BillFitzmaurice.info

Thought I'd mention that, for no good reason, I am a fan of 8" drivers. I'd love for you to build a pair of OT8's!

Grant Bunter wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:19 pm I reckon you should remove the Jacks from the decision.

I agree.

Hi Grant

I should note that I’m ok with the weight penalty if I’m gaining storage space and or performance.

Thanks Seth
Well I sure do love my DR200s and those just have the beta 8.
I saw one guy in the build threads that put together a pair of Otop8s and T48s ... raves about em. I messaged him to see if he had anything else to say about his set up, but it sure sounds promising. He used the beta 8s as well so I really wonder what bi amped premium drivers would do?
Shoot, now we just need to build them to compare! It’s for the best of the group

J_Dunavin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:51 pm ...I really wonder what bi amped premium drivers would do?

Bi amping will just add complexity and unneeded amp channels to the system, no benefit in doing so... that's what Bill always says anyway. However, I understand the urge to do it anyway. Because, sometimes, we just want to. Won't hurt the sound. Just more setup and kit to haul.

I like the idea of the ultra premium driver option

Ahhh I’m already there. I’m bi amping my DR200s, not that I need to power, I like to turn down the gain on the highs. I know it’s overkill but whatevs

J_Dunavin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:01 pm Ahhh I’m already there. I’m bi amping my DR200s, not that I need to power, I like to turn down the gain on the highs. I know it’s overkill but whatevs

Exactly. What ever tickles your fancy, I say. This is DIY audio after all.

J_Dunavin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:43 pm Ahh I think I like the form factor of the Otop8 better.
Does the two 8s have any advantage over the single 12 in terms of audience coverage?

SPL is SPL, the source doesn't matter. Sensitivity and driver displacement matter. Just don't screw it up like the guy in that OTop 8 thread where he used totally out of spec drivers that weren't even suitable for a ported box, let alone a horn.

Roger that sir!
I’m in the aviation field, doing it right the 1st time is pretty important

Bill Fitzmaurice wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:20 pm

J_Dunavin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:43 pm Ahh I think I like the form factor of the Otop8 better.
Does the two 8s have any advantage over the single 12 in terms of audience coverage?

SPL is SPL, the source doesn't matter. Sensitivity and driver displacement matter. Just don't screw it up like the guy in that OTop 8 thread where he used totally out of spec drivers that weren't even suitable for a ported box, let alone a horn.

Is the off axis coverage between the OT8 & OT12 for all intents and purposes close enough to not be concerned with?

SethRocksYou wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:45 pm

Bill Fitzmaurice wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 5:20 pm

J_Dunavin wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 4:43 pm Ahh I think I like the form factor of the Otop8 better.
Does the two 8s have any advantage over the single 12 in terms of audience coverage?

SPL is SPL, the source doesn't matter. Sensitivity and driver displacement matter. Just don't screw it up like the guy in that OTop 8 thread where he used totally out of spec drivers that weren't even suitable for a ported box, let alone a horn.

Is the off axis coverage between the OT8 & OT12 for all intents and purposes close enough to not be concerned with?

Melded array is melded array.....flat it flat.....CD horn is CD horn. The box in this case won't change that.

Bruce Weldy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:11 pm
Melded array is melded array.....flat it flat.....CD horn is CD horn. The box in this case won't change that.

I get that with the tweeter section. Makes all the sense in the world.

More specifically, the dispersion angle of the mid range. Enclosure width wouldn't matter? I don't know, that's why I ask. Joe's question raised the curiosity for me, if that would change anything one way or another... or not at all. I know driver size in direct radiator tops effects dispersion angle, but I think that may be an effect of the cone angle, or something to that effect. But, again, I don't know for sure.

Hi Bruce

SethRocksYou wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:06 pm

Bruce Weldy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:11 pm
Melded array is melded array.....flat it flat.....CD horn is CD horn. The box in this case won't change that.

I get that with the tweeter section. Makes all the sense in the world.

More specifically, the dispersion angle of the mid range. Enclosure width wouldn't matter? I don't know, that's why I ask. Joe's question raised the curiosity for me, if that would change anything one way or another... or not at all. I know driver size in direct radiator tops effects dispersion angle, but I think that may be an effect of the cone angle, or something to that effect. But, again, I don't know for sure.

Hi Bruce

The lower the frequency, the wider the dispersion. Everything below the tweeter section should be as wide or wider than the tweeters.

SethRocksYou wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:06 pm
Hi Bruce

Howdy Young Fella....

SethRocksYou wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:06 pm More specifically, the dispersion angle of the mid range. Enclosure width wouldn't matter?

It does. The narrower the enclosure the wider the dispersion. This applies down to the frequency where the enclosure width is one wavelength. At that point dispersion is 180 degrees. Below that you lose axial output, because the dispersion is wider than 180 degrees, so this sword has two edges.

Bill Fitzmaurice wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 9:11 pm

SethRocksYou wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:06 pm More specifically, the dispersion angle of the mid range. Enclosure width wouldn't matter?

It does. The narrower the enclosure the wider the dispersion. This applies down to the frequency where the enclosure width is one wavelength. At that point dispersion is 180 degrees. Below that you lose axial output, because the dispersion is wider than 180 degrees, so this sword has two edges.

That's super interesting. Thank you Bill.