Ellis 3-Way

EProvenzano · « **Reply #60 on:** 28 Dec 2005, 11:28 pm »

Hi Dave,

Judging by the added level of complexity to the cabinet, do you still intend to offer this speaker as a kit?
If so, are you planning to collaborate with a cab manufacturer to produce mdf flat kits? and/or completed, and semi-finished, cabinets?

Thanks.

David Ellis · « **Reply #61 on:** 30 Dec 2005, 03:17 pm »

I will not offer a cabinet kit. I will only offer the electronic guts as a kit.

Also, the cabient plans will be filled with pictures and dimensions, but will have SIGNIFICANTLY less step-by-step instructions then the current 1801 plans. A rookie will not be able to obtain good cabinet results in 2 weekends time.

Dave

MemphisJim · « **Reply #62 on:** 30 Dec 2005, 07:07 pm »

Hi Dave-

Is the current thought still to use the same drivers as the 1801 only supplanting them with the tc sounds driver? Or has the newer seas excel driver caught your eye or maybe one of the nice (and expensive) accuton midrange drivers would work as well?

Jim

EProvenzano · « **Reply #63 on:** 30 Dec 2005, 08:50 pm »

Thanks Dave,
Glad to hear the kit will still be available

I'm probably jumping the gun a bit here, but I think there will be some interest in an MDF flat kit, for most of us rookies

Perhaps a group buy from a reputable CNC machine shop would be an option some of us could consider. I'm sure this can be coordinated behind the scenes by the new owners.

I'm open to recommendations from anyone for a reputable machine shop, and I'll be happy to begin some preliminary research for the group.

Happy new year Dave! I hope it is a grand year for you and your family.

Warm regards,
EP

David Ellis · « **Reply #64 on:** 31 Dec 2005, 12:53 am »

I... really don't foresee a CNC MDF flats kit from me, or... anyone. The primary reason is shipping weight and potential for damage. The cabinets will weight 150lbs +. Shipping this quantity of weight is expensive using conventional methods, and the likelihood of damage is great.

However... If I shipped $100k annually via pallet, the cost per pallet would drop to @ $80. Unfortunately this isn't going to happen. The cost per pallet will remain in the $200-$300 range.

Another consideration is the kit will be... expensive. Very expensive. I am not going to artificially increase the prices, but the raw cost of components will be expensive. Given this cost, I don't think the number of customers will warrant a group purchase of cabinets, or flats-kits.

I do appreciate your enthusiasm, but remain a bit pessimistic about some of this.

My primary thought is... getting done with my current customers... getting some woofers and... building a prototype.

Dave

skrivis · « **Reply #65 on:** 2 Jan 2006, 08:33 pm »

Quote from: David Ellis

I thought of this, but the appearance is slightly... cheezy/cheap. In an "economical" speaker a single spike in the front to create a backwards lean would be fine. For a better looking speaker, the simple spike is less than desirable - according to my wife. Some complexity in the construction process is acceptable for aesthetics. However, a round back for the enclosure is not acceptable. This is way too much work. Also, my wife really doesn't prefer the appearance of a rounded back cabinet.

Have you thought about a 2-piece design? To give a modern example; something like the Wilson WATT/Puppy combo.

The top part would be the complex cabinet, with sloped front panel (a truncated pyramid, in essence). I built a similar cabinet and it was a pain, but probably not as bad as the full-size cabs you showed pictures of.

The bottom woofer cabinet then becomes fairly straight-forward with no compound angles.

It might be easier for customers to move around too.

Hmm... I note that Salk is doing something similar, although I think his speakers somehow look awkward.

David Ellis · « **Reply #66 on:** 2 Jan 2006, 11:37 pm »

I have thought about a 2 piece cabinet, but these generally don't have asmuch horizontal distance between the woofer and midrange to account for the electrical phase shift. Moving the woofer down low on a sloped cabinet might offer 6-8" of horizontal shift to accomodate the phase differences between midrange and woofer. This compares to perhaps 2-3" of differnce in the Wilson Watt configuration.

I have considered that a 2-piece setup can actaully look good. I think this speaker looks pretty decent http://www.avalonacoustics.com/sent.html, and has enough volume in the bass cabinet to allow higher sensitivity and/or deeper bass. While the Wilson Watt has 2 woofers, the cabinet remains relatively small. Bass will resultantly suffer in comparison. Bigger is better with regard to bass cabinets. Unfortunately, these big cabinets DO get friggin heavy and very awkward in the workshop. It's very difficult to avoid damage when working on very big cabinets. If I used 2 cabinets, the lower bass cabinet would still have to be very big... and heavy.

HChi · « **Reply #67 on:** 1 Feb 2006, 06:16 pm »

Hello David,
Is there any plan/possibility to actuate this wonderful 3-way design this year?

-Howard

David Ellis · « **Reply #68 on:** 13 Feb 2006, 05:31 pm »

I am visiting with the folks at TC sounds in SanDiego later this month and will know more concerning the status of woofers. This is currently the long-pole in the timeline.

Dave

TomW16 · « **Reply #69 on:** 13 Feb 2006, 09:09 pm »

Hey Dave,

We (at least I) would love to hear anything that you could share following your meeting with TC.

Thanks.

Tom

jhd · « **Reply #70 on:** 15 Feb 2006, 05:59 pm »

Dave: what is your current estimate on the cost of this 3-way kit?

skrivis · « **Reply #71 on:** 15 Feb 2006, 07:32 pm »

Quote from: David Ellis

I have thought about a 2 piece cabinet, but these generally don't have asmuch horizontal distance between the woofer and midrange to account for the electrical phase shift. Moving the woofer down low on a sloped cabinet might offer 6-8" of horizontal shift to accomodate the phase differences between midrange and woofer. This compares to perhaps 2-3" of differnce in the Wilson Watt configuration.

I have considered that a 2-piece setup can actaully look good. I think this speaker looks pretty decent [ur ...

I think it also depends upon where the x-over point is. If you made a smaller 1801 with a 6.5" driver, you might be able to cross over to the sub at a low enough point that phase shift is less worrisome. You could even place the woofers on the sides of the subs and that would give you plenty of setback.

A separate sub enclosure will be no larger than, and possibly smaller than, a big 3-way box. It might be easier to work with in the shop. But it also might give you two new models to sell. The sat by itself as a smaller speaker for small rooms, surround use, etc. Then the whole 3-way system would be an option for those who want it. People could even buy the sats with the intention of upgrading with the subs. That's good for people who have limited funds.

Anyway, just my thoughts...

HChi · « **Reply #72 on:** 16 Feb 2006, 04:30 pm »

Hello Dave,
Besides woofer, do you have tentative tweeter and midrange (preferrably underhung) drives yet? Maybe I have missed this, have you decided the size of the woofer? I remember reading 15" is no-no because of WAF. Is the woofer going to be a single unit or the possible dual woofers design?

Thanks,
-Howard

TomW16 · « **Reply #73 on:** 3 Mar 2006, 05:00 am »

Quote

David Ellis Mon Feb 13, 2006 11:31 am

I am visiting with the folks at TC sounds in SanDiego later this month and will know more concerning the status of woofers. This is currently the long-pole in the timeline.

Hi Dave,

Assuming you had your meeting with TC Sounds, inquiring minds would like to know of any new news.

Thanks.

Tom

Al Garay · « **Reply #74 on:** 1 Apr 2006, 06:17 pm »

Is the 3-way done yet? Check the date.

Hope your visit to San Diego went well, perhaps moves you back to the West coast (well Montana was close).

What is your target sensitivity? Getting close to 92db at 6-8 ohm would put it in a unique/highly-desirable position.

Al

David Ellis · « **Reply #75 on:** 3 Apr 2006, 01:28 am »

The SanDiego visit was very nice, but... the interaction with TC Sounds is very, well, mediocre. Due to several contributors, they wish to return to a 10" woofer. As with all things, I am open to divine inspiration and God's will. However, I am lukewarm on the idea of a 10" driver. I will henceforth convey my sentiments on the matter. This decision needs to be made before tomorrow morning. Any comments after tomorrow morning will have no impact on my decision.

A 12" woofer project would include the new fangled Accuton drivers, and cost @$3k$ for the KIT. It would have 91-92db sensitivity in a BIG cabinet and have solid bass.

A 10" woofer project would include SEAS & Hiquphon drivers and cost @$1500 for the KIT. It would have 89db sensitivity in a good-size floorstanding cabinet and have solid bass.

Both configurations would be 8 ohm sensitive (7ohms low dcr) and both would have a sealed bass roll off in the high 30s.

The cabinet size is directly proportional to the sensitivity. Keeping all other things equal, adding 3db of sensitivity doubles the cabinet size.

I could move the T/S parameters tighter and obtain more sensitivity, but the bass depth dissappears.

I could use electrical compensation to artifically improve bass response, but the result is thermal compression in the voice coil.

I think the "testosterone" in me wishes to have a bigger, more expensive, and more sensitive speaker. However, that speaker would be friggin huge, and heavy, and I'd no respectable housewife would allow such a speaker in her living room. I'm also NOT excited about building whoppin' huge cabinets. They are a pile of work and very easy to "ding" in the workshop. I think the $1500 10" SEAS/Hiquphon project is a smarter decision. And, candidly, have you heard any midrange/tweeter drivers that sounded clearly better? I haven't. So, while the Accuton project may have sex-appeal, I don't really know that it will sound better. I should probably ignore my male urges, and build what is a the wisest speaker.

What do you think Al? Would you really spend 2 x $ to go from 89 to @91db sensitivty and use Accuton drivers?

Dave

natemil · « **Reply #76 on:** 3 Apr 2006, 01:58 am »

Hi Dave,

I'm excited on further development with the 3-way project. As with many products, there's always give-and-take. Have you considered both offerings? Having options may serve and suit more customers, as individual needs and wants always differ.

Doug

TomW16 · « **Reply #77 on:** 3 Apr 2006, 02:56 am »

Just speaking for me, I would have gone for the 1801 but when push came to shove, I would like deeper extension that only a larger woofer can manage. You can't beat the laws of physics. Since I have an AVA 350 EXR amp, sensitivity is not a large issue for me so my vote is to go for the less sensitive and less expensive speaker assuming the sonics are identical. The spouse acceptance factor is only a bonus.

Good luck with your decision Dave and thanks for the update.

Tom

EProvenzano · « **Reply #78 on:** 3 Apr 2006, 03:33 am »

I've been waiting a long time for a kit that will go head to head with Avalon , Kharma, and the like. I think you'll offer a very special, unique kit if this speaker sounds like I think it will.

This might be the testosterone talking but....I'll be first in line for the Accuton Kit

zybar · « **Reply #79 on:** 3 Apr 2006, 03:42 am »

Quote from: David Ellis

What do you think Al? Would you really spend 2 x $ to go from 89 to @91db sensitivty and use Accuton drivers?

Dave.

Dave,

I am not really a potential customer since I am very happy with my current speakers (Salk HT3's), but why not throw my two cents in?

Go with the less expensive and sensitive kit. It really doesn't seem worth it to just go up a few db's in sensitivity. Now if you were jumping up to say 95-97 db's, that would be a different story as it would allow for different types of amps to be used.

Having owned some very big speakers (VMPS RM 40's) previously, I would caution you on going that route. Shipping becomes an issue as does fixing problems in the field. Plus there is the WAF to consider.

Anyway, best of luck in your decision.

George