Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am moving, and my mind has already turned to my HT setup. Immediately, the DIY instinct took over.

I was wondering if anyone might give their thoughts on a DIY design - 5.1 or 7.1 (possibly 5.2 or 7.2) - for a large, and odd-shaped room. I will post floor plans when I get them.

My preference is for an MTM (or variant, thereof) arrangement. Such as the "Impressario" listed at Parts Express. Only problem is, that system doesn't seem to list a complete parts list or build plan. (only materials and plan for the mains)

Of course, something similar is cool. It's just got to sound fantastic, and be cheap. (relatively speaking)

My budget is about $2K for a DIY build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Zaph audio has a line of HT speaker kits at madisound.com You can choose from TM, MTM, and MMTMM.
Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information...

We are also looking for a design that fits well into a contemporary/eco motif. (speaking more to the enclosure design) By "eco", I mean lots of natural materials, like concrete, terrazzo, bamboo, etc. If anyone has great ideas for a enclosure designs, I'd appreciate them. The enclosures don't have to be made from those materials, but consider the design and earth tones used in the theme, and suggest something that would suit that. Art deco is good, also... BTW - I don't consider the enclosure build as part of my budget.

Thank you again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information...

We are also looking for a design that fits well into a contemporary/eco motif. Art deco is good, also... BTW - I don't consider the enclosure build as part of my budget.

Thank you again.
Huh? So does that mean a single full range or line array? How is one speaker (thinking baffle only with regards to where the drivers are mounted) better than another for different decorating styles? Isn't that all in how the enclosure is built and finished? So wouldn't an MTM work equally as well as an MTMWW?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Huh? So does that mean a single full range or line array? How is one speaker (thinking baffle only with regards to where the drivers are mounted) better than another for different decorating styles? Isn't that all in how the enclosure is built and finished? So wouldn't an MTM work equally as well as an MTMWW?
I don't really understand your question. (questioning?)

All that I really said was, I appreciate the link to the resource - but I am looking for a full set of plans - not just a speaker kit. The idea was to also introduce an implementation - not just a parts source. And in addition to that, I would like to find something that fits (oro could be made to fi) the motif. Looking for IDEAS...

Is that clearer?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Not quite what I am looking for in a design, but yes, you are on the right track! My friend has some original artwork, and I hope that I can get permission to post it. When I first saw it - not to insult him - but my mind immediately thought speakers... I will post pics if he allows me.

I like the sound of MTM, MTMW, so on, so forth. I don't need a complete space age concept. Melding traditional sound with killer (themed) design is a my goal. Even if it might be considered "hard to make", I don't mind. And to reiterate, I would like to base my concept around the Impressario on PE. (or something very similar - with a full HT setup in mind)

Thanks for those.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
I don't really understand your question. (questioning?)
Well, someone mentioned a TM, MTM, or MMTMM and you responded with "Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information..." as in non of those configurations would work for you.

So I asked wondered why certain configurations wouldn't work.

Because fashion is being chosen over function, you need to find a cabinet styling/finish that will work, then find a kit that will work with that cabinet. And then post pictures of the project. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Because fashion is being chosen over function,
I never said that. In fact, that is a completely false statement. I even stated that my preference was for an MTM, or "variant thereof". (in my mind, that could be MTMW, or WWWWWWWMMMMMMMMMTTTTTTTTTTTTMMMMMMMMMWWWWWWW, or whatever else, for that matter)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
First off the enclosure design (the shape) is not relevant to this situation at this time. What is relevant is what kind of a speaker system (that is size of box and components to put into it I.E drivers and Xover) you want to build that will produce the sound you want. And for that you have some choices to make. Once you have decided on the parts, then you can decide on the shape and look of the boxes while maintaining the internal enclosure volume. That part of the situation is the Y in the DIY.
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=211558&AID=1482282&PID=2777698
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
So apparently we have a misunderstanding. No reason to get all worked up.

What about something like this.
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=35905

A 5.0 setup will cost around 360+enclosures. That leaves quite a bit for the subwoofers.

Worked up? :nono: Emotionless posts being misinterpreted, I am afraid. I'm not riled, in the least...

That was one of the projects that I came across, and thought to possibly use. One thing for sure - I think I am going to lock in on the MTM concept. (for simplicity's sake) Unless someone wants to talk me out of it. I have an IB sub currently, and a PR sub in the works.

Do I need to also do MTM for surrounds, or can they be simplified to TM? Center channel - does it want to be more like a WMTMW?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
430 Posts
Well if you have 2k to spend, and already have your subwoofer(s), you could step up to say the Natalie P's? They've been well regarded MTM's, much like the Statements have been well regarded WMTMW's. Both are good performers in their class.

For surrounds, you don't have to build identical MTM's and could instead build the smaller TM varient, it's up to you.

For a center, MTM's have their weakness, but the only way to improve on them, is to make a 3way WT/MW where the tweeter is above the mid with woofers flanking. For example, http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=28262
However, even though the horizontal MTM's weakness is off axis response, if you're never off axis or at least remain close to the sweet spot, then it won't matter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 · (Edited)
Well if you have 2k to spend, and already have your subwoofer(s), you could step up to say the Natalie P's? They've been well regarded MTM's, much like the Statements have been well regarded WMTMW's. Both are good performers in their class.

For surrounds, you don't have to build identical MTM's and could instead build the smaller TM varient, it's up to you.

For a center, MTM's have their weakness, but the only way to improve on them, is to make a 3way WT/MW where the tweeter is above the mid with woofers flanking. For example, http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=28262
However, even though the horizontal MTM's weakness is off axis response, if you're never off axis or at least remain close to the sweet spot, then it won't matter.

Call me a-nal, but I crave symmetry, and I don't have the depth to install the config you mentioned. I have a design for a WWMTMWW, which was originally deisgned as an on-wall unit. I am talking to the original designer about modifying this, as I have all of the components, and a finished enclosure. Would this be a wise choice? Nevermind the fact that I have components - I'm looking for a grand finish, so don't be afraid to tell me it's no good.

By the way, the designs that I currently have for the mains and center are based on Dayton RS150-4, (woofer) Peerless 810921, (tweeter) and Peerless 830860'. (mid) The mains are WWMTM, and the Center is as mentioned avove...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Someone is confused...
My preference is for an MTM (or variant, thereof)"(in my mind, that could be MTMW, or WWWWWWWMMMMMMMMMTTTTTTTTTTTTMMMMMMMMMWWWWWWW, or whatever else, for that matter)
Now you are saying
Call me a-nal, but I crave symmetry, and I don't have the depth to install the config you mentioned. I have a design for a WWMTMWW, which was originally deisgned as an on-wall unit..
You never said anything about an in wall, or on wall installation, so why would you not have the room for an MTM?:huh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Someone is confused...


Now you are saying
You never said anything about an in wall, or on wall installation, so why would you not have the room for an MTM?:huh:

I apologize for the fact that you are confused.

I was replying directly to what looneybomber said. (not having the depth in my chosen location to place the configuration that he recommended) I said I have a design that was *originally* an on-wall, which meant that I was alluding to the fact that I *already* have components to work with. Anything else that you may have tried to get out of that statement is irrelevant.

Not having room for MTM? I just don't understand where that came from... I have about 11 inches of space to fit a center channel in, and I am shooting for a certain aesthetic, so I don't want to cram a deep box into that space. So what I am getting at, is that I have a preference for a slimmer configuration - such as my designed WWMTMWW profile.

Mind you, I have a design, but not a finished build. (only an enclosure) My current enclosure - which was meant to go on-wall - was only 9" deep. My new home and room will not utilize an on-wall enclosure. I am hoping that I can modify the crossover and enclosure to accommodate this new found freedom.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
I apologize for the fact that you are confused.

I was replying directly to what looneybomber said. (not having the depth in my chosen location to place the configuration that he recommended) I said I have a design that was *originally* an on-wall, which meant that I was alluding to the fact that I *already* have components to work with. Anything else that you may have tried to get out of that statement is irrelevant.

Not having room for MTM? I just don't understand where that came from... I have about 11 inches of space to fit a center channel in, and I am shooting for a certain aesthetic, so I don't want to cram a deep box into that space. So what I am getting at, is that I have a preference for a slimmer configuration - such as my designed WWMTMWW profile.

Mind you, I have a design, but not a finished build. (only an enclosure) My current enclosure - which was meant to go on-wall - was only 9" deep. My new home and room will not utilize an on-wall enclosure. I am hoping that I can modify the crossover and enclosure to accommodate this new found freedom.
Do you have any pictures of designs that you like? Have you seen any kits that you like?
I think it would be easier to find a kit and drivers you like and then try to marry them to a design rather than working the other way around.

Matt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Do you have any pictures of designs that you like? Have you seen any kits that you like?
I think it would be easier to find a kit and drivers you like and then try to marry them to a design rather than working the other way around.

Matt

I have a complete design, (not yet built) using the drivers that I mentioned earlier. I have the drivers that I listed earlier in hand. I will try to post pics of my new enclosure proposal in the coming days. The design that I like is the Impressario, as mentioned previously. However, my custom design is a much bigger design. And it is currently on-wall, and that has to change.

http://www.parts-express.com/projectshowcase/indexn.cfm?project=Impresario

Once again, to reiterate - the unbuilt design that I have consists of the following:

Center - WWMTMWW
Mains - WWMTM

Dayton RS150-4 (woofer)
Peerless 810921 (tweeter)
Peerless 830860 (mid)


Whatever enclosure that I design will use a stacked layer construction of baltic birch plywood, with solid face baffle. (I have a proven construction method, and I like how it looks)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
176 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Make sure to take pictures!!! :T Are you planning on going with active or passive crossovers? If active the onwall design could in fact work. :)

Matt
As far as I know, the crossover will be passive.

I have to admit, though - I am not much of a speaker designer. My forte is really the design and build of the enclosure. But yes, I will definitely post pics.

The on-wall design is scrap. It was meant for my old house, which had a small room, and not enough space for free standers.

Still wondering about that CC, though. I should keep that concept, if it works...
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top