[bakufu]

http://www.audioartistry.com/index.htm

their appearance is certainly very striking, although it looks as if an errant breeze would tip them over.

[poseidonsvoice]

bakufu,

Selah Audio makes a version, also through the assistance of Don Keele and Marshall Kay.

See here: http://selahaudio.com/id282.html

Parts Express sells it as a kit:

http://www.parts-express.com/cbt36/

I listened to a version that was $10K built by Selah Audio recently. There is plenty of science and measurements behind Keele/Kay's design which is great. I noticed very good vertical directivity but poorer horizontal controlled directivity and controlled dispersion. This is also what I heard. For the kit price that Parts Express sells it for (~$2K, you just assemble and finish it), it is competitive and impressive. For the fully built price that manufacturers sell it for, it is not impressive to me, but it looks cool and has a great WAF I bet.

Best of luck, and remember this is just one fellas opinion. Listen to it for yourself and decide.

Anand.

[bakufu]

thanks for the link.  now i do remember seeing references to the selah audio version a while back.

while i'm not currently in the market for speakers, i am interested in the opinions of those who, like yourself, have actually heard them.

[Rick Craig]

bakufu,

Selah Audio makes a version, also through the assistance of Don Keele and Marshall Kay.

See here: http://selahaudio.com/id282.html

Parts Express sells it as a kit:

http://www.parts-express.com/cbt36/

I listened to a version that was $10K built by Selah Audio recently. There is plenty of science and measurements behind Keele/Kay's design which is great. I noticed very good vertical directivity but poorer horizontal controlled directivity and controlled dispersion. This is also what I heard. For the kit price that Parts Express sells it for (~$2K, you just assemble and finish it), it is competitive and impressive. For the fully built price that manufacturers sell it for, it is not impressive to me, but it looks cool and has a great WAF I bet.

Best of luck, and remember this is just one fellas opinion. Listen to it for yourself and decide.

Anand.

Actually the directivity is better with a CBT to a lower frequency than conventional designs that make a claim for controlled directivity. The off-axis energy is also more uniform (try measuring a 2-way with a waveguide or CD tweeter and you'll see the difference). You might not like the wave launch since it's more of an omni pattern; however, the soundstage is in my opinion more realistic with a CBT.

The Parts Express CBT-36 kit price is lower because it uses less expensive drivers and the labor time and finishing is not a small task for a fully assembled CBT-45 system.

[JLM]

The Constant Beamwidth Transducers concept has merit, but driver spacing should be even tighter than usually provided on a line array (2/3rds of the driver's maximum frequency wave size) and some sort of control to reduce drive power for the top drivers are needed for best performance.

I'd also wonder how good the quality of drivers are versus affordability with the 90 drivers as shown per speaker compared to more conventional designs.   

[Rick Craig]

The Constant Beamwidth Transducers concept has merit, but driver spacing should be even tighter than usually provided on a line array (2/3rds of the driver's maximum frequency wave size) and some sort of control to reduce drive power for the top drivers are needed for best performance.

I'd also wonder how good the quality of drivers are versus affordability with the 90 drivers as shown per speaker compared to more conventional designs.   

Based on the drivers we have used so far (3"/4"/5" woofers and 3/4"/1" domes)the spacing hasn't been a problem; in fact, less of an issue than with straight lines using similar woofers. With planars / ribbons there is a lower frequency where the wavelengths don't sum as well but in listening it doesn't seem to be an audible issue.

As far as driver cost versus a more conventional speaker that's a good point. In order to make a fair comparison you need to consider what happens when drivers are multiplied. SPL capability increases and the thermal / mechanical demands are reduced. It also can involve drivers that are produced in much higher quantities and possibly from automated production lines which adds to the economy of scale and lowers overall cost (versus small batches of drivers mostly handmade at a higher cost).  Response curves might be a little better with the higher cost drivers but since we're using DSP correction that's really not an advantage. Just a few things to think about.

[nickd]

I own the latest parts express CBT36 version. I have slightly modified the design to encompass a 15" parts express sub and Digamoda DSP controled 3 channel amps.

The sound is mind blowing. Much better than I heard at RMAF 

Not a easy build, but I have had many a reference quality speaker and these will hang with any of them regardless of price. They have some of the best imaging I have ever expierenced.

Takes a little effort to tweek the speaker balance to your room / system. but WAY easy compared with tweeking standard passive crossovers.

 

[JLM]

Real eye candy there nickd.   

[nickd]

Thanks JLM,

My wife is warming to them. She likes the color and loves the sound. It took a lot of wifely understanding to warm up to the strange shape and no grill cloth. So for the WAF, I would rate these a "3" on a 1-10 scale. Sound, a solid 9 on a 1-10 scale.

I have never owned or heard a "10" on that scale. As the CBT technology developes?? who knows what is possible.

[jtwrace]

no grill cloth.

Rick has made grills for his. 

[nickd]

Rick has made grills for his.

Glad my wife doesn't read this circle 

[Rick Craig]

Glad my wife doesn't read this circle 

I think you could add some to you pair. It would involve substituting a longer bolt and standoff (or possibly magnets). FWIW we actually had quite a few females say that they like the looks when showing the arrays.

[nickd]

I have thought about grills, but I usually prefer the sound without. My wife has adapted to the new look Sooooo. The CBT's will stay as is.

I really like the look, kind of modern art. Athough I'm not so sure that others would agree with that. Most audiophiles in the western world own mini-monitors or small towers. the current trend is small plastic boxes and in-walls or in-celing speakers.

I count myself as blessed for getting to enjoy these full range beauties in my home.

[Bjorn]

I have a pair of CBT36. They are the best speakers I've heard and I'm not saying that simply because I bought them. They blow away my Gedlee Abbey speakers.
I'll see if I can write a more in depth review of them soon.

[rascal]

Bjorn,

Looking forward to it. From what I have read- both seem to have strong science behind them (Gedlee and CBT). However I think CBT does take line array up a notch.

Are you using subs with CBT as well?

[Bjorn]

Yes I do. They require a sub. I use two. CBT is IMO the greatest evolution within speaker design we've seen in a long time. Common line arrays have major flaws by the way.

[hdspeakerman]

In addition to accurately reproducing music I heard them used to duplicate a jet taking off and it was so loud it ran me our of the room.  They are for real.
Howard

[Bjorn]

Horns can play louder. But the dynamics of the CBTs are incredible and most likely more then sufficient for home use with all types of music. Sound more real then anything I've heard.

[wagnju]

   pictures please

[Doublej]

Could this concept be scaled down in physical size? Specifically could one make a pair for desktop use with 3 woofers per side and get a better result than a traditional box design?