Rework Foster / Dayton Neo array [message #24473] |
Wed, 20 August 2008 13:51 |
Marc G
Messages: 16 Registered: May 2009
|
Chancellor |
|
|
Well about two years ago I built my el-cheapo array. I used the Madisound buyout 5 1/4" (Foster or Fostex I can't remember), mids.I then went to sealed enclosures, then added a line of the Dayton 3/4" Neo Domes with the truncated (by me), flanges. Each step was better but I can't help but think that the Mids just can't reach a comfortable crossover point that the Neo's can handle. I was tri-amping with a Behringer analog 3 way crossover and using good equipment overall. I was able to use an Ultracurve to EQ the beast then was able to use my crossover alone to set levels and bypass the ultra curve, getting pretty flat without any other EQ. After all the work I picked up a set of cheap Heresy's and they just killed my COMPLICATED array project. They sounded so well integrated and mine did not. Hmmm. Well, I'm sure the tweets are the biggest investment of the project and I think I would like to reuse them. Maybe I should buy some mids that integrate better. They sound OK but the HI-VI B3s or the round frame seem like a better match. Is there a passive crossover out there to mate a 3" Hi-Vi or similar to a Dayton Neo array ? If not, what small affordable 3-4 inch driver would be a good match for my Neo array ?
|
|
|
Re: Rework Foster / Dayton Neo array [message #24477 is a reply to message #24473] |
Thu, 21 August 2008 22:39 |
Marlboro
Messages: 403 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
You haven't given ME enough information to be able to reliably advise you. Do you have any woofers involved in your system? What are the specs on the Fosters since Madison no longer sellsx them? How big a line of tweeters did you use? What were the crossover frequencies you used? If you have no woofer are you using an equalizer? What about the heresy's blew your system away? Stuff like that. I'm actually having problems myself. My tweeter amp died and I can't seem to figure out why I can't get the replacement tweeter amps to work with the system. Its weird! Marlboro
|
|
|
Re: Rework Foster / Dayton Neo array [message #24478 is a reply to message #24477] |
Fri, 22 August 2008 03:06 |
Marc G
Messages: 16 Registered: May 2009
|
Chancellor |
|
|
So Sorry, Yep, I'm using a ported 2 x 8" crossed in at 150 hz with both the 1980 Heresys and the line. I'm using a line of 32 Neo's and 12 of the Foster 00463 Woofers. The published curve has them flat out to 5K where they drop quickly. I have them in a sealed box fabbed up from the open baffle I started with. I believe I sent you pictures before, long ago. I was quite proud of the effort anyway. I'm using a Behringer CX3400 http://www.guitarcenter.com/Behringer-CX3400-Super-X-Pro-Crossover-101219558-i1125203.gc I was crossing anywhere from 2k to 5K. running the HP on the tweets and the LP on the mids. Using my ultra curve and the measuring mic back about 10 feet I got it pretty even with the level controls on the X-over alone. Still, it sounded like separate drivers. Foster "0463" 8 ohm, Vas 6.6, FS 81 hz. My AMC Digital amp lost a channel 1 of 4. Well it kind of got scratchy. Runs the subs ok though when bridged. I'm hesitant to scrap the tweeter line. But I understand these woofs may find a better home.Marc
|
|
|
Some thoughts..... [message #24480 is a reply to message #24478] |
Sat, 23 August 2008 12:09 |
Marlboro
Messages: 403 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
I've thought about your problem and I'm still not sure I know what it is. You've told us the configuration of your system and that its the heresy(large woofer, midrange horn, tweeter horn) that you feel beats out your system. There are several things which could be involved. 1. You've not defined "integration" for you. Does integration mean the sound that comes from a horn system? 2. You've not indicated your amplification system. Mine uses nearly 1300 watts RMS total. Your system may be way way way less efficient than the heresy's and you could actually be hearing a lack of power that provides less impact and thus perceived less integration. I agree with Thylantyr that systems run on less than 1000 watts won't give you the resource you need. 3. I'm not sure that the Foster's are the best midrange to use with the Dayton neo's and I personally believe that they are stretched too thinly to cross any higher than about 1600, and the neo's can't go any lower than 2400 on a 24 db slope. This would make it seem as if you had separate speakers and a drop out in the critical 1600 - 2500 midrange area. Marlboro
|
|
|
some additional thoughts [message #24481 is a reply to message #24478] |
Sat, 23 August 2008 17:19 |
Marlboro
Messages: 403 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
Marc, As I finished finding an amp that would drive the tweeters(I bought a number back when I was building and designing the system two of which were dead on arrival from the wonderful ebay sellers but I didn't know until months later when I got around to hooking them up.) What are you using the balance the different lines? I've not found the gain controls on my Rane to be up to the task. As a consequence, both the tweeter and the woofer sub lines are driven by amps with their own gain controls on them. This allows me to make balance adjustments that would be impossible with just the little Rane. When Klipsh built the Heresy's they put in what is commonly called the California sound, which is heavy on emphasis in the impact bass. The horns tend to a more crisp sound, and the whole package is designed for rock bands. I wonder if its a combination of balance and equalization(caused in the passive cross) that has got you enthused with the sound of the Heresy speakers. Of course, this doesn't deny my first two points in the first missive response. Altho some would simply blame it on: If you use cheap speakers you'll get cheap sound. I think its more complicated than that. Marlboro
|
|
|
|
all comes down to money..... [message #24484 is a reply to message #24483] |
Sun, 24 August 2008 02:29 |
Marlboro
Messages: 403 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
Well, first of all how much money do you have to spend? Marc,Building a simple three way is usually pretty forgiving, but as you've discovered, building a line array inexpensively without taking care to see that all the elements fit together like a glove can be less than successful. Its easily done, but you have to do a lot of design looking and waiting ahead of time. If i were you I would simply replace the fosters with a three incher. But I designed my system so that the speakers would work together before I started. If you search around you might be able to come up with 32 sammi's and pay not more than $5 each. Here's some guy who will sell you a case for less than $3.99 each: http://cgi.ebay.com/3-1-4-SAMMI-WOOFER-MIDS-CW77B10-4OHM-ALLISON-NEW_W0QQitemZ280129614660QQihZ018QQcategoryZ3276QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem I'd keep the electronic crossovers, though you could get one of the heavy hitters in passive's over at PE Tech form like Jeff or Pete or Curt to actually design a passive for you. But in my opinion, The evils of passives bring in more troubles than they are worth. As I see it, if you go to a single tweeter you lose the low distortion and the wonderful line array benefits. But it all comes down to how much money you want to spend. Compare 16 PT2 planars for $28 each for $448 or the B3n's for $305. I's stick with the domes if I were you. 64 domes are incredibly distortion free as well as super responsive. If you go with a tweeter you really need one that can give you the same sensitivity as a line of mids, but with individual volume controls on the amps that is not as necessary as when you have a passive crossover. You might want to consider the benefits of putting the 3 inchers into individual tube enclosures also, but that is pretty labor intensive. Just my thoughts. Others may have better choices. Marlboro
|
|
|
Re: all comes down to money..... [message #24485 is a reply to message #24484] |
Sun, 24 August 2008 13:03 |
Marc G
Messages: 16 Registered: May 2009
|
Chancellor |
|
|
I checked out the Sammi's and put a question in to the seller. I see they are the 4 ohm version so I imagine just doing a series parallel arrangement should get me close to my 6-8 ohm target. My question to you is what would be a good sealed box volume for these drivers. I dont have the time for a fancy enclosure. A sealed box should be good to 100-120 hz right ? My line of Fosters were 63" and 16 - 3.24 drivers would get me approx 52 inches. Why do you suggest 32 units ?Marc
|
|
|
Sammi's plus neos in pvc tubes [message #24486 is a reply to message #24485] |
Sun, 24 August 2008 14:06 |
Marlboro
Messages: 403 Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (1st Degree) |
|
|
I used a separate PVC tube for each of them, stuffed to 4 lb/cu in fiberglass. Have you seen my enclosure system? I used 16 of them per side myself in a 7.5 foot high system. I wouldn't cross them below 145-150 where you'll get a resonance in the tube to support the lower end(though not very much considering the intense stuffing). I can email you the information about the tubes if you want. The Calipso LINE ARRAY: http://pub48.bravenet.com/photocenter/album.php?usernum=4095425731&album=48032
|
|
|
|