panzerholz or Mapleply used in
Piano sound boards amongst other materials.
Good luck...have fun, the sky is the limit
-
Excellent idea, maybe spin some of that Perfect magic into it, and make it a 2 or 3 piece modular design so that they can be set up a bit easier.
-
Ed, why not make a bipole? I think that would be much more interesting.
With the regular setup you lose about 5db to BSC, Ryan would only correct it 3-4db. But if you run bipole you'd have 0db BSC needed (may even have to filter a little off). That might be one thrill ride with those big 15's. You'd have to brace the box more, probably thicker walls. But the bass in the room might not be as subject to nodes? Someone else probably knows better than me on that.
To me it would simply be more interesting to have a different kind of bass that isn't subject to the problems of the baffle not being infinite. Also the speaker would only be a bit deeper. You would probably want to section off the mid speaker. And it might be fun to add a rear firing ring tweeter that has some power behind it (dipole, not bipole).
If you just have two forward firing subs it'll be enormous and respond perhaps more like a line array in the bass, which has very little value by comparison. Generally the best improvements with bass come from overcoming room node problems, and having a cabinet that doesn't sound like a ported breather; so it seems to me anyways. So what I'm saying is that you should change how the bass is produced in order to get a more drastic change. I'm curious about aiming the lower double bass box tilted up in the front in order to cause more asymmetry instead of letting the bass just plow out the back wall and rear wall.
Just an idea... from someone whom hasn't tried it just yet but certainly has it on their list. I wouldn't want to do this with the mid driver, because it would lower the imaging. But the bass range doesn't really do imaging to the same degree, and most of it will be defined by the mid and tweeter, for location. That means you get the benefits without the drawbacks doing just the subs as bipoles (wired how you would wire them if both facing forward).
-
Do what another speaker company did...put a > $250k price tag on them and you will sell a ton of them. I'm not talking about Wilson btw.
-
Have you ever designed a speaker before implying you're familiar with just basic things like T/S parameters?
-
Chu...I refuse to be held down by these...what do you call them...Laws of Physics!!!
-
Chu...I refuse to be held down by these...what do you call them...Laws of Physics!!!
Then best you partner with someone who does embrace physics. You can't just use any drivers and stick them into what will likely be an attractive cabinet and trust that a carefully designed crossover is going to result in that,magic you're looking for. The parameters and behavior of drivers dictate a lot of things.
For example, you can't just drop any engine into a car or add turbochargers and expect that you're now going to have some super performing monster. Does the front to back weight distribution compromise handling? Does the frame adequately support things? Can the differential or transmission handle the power and torque. Etc.
You wouldn't trust a person who calls themselves a doctor yet hasn't taken anatomy and physiology courses to properly treat you. So, don't trust that you can pull this off without assistance. There are books that can help you get started but it's a learning curve. But the most expedient way would be to partner with someone who has the abilities you lack. Synergy and all that.
-
I'm even more confused now. So Ryan isn't designing speakers anymore? The cabinet maker is the designer for Vapor or has the cabinet maker always been the designer?
-
Sounds like you want to build an Evolution Acoustic MM3?
Kevin T
-
Come on Chu, seriously? The way we work at Vapor is with our strengths. Each of us have our own skill sets. Ryan and Pete have been building speakers for years. They know how to put just the right combination of components together to catch the sound they want. I've been told that Vapor speakers have a very particular "sound". A uniformity that is evident, especially after going from room to room at RMAF. A personal friend of mine that went to RMAF and AXPONA told me..."I just like how Ryans speakers sound". Ryan and Pete know those "Laws of Physics" and the mixing of components inside and out. They give me rough dimensions to work with, which I see as a "canvas", and I start drawing. I don't like boxes. I was an art major in college, and I really liked sculpting. The forms I make use curves to be aesthetically pleasing, but also to strengthen the cab and to increase overall performance of a speaker design. I constantly experiment with shape, texture and materials. My "magic sauce" was derived from a need to find something better than what I could find that was commercialy available. I come up with a shape that I like, then I cut out a silhouette of that shape and stand it up in my house for days. I'll make changes, or throw it away. When I finally choose something that I like, I send pics to Ryan and Pete. I get their feedback and make changes if needed. Then I have to figure out how to build my monstrosity. My shop has templates, jigs, forms, straps, presses...I wish I had a 3-D printer.
Anyway, this is rambling on way to long. But, my point, Chu, is we all have our strengths and we are all aware of them. We try to encourage and inspire each other, and support each other. Ryan and his family are going through a dark time now, so I'm here to help. We do what we can, and maybe we can all come through this a little closer, a little better. This is Life, and one of the Laws of Life is that it continues on.
PEACE!
-
I have never been a huge fan of the Raal tweeter they have issues in the 4-5k band as well as verticle
A good AMT tweeter like the Byma you used in the Aurora is a great speaker IMO. How much to make a efficient 3 way over 90 db @1 W is this possible like a Smaller Wilson Sophia the Accutom 7 inch midrange
Great driver a 9 inch woofer .44 inch tall. For under $7k With quality xover parts
Niobe speakers of Audyn of Germany their true Copper cap is as good as Jupitersbest as well as Mundorf
Rationed a12.5 on humble home made capacitor test .i have used several times parts express.
Even the less expensive white daps are very good and Ohmite a Gold resistors,Jantzen inductors
All med price High performance ,tired of paying more then 1/2 for the Cabinet.
This is just my observation and 30 + years in the consumer ,mod field.
-
Come on Chu, seriously? The way we work at Vapor is with our strengths. Each of us have our own skill sets. Ryan and Pete have been building speakers for years. They know how to put just the right combination of components together to catch the sound they want. I've been told that Vapor speakers have a very particular "sound". A uniformity that is evident, especially after going from room to room at RMAF. A personal friend of mine that went to RMAF and AXPONA told me..."I just like how Ryans speakers sound". Ryan and Pete know those "Laws of Physics" and the mixing of components inside and out. They give me rough dimensions to work with, which I see as a "canvas", and I start drawing. I don't like boxes. I was an art major in college, and I really liked sculpting. The forms I make use curves to be aesthetically pleasing, but also to strengthen the cab and to increase overall performance of a speaker design. I constantly experiment with shape, texture and materials. My "magic sauce" was derived from a need to find something better than what I could find that was commercialy available. I come up with a shape that I like, then I cut out a silhouette of that shape and stand it up in my house for days. I'll make changes, or throw it away. When I finally choose something that I like, I send pics to Ryan and Pete. I get their feedback and make changes if needed. Then I have to figure out how to build my monstrosity. My shop has templates, jigs, forms, straps, presses...I wish I had a 3-D printer.
Anyway, this is rambling on way to long. But, my point, Chu, is we all have our strengths and we are all aware of them. We try to encourage and inspire each other, and support each other. Ryan and his family are going through a dark time now, so I'm here to help. We do what we can, and maybe we can all come through this a little closer, a little better. This is Life, and one of the Laws of Life is that it continues on.
PEACE!
That wasn't what you were implying with your original post Ed. Sounded to me and perhaps others that you were looking to do it all yourself.
-
That wasn't what you were implying with your original post Ed. Sounded to me and perhaps others that you were looking to do it all yourself.
Yep. I thought the same thing and why I posted what I did.
That wasn't what you were implying with your original post Ed. Sounded to me and perhaps others that you were looking to do it all yourself.
-
For goodness' sake. He's just brainstorming.
-
Exactly John. I was downstairs listening to a set of Ryans Stiff Breeze Whites and getting all inspired. Ryans speakers can be very inspiring, and inspiration-drunk designs are what pushes the envelope. I appreciate everyone's feedback immensely guys!!!
-
For goodness' sake. He's just brainstorming.
+1. I thought it was obvious. :duh:
-
+1. I thought it was obvious. :duh:
+2, I thought it was obvious as well. No reason to test Ryan, Pete or Ed on their ABCs. They know them well. :duh: :duh:
-
For goodness' sake. He's just brainstorming.
Exactly. Adding a second woofer to a proven design isn't exactly breaking new ground on a different design either. And IMO it has merit as the more surface area the better for low frequencies.
I was also thinking of the Evolution MM3 when I read the OP... and also Endeavor as they have tall speakers with woofers at top and bottom. And many others... I think it's a good idea.
Another way to go would be to make it a 4-way with true subwoofer drivers in a force-canceling arrangement. Keep the 15" for the impact and add a couple of 18s...
And another way to go is Nelson Pass' slot-loaded design, which has the advantages of lots of driver surface area and force canceling in a small package.
-
I did actually talk with Ryan about my twin 15 idea. While having two 15s would have some small positive effect, adding a smaller woofer like a 10" or even a 12 would have more positives. So I'm off to the drawing board. I doubt Ryan will put up with my "Shark-nado" moniker, but now to figure out what it could look like. :icon_twisted:
-
While having two 15s would have some small positive effect, adding a smaller woofer like a 10" or even a 12 would have more positives.
uh huh. Looking forward to yours groups outcome
-
Edro,
You should design a twin 18inch, using one of of driver as a radiator. Call it the Vaporizer or eu version THE VAPORISER.
:green:
-
I don't think the name megatron will suit your vapor speakers.
Something like vaporiser or even a humidifiers might sound more in line with the vapor atmosphere branding names used.
But it would be nice to see a dual 18inch, with a 12 inch midrange something that can be used for large home theatre.
-
I don't think the name megatron will suit your vapor speakers.
Something like vaporiser or even a humidifiers might sound more in line with the vapor atmosphere branding names used.
But it would be nice to see a dual 18inch, with a 12 inch midrange something that can be used for large home theatre.
Why would you want a narrow sweet spot midrange for HT?
-
Just a Thought I guess I'm not a speaker designer but it would be interesting to see a super Large 12 inch Midrange and Dual 18s, Something worthy of the name Megatron but even better The VAPORISER or THE AIR-PURIFIER as I suspect the 18 or 15 inch will be moving a lot of Air from Speaker Cabinet. These are just my thoughts id like to share With ED.
-
Why stop at 18"? We've made 17 cubic foot transmission line subwoofers featuring 21" drivers.
:o
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12011375_901010913301356_6049645973017316155_n.jpg?oh=3c6a83ec379305dcec206b3d75676820&oe=584CDD1B)
-
If I were to build an ultimate speaker it would have back to back siding firing woofers in transmission lines with single midrange and tweeter mounted at listening height.
But research points to the ideal speaker needs to be in multiple cabinets. Midrange/treble should emanate from the "standard" left/right stereo positions in front of you while bass needs to asymmetrically load the room from multiple locations. And I'd use a transmission line loading for the midrange too. TBI is onto this concept, but on a much smaller scale.
Frankly the number of homes that can support a "Megatron" vision is vanishingly few. Seems like you're trying to build a dinosaur.
-
Why stop at 18"? We've made 17 cubic foot transmission line subwoofers featuring 21" drivers.
:o
(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12011375_901010913301356_6049645973017316155_n.jpg?oh=3c6a83ec379305dcec206b3d75676820&oe=584CDD1B)
Yes iv seen this one being mentioned 100s of times on the forums---and yes I know you guys made 1., Pro Audio Technology makes a 24 inch, I have heard that and a 21inch many times and always found them to sound slow. Ultimately the Quested 18 inches were by far one of the best and punched well higher than most 21 inch could. The larger the driver becomes the harder it tends to be for the designer to make them sound fast punchy and articulate.
-
I had a pair of 6 cubic foot I. M. Fried MLTL's driven by 8 inch woofers in the 80's that were rated to go 114 dB at 17 Hz (and I believe it). Way too much output for residential spaces, but so musical! But brought tears to my eyes in a 160 seat, 20,000 cubic foot chapel. In comparison those TL's would be a much better fit for a small arena.
Actually I'm wondering if a tiny highly affordable TL subwoofer is available that can do just 100 dB at 20 Hz, or am I asking the laws of physics to bend too far?
-
Yes iv seen this one being mentioned 100s of times on the forums---and yes I know you guys made 1., Pro Audio Technology makes a 24 inch, I have heard that and a 21inch many times and always found them to sound slow. Ultimately the Quested 18 inches were by far one of the best and punched well higher than most 21 inch could. The larger the driver becomes the harder it tends to be for the designer to make them sound fast punchy and articulate.
Sounds like you experienced poor designs, or subs that were driven too high above their design range.
Subs aren't supposed to sound "fast, punchy, articulate." They are supposed to move air and typically at frequencies well below 100Hz.
Woofers need to be punchy and articulate, and that is accomplished by proper enclosure loading, good driver linearity, and clean power to drive them them.
I had a pair of 6 cubic foot I. M. Fried MLTL's driven by 8 inch woofers in the 80's that were rated to go 114 dB at 17 Hz (and I believe it). Way too much output for residential spaces, but so musical! But brought tears to my eyes in a 160 seat, 20,000 cubic foot chapel. In comparison those TL's would be a much better fit for a small arena.
Actually I'm wondering if a tiny highly affordable TL subwoofer is available that can do just 100 dB at 20 Hz, or am I asking the laws of physics to bend too far?
All you need to do is specify the size of sub you want and I'll find a driver to match that criteria. But if you want small at all costs, your best bet is to go with a Passive Radiator and throw a driver in the enclosure that has a lot of linear throw and can soak up lots of power.
The problem with small enclosure and lots of dB is that the air movement can cause audible turbulence at the terminus of the line (or vent in a Helmholtz radiator). T-lines tend to do a little better at reducing that port turbulence than typical ported enclosures, but a proper PR design works best of all.