OP
- Thread Starter
- #21
Yes, once I am done, he will get the pair since they can only be purchased as a set.
Last edited:
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Dayton Audio C-Note MT build progress
- Thread starter Rick Sykora
- Start date
Yes, once I am done, he will get the pair since they can only be purchased as a set.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #22
First one is done and ready to ship to Amir...
Frequency response graph at 1 meter, REW 75 dB level, gated without additional smoothing...
Frequency response graph at 1 meter, REW 75 dB level, gated without additional smoothing...
maty
Major Contributor
With this scale the graph is more credible to me, comparing with others that I have from other loudspeakers.
Last edited:
Not bad for a hundred bucks eh? Pretty close to mfr claim of "±3 dB from 43-20,000 Hz (±2 dB from 60-16,000 Hz)."
OP
- Thread Starter
- #25
Glad it works for you. No intentional scale manipulation on my part. Is comparable to the one I posted for Zaph 5.2 TM. I do zoom in and out on occasion and your post reminded me to watch the scaling before I post!
This test is just to verify that the speaker is functioning correctly and it appears to be. The real test is the Spinorama. Stay tuned for that.
Last edited:
maty
Major Contributor
I already guess it is not intentional. I am one of those who prefer to use scales that magnify the oscillations instead of smoothing them. When I compare the scales they have to be similar, which leads me to resize them but I rarely share them in the forums.
The problem with these speakers is their thin walls. Presumably its users listen only to modern commercial music so badly produced, and then an additional distortion should not be very noticeable, especially with synthesized instrumentation and everything else.
Yes, the spinorama is the real test, and the CSD too (it is important to know how fast the signal decays). Having the speakers so close together, presumably the spinorama will be quite acceptable.
The problem with these speakers is their thin walls. Presumably its users listen only to modern commercial music so badly produced, and then an additional distortion should not be very noticeable, especially with synthesized instrumentation and everything else.
Yes, the spinorama is the real test, and the CSD too (it is important to know how fast the signal decays). Having the speakers so close together, presumably the spinorama will be quite acceptable.
maty
Major Contributor
A good tip for your next graphics:
* 50 dB vertical scale
* 1/12th or 1/6th octave horizontal
An example, KEF 150, 5.25" Uni-Q coaxial, measured by same person:
Before, very smoothed
After, 50 dB, 1/12th
* 50 dB vertical scale
* 1/12th or 1/6th octave horizontal
An example, KEF 150, 5.25" Uni-Q coaxial, measured by same person:
Before, very smoothed
After, 50 dB, 1/12th
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #28
Agree on the 50 dB vertical scale (was already a requirement), but more importantly, this is meant to be a minimal functional test. My room is rather small and not a dedicated testing space...
I have older Zaph 5.2 measurements from a larger room and I get much different results than my recent build. Since we all want scientific reproducibility, am just stating from experience, that I would be careful to overly compare my own results between rooms. So, I would caution against comparing one set of measurements vs. others (notably without any common established baseline using a reference speaker).
I have older Zaph 5.2 measurements from a larger room and I get much different results than my recent build. Since we all want scientific reproducibility, am just stating from experience, that I would be careful to overly compare my own results between rooms. So, I would caution against comparing one set of measurements vs. others (notably without any common established baseline using a reference speaker).
Incorrect presumption.
I currently use them nearfield, so I'm not exactly rattling the cabinets. Previously I used them crossed over to subwoofers, which again limits the amount of energy being poured into these things.
But sure... presume anybody who buys these listens to music that is "badly produced" if that helps you feel superior.
maty
Major Contributor
Such is the truth for decades. Now these bad practices are beginning to be detected even in classical recordings! But that is another discussion.
The improvement after damping is very evident in good recordings. Some hours ago:
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=50768.msg1785137#msg1785137
The improvement after damping is very evident in good recordings. Some hours ago:
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=50768.msg1785137#msg1785137
are we just doing random font styles
The improvement after damping is very evident in good recordings... if you're playing it loud enough to rattle the cabinet.
The improvement after damping is very evident in good recordings... if you're playing it loud enough to rattle the cabinet.
maty
Major Contributor
With good recordings, even at normal listening volumes you can hear differences after improving the damping. Even with cheaper baffles and worse response than these.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #33
Here is the second one...
Here is the REW measurements for the pair...
They track each other very well. This indicates they parts are consistent in quality. newer one is the blue trace.
Here is the REW measurements for the pair...
They track each other very well. This indicates they parts are consistent in quality. newer one is the blue trace.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #35
This one is also on its way to Amir
.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #36
For those who might be curious while we wait for Spinorama...
This is my really crude attempt at an off-axis comparison, but I have to move my test setup soon, so thought I would try. Black trace is on-axis and red is 45 degree off-axis.
This is my really crude attempt at an off-axis comparison, but I have to move my test setup soon, so thought I would try. Black trace is on-axis and red is 45 degree off-axis.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #38
Last edited:
Prana Ferox
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Putting my kit together now and I've got to say the MDF flatpack is a letdown. I had to sand the fuzzies off the routed back panels as well, just like post #18. Just in general it seems not as nice MDF as the DIYSG kits I've bought, likes to soak up Titebond III and fray at the edges. I'm planning on veneering this pair but I can see how prepping these for paint would be irritating.
Obviously nowhere near knowing how it sounds, and it's no secret the money in these goes to the drivers and crossover, but if this was Babby's First Speaker Kit I'd go with Overnight Sensations, the Baltic birch ply flatpack is just nicer and more idiotproof.
Obviously nowhere near knowing how it sounds, and it's no secret the money in these goes to the drivers and crossover, but if this was Babby's First Speaker Kit I'd go with Overnight Sensations, the Baltic birch ply flatpack is just nicer and more idiotproof.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #40
While have to agree on the cabinet, will be interested to hear how you feel about the sound. The C-Notes have newer drivers, a larger woofer, waveguide for better integration and (imo) better overall design.
Similar threads
- Poll
