anyone with an MBOW1 in the GTA?

tomek · « **on:** 12 Jan 2005, 07:52 pm »

hi there,

i'm debating what speaker to possibly make for a DIY project. I heard the excellent CSS single driver speaker yesterday and loved it, but I'd really like to hear an MBOW1 before committing to the cost and time.

toodles!

Dmason · « **Reply #1 on:** 13 Jan 2005, 01:20 am »

Tomek,

I built the OW1 two years ago for fun and LOVED it. Anything from the mind and ear of Dennis is gold. Do not concern yourself in the least as to whether or not this is a good choice. It is one of the very best choices of all, for what you wish to do. The Hiquphon is the princess of dome tweeters, fabulously musical. Lush, transparent, something to cherish.

If you use the best doodads for the XO, you will have a World Class two way speaker.

Kramer · « **Reply #2 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 07:20 pm »

Im in the process of building the CAOW1. I chose the "CA" version for the clearer mid-range (Dennis' words) at only a few $$ more. Also, Dennis is working on an MTM version of the CAOW1, so it should be easy to upgrade if I want more output (there will not be an MBOW1 MTM).

Marbles · « **Reply #3 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 07:24 pm »

I saw some amazing looking MBOW1's at Jim Salk's house, unfortuneatly I didn't have a chance to listen to them.

They are really functional art IMO.

www.salksound.com

Look in the available speakers gallery...

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #4 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 07:57 pm »

I didn't know about the caow1 mtm, I haven't browsed madisound in a while, but I thought he was working on a caow1 3-way, which when I was building my mbow1s, he wasn't. So the caow1 isn't a bad deal. It also doesn't measure quite as smoothly and Dennis wasn't sure for at least several months whether the caow1 sounded better than the mbow1 or just different, so they're very close in sound. Today, I would probably go with the one that offers the most options you are interested in, whether 3 way or mtm. I'd go for the 3 way option myself.

Kramer · « **Reply #5 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 08:29 pm »

Dennis talks fondly of the CAOW1.

He has finished a 3-way version of the CAOW1, and is working on an MTM version (there will not be an MBOW MTM). [MTMs typically add 6dB to the output.] Dennis said that he will probably be finished with the MTM this week.

The 3-ways dont look that smooth to me. I am going to go 2-way (MT or MTM) and cross with a sub. Better look also (IMO).

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #6 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 08:56 pm »

I just don't fly with mtms because of the limited vertical dispersion. But that may not be an issue with others. Yes, I'm sure the caow1 is an awesome speaker. My only beef is with Dennis's choice of bass driver.

I wish he would choose something that would do 20hz or at least 25hz.

Kramer · « **Reply #7 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 09:06 pm »

Quote

I wish he would choose something that would do 20hz or at least 25hz.

I take it we are talking 3-way here (20 HZ is pretty low for a 2-way). I guess you just dont like the 10" peerless that he uses.Yes, it wont hit low. I think he even intends that speaker to be backed up with a sub.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #8 on:** 17 Jan 2005, 09:16 pm »

It would have to be able to hit 20hz, but that would have to be some sub with some crossover to be able to truly cross steeply at 30hz because that peerless 10" will easily do 30hz. But not under

Kinda expensive to build a megasub to play 1/2 an octave...

Kramer · « **Reply #9 on:** 18 Jan 2005, 12:27 am »

You wont need a "megasub" with the 3-way.

This is not for an HT system, remember. This is for hi-quality audio. "Cheaper" alternatives are better served for HT duties.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #10 on:** 18 Jan 2005, 12:33 am »

I see no reason why it shouldn't do double duty. Not everyone can afford an HT system and a 2ch system. I may ask Dennis to do a 3 way one day that will do 20hz if he's willing.

I don't understand the tone of your followup post. You just said, "I think he even intends that speaker to be backed up with a sub." And I said that it had to be an exceptional sub. It simply makes sense to me for that 10" to be replaced with a competent 12". The 12" will naturally cost more, but that makes more sense than two cheap (the peerless 10"ers are fairly cheap) 10"ers AND a sub for the last half octave.

Kramer · « **Reply #11 on:** 19 Jan 2005, 04:09 am »

What I am trying to say is that a better system, especially an "all-around" system, would be a "2-way" with a sub (not a 3-way with a sub). The "3-ways" are not (IMO) the correct choice for HT (or "combo") systems.

Wouldnt a 3-way that will cover the full HT range, be nothing more than a 2-way sitting atop a 12" sub (with less flexibility)?

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #12 on:** 19 Jan 2005, 05:27 am »

Hm, I think we have a misunderstanding. The entire point of my later posts were to push the idea of having Dennis design a 3 way with a nice 12" woofer instead of the cheap peerless 10".

Not a 3 way with a sub, but just a 3 way.

Kramer · « **Reply #13 on:** 19 Jan 2005, 01:23 pm »

Oh, OK.

I would rather see a good 8" (in place of the 10"). Im not giving up my 12" sub - which sits directly behind the sofa.

rosconey · « **Reply #14 on:** 19 Jan 2005, 01:27 pm »

just buy a pair of cerwin vegas and have dennis redo the crossover-
they thump and have great efficiency,my friends are like 96 or 98db.
i'm trying to get him to try a cheap tube amp.

ooheadsoo · « **Reply #15 on:** 20 Jan 2005, 05:52 am »

I'm going to get one of Danny's GR sub/pr combos soon and see how that works.

I don't know about making a 3 way with a 5.25" midwoof and an 8" midwoof. The mid 50's is low enough imo for sub crossing down low. Or you could implement a "poorman's" 3 way with stereo subs and a higher xover point via a deq2496 or somesuch. Though it's actually not cheap at all...

Kramer · « **Reply #16 on:** 20 Jan 2005, 03:20 pm »

With the 3-way, Dennis crosses over the mid at 300Hz (LP remains the same - 2.5KHz). The 8" would cover ~ 40 to 300 (the "musical" lows), which then can easily be backed up by a "mega-sub" for the HT lows. So the overall system consists of a 3/4, 5, 8, and 12 (or 15) inch driver(s). None of the drivers will be over-stressed, even though each driver needs to cover an octave (or two) above and below the crossover point for seemless intergation.