[BradJudy]

Danny, HAL's thread of his DIY open baffles (over on the AV123 forum) got me wondering about the Neo3 with M-130 as a stand-alone open baffle monitor, perhaps with the addition of an M-165X in a box (big monitor) to get more complete extension.  I expect the Neo3 would have to be padded down and the end efficiency might not be great. 

Did you ever play with such a creature when working on things like the O-3? 

[poseidonsvoice]

Danny, HAL's thread of his DIY open baffles (over on the AV123 forum) got me wondering about the Neo3 with M-130 as a stand-alone open baffle monitor, perhaps with the addition of an M-165X in a box (big monitor) to get more complete extension.  I expect the Neo3 would have to be padded down and the end efficiency might not be great. 

Did you ever play with such a creature when working on things like the O-3? 

Hmmm...that sounds similar to an OB2X or OB3X from RAW Acoustics. Only difference really is the tweeter. BG NEO3 versus RAW 104.5 ribbon 

Best,
Anand.

[Danny Richie]

Like Anand said, I did two models for Raw Acoustics like that. See links below.

http://www.rawacoustics.com/item__OB2X_speakers,862.html

http://www.rawacoustics.com/item__OB3X_speakers,864.html

They are also sold as kits. They sounded awesome. I especially liked the OB3X. It would hit a -3db down point in the low 40's too. 

[BradJudy]

Doh - I haven't followed RAW products, so I didn't see those.  Much bigger than I was thinking though - I guess the 130X needs a bigger box than I was thinking. 

[RAW]

The M-130X uses thew same size box?

On the OB2X design it is only 6.5" deep external.

[poseidonsvoice]

I agree, the OB2X is a pretty small speaker. In fact most people have wanted to make it a little bit deeper with a bigger base as well! What it does for its size makes it a sweet deal. I wrote up a comparison of the OB2X and O-3 a while ago which Danny has read and helped me edit. The midrange qualities of both the OB2X and OB3X is supposedly as good as a standard OB-5 since the OB2X uses the M130X instead of the M130's used in the OB-5 open baffle portion. Just as much detail due to the XBL motor.  I've heard the OB-5's at Denny's place but haven't been fortunate enough to hear an OB2X or OB3X 

Best,
Anand.

[klh]

Anand...

How could you write an accurate comparison of the OB2X and O-3 when you haven't listened to the OB2X or OB3X?  Stats are important but what matters most is how they sound. In theory one would think the OB2X and especially the OB3X would hold it's own in terms of Xmax (or more accurately displacement) and decreased distortion, but it's hard to make a direct comparison without actually hearing the difference. Especially since one mid would work harder than two (despite having a theoretical edge in design).

[BradJudy]

I didn't mean the box was large in general, I was just envisioning a more monitor sized speaker rather than a slim floorstander.  It looks like one could get more monitor-like by doubling the depth of the cabinet if they wanted. 

[Danny Richie]

Yea, the OB2X could be made into a stand mounted speaker real easy.

[HAL]

Just for reference this is the thread that Brad was referencing at the AV123 Forum.

http://av123forum.com/showthread.php?t=23905

[klh]

Cool thread... using cardboard is ingenious .

I bet they could be used as surrounds, too, if someone was inclined. If needed, they could be put on a table behind a couch. Not an ideal situation, but it may be more practical for some.

[poseidonsvoice]

Anand...

How could you write an accurate comparison of the OB2X and O-3 when you haven't listened to the OB2X or OB3X?  Stats are important but what matters most is how they sound. In theory one would think the OB2X and especially the OB3X would hold it's own in terms of Xmax (or more accurately displacement) and decreased distortion, but it's hard to make a direct comparison without actually hearing the difference. Especially since one mid would work harder than two (despite having a theoretical edge in design).

Agreed. The only reason I posted it was if there was anybody else thinking of the OB2X and O-3 (which are in a similar price bracket) and who didn't have the conversation that I did with Danny. I was just putting what Danny and I discussed into words. Nothing else. I haven't listened to the OB2X, OB3X or O-3. Only the OB-5. So I asked how the OB2X's midrange would compare to the OB-5's and that's what Danny told me. If we take what Danny says as the truth, given that he designed all the speakers  then...here is the link:
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=42943.0

Best,
Anand.

[klh]

OK... that's fair enough. Having his words put together succinctly (and of course with his permission) is a good thing, and I'm sure Danny is good for his word. At the same time, he can't be completely impartial (humanly impossible when you have a vested interest). It would be nice if there could be some kind of meet where the OB2X, OB3X, O-3 and OB-5 could be heard by multiple people. Obviously that would be difficult to pull off (and not likely to occur).

[klh]

I wrote another response but moved it to the thread you mentioned, Anand. It was too far OT for this thread. Sorry.