Kit for Nearfield monitor: piccolo, mandolin, Continuum?

[jeshi]

I am considering building one of Jeff's kits for use as a nearfield monitor on my music workstation. I would be using the speaker in the 0.8m to 1.2meter distance.
I am considering the piccolo, mandolin or continuum, with the vented piccolo looking most interesting to me. I am looking for a detailed, flat, monitor with excellent stereo localization,depth phase accuracy. Something to compose and mix tracks on.
Maybe this question is for Jeff. For what listening distance did you design these monitors? Would these monitors work at a close distance (0.8m or 1m) or was the cross-over designed for HT/living room distances?
Also which monitor would you recommend and what are the unique qualities of each one? I currently use Focal CMS40 (4") monitors on stands with a subwoofer which are really quite excellent.

This will be my first 2way build. I want to eventually do my own build with active/miniDSP for crossover and for mild room eq-ing.

thanks jessica

[Wolf]

Welcome to the forum, and I must say- there are very few women in this hobby.. Nice to have you!

I think the Continuum would be the best in closer proximities. It's smoothness is easier on the ears than the other 2, so closer would likely still be better. I'm sure Jeff will chime in for his opinion, but of the above choices, that's my wager.

The Sopranos might be better still due to size and application.
Later,
Wolf

[jeshi]

Thanks wolf. I don't know how many speakers I will build, but this is an interesting hobby. I have learned a lot in the last month reading lot of forums and websites. Also my small japanese apartment does not lend itself to having lots of speakers laying around

I should also mention that my current monitor (focal cms40) are kind on on the smooth side and a 4" woofer (65hz F3 with a bit of a hump at 80hz). I am looking for an alternate monitor with more bass extension, a little flatter, and a bit more detail. My sub does not integrate so well (room nulls I am trying to fix). Also for mixing I need something a bit more analytical (more like a precision tool) without being shrill,distorted, or painful. Right now I have some PSI A17 monitors on home loan http://www.psiaudio.com/product/active-monitors/a17-m. These are very professional monitors and excellent, but just a bit out of my price range.

I think the soprano will be too similar to my current CMS40. If the continuum are too easy on the ears, then maybe that will not be what I am looking for.

I found this thread of someone who built a Mandolin for his nearfield use and loves it
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showt ... ost1925095

starting to think the Mandolin might be what I have been looking for. I just read on several site where they think the SB15 has better midrange and less distortion than the SB17, But maybe the SB17 is actually not so different.

Eventually I really want to do my own design, but the more I read, the more I think my first build should be a kit. I really want to eventually do a build with the D2608 HDS tweeter since I think that is exactly what I am looking for.

[jeshi]

I was originally thinking (after lots of studying of different drivers, tests, comments) to get some D2608/9130 HDS tweeters and the SB15NRX or SB15MF woofers and a miniDSP and try to do my own crossover. The SB29 tweeter was my second choice, so when I recently found Jeff's kits I started thinking this kit might be a better way to start. But with my music production training, I really understand how to work with monitors (what they are supposed to sound like, how to hear their dips and peaks and adjust my mixing to them) and how to use filters. So maybe it might not be so bad to jump right into the miniDSP, measure, listen, adjust approach (similar to how I produce/mix anyways).

[jeshi]

if anyone wants to comment on SB15 vs SB17 that would be helpful too.
Or if anyone has worked with both the SB29 and D2608/9130 HDS tweeters.
I have found comments and tests on the web (zaph, audioexcite, audioheuristics, diyaudio....) so I have a little idea.

[Wolf]

The Docero fits your needs then....
Wolf

[isaeagle4031]

I think you are right Ben. The Docero would make a great near-field monitor.

[jeshi]

first off thanks everyone. The Docero kit does look interesting, but the Eclipse woofer is a big unknown for me. I understand this is a Meniscus woofer so there is not a lot of information about it out there.
Has anyone directly compared the Eclipse W6520R-4 woofer to the SB17 (or SB15)?
The only test data I found was here
http://www.diyspeakerforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=379
The distortion measurements of the SB17 & SB15 (from Zaph's site) look better to me. The 3rd order harmonics on the Eclipse look a bit too high for me. And the distortion seems to be rising a lot by 60hz.

W6520R


SB17
http://www.zaphaudio.com/6.5test/compare.html


SB15
http://www.zaphaudio.com/5.5test/compare.html


also can anyone comment on the SB29 neo vs the D2608/9130? The mandolin/piccolo kits still has my curiosity. My impression from reading forums is that the SB29 tends to the warmer/musical side, while the D2608/9130 tends toward the analytical side. I guess both are detailed and "open" but the 9130 might offer more details and is lower distortion. This is why I was leaning toward the D2608/9130 tweeter.

I have actually almost convinced myself to go ahead and do my own crossover (DSP) with the D2608/9130 and the SB15 in an overdamped (11L) vented box with a low port tuning (37hz) to give me a tight and controlled bass - almost like a sealed box. I have done the modeling in unibox.
I actually am a bit more interested in learning the design process. I am not really into the box-build wood-working aspect of this hobby

[jeshi]

looking at the Continum kit again. This has the Dayton RS28A-4, Metal dome tweeter. wolf, I am surprised you would call it smooth and easy on the ears compared to the SB29 tweeter based piccolo/mandolin. From what I have read around the forums, I thought the general consensus was that the RS28A is more detailed than the SB29. Or am I confusing this with the RS28F.
If the Continuum follows the Roger LS3/5a design it should have a flat midrange with a slight bass bump and rising treble
http://www.stereophile.com/content/bbc- ... ion-part-2


I have no direct listening experience with any of these drivers yet so I have to rely on people's comments here. I understand that crossover/eq can alter the sound of a speaker a fair amount, but the drivers should still have some inherent qualities.
I usually would never consider buying any speaker/headphone without listening, so this DIY is a big leap of faith for me.

[isaeagle4031]

Jessie I can tell you for certain that the. eclipse woofer is very good. I used it for my Armonicos and the distortion profile is quite low. Personally I like it a bit better than the sb17, but that is just a personal choice.
The continuum does have the BBC type dip I believe. Jeff mimicked it to be close to the ls3a/5.

[Wolf]

.............Without the rising treble.

FWIW, the SB29 is not one of my personal favorite tweeters. If I go dimple/ring style, I pick the XT25 over the SB29 anytime. The RS28A is not a harsh tweeter, and does not have any metallic character to it- and I like it better than the RS28F as well.

Wolf

[jeshi]

found a frequency response plot of the Continuum by Jeff
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showt ... ost1985327


Looks very good. Of course it has the LS3/5a midbass bump and rolloff by design.
Unfortunately for me, this is what my current speakers (cms40) look like (my bump is 80-100hz).
The Continuum does look like a great small near-field monitor which could be easily paired up with a subwoofer.

[Fwiler]

If you are having issues with the subwoofer then I wouldn't recommend the Continuum. This is the type of speaker that really depends on a subwoofer for the complete package.

Mandolin if you want flat, Piccolo if you want a slight rise in bass.

In any decision, I would highly recommend getting the kit with the cross-over.
One- it's done correctly, in fact some might say it's the best you can get with those components.
Two- if for some reason we want to tweak it, you could learn about cross-over design and go from there, or like you said take the cross-over out and use dsp.

Either way you would have an excellent reference to work from.

[Jeff B.]

I guess I should visit here more often, as I just found this thread. Here's my two cents worth on some of what's been discussed.

1.) If you're using a good subwoofer then I would personally choose the Continuum. If, on the other hand, you are wanting a small speaker to play by itself as a near-field monitor then I would personally choose the Piccolo. It has a very similar response curve to the Continuum but is more extended in its vented form. For desk-top use right in front of me, again, I'd personally go with Sopranos. They don't get the love they deserve but they are a very good little speaker. These are my personal choices of what I would use for myself based on these designs.

2.) You can't compare those distortion curves above on the Eclipse woofer and SB' woofers without knowing the exact set-up. When distortion is displayed is terms of harmonic dB below the fundamental it loses its context. If one set of data was taken at 100 dB and another at 90 dB then the distortion profiles will be very different and they are not apples to apples for comparison. You can not tell from this data if the Eclipse is better or worse than the SB's.

3.) Having worked with all of these woofers the Eclipse is the most robust of the bunch and puts out some excellent bass. Better than the SB drivers in my opinion.

4.) The LS3/5a does not have much of a rising treble, it's pretty flat. Here's how the Continuum compares with the 1978 Rogers' LS3/5a measured under very similar conditions:


5.) The RS28a is a very smooth but detailed sounding tweeter. I like it a lot better than the RS28f and better than any other metal dome I have used. It really doesn't do much wrong and it doesn't have a "metal sound", whatever that is.

6.) The Continuum remains the lowest distortion small stand-mounted loudspeaker I have ever designed. I believe the construction of the cabinet has a lot to do with it, but the driver's themselves are very low distortion in their operating ranges as well. (I only qualified this because I have designed some large systems using pro-sound drivers that have more output at the two watts than the Continuum can hit at full volume, so distortion comparisons here may not be fair.)

Jeff B.