[mlundy57]

How about doing the MTM-Otica and dual subs as stands?  That still gives very good performance and you don't have to worry about shoehorning separate sub towers into that room.

Exceptionally good performance. Then again, I am biased since that is what I have and am thrilled with them.  With the two sections combined you have a similar design to the aforementioned Super 7s, same bass section, same tweeter, different midrange drivers.

[cjsailer]

Exceptionally good performance. Then again, I am biased since that is what I have and am thrilled with them.  With the two sections combined you have a similar design to the aforementioned Super 7s, same bass section, same tweeter, different midrange drivers.

Does anyone do a flatpack for the MTM Oticas?  Sorry if this has been answered before too many threads to look through.

[mlundy57]

Does anyone do a flatpack for the MTM Oticas?  Sorry if this has been answered before too many threads to look through.

Yes. Jay, Captainhemo does

[cjsailer]

Yes. Jay, Captainhemo does

Well I thought he would do a run provided there's enough interest.  Most people just go for the extremes or oticas.  I understand that you do finished speakers, is the MTM something you would build again (or currently build)?

[mlundy57]

Well I thought he would do a run provided there's enough interest.  Most people just go for the extremes or oticas.  I understand that you do finished speakers, is the MTM something you would build again (or currently build)?

Yes it is.

However the MTM by itself is not a stand alone speaker. It was designed to be paired with the 2 driver servo sub section. In this way it is like the Super 7 and Super V but built in two pieces instead of one.

[Captainhemo]

Yes. Jay, Captainhemo does

Well,  we did originally cut those but they really didn't  move and a number of them sat on the  shelf for ages.  Once they were gone,  Danny  had a local guy try and cut a few pairs,  I don't  know  if he is still doing them or not.  We have not done a run of them in ages.

In my room, I went back and forth with them   and the  full NX-Otica's for  a long   period oftime,  both speakers were  paired with a pair of our dual h-frames.
I could never  get the   NX-MTM's to  equal the sound of the NX-Otica's they always seemed shallow to me as well as other's  who dropped in to  hear  them.  I am not saying they  were  bad sounding speakers in  any way,  I  just   did not feel they equaled the performance of the  NX-Otica (full version).

In that room,  I'd go for the   full NX-Otica and  either a pair of dual h-frames or triple h-frame.

If you  want to go the MTM  route,  I think  we have a pair of MTM's already glued up that  are  just  sitting in the  back room ,  not  overlly pretty,  Duratex with   PPG  Copper  wave guides... but,  the duratexd could easily be  sanded off   and the cabs could be  painted  or  veneered in something  to go with the copper  waveguides.  If you  might be interested in them,    I can dig them out and make sure  they are   ok,  they've been  in  a pretty jammed room for a long time....   I bet  Mike  could do some cool veneer  on them !!

jay

[paolocaminiti]

they always seemed shallow to me

What do you mean by shallow? Missing in depth layering or body of instruments?

I'm very interested in the MTM as they best suit my room - and my budget. Basically waiting for them to be available again on the website.
But would be very interesting to know what will be missing comparing to the full otticas.
Also does anybody know if an upgrade path is offered if one decides to move from the mtm to the bigger brothers in the next step? It looks mid and tweeter are shared by the two, not sure how different the crossovers...

[Hobbsmeerkat]

I'd imagine the shallowness may come from the room size.

In a smaller or a long narrow type room, I'd wager it's less likely of an issue since it gains a little reinforcement from the walls.
In a wide or large room, that little bit of reinforcement is lost.
My U-frame sub-stands suffer from a similar issue in large rooms.
They're still there, but there's a lack of punch/weight they have when they're used in a smaller room.

If your listening space is in a small-ish room, the Otica-MTM on dual 12" H-frame subs will be your best option.

[jn316]

What do you mean by shallow? Missing in depth layering or body of instruments?

I'm very interested in the MTM as they best suit my room - and my budget. Basically waiting for them to be available again on the website.
But would be very interesting to know what will be missing comparing to the full otticas.

https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=153391.0

[mlundy57]

Shallow as compared to the full size NX-Otica with triple servo subs. The full size NX-Oticas have four more 6-1/2" upper/mid bass drivers and an additional subwoofer than the MTM/dual sub combo. This gives the full size NX-Oticas/triple subs more weight, fullness, and effortlessness for frequencies up to 200Hz than the MTMs/dual subs.

When compared to almost any other speaker (except the NX-Treme) the NX-Otica MTM/dual sub would not be the shallow one.

[paolocaminiti]

https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=153391.0

Thanks, I don't know I missed this thread!

I'm totally set on the MTM. Was just curious about "shallowness", hifi adjectives live in a dictionary of their own... I get it as midbass weight then. I suppose it will be more then enough for me - for now - anyway.

[Captainhemo]

Actually,   as mentioned in that thread (reply #2)  the direct comparisons between the NX-Otica and NX-MTM  were done  at my place, ina     say medium room  (18x12) and  both   speakers were paired with the  same  set of duals... we never  did have the MTM's up at Don's place.

I'm not  trying to bash the MTM's ,  they   are also a great speaker and   again, as I mention in that post,   we really  liked them   with the duals in my room until we went back to the    full NX-Otica.  We   tried multiple times with multiple  sub  tweaks, placement but we could never  get them to sound as good as the   full NX-Otica/dual sub combo.    Crossover parts were   similar,   Sonicaps with platinum/Jupiter bypass, the  full Otica's  had  the standard  inductors, the   MTM's   we tried Gortz and   Jensen paper./wax foil  inductors
IMO ,  taking    the workload  off the NQ's is a good thing,  instead of sending them    a full signal from say  1350 and down you     end up not sending them  those  3+  lowest octaves  and let them  focus only  on the midrange and you  end up with the  4 M165's handling those  lower   frequencies which do provide a lot of punch/snap    in that   say  80-200 hz  range.
Now, the one thing  we did not  try was high passing the amps fo the  NX-MTM's and rolling off the   MTM's with a high pass cap (line level) and  then have the  duals play up a bit higher to coverr what's been  rolled off.   IIRC,  Mike is doing this  with his system and it may  make a big didfference

jay

[mlundy57]

Actually,   as mentioned in that thread (reply #2)  the direct comparisons between the NX-Otica and NX-MTM  were done  at my place, ina     say medium room  (18x12) and  both   speakers were paired with the  same  set of duals... we never  did have the MTM's up at Don's place.

I'm not  trying to bash the MTM's ,  they   are also a great speaker and   again, as I mention in that post,   we really  liked them   with the duals in my room until we went back to the    full NX-Otica.  We   tried multiple times with multiple  sub  tweaks, placement but we could never  get them to sound as good as the   full NX-Otica/dual sub combo.    Crossover parts were   similar,   Sonicaps with platinum/Jupiter bypass, the  full Otica's  had  the standard  inductors, the   MTM's   we tried Gortz and   Jensen paper./wax foil  inductors
IMO ,  taking    the workload  off the NQ's is a good thing,  instead of sending them    a full signal from say  1350 and down you     end up not sending them  those  3+  lowest octaves  and let them  focus only  on the midrange and you  end up with the  4 M165's handling those  lower   frequencies which do provide a lot of punch/snap    in that   say  80-200 hz  range.
Now, the one thing  we did not  try was high passing the amps fo the  NX-MTM's and rolling off the   MTM's with a high pass cap (line level) and  then have the  duals play up a bit higher to coverr what's been  rolled off.   IIRC,  Mike is doing this  with his system and it may  make a big didfference

jay

It does help with the SQ of the mid range drivers quite a bit. However, until I get off my butt and build new in-line filters I have to put up with unfiltered mids. When I upgraded my electronics with balanced components I replaced th A370PEQ3 sub amps with A370XLR3s. That way I get the noise rejection of balanced circuits and a gain match between the MTM and sub amps. Unfortunately my current filters won't work since they are single ended.

I have Miflex KPCU caps and Furutech FT-785M/FT-786F Rhodium XLR sockets for the new balanced filters, just got to get them done.

Mike