[Juhazi]

I am glad that you are happy with your project!

It has been a long road and learning process for me to measure and develop AINOgradient. Here I show two directivity graphics - before and after I gradually went to LR4/Kreskowsy filters. I have saved most of my measurements and minidsp configurations.

Original Duelund xo is practically like acoustical LR2 up to xo-point, then shifts to LR4.
My implementation tries to follow Kreskowskys n=4 principle, starts as LR4 and then deepens even more.

Both are measured same way in the middle of my living room, here I show 12ms gated measurements at angles 0¤, 30¤ 60¤ and 90¤ Motice the great difference at 60 and 90¤. Direct sound is similar but reflected sound is also phase-coherent now -anyone will hear the difference. I have my speakers on the long wall of the room 2,5m apart, listening distance 2,5m, speakers toed-in 45¤.

v62 has LR2 for W/LM/HM and LR4 for HM/T
vXX4 has LR4 for every xo

[AJinFLA]

Looks good Juhazi. Perhaps you could start a separate thread about your AINO speakers as not to thread-jack Matevana. Make sure to include pics of the speakers 

cheers,

AJ

[matevana]

Looks good Juhazi. Perhaps you could start a separate thread about your AINO speakers as not to thread-jack Matevana. Make sure to include pics of the speakers 

cheers,

AJ

Thanks AJ!  I see that you attend performances at USF a lot. I work for the state university system in FL and visit there often.

[Juhazi]

Sorry about hijack-attempt!

I have linked my own thread with loads of pictures and measurements earlier, here again. You have to register to see attachments. My avatar speaker is AINOgradient.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/231353-aino-gradient-collaborative-speaker-project.html

Occasionally I jump over this forum too and I have followed matevana's Hestias from the beginning.  The general concept is very nice and "pure"! The problem for me is lack of measurements shown, it has been very difficult to evaluate and comment it. My problem.

Greetings,
Juha

[AJinFLA]

I see that you attend performances at USF a lot. I work for the state university system in FL and visit there often.

Unfortunately don't attend near as much as I use to, now that I am a "business" 
Shoot me an email to soundfield next time you're in town. Actually doing a demo for the local audiophile club http://www.meetup.com/Suncoast-Audiophile-Society/events/past/?scroll=true#past this weekend. Not dipoles 
Juha, is that your speaker in your avatar?

cheers

[sjhomey]

Winter must be coming. The threads are starting to get active. I finished a pair of SLs early in the summer, but because of some other equipment issues am only now getting around to posting. That is I thought I had finished until I saw Matevana's posting of upgraded crossover components. Ed, how much difference do the new components make?

Compared to the original Hestias I find these to be more detailed and to have a more fuller sound.  I like them and my audio buddies do also. There is also plenty of bass. At this point I am using the Yung 300 watt plate amp with boost in a mono hookup as in the original Hestias. Although I know the boost has something to do with the full bass I think the Ushers and the H frame are a very good combination. I have to be careful not to give the Ushers too much gain and perhaps will add the FMODs Matevana has mentioned elsewhere.  Parts Express has just put all the Yung plates on sale and so I will be buying and upgrading to stereo. I will certainly be going with a non boost amp, but I wonder at what wattage. I am driving the top end with a 25 watt Nelson Pass F5 so the 300 watt seems a bit of overkill. I think I will at least move down to the 200 watt model and wonder if even the 100 watt version would be appropriate? On sale there isn't all that much difference in price on all three models.

As can be seen in the photos I tried to isolate the top baffle from the H frame in this case with Sorbathane between the two and rubber washers under the bolt heads. There is still a fair amount of vibration on the top baffle, although quite a bit of it might be coming from the low mid Dayton. I don't know if it affects the sound much but perhaps separating the baffle from the H frame and giving the baffle its own stand might reduce vibration.

These speakers are very good. They are not that much more complicated than the Hestias and the sound is amazing. 

Peter

[OB_Newbie]

Hello sjhomey and Ed,

Really enjoyed this and the original Hestia.  Awesome build threads and kudos to Ed on these AMAZING designs... THANK YOU ED!!  I also totally appreciate the design approach as well using the Ashely crossover and tweaking by

ear.  Focused on the sound of music (not a software exercise, quick to progress the Xover design and above all... practical.

I'm new to OB and very interested in both of these designs.  I'm inclined to try the original just to learn but really do like the more detailed/resolution promised by the Dayton 10 over the MCM used as the mid in the SL (and the

general advantage of using a larger driver as the mid, I've heard that 8-10 inch mids seem to the preferred for vocals, horns, piano, etc).  If I do go with the more simple design of the original I wonder what work it would take to

replace the MCM with the Dayton?)  Of course sticking with the original design is always the best, most conservative approach and will yield excellent results but with you working the Dayton as a mid in the SL I thought I would simply ask the question.  What are your thoughts Ed?  Can it be done with minor tweaking/should I even consider?  Is there a gain to be had (Hestia v2?)?  I have used Jeff Bagby's PCD/design tools and can probably model both  designs in regards to the XOvers to see the impact on the 2 designed if you feel it is a reasonable modification.  Sorry for the questions... just pumped... was up to 4:30 last night reading the threads and looking at OB design. 

I am REALLY excited to begin my first OB build.  Your designs struck a chord with me as I was eyeing up the Yung plate amps (can't pass up a quality amps for $89/$99) and had the MCM woofers on the short list... destiny?  has

sjhomey, if it not too much to ask, can you weigh in on the original and SL?  I'm curious what you think of the 2 designs independently and comparatively? 

[matevana]

Hey Peter,

Nice job!  The recent crossover change is one of refinement and coherence. I listen to a lot of acoustic music and jazz instrumentals and the improvement is significant. However with music that uses a lot of compression the differences are not as significant. It mostly affects the handshaking between the Dayton woofer and the Celestion mid driver. There is a lot less overlap in the current design and that translates to a more coherent (but slightly less full) upper bass section.

The ushers are amazing drivers and can handle a fair amount of abuse without complaining. If you are making the transition to stereo bass, I would recommend the 200 watt Yung units w/o boost. Remember they will now be running at 8 ohms per side, so the amps output will be halved (approximately). Don't worry though. The 200 watt amps will provide plenty of headroom.

[OB_Newbie]

Sorry Ed, I saw the post about the original Hestia where you switched the Dayton and MCM and adjusted the crossover to adjust for the Dayton as a mid.  BINGO... Thanks!  So thats a finished design as I'm sure I can go with the Dayton both on the bottom and mid.  So long as i go with the Yung amps I assume.

Do you think Dayton is an upgrade (man, the price of the MCM is attractive... but if I'm going to take the time to build the baffle, I might as well go for the more detailed option.  Imagining the more deailed Daytons might sound better with my warmer sounding Fountek tube amp)? 

Any subjective insight would be much appreciated.  I'm sure i can't go wrong with either!!!

Thanks again!
Rich

[matevana]

Sorry Ed, I saw the post about the original Hestia where you switched the Dayton and MCM and adjusted the crossover to adjust for the Dayton as a mid.  BINGO... Thanks!  So thats a finished design as I'm sure I can go with the Dayton both on the bottom and mid.  So long as i go with the Yung amps I assume.

Do you think Dayton is an upgrade (man, the price of the MCM is attractive... but if I'm going to take the time to build the baffle, I might as well go for the more detailed option.  Imagining the more deailed Daytons might sound better with my warmer sounding Fountek tube amp)? 

Any subjective insight would be much appreciated.  I'm sure i can't go wrong with either!!!

Thanks again!
Rich

Hey Rich,

Glad you are considering the design. Due to space limitations I no longer have my original Hestia's, but if memory serves I actually preferred the MCM driver in that configuration over the Daytons. It's a bit of a balancing act but sometimes a slightly more revealing driver isn't always a good thing. For example, I mostly prefer the smooth sound of a paper midrange over a more revealing aluminum cone. If you are going to use the Dayton in the original Hestia, I would recommend using the zobel network added to the SL's crossover, so the driver presents a more friendly load to the amp and the crossover tracks better. This is not necessary with the MCM. I also liked the combination of the original MCM with the Vifa D19, more so than I did with the Dayton. It would be good to hear what others think as well. I hope this helps.

Ed

[danvprod]

I am considering building a pair of these. They look really nice. I like the idea of a Active/Passive hybrid system that would only need bi-amping. I was wondering if you think that the top half of these would work with standard MJK h-frame alphas? I have a pair that are already made, I am considering a design that would take the top of your design and place it on the current h-frames.

Currently have a mini-DSP and rotel rb-1050 that is running the h-frames from the mono output of my Decware preamp. I'd be powering the Hestia-SL tops with a set of 9-watt 300b monoblocks.

you are using the lower h-frames from 25 Hz - 100 Hz, correct? Do the tops run with a full-range signal, or are you using fMods to LP them?

Thanks for the great design!

[matevana]

Hi Danvprod,

That is almost exactly the design concept I am working on right now. The top end will consist of the current Hestia-SL using the new crossover.  There is no high pass f-mod so the 10" Dayton rolls off naturally.  The bottom end will be a tandem H-Bomb enclosure with two 10" drivers per side. The woofer alignment will be side by side to allow maximum benefit from floor bounce. The drivers will likely be Peerless SLS's based on a nice blend of performance and price. I happen to be sitting with a quad right now.  The compressed fiber H-bomb design has proven to be very effective in damping cabinet resonance. They are also very light and easily slid away from the front wall in operation.

The top half of the Hestia-SL will remain in tact, with a new base that goes down to the floor and sits behind the dual H-frames. This will serve to decouple the Hestia from the bass section and provide the necessary offset to address time alignment. The dual woofers should add an additional 9-12 dB of headroom, which should significantly improve the current SPL capabilities.

I'm guessing you could power the tops adequately as you describe. I tested the top sections with a small tripath chip amp outputting 10 watts per channel into 8 ohms. They sounded amazing with the new crossovers and played loud and clean.

[danvprod]

Hi Matevana --

Thank you very much for the answer, and the insight. Those H-Bomb enclosures look pretty cool. Neat idea on using the pre-fab storage cubes.

Would you be willing to send me the sketch up file of the final baffle, so that I can print it out full-size as a template?

[matevana]

Hi Matevana --

Thank you very much for the answer, and the insight. Those H-Bomb enclosures look pretty cool. Neat idea on using the pre-fab storage cubes.

Would you be willing to send me the sketch up file of the final baffle, so that I can print it out full-size as a template?

Sure thing. If you PM me on here with an email address, I will send the .SKP file.

[matevana]

Sure thing. If you PM me on here with an email address, I will send the .SKP file.

Dan,

I sent the Sketch-up file to your Google mail.

Ed

[sjhomey]

sjhomey, if it not too much to ask, can you weigh in on the original and SL?  I'm curious what you think of the 2 designs independently and comparatively? 

I had a chance this weekend to put my Hestias back into my system. I still feel the same as mentioned in my post above. The Hestias sound better than I thought they would after listening to the SLs for awhile, but the SLs are tighter and more articulate. They are more time and money but well worth the effort. On the other hand the Hestias are no slouch. They have a big open sound to my ear that is quite pleasing.

[matevana]

Since a few people have asked, the latest iteration will make use of double H-bombs in a completely separate alignment, similar to what Martin King has done with his Lowther/Acoustic Elegance combo. I think it's really smart to keep the bass drivers as close to the floor as possible (side-by-side).  The H-bombs have proven themselves as viable structures over the past few months.

I plan to keep the Hestia-SL top section as-is. I am very happy with the design. The only problem is the new crossover allows for higher SPL's and the single 8" Usher may not be able to keep up with the demand... thus the need for a beefier bottom end. The top section will be stand mounted and sit behind the H-frames, isolating the baffle from additional vibration. The foot of additional floor space should be close to ideal in time alignment when I factor in the distance to my listening position.

Here's what I have so far. Gotta love the the ease of the cube's assembly, along with cleats and mechanical fasteners.









 

[danvprod]

Nice! Love the double h-frames. Very good idea to run these like MJK does with his setup. Fit and finish on these look great, too. As a slight aside, I just love the flexibility of the h-frames.

Looking forward to how these shape up with the Hestia-SLs. Did you decide on a woofer to use in your h-frames?

[matevana]

Nice! Love the double h-frames. Very good idea to run these like MJK does with his setup. Fit and finish on these look great, too. As a slight aside, I just love the flexibility of the h-frames.

Looking forward to how these shape up with the Hestia-SLs. Did you decide on a woofer to use in your h-frames?

I will probably go with a quad of Peerless 10" SLS for the main reasons that I have them available and John K seems to like them for his new Nao Note II RS. They are also relatively inexpensive. I really like the Ushers but it would be hard to justify the cost of four. One of my biggest peeves about woofers used in open back is their motor noise; I'm sure John K has vetted this out in his woofer selection even though I have yet to hear them for myself. 

[danvprod]

Do you have the 10" Peerless SLS Subwoofers or regular woofers? The subwoofers: http://www.parts-express.com/peerless-830668-10-paper-cone-sls-subwoofer--264-1110 have a Q of 0.55 and Fs of 32 Hz. Or the woofers: http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/approx-10-woofers/peerless-sls-830668-10-woofer-coated-paper-cone/

Looks like the woofers are not sold by PE anymore, but the subwoofers are. Maybe the subwoofers are just a new version of the woofers?

Are you still planning on powering your quad subwoofers with a Yung plate amp? Do you envision needing any additional frequency shaping or active components in the H-frames to work with the Hestia-SL tops?