• 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!

High sensitivity speaker options

I haven't had a chance to get through your linked threads yet... could you briefly talk about the goal of the extra woofer? is it additional output, lower bass extension, both? Does that affect the integration of the waveguide at crossover? (guessing no since it's a 2.5 way and one woofer probably isn't active during the crossover from the top end?)

thanks!
It will effectively replace the output of the port, with way more headroom and performance, and of course no port noises. I can omit the Linkwitz transform and low-pass filter, and push the woofer way less. Not that I need or use the extra output, these things are terrifying when turned up. The only time I have pushed them I wore earplugs because of the SPL.

And yes, the lower woofer is rolled off low, so change to integration with the D2.

Also, they should look completely badass:
1717601513764.png

Subjectively, how can this not sound good?;)

I have configured a single (with the two bass cabinets), and it sounded great. I hope to start posting some actual measurements, the ones in the build thread were compromised by the size of my shop and mic too close for a large speaker. I am going to try to up my measurement game...
 
It will effectively replace the output of the port, with way more headroom and performance, and of course no port noises. I can omit the Linkwitz transform and low-pass filter, and push the woofer way less. Not that I need or use the extra output, these things are terrifying when turned up. The only time I have pushed them I wore earplugs because of the SPL.

And yes, the lower woofer is rolled off low, so change to integration with the D2.

Also, they should look completely badass:
View attachment 373370
Subjectively, how can this not sound good?;)

I have configured a single (with the two bass cabinets), and it sounded great. I hope to start posting some actual measurements, the ones in the build thread were compromised by the size of my shop and mic too close for a large speaker. I am going to try to up my measurement game...

just for clarification, the idea here is to stack 2 woofers in sealed boxes, so no port nonsense?

that simplifies the build significantly....
 
just for clarification, the idea here is to stack 2 woofers in sealed boxes, so no port nonsense?

that simplifies the build significantly....
Yes, no ports. Two sealed enclosures per side. Could share the same enclosure volume if wanted. I am enjoying the modularity of the individual bass cabinets and stackable D2 lens. Easy to move too.
 
awesome list, thanks!

I can save on the veneer (maybe the amps, but still a channel short), lol. going behind an AT wall, so flat black rattle can is all good for a finish... ;)
I will definitely be cheering from the sidelines if you decide to build these bad boys. IMO it's one of the cooler DIY projects you can do because of the high output and accuracy, and maybe in no small part because the real thing is so expensive. :D

I should note that you do need DSP somewhere in the chain because the horn needs a good bit of EQ to have a smooth FR. The real M2 comes with it, but DIYers have derived the settings, you just need some way to apply it. Nothing fancy, like maybe 10-20 bands of PEQ or something.
 
I will definitely be cheering from the sidelines if you decide to build these bad boys. IMO it's one of the cooler DIY projects you can do because of the high output and accuracy, and maybe in no small part because the real thing is so expensive. :D

I should note that you do need DSP somewhere in the chain because the horn needs a good bit of EQ to have a smooth FR. The real M2 comes with it, but DIYers have derived the settings, you just need some way to apply it. Nothing fancy, like maybe 10-20 bands of PEQ or something.
Yes. Exact JBL PEQ is here:
The passive filter is here as well.

MiniDSP Flex is enough to do a stereo pair with the exact filters as JBL, plus a Linkwitz transform. At that point it's filters are all used. If I have my facts straight, several of MiniDSP's models do not have sufficient filters, like the HTx. The Flex Balanced does for sure have all you need. There are several paths to integrate a sub with the Flex Balanced. Since it has a competent ADC, one way is to use the analog input conjunction with an upstream processer/crossover.
 
Yes. Exact JBL PEQ is here:
The passive filter is here as well.

MiniDSP Flex is enough to do a stereo pair with the exact filters as JBL, plus a Linkwitz transform. At that point it's filters are all used. If I have my facts straight, several of MiniDSP's models do not have sufficient filters, like the HTx. The Flex Balanced does for sure have all you need. There are several paths to integrate a sub with the Flex Balanced. Since it has a competent ADC, one way is to use the analog input conjunction with an upstream processer/crossover.

super helpful, thanks...

I'd likely run pre-out from my current AVR for the channels I'm building to the Flex, then to my Outlaw/whatever I replace it with since i'll be a channel short. That would let me keep all my sub programming in the 2x4HD, as I used Multi-Sub Optimizer to work out the filters for each of the 4 subs. REW and some measurements with Audessey off let me calculate and then tune crossover frequency pretty well separately. Said another way, that technique works well enough for my space but could probably be more sophisticated at the expense of time...
 
super helpful, thanks...

I'd likely run pre-out from my current AVR for the channels I'm building to the Flex, then to my Outlaw/whatever I replace it with since i'll be a channel short. That would let me keep all my sub programming in the 2x4HD, as I used Multi-Sub Optimizer to work out the filters for each of the 4 subs. REW and some measurements with Audessey off let me calculate and then tune crossover frequency pretty well separately. Said another way, that technique works well enough for my space but could probably be more sophisticated at the expense of time...
It's a good plan. And you retain your full sub integration capability.
I am way over-spec'ed on amp now. I'm off measuring hiss at millimeter distances, etc.:facepalm: The thing I used a Niles 12-channel install amp in the shop when I first built the prototypes, that amp would work fine for a lifetime if I wasn't obsessive...;)
 
It's a good plan. And you retain your full sub integration capability.
I am way over-spec'ed on amp now. I'm off measuring hiss at millimeter distances, etc.:facepalm: The thing I used a Niles 12-channel install amp in the shop when I first built the prototypes, that amp would work fine for a lifetime if I wasn't obsessive...;)
obsessive? you mean detail oriented... :D

i get it for sure, good info to know actually
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAB
It will effectively replace the output of the port, with way more headroom and performance, and of course no port noises.
I would wager that the M2 port will make no troublesome noises in domestic situations?
 
I would wager that the M2 port will make no troublesome noises in domestic situations?
No velocity /chuffing problems, but ports are problematic for midrange resonances as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAB
I would wager that the M2 port will make no troublesome noises in domestic situations?
Perhaps. Port resonance and turbulence are two things, you are talking about turbulence I think. I am fine with having neither.
And, I don't need the extra output of the port in domestic situations, so sealed is fine.
And the build is so much easier.
Also, the JBL ports for the M2 are not available, they are fancy and measure very well (i.e. well controlled port resonance). You can get them 3D printed, the plans for a copy are available, though I am not sure if the fancy features of their patented port are replicated, and 3D printing isn't cheap.

So I think the wager is off.;)
 
Perhaps. Port resonance and turbulence are two things, you are talking about turbulence I think. I am fine with having neither. +1
And, I don't need the extra output of the port in domestic situations, so sealed is fine. +1
And the build is so much easier. +1
Also, the JBL ports for the M2 are not available, they are fancy and measure very well (i.e. well controlled port resonance). You can get them 3D printed, the plans for a copy are available, though I am not sure if the fancy features of their patented port are replicated, +1 and 3D printing isn't cheap.+1

So I think the wager is off.;)

so... +5? ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: MAB
so... +5? ;)
Yeah, I love it when someone who hasn't built the speaker, and didn't read any of my posts or measurements, challenges me to a bet.;) Here is a comparison of Erin's measurements of the ported 2216Nd using Klippel to my measurements of sealed performance with and without Linkwitz-Transform:
1717685080936.png

The 2216Nd in the ported M2 has 3Hz deeper extension at 3dB down. The difference isn't even due to a natural ported response of a woofer in a box, it is because JBL uses their own bass PEQ:
1717685431079.png

You can see the M2's deviation from typical ported response due to the 21.5 Hz filter. Obviously, JBL figures the extra expense of the ports is worth it to hit a target SPL and extension. And wonder why anyone in a domestic environment would need the ports and the hassle building them.:cool:
 
Yeah, I love it when someone who hasn't built the speaker, and didn't read any of my posts or measurements, challenges me to a bet.;) Here is a comparison of Erin's measurements of the ported 2216Nd using Klippel to my measurements of sealed performance with and without Linkwitz-Transform:
View attachment 373489
The 2216Nd in the ported M2 has 3Hz deeper extension at 3dB down. The difference isn't even due to a natural ported response of a woofer in a box, it is because JBL uses their own bass PEQ:
View attachment 373491
You can see the M2's deviation from typical ported response due to the 21.5 Hz filter. Obviously, JBL figures the extra expense of the ports is worth it to hit a target SPL and extension. And wonder why anyone in a domestic environment would need the ports and the hassle building them.:cool:

brilliant... love this info, thanks!
 
I wanted to post at Parts Express Tech Talk to ask Paul Kittinger for a mass-loaded transmission line (MLTL) design (he has been kind enough to run those for people on the board) for the 2216 or 2216-1, whichever works better. Unfortunately my computer lost my password, I did not want to start over with a new user ID, and I was not planning on a build anytime soon - it was more of academic interest because the DIY M2 seems to be the best price/performance out there. And, OK, I want M2s as an eventual retirement project. I'd prefer a vented box simply because it makes a nice floor-standing speaker and an MLTL might be a worthwhile improvement.
 
Vbs10.2 has excellent response and Polaris, can get loud. Kind of a poor man's genelexlc s360 if you will. I love mine.
 
Yeah, I love it when someone who hasn't built the speaker, and didn't read any of my posts or measurements, challenges me to a bet.;)
Yeah but you didn't take on the bet either. ;)
 
Vbs10.2 has excellent response and Polaris, can get loud. Kind of a poor man's genelexlc s360 if you will. I love mine.
That is a speaker I’d be curious about, I think Matt also designed the previously mentioned htm line…. But I imagine the M2 is a significant upgrade in sound quality…. I wish Matt would do a design targeting 500-1000 in raw components to see what he could do…. Especially an active design. Erin’s review of the HTM-12 and JTR left me saying “meh”, hence the discussion here.
 
That is a speaker I’d be curious about, I think Matt also designed the previously mentioned htm line…. But I imagine the M2 is a significant upgrade in sound quality…. I wish Matt would do a design targeting 500-1000 in raw components to see what he could do…. Especially an active design. Erin’s review of the HTM-12 and JTR left me saying “meh”, hence the discussion here.

I don't think the HTM-12 measures nearly as well as the VBS 10.2, the M2 is for sure better but several times the cost. I'm kind of a lower cost DIY guy so I tend to stick around that territory, but if you look around at drivers, CD's+Horns, etc... it's the same as the rest of the industry where cost doesn't always correlate to quality. I run my VBS 10.2 active atm mostly because I don't want to shell out the money to populate the crossover pcb lol.

I use mine as effectively silly loud monitors for mixing and they certainly accomplish that task. If I had one criticism and this kind of goes for all the horns I've heard, the sound stage width feels narrow. Otherwise they sound like really really loud genelecs to me but I still very much prefer the wider dispersion of other speakers I have.
 
Back
Top Bottom