[Danny Richie]

They say there is a first for everything and I guess it's true.

I have a customer that bought some M-130 woofers that he used in his design. Without making any changes to his network or anything, he cut a larger hole and dropped in a W cone Focal woofer that was four times the price.

He likes the Focal better, which is fine, but then starts a thread bashing the M-130 and claiming it sucks.  

I have never had anything bashed by a customer before, and of all our products that he could have picked to bash, he picked the M-130 woofer.    The M-130 woofer is probably the most popular item we sell. We have literally sold thousands of them separately and in kits. These are extremely popular with the DIY crowd.

Here is the thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59880&perpage=10&pagenumber=1

If any of you guys have had similar or apposing impressions of the M-130 woofer then please fell free to join in the discussion.

[Kevin P]

No matter what you do someone is not going to like it.   I'd say your doing just fine with a 1000-2000:1 satisfaction to dissatisfaction ratio.

[kyyuan]

sounds like a young, perhaps capable DIYer, who needs to work on his/her communication skills, among other things.

[carlos spud]

Well Danny I guess you just can't account for some people's taste or the lack there of, just from reading the thread i about got a headache, he must be one of those people who think we never landed on the moon and that the holocaust was a hoax, I mean to think that you Dennis,and John K
are in cahoots together THE CONSPIRACY IS FINALLY REVEALED
Cheers,Carlos

[_scotty_]

All I can say is he better have put some spares on the shelf in case something blows up. It is highly unlikely that he will be able to get replacements for them in the future.  I agree about his interpersonal communication skills. As far as I know Danny has never misrepresented the
performance of any thing he sells unlike some other manufacturers I could name.
Scotty

[Al Garay]

The guy has a colorful style likes to come to firm conclusions and make bold statements without much thought. He revealed his style when he started ripping Dennis Murphy and JohnK in addition to you.  When he starts ripping the senior citizens in DIY, then he's gone too far.

[RAW]

Danny no worries.
 A single Idiot does not effect us all but his true colours sure do effect his.

Not worth getting worked up over.
We all know for the money nothing , nota, elzip for drivers out on the marker come close to the M-130 for the price .

Have a good one.
Al

[ooheadsoo]

The kid is 14 and is acting his age.  "This sucks, that sucks."  He can't even state anything concrete about the driver that doesn't meet his standards that you can't find out about the m130 by just reading the description of the driver and looking at a picture.  His opinion is basically worthless, as anyone reading the thread in entirety can determine except for certain "facilitators."  In his original thread here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59537&perpage=10&pagenumber=1
you can see that he just took the mbow1 3 way xover, built a different box, changed the drivers and hacked at the xover a bit and then started swapping drivers nilly willy.      

He can build a cabinet, I'll give him that - if he did indeed build it and not his father.

[RooX]

the diyaudio forum mistifies me somethimes, i wrote a little blurb for the thread, basicaly stating that the kid should chill out, not publicly bash products/companies that he has little to no knowledge of.  And that by bashing people in the industry he certainly isnt making any friends.

i then wrapped it up with some witty (or less than? ) statement about how he seems to be a tin ear if he likes to just drop dirvers into cbinents and crossovers that arnt made for it.

i didnt use any foul language or anything, figured i was WAY less harsh than he was origianlly or most of the other people i nthe forum were to him.  But needless to say i got a long email telling me i am not aloud to post such hurtful things and that ill be being monitored now or something to that effect.

Little punk is being babied.  I say he should be thrwn to the wolves, hes the one whom asked for it.

[Danny Richie]

Roox,

Which post was yours? And who sent you the long e-mail?

I noticed Al got a warning from a moderator warning not to use profanity and I could not find any profanity in his post.  

[Mudjock]

I'll have to admit I'm on the fence a little with regard to the M130.  I agree with the other posters about the questionable (at best) nature of the original user comments.  He obviously didn't hear the driver at anywhere near its best.  That said, I have heard the MBOW1 and 3 or 4 other implementations of the M130.  

1.  The M130 needs some careful crossover work.  I bought a pair of DIY speakers for parts using the M130 and Morel MDT20 in a Parts Express 0.25 cu. ft. box.  The individual I bought the speakers from tried to cross these using a first order (electrical) crossover - claiming that this was "more pure" sounding.  More painful is more like it.  This driver gets a bit ragged around the crossover region.

2.  The M130 is marginal as a woofer.  This driver has less extension and impact than many competitors.  The Dayton RS-150 and the now discontinued Peerless 850108, as a couple examples, are similarly priced, produce more authoritative bass and are low distortion drivers.  Even the Platinum Audio Studio Ones I had at the time did better below 100 Hz than the M130 based speaker (although a little larger box would have helped the M130 some in that area).  I will ultimately do that with the pair I have.

3.  Personally, if I was willing to invest the $ in the OW1, I would put a little more into the midwoofer - for example, the CaOW1, or the Dillon Metaphor, or even the Ellis 1801 (which I own).  When I hear the MBOW1, I can't help but hear a great tweeter and an average woofer - even if they are matched about as well as possible.  To me, the MB20 or the GR Research Kits make a lot more sense budgetwise.  

4.  The M-130 based kits, when designed and implemented well, will still provide a much better value and sound than anything close to the price that you will find at your local retailer.  The designs are popular enough that you can find multiple sources for prebuilt cabinets and several options for tweeters if you want to minimize the construction effort.

... just my $0.02

[Danny Richie]

Well, thanks for sharing your views.

I don't believe I can agree with you on a few of those though.

The M130 needs some careful crossover work.

The M-130 is really easy to work with. It can be crossed just about anywhere and has no break-up modes to contend with.

This driver gets a bit ragged around the crossover region.

The response is really smooth and extends to nearly 10kHz with very minimum break-up.

I have heard several implementations using a first order crossover sound really smooth with this driver.

This driver has less extension and impact than many competitors. The Dayton RS-150 and the now discontinued Peerless 850108, as a couple examples, are similarly priced, produce more authoritative bass and are low distortion drivers.

Not hardly. Run the numbers. The peerless will only -3db down on the mid 60's. The RS-150 is -3db down at 55.9Hz optimal ported. The M-130 is -3db down at 54.2Hz optimal ported.

The Peerless is a decent driver but does not quite have the midrange clarity of the M-130. I have used them.

The RS-150 is a nightmare. It's a typical metal cone woofer with outrageous break-up mods. I have yet to hear a really good sounding metal come woofer especially covering mid-range.

Have you seen the scary response curve of the RS-150?

http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/295-362g.pdf

It has about a 12db peak in the break-up in the upper end. Eeeeekkkk. There is a lot of ringing going on there.

I bought a pair of DIY speakers for parts using the M130 and Morel MDT20 in a Parts Express 0.25 cu. ft. box.

That is way to small of a box for that woofer. It wouldn't work too well in nearly half the optimal air space. It needs about .39 to .4 cubic feet of air space (ported).

Even the Platinum Audio Studio Ones I had at the time did better below 100 Hz than the M130 based speaker (although a little larger box would have helped the M130 some in that area). I will ultimately do that with the pair I have.

In that little box, I am not surprised.

Try it in a more optimal box and I think you'll be more pleased with it.

Wait until you hear it in an open backed design like the A/V-4. Relieving it of having to play from 100Hz and down really allows it to do what it does best really well (midrange). In that area it is tough to beat even in the high price ranged drivers.

[Mudjock]

Danny,

Thanks for your quick and thoughtful reply.  I will try clarify my position below.

The M-130 is really easy to work with. It can be crossed just about anywhere and has no break-up modes to contend with.

I agree that there are no large breakup modes.  Part of my rationale for my statement is that Dennis Murphy uses a 6 element crossover on the M-130, even though budget was one of his main objectives for the MB-based designs.  He doesn't need any more than that to tame the Seas W18.  I haven't tinkered with the M-130 nearly as much as you or Dennis, but I still think it needs more shaping than some drivers to come out right.

I have heard several implementations using a first order crossover sound really smooth with this driver.

I see no reason why this isn't possible (at least if you are talking about first order acoustic, rather than first order electrical).  Maybe first order electrical would have been possible if a different crossover point and/or tweeter was chosen than what I heard.

Not hardly. Run the numbers. The peerless will only -3db down on the mid 60's. The RS-150 is -3db down at 55.9Hz optimal ported. The M-130 is -3db down at 54.2Hz optimal ported.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here.  The -3db point is less significant to bass performance IMO than other factors.  The Peerless driver I mentioned has a much larger xmax (4.5 mm vs. 3 mm) and very impressive power handling.  The RS-150 has 4 mm xmax.  Some of the Seas drivers are up over 5 mm.  Regardless of what the box tunings say, the M-130 just moves less air and runs out of steam before these other drivers do.  

I do agree with you that the M-130 has an advantage in midrange clarity versus the Peerless driver and that the M-130 does very well when relieved of low bass duty.  This is, IMHO, its optimal use.

 

The RS-150 is a nightmare. It's a typical metal cone woofer with outrageous break-up mods. I have yet to hear a really good sounding metal come woofer especially covering mid-range.

Again, I have to disagree with some of this.  I own the Ellis 1801, the midrange clarity of which is in an entirely different class (better) than the MBOW1.  For all of the breakup modes of the RS-150, it is pretty easy to model a crossover (with as few as 3 elements) that effectively wipes out those modes and gives a nice 4th order L-R alignment at around 2 kHz.  I've heard this implemented and would call it anything but a "nightmare".

Don't get me wrong, I think the M-130 is one of the better budget drivers out there and a solid choice for many situations.  I just wouldn't go so far as to imply that it is head and shoulders above the rest or the only 5" driver worth considering below $50 - which is to some extent what I was led to believe by the DIY community as a whole before I actually heard it.

[RooX]

Roox,

Which post was yours? And who sent you the long e-mail?

I noticed Al got a warning from a moderator warning not to use profanity and I could not find any profanity in his post.  

Mine wasnt even put into th thread, i dont post there often, so im still under consideration i guess, have posted only a few times in the last few years.  

either way, i got a rather long message that i need to be civil etc etc and that they will be watching my future posts. lol.  

kinda bizzare really, no swearing, just telling the little brat to chill out so he might be able to learn something from people with a combined knowledge greater than any one person could ever have.

[Danny Richie]

Part of my rationale for my statement is that Dennis Murphy uses a 6 element crossover on the M-130, even though budget was one of his main objectives for the MB-based designs.

I am not sure why he used so many components. It doesn't need that many for any applications that I have used it with.

The A/V-1 uses a series network so I can't show individual woofer responses, but the 16 ohm version of the woofer (same other than impedance) is used in our A/V-3. It has a first order (electrical) network on the woofers with impedance equalization.

See below:



How much better can it get?

A simple second order works great too.

The Peerless driver I mentioned has a much larger xmax (4.5 mm vs. 3 mm) and very impressive power handling. The RS-150 has 4 mm xmax. Some of the Seas drivers are up over 5 mm. Regardless of what the box tunings say, the M-130 just moves less air and runs out of steam before these other drivers do.

Oh, you weren't talking bass quality. You were talking SPL. Yes, I guess the 3.3mm X-max of the M-130 is a limitation. Stay tuned for the next version with XBL^ technology. I am guessing X-max to be in the 7mm range if the surround will allow it. Distortion will be lower too.

Again, I have to disagree with some of this. I own the Ellis 1801, the midrange clarity of which is in an entirely different class (better) than the MBOW1.

It depends on implementation. I have used that same Seas Excel woofer several times. To me it has a little bit more of a dry sound to it. It sounds very good and much better than other metal cone drivers, but still not quite natural. Pushed hard, it clearly has lower distortion than the M-130 (due to the stiffer cone). But in the application of the A/V-4 (used as a mid-bass) I'd take it over the Seas Excel any day.

[BradJudy]

Stay tuned for the next version with XBL^ technology. I am guessing X-max to be in the 7mm range if the surround will allow it. Distortion will be lower too.

That sounds like a fun toy.    What are you planning for the new driver?  Updates of the existing models or all new speakers?

[Danny Richie]

What are you planning for the new driver? Updates of the existing models or all new speakers?

First they have to complete adding the XBL^ technology to the new 6" woofers that they are building for our new line source models. It has taken them a while to get it implemented correctly and delays have been really burning me, but I think they'll get it correctly implemented soon. The last version as of last week was close enough to my specifications to make it work but I am still on them for improvement in on area.

After that I will have the motor structure technology added to all of my M130 woofers and a new 6" 8 ohm woofers that I want to do.

All parameters should be the same (or close to it) and all other hardware will be the same. I'll just be adding the Adire motor structure.

[gprro]

does this mean the current a/v kits will be upgraded to xbl motors? Will the crossovers need to be changed?

Hope you get the new xbl's working. I'm going to order some av3's when I can sell my Ascendant atlas 15's and some other equipment. Maybe i'll get the whole home theater setup.

[Danny Richie]

does this mean the current a/v kits will be upgraded to xbl motors?

At some point, yes they will.

Will the crossovers need to be changed?

I can't answer that yet. I don't know for sure that the XBL^ moter will not have some effect on the response. Hang in there and we'll see.

[Hank]

BL.

Danny, sounds good that they're getting close.

Son of Alpha, anyone?