[dayneger]

Ok, so I'd wanted to make a more comprehensive diagram showing more of the possible variations on this theme, but I'm low on time so here's the basic concept.

The thought experiment was to allow a higher single footprint approach that still integrates everything on one footprint, but (obviously) with more flexibility for a reasonably taller speaker. I have a separate room where this would be ok, and perhaps I'd flip my entire living room 180 degrees to make these possible if the concepts were compelling enough.

First, this was triggered by the comments around possibly wanting triple servos for my room volume... paired with the idea that hey, the amp can handle up to 3 drivers so what would happen if we explored triples?  I do a ton of design thinking and never know what'll happen when divergent ideas are considered, so why not have some fun with it?

I'm actually working on a version that has an arced baffle that flows from wing to wing, but this is close enough to convey the ideas. 

Here's the MTM paired with triple servo 12s per side.  The 12" drivers accidentally ended a bit further back than I'd intended, will be corrected along with the curved baffle.  They're approximately 61" tall as shown, 8.5" wide at the front, 16" wide at the back, 15-16" deep.  Please ignore the extra tangent lines, they're the result of kludging this together.  The skin surfaces would of course be smooth and contiguous.

 


As noted in my prior post, one of the ideas would be to replace driver position "B" with a 10-12" passive OB bass driver that could cover from 80-250 or 100-300 Hz (guessing).  A 10" driver would have a similar Sd area as 2.5 of the M-165s in the Otica, while the 12" would have the Sd of 3.6 M-165s.  Unload the 165NQs of mid- and upper bass, keep the 12" servos from needing to play too high, maybe give more slam in the mid-bass. 

This passive 10/12" idea was inspired by Danny's comments about the new (sealed) Brute design, but I have no idea how viable the concept would be here; or whether it would still be preferable to have triple servo 12s.

[BrandonB]

Why not just build the compact Otica and get a sealed sub and put it in the corner?  That would give you a small footprint, very good midbass from the triple 8's and very good ultra low bass with the sealed sub.

Tyson I'm just curious.  Do you think the new baby Otica being designed with the 3 8in. servos and a stack of open baffle 12,s sound better that the NS otica with the same stack of open baffle servos.

[Tyson]

Tyson I'm just curious.  Do you think the new baby Otica being designed with the 3 8in. servos and a stack of open baffle 12,s sound better that the NS otica with the same stack of open baffle servos.

Oh, that would be interesting.  I'd have to hear it, but my gut tells me it'd be close.

[dayneger]

As noted in my prior post, one of the ideas would be to replace driver position "B" with a 10-12" passive OB bass driver that could cover from 80-250 or 100-300 Hz (guessing).  A 10" driver would have a similar Sd area as 2.5 of the M-165s in the Otica, while the 12" would have the Sd of 3.6 M-165s.  Unload the 165NQs of mid- and upper bass, keep the 12" servos from needing to play too high, maybe give more slam in the mid-bass. 

Any thoughts on the viability of pairing a 10-12" OB driver at "B" with the MTM section?  Or the relative pros/cons of doing so vs triple servo 12s?

[sumoking]

anyway to work in an AMT driver?
Would really help out performance...

[Hobbsmeerkat]

Not without changing the crossover for the mids and tweeter circuit, but I highly doubt an AMT is going to be an improvement over a planar tweeter, especially when most AMTs have to be crossed at 2.5-3KHz compared to the 1500-1800Hz we're crossing the planar tweeters at.

[Danny Richie]

anyway to work in an AMT driver?
Would really help out performance...

Hobbs is right. I have yet to find an AMT even close to what we are currently using in them.

[dayneger]

Any thoughts on the viability of pairing a 10-12" OB driver at "B" with the MTM section?  Or the relative pros/cons of doing so vs triple servo 12s?

I'm not interested in an AMT.

In fact, what I've mostly been focusing on is packaging the existing components differently.

The question above is the first time asking about a different driver, which was triggered by Danny's comments about the Brute's bass articulation. Basically, how about replacing the Otica's 4x 165s with a single 10/12" OB driver?

[Danny Richie]

Multiple smaller and faster drivers have some advantages.

[dayneger]

Multiple smaller and faster drivers have some advantages.

I believe you!

It's a matter of perspective for evaluation.  I'm not trying to improve upon the sound of the full Oticas... I'm just curious how close it's possible to get to that performance on a single footprint that's not particularly tall. 

Four 165s mounted bezel to bezel --> 7.25" x 4 = 29" height adder.  A single 12" adds only half of that height.  The dual servo 12" servo subs with the MTM could be around 47" tall, while adding that extra 12" driver would hit around 61".

Maybe I should ask it differently--would an additional 12" driver (woofer or sub) bring the dual 12" servo sub/MTM stack noticeably closer to the full Otica?

[g3rain1]

This variation with three 8" servo subs is coming.

How will this differ from the traditional Otica performance wise?

[mlundy57]

I believe you!

It's a matter of perspective for evaluation.  I'm not trying to improve upon the sound of the full Oticas... I'm just curious how close it's possible to get to that performance on a single footprint that's not particularly tall. 

Four 165s mounted bezel to bezel --> 7.25" x 4 = 29" height adder.  A single 12" adds only half of that height.  The dual servo 12" servo subs with the MTM could be around 47" tall, while adding that extra 12" driver would hit around 61".

Maybe I should ask it differently--would an additional 12" driver (woofer or sub) bring the dual 12" servo sub/MTM stack noticeably closer to the full Otica?

Sounds like your question is the exact same one I asked when the NX-Otica first came out. Since my room was too small for four towers, I wanted to get as close to the four tower experience I could get with two towers. The solution I ended up with was the NX-Otica MTM monitors on top of dual OB H-frame subs. This worked very well. It does put the center of the tweeter at 44" which is 5" above my ear level with my current seating arrangement. Since they are a two piece speaker, the MTM section could be placed on a stand of the desired height with the H-frames sitting next to them. This would lower the height though at the expense of a clunkier look.

[dayneger]

How will this differ from the traditional Otica performance wise?

This was discussed pretty well further up the thread if you'd like to skim through. 

For my system I know I want to have full impact down to 20 Hz.  Unanimous consensus in the feedback says that requires dual 12" servo subs per side (if not triples) if OB bass is the goal.

Just wondering... is there a way to change the title of a thread? 

Maybe Exploring "compact" Otica variants based off of 12" servo subs would be better?

Sounds like your question is the exact same one I asked when the NX-Otica first came out. Since my room was too small for four towers, I wanted to get as close to the four tower experience I could get with two towers. The solution I ended up with was the NX-Otica MTM monitors on top of dual OB H-frame subs. This worked very well. It does put the center of the tweeter at 44" which is 5" above my ear level with my current seating arrangement.

Very similar, Mike.  I'm hoping to compress things down a bit to get the MTM section closer to the ground, and started wondering whether adding a 12" driver zone on top of the MTM section would help the mid-bass discussion (i.e., the reason the full Otica has the 4x 165 drivers).

The subs could be bottom and top, with the 12" woofer below the MTM, or the 12" woofer could be above the MTM and the subs as usual.  Or all three 12" zones could be servo sub drivers and maybe they'd sound a little better playing higher?