[EProvenzano]

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.  Sh ...

I hope this doesn't come accross as a debate....
I think the demographic interested in a state-of-the-art 'Kit' will not be concerned so much about WAF because most of us willing to spend that kind of money have a dedicated space, or wives who understand our passion for this insane hobby.  
From my reading, I believe Dave will only offer this speaker as a 'kit' therefore the shipping issue is a non-issue.
The Accuton kit, at 2x the price of the Seas kit is expensive, but still 1/4 the price of a similarly designed Avalon, for example.

Can you tell I'm passionate about this?  Dave just let me know where to send the cheque!  
Hohumm....here's hoping.

[Al Garay]

Dave,

Though I think an Accuton 3-way would be very unique and highly desirable, save the Accuton for another day. The price is not an issue for this level of performance. But I agree that the size is significant. No sense building a 3-way that performs similar to the HT-3 but is bigger. If it's going to totally outclass the HT-3 and be up to the Isis level, then EP is right. We need to buy Spa visits for our wife and they won't mind the size.

On the other hand, the Seas-Hiq 3-way for $1500, that has family resemblance in performance to the HT3 and is in a smaller, lighter package... that will be attractive and popular.

You should seriously think about using baltic birch plywood. You already have serious bracing, plenty strong and the light weight is another major benefit for shipping and moving around the house.

Go for the best 10" woofer even if it means adding to the kit cost (Volt, Eton, ScanSpeak Revelator for example).  Sounds like you might have chosen the TC Sounds. Looks like it works OK for the HT-3 guys  

Getting an Ellis 3-way done, completed will be a great accomplishment.

Al

[awm]

Hi, DAve -- I'd recommend the non-Accuton, less expensive 3-way, too.  And, I'd go for the deepest bass possible that integrates well with the mid and tweet.  Sacrificing a few db of sensitivity for deeper extension is a trade-off that I imagine many of us would make.  

For what it's worth, I, too, am no longer a potential customer for this 3-way, now owning a pair of Orions.  But, I'd love to hear what you do come up with -- and, I'm still diggin' my 1801b's in the bedroom!  

Andy

[JoshK]

If it is not too late, I'd personally suggest the Accuton setup with maybe a 12" in a smaller cabinet and biamp & add a LT to the lower cabinet.  Noone on the planet offers an Accuton kit.  Differentiate!

[Jason1]

I vote for offering both.

[ohenry]

So, while the Accuton project may have sex-appeal, I don't really know that it will sound better.

I'm sure you've already contemplated this, but I have to ask if for no other reason than to educate myself...

How would you really know which way to go (Accuton, SEAS, or both kits) when it appears that you haven't built prototypes of either, or at least a prototype of the Accuton?  Is gambling on an Accuton prototype totally out of the question due to the high cost of materials and time?

It seems that synergistic magic happens unpredictably and something's true worth often remains a mystery until it becomes reality.

I do hope the best for you in developing the kit.  With your capabilities, I'm sure it will be excellent.

[EProvenzano]

I've owned a pair of SCC300 sub-woofers in 3.75ft cabs.  Those, in combination with my 1801's, were used as sub/sats in my 2 channel system for a long time.  I just don't get the issue with size. Yes they were heavy, but they don't compare to some of the line sources, or WMTMW systems people own.

I've had visions of a 2 peice cabinet for a large 3 way, and I think this would make the assembly more managable.  I wish I had a CAD program.  The 2 peice idea can still incorporate the same time-aligned backward leaning set-up, only it's split below the mid-bass and above the woofer.  That could make this a much easier build for the DIYer.  I remember lugging around my SCC300 woofer cabs; they weren't that bad.  The bottom half of this speaker would be no different.  

[TF1216]

Great thread guys!

I have to say that Dave's 1801b's are the first speaker I was attracted to when I decided to go the DIY route.  That is the reason why I have a pair of W18EX and W18NX to play with as well as the OW4.

But a 3-way design using the W18E and the Accuton drivers can be found on the web.  Not all of the speakers using these drivers are offered in kits but people have completed designs and have posted results.

May I suggest, Dave, that you look into different drivers to the Seas and Accuton.  How about PHL drivers?  I am assuming the subwoofers you intend to use can play up to 300 Hz where they will be required to be low passed when using the PHL midranges.

I think the sensitivity of the PHL drivers as well as their midrange detail is exactly what you are looking for.  Most importantly, you will have a kit unlike one I have seen yet on the web!  Something I think you can be very proud of.

[Al Garay]

EP,

Have you seen the Lumen White from Austria? Check out the Silverflame and DiamondFlame.
http://www.shows.soundstagelive.com/shows/avtour2005/frk_showstoppers_3.shtml

Here are morer high-end speaker using the C90-T6:
http://www.isophon.de/pages/isophon.pages.php?id=en_801

Then there's always the Avalon Isis:
http://www.avalonacoustics.com/isis_specs.html

Talk about sex appeal.  Trying to play both sides... it's a tough choice.

OW4 or C13/C24 for highs
C90 for mids
and 3 x C220 for lows

that would do nicely.

Al

[EProvenzano]

EP,

Have you seen the Lumen White from Austria? Check out the Silverflame and DiamondFlame.
http://www.shows.soundstagelive.com/shows/avtour2005/frk_showstoppers_3.shtml

Here are morer high-end speaker using the C90-T6:
http://www.isophon.de/pages/isophon.pages.php?id=en_801

Then there's always the Avalon Isis:
http://www.avalonacoustics.com/isis_specs.html

Talk about sex appeal.  Trying to play both sides... it's a tough choice.

OW4 or C13/C24 for highs
C90 for mids
and 3 x C220 for lows

that would do nicely.

Al

Hi Al,

I've drooled over some of those speakers for a while now  

I wonder if the C90 mid can be utilized with the Hiq tweeter and 10" bass driver???
I expect the extra sensitivity will be a waste, but perhaps a higher xo point to the tweeter would be a nice benefit.   I'm also curious if the 10" 3way will be a time aligned, backward leaner.   I didn't see this info in the 10" thread.

Although I'd be slightly dissappointed, I could easily live with a Hiquphon/C90/TC Sounds 10" .

Something about the W18 has me craving something different.   It's not that I don't like it, but I suspect a more pure midrange driver would excel (no pun intended) in the mid band, potentially extending the pass band and reducing the stress on the tweeter.  I'm far from a designer so I could be way off here.

I'm pretty stoked that Dave is close to finalizing some plans.
Good luck Dave!

[David Ellis]

Wow,

I didn't really think there would be such a significant response.  Overall, it seems like the sentiment is towards a lower sensitivity speaker.  However, at 89db @ 8 ohms, it'll still have a higher wattage sensitivity than @95% of available speakers.

There are many other fine gents who offered input.  I will try to respond to the most prevalent issues.

How would you really know which way to go (Accuton, SEAS, or both kits) when it appears that you haven't built prototypes of either, or at least a prototype of the Accuton? Is gambling on an Accuton prototype totally out of the question due to the high cost of materials and time?

Well, the NEED for the Accuton driver rises from the sensitivity of the new C90 driver.  There are extremely few good drivers having 92db/watt sensitivity.  If the woofer has 92db sensitivity, the midrange must also have this.  I must admit that I have NOT heard this driver, but assume that it will be on-par or better than the current line of Accuton drivers.  I do think there are some issues regarding driver integration and synergy, there is nothing magical present.

I have spent time with the Accuton C95 driver in my workshop.  I have heard the 5" Accuton midrange very recently.  I have also heard the Lumenwhite speakers, Kharma, Avalon etc.  IMO, the Accuton drivers are very good, but the only reason I would transition to them is:

1.  Q.C. of the SEAS drivers declines.

2.  The application of an Accuton driver works better.  Example:  This could be the case with the Accuton C79.  Certainly Joe D' spent www.usheraudio.com money on the best midrange when asked to build Usher's best speaker.  The application would also necessitate the use of the C90 midrange if the woofer was 92db sensitive.

... More to follow... it's dinner time.

Dave

[David Ellis]

I spent a bit of time with the Accuton C95 driver, and found it superior in the bass to the W18, but very slightly inferior in the midrange.  I decided a change to the 1801 wasn't going to happen.

While I do believe the Accuton drivers are very good, most of the SEAS drivers are right on-par.  This is true with one exception - the bass.  I find the bass from the 8" Accuton clearly superior to the 8" SEAS.  The midrange is very similar with the SEAS driver having a very slight superiority.  In retrospect, I could have very easily used the Accuton C95 in the 1801 with slightly different results.  I am certain many foliks would prefer the bass of the C95.  However, at the time, I was very budget oriented with regard to the speaker.  This is less true now, but budget/value remains a valid concern.   Time and effort are a greater concern.  I have a pair of C95's in the workshop, but they won't find a home in my personal speakers simply because there isn't enough difference to warrant my time and effort.  

I found the Accuton drivers integrated very well in all speakers - except the Lumenwhite.  I don't know what the issue was with these speakers, but I suspect the problem was not the drivers.  A cohort of good hearing (Alan Sull) did mention that he really liked the Lumenwhite, so I suspect the problem was not the drivers.  Accuton drivers are very good, the QC (by reputation) is top notch.

Soooo, it looks like the woofer will arrive in an 89db configuration with the remainder of the drivers yet to be determined.  I'll most likely test the W18EX001 and the Accuton C89.

Oh, someone above mentioned PHL drivers.  I heard one of their @ 7" midwoofer drivers with a very well designed crossover using a B.G. planar tweeter.  I'll not convey the louspeaker builder, but the guy is VERY good.  My opinion... is that PHL may produce some very good drivers, but this one isn't one of them.  The chance of finding a @7" driver in one of my speakers is nil.  This is my opinion only.  Other's are welcome to disagree.

The 2 peice idea can still incorporate the same time-aligned backward leaning set-up, only it's split below the mid-bass and above the woofer.

I can mentally picture this but... Do you think the average houswife would allow a double box cabinet?

[David Ellis]

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.

Jim Salk's HT3 speaker already does this, but isn't offered in a kit.  I also believe the Linkwitz Orion and John K NAO are in this league.

Dave

[AKSA]

David wrote this:

Jim Salk's HT3 speaker already does this, but isn't offered in a kit. I also believe the Linkwitz Orion and John K NAO are in this league.

 - except that, like all active crossover systems, the sound is now probably limited by the electronics, rather than the speaker.

Cheers,

Hugh

[David Ellis]

On the other hand, the Seas-Hiq 3-way for $1500, that has family resemblance in performance to the HT3 and is in a smaller, lighter package... that will be attractive and popular.

You should seriously think about using baltic birch plywood. You already have serious bracing, plenty strong and the light weight is another major benefit for shipping and moving around the house.

Go for the best 10" woofer even if it means adding to the kit cost (Volt, Eton, ScanSpeak Revelator for example). Sounds like you might have chosen the TC Sounds. Looks like it works OK for the HT-3 guys

The HT3 is actually a very small 3-way speaker.  I think Jim has about 2 cubic feet internally.  I'll have 3+'.  This is necessary for the sensitivity.

Baltic Birch... is this stable enough for veneer?  Is the edge grain stable enough for veneer?  

I think better plywood is easily good enough for bracing, but not suitable for the external veneered surface.  I really don't think it's stable enough.

All of the drivers you mention have overhung motor structure.  Mine will have an underhung motor structure.  These cost @2x$, and are more linear.

[David Ellis]

- except that, like all active crossover systems, the sound is now probably limited by the electronics, rather than the speaker.

Yes    I agree.  I don't intimately understand the electronic crossover designs, but find it very convenient that folks dismiss the importance of quality parts in their active crossover gear.  I discussed this with Frank VanAlstine.  He is in agreement.  

Most folks seem to think that an active crossover will "fix" all those nasty problems created by a passive crossover.  They seem to forget all of the parts contained in their active crossover.

Thanks for commenting Hugh.

[EProvenzano]

Thanks for all the very good responses Dave.
Each time I read your commentary I come away a little more knowledgeable    .

Will the 10" design still incorporate time alignment via sloped baffle?

Good luck with the R&D.
EP

[David Ellis]

Will the 10" design still incorporate time alignment via sloped baffle?

These terms are "tossed" too liberally by marketing departments IMO.  

All speakers with coherent phase (i.e. phase aligned) on a flat baffle have the phase of the woofer 360 degrees behind the tweeter.  This is accomplished in the crossover.

All speakers that are time aligned have the right tweeter wave and woofer wave arriving perfectly and at the same time.  They are not 360 degrees out of phase.

Given a 2-way speaker, a simplified explanation is thus:

1.  The woofer acoustic center is generally at the base of the cone.  Adding an inductor to the woofer will delay the phase further at the crossover point.

2.  The tweeter acoustic center is generall at the base of the dome.  Adding a capacitor will advance the phase further at the crossover point.

To time align these drivers, the tweeter acoustic center must align with the woofer acoustic center.  The offset is significant, and can be found on several ACI speakers.  I'll not do this.

However, the baffle will most likely be sloped.  A detailed explanation is complex, but... after doing a few 3 ways  (and several 2-ways) it's possible to optimize the crossover with less components if the baffle is slightly sloped.  This is just how things matriculate.  When I thought (?) my observation was valid via testing, I conveyed it to some other knowledgable gents.  They agreed.

So... the baffle will most likely be sloped, but the drivers will not be time-aligned.  They will be phase coherent.

[Jason1]

While I do believe the Accuton drivers are very good, most of the SEAS drivers are right on-par. This is true with one exception - the bass. I find the bass from the 8" Accuton clearly superior to the 8" SEAS.

Hi dave, I'm curious if you've tried out Scan Speak woofers? They are generaly considered to have better bass then the Seas offerings.

[David Ellis]

Indeed, and I do think Scanspeak woofers generally sound better than the SEAS offerings.  I don't have any measurements to suppor this.  I simply think the Scanspeak woofers sound more authoritative than the SEAS woofers.  

However, the same is true when comparing the SCC300 woofer www.soniccraft.com to any Scanspeak woofer.  The SCC300 woofer has more authority and snap than the Scanspeak woofers.  There are many reasons for this, but I... am not an authority on these matters and therefore am hesitant to convey hearsay given my limited knowledge.

If a 10" woofer matriculates from TC Sounds, it will be compared with the SEAS L26 and W26 woofers in my basement.  I feel obliged to at least try these woofers in a very solid a/b test before making my decision.  One very simple advantage is THESE Seas woofers have is a 2" voice coil.  This 2" voice coil has more surface area and will dissipate heat faster than the typical 1.5" voice coils from Scanspeak.

Dave