›
Please review the site Rules, Terms of Service, and Privacy Policy at your convenience. Rules, TOS, Privacy
Get familiar with the reaction system: Introducing the Reaction System

Center Channel Design

jhollanderjhollander
in DIY
I need to build another center channel as friends and family keep taking mine. So as long as we are asking opinions about designs, which one do you like?  I like to build matching mains as long as I'm cutting wood.  The front baffle is 5" x 19"




 John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
«1

Comments

  • PWRRYDPWRRYD
    A
  • WolfWolf
    Yeah- A.

    InDIYana Event Website

  • BrannigansLawBrannigansLaw
    C or A
  • ani_101ani_101
    I like the B, asymmetrically symmetrical!
  • ani_101ani_101
    Hey John, can you post the measuring criteria and XO considerations for the Center vs the Mains. would be good to know how the same speaker would behave in two orientation. My MTM is not symmetric on the top and bottom... :s
  • 4thtry4thtry
    A or B, because the port would then be symmetric, left to right.  Do you think this would be audible?  Not sure it would be.
  • KornbreadKornbread
    a
  • 6thplanet6thplanet
    B....with a hint of A.
  • jhollanderjhollander
    With respect to symmetry, the thought with the single port was to place it the same distance from the driver as the edge of the box.  I would expect some minor differences in the off axis. 
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • jhollanderjhollander
    My measurement process for the center channel will be to measure the assembled speaker in my TV stand at a distance of 30 inches, and gate out any reflections.  I will compare this to the stand measured and see if I can create a simple x-o with only inductor and padding changes between the two designs.

    For the center channel design I'm targeting a second order LR with a low (1,500 Hz) x-o point.  With my test x-os I will measure off axis to see what changes and then change my x-o point and slopes.

    I will treat the MTM as a measure as 1 woofer and use actual measurements to look for problems off axis.  I'm contemplating using the 3.5 inch Tectonic drivers so I don't see any value separating woofers and using PCD to look off axis.

    That said, in the past I have dummied in driver parameters in PCD and tested my x-os off axis with PCD.  I think you can get a good feel if your x-o is going to put a dip in the response.
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • GowaGowa
    A
  • JasonPJasonP

    A!

    = Howard Stark: "This is the key to the future. I'm limited by the technology of my time, but one day you'll figure this out."
  • 4thtry4thtry

    How about version "E", with the two thin slot port exists located on the rear of the cabinet?

  • jhollanderjhollander

    Rear of the speaker ports are a no go for mounting the speaker in TV cabinets

     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • Silver1omoSilver1omo

    A for center, D for LR.

  • DanPDanP

    @Silver1omo said:
    A for center, D for LR.

    Same

  • tajanestajanes

    what Silver1omo and DanP said...

  • ThumperTomThumperTom

    A or B, option E would put two small ports under the tweeter and between the tweeter and woofers.

  • NeisNeis

    I'm with those guys^^^. A center, D for LR.

  • jhollanderjhollander

    I think the challenge is picking one to do both. The stand for placing on a stand is also a design element.

    I'm contemplating using my least favorite Dayton woofer series the DSA115-8. This is kind of the last chance for this series, I can only be disappointed so many times...

    Nicholas_23PWRRYD
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • ani_101ani_101

    That's a lot of woofers to use for a woofer that's not a top pick.

  • jhollanderjhollander

    Yes, but I have two, they model very well, and I haven't spent time listening to them. It took me several weeks to develop a dislike for the DSA175 and DSA135, so I'm hopeful these can go the distance...

     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • jhollanderjhollander

    Actual progress


    JasonPsquamishdrockenrhodesani_1016thplanethifisideThumperTomGowa4thtry
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • JasonPJasonP

    So to pick your brain, and I know you have had experience across at least two of these. How would you compare the Dayton DSA, DS, and RS drivers you've heard? I have only heard one DSA (it sounded ok in JR's build) and several DS due to KennyK, and I've used more than one RS myself. Myself I think perhaps the line is de-volving? RS > DS > DSA. I have no data to back that up though.

    Besides that loaded question, build work looks stunning!

    = Howard Stark: "This is the key to the future. I'm limited by the technology of my time, but one day you'll figure this out."
  • jhollanderjhollander

    Might as well throw in the DA series too. I keep trying to like the DS and DSA series. I don't think I have comparable distortion measurements, but it must be the DS and DSA breakup that is bothering me. I don't like them compared to the RS series. I lean more to liking the DSA over the DS. I've only heard the DAs in multiples and thought they were a decent value.

    I don't see why PE makes all of these. There's not enough separation in price or sound to be meaningful in my opinion.

    As I mentioned above this is the last shot with the DSA series. I'm probably becoming cynical in my old age, but like others here I'm gravitating toward more expensive woofers.

    JasonP
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • jhollanderjhollander

    Between house projects I get to work on these. I'm happy with the baffle. The surface mount DSA frame is a bonus. The DSA115s have very tight rear/ under cone venting. My back up are RS100s, but they would not look good surface mounted.

    Some glare on the last pic


    JasonPsquamishdroc6thplanetGowa4thtry
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • squamishdrocsquamishdroc

    @jhollander said:
    Might as well throw in the DA series too. I keep trying to like the DS and DSA series. I don't think I have comparable distortion measurements, but it must be the DS and DSA breakup that is bothering me. I don't like them compared to the RS series. I lean more to liking the DSA over the DS. I've only heard the DAs in multiples and thought they were a decent value.

    I don't see why PE makes all of these. There's not enough separation in price or sound to be meaningful in my opinion.

    As I mentioned above this is the last shot with the DSA series. I'm probably becoming cynical in my old age, but like others here I'm gravitating toward more expensive woofers.

    I had experimented with the DSA driver frames a few months back - I put a bunch of sound deadening material on the baskets and it made a difference in the driver distortion sweeps. Might be worth a try if you can get some sound deadener.

  • jhollanderjhollander

    Spent 3 days on this. Mostly on the mains then the center channel. I'm tired of lumpy responses. Anyway the two DSA115 sound pretty good with the RST28A.

    The long narrow baffle doesn't translate well going from vertical to horizontal. I ended up remeasuring with a dummy cardboard entertainment center. This worked well for the off axis measurements. Both x-os ended up being LR4s at 1,500 hz.

    This is the vertical mains 0 to 30

    Test setup

    6thplanetDanPGowasquamishdroc4thtry
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • jhollanderjhollander

    Tiny .01 mh inductor

    squamishdroc4thtry
     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
  • jhollanderjhollander

    Side note, the RST28A seemed like it had less sensitivity than I would have expected. I felt it ran 2 dB less than advertised

     John H, btw forum has decided I don't get emails
Sign In or Register to comment.