Page 4 of 21 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 314

Thread: KM2

  1. #46
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti K View Post
    My listening room is basically like small club room.
    Difference is, I do not stand (or jump) but just sitting in the first row.
    Green rectangle is 'the listening' area (have to separate with curtains) and red line is 'the band'. Same time want to keep the clean look. No cahins and metal and scrached front grilles.
    That's why I'm thinking of veneered monsters.
    When there is a usual day, the curtains are hidden and the monsters play easy. The Volume-knob would be as well a part of plan...

    Started the thread for some advise ... have people experiences with SUB18, how they are implemented with M2. If the M2 does not play all the way down - SUB18 does this part - maybe there is no need such of big enclosure for 2216 then ... etc.
    Very cool project!

    I can't speak to the use of SUB18 with the M2s, but I have used a pair of JBL ASB7118 subs (same driver in a slightly different cabinet and tuning) in an actual barn. They were able to fill the place with powerful and dynamic bottom end. I'm sure the addition of the SUB18s will help support your M2s in your large space.

    I agree 100% with your idea of using the heavy curtains to frame out the listening area for more intimate or critical listening. Since the curtains will be invisible to lower frequencies, I think your idea of adding reinforcement here is very valid.


    Widget

  2. #47
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    Very cool project!
    Thanks Widget!

  3. #48
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Robh3606 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    a pair of JBL ASB7118 subs /.../ in an actual barn /.../ were able to fill the place with powerful and dynamic bottom end.
    grumpy gave 18'' measures and Rob and Widget gave me bit more confidence; my 'barn' gets 2269s too.
    Widget's hint ensures me that 2269 may easily fit in smaller encl. as well, ASB7118 seems less than 200ltr. Do not want to go lower from 30Hz, will cut off lower anyway.
    For healthy reasons :-)

    Rob, fellow member 4313 had 476Be in 9800 horns(?) and wrote once - they play so good that has no motivation mess up with 476Mg and M2 WG-s, they just lay on shelf...
    Just curious, have You tried 476Be (or Radian 951Be)? There has to be a logic explanation, it's physics! Be is LIGHTER than ALU and TIGHTER than TITANIUM!
    Maybe just 2451 core does not fit? Phase plug(s), back cup. Or cups damping or...?

    #memberGuido

  4. #49
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    K2 9900 use 476Mg, works up to 15kHz , there 045 takes over
    K2 67000 uses 476Be up to 20kHz , 045 starts somewhere far beyond, after 20k...

    Is anybody in this forum, who listened both of them?

    Because, I think, 67000 is not made just for dumb rich people.
    Be is inside just for marketing reasons (!?) , one of the rarest metal, it costs!
    Then 67000 had also enormous wide lens-lips from massive polished gold, sounds more like a deal for oil-billionaire.

    I know already, I get standard answers the 476 is a completely different anymal, etc.
    But, in my best understanding, fans of Jim's heritage, didn't then nobody look inside?

    Then, new topic: 476
    What is so special in there? Or is it a desecration of holiness to peek inside :-)

  5. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Germany / Hamburg
    Posts
    650
    I´m not an expert on these specific parts you are asking about, but just some thoughts:

    If Im not mistaken the 476 has a copper shorting ring which the 2450/2451 don´t have...

    I like your idea of using 18" subs per sides. But if you need the woofer just to play above aprox. 80hz, why use the 2216? Wouldn´t it make more sense to use a dedicated midwoofer? This should have a higher efficiency, less powercompression, a lighter and even better sounding midrange cone.
    Maybe the 2216 is that well designed, that it is even better sounding in the midrange allthough it is a mid-low-woofer?
    How about the JBL 1400pro, JBL 2217H, JBL 2227, or some high sensitivity 12" ?

  6. #51
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,570
    K2 9900 use 476Mg, works up to 15kHz , there 045 takes over
    If you look at the schematic the 476Mg runs all the way out no low pass. I use them in my passive M2 and they run out past 22k and they are very clean looking on a waterfall. No hint of break-up you would normally see in a typical Ti diaphragm. No tweeter needed and they work great in the M2 waveguide. Unfortunately they are hard to source.

    The only Be drivers I have and use are 435Be and 045Be in my "Array clones".

    Read the white paper the 476 is highlighted in it.

    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...24086-K2-s9900

    Rob
    "I could be arguing in my spare time"

  7. #52
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    10,792

    A 476 Thread Diversion

    Quote Originally Posted by Anti K View Post
    Is anybody in this forum, who listened both of them?
    I have had both in my home. Actually the DD66000s which use the same HF components as the DD67000 that I later upgraded to DD67000 and I had a pair of the K2-S9900 in my home as a demo for a period of time. I actually prefer the top end of both to that of the M2, but that may be a personal bias. I have listened to many different systems using many different technologies. I have heard many that are good and a few that have really impressed me.

    My favorite systems are mostly well designed systems using a 4" compression driver and horn. From JBL I like their systems that use the 476Be and 476Mg, and from Meyer I like their systems that use their own 4" driver with an aluminum diaphragm. Though the TAD 6 1/2" coaxial beryllium cone and dome is pretty darned great too.

    Beryllium is not the flavor of the decade or a bunch of marketing hype, it is the best material to use in a conventional driver, whether it is a cone, dome, or compression driver. Its naturally internally dampened and yet it is super stiff and is crazy light (look at it's atomic number). That said, simply putting a Be diaphragm in a JBL or another driver does not make it the best driver. The 476Be and the 476Mg are great drivers. I would take a 476Mg over most other compression drivers. I would take the 476Be or the TAD TD-4003 over the 476Mg, but that is about it.


    Widget

  8. #53
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Robh3606 View Post
    Read the white paper the 476 is
    http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...24086-K2-s9900
    Rob
    Thanks, Rob.
    The 3D draft is interesting, gives lot hints why 476

    And respect to Your work!

  9. #54
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    I have had both in my home /... /DD66000s /... / K2-S9900
    Then I have a reason to belive You. Interesting, what You say...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    My favorite systems are mostly well designed systems using a 4" compression /... /

    Beryllium is /... / naturally internally dampened and yet it is super stiff and is crazy light
    (look at it's atomic number).

    I would take the 476Be or the TAD TD-4003 over the 476Mg
    Exactly!
    All I need to hear is nicely gathered together in Your post!

    TAD-suggest is a good suggest.
    I excuse it to myself as a temporary solution until I find (or able to purchase) 476Be. Just because a worship to Jim's heritage (as Steve's, as Daimler's etc)
    Last edited by Anti K; 01-31-2021 at 01:40 AM. Reason: TAD

  10. #55
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.db View Post
    I like your idea of using 18" subs per sides.
    /... /
    why use the 2216? Wouldn´t it make more sense to use a dedicated midwoofer /... / 12" ?
    For 3 reasons:
    1) I can
    2) Already have a dedicated 12''. Monitors 4429 have probably one of the best 12'' inside. 4429 is very good. Very, friend just borrowed for reference to mix their new album.
    But they does not makes me goosebumps. They do not make me feel that Matt Belsante (not a fan) or Warhaus stand in front of me.
    3) 4365, 4367, M2. ALL reviews I have read talk about differences on high section (that's why I prefer 4''CD, and Widget just cement it) but NOBODY talked the low part is somewhat lazy or something. 15'' rules.
    And understood; the differential drive is something.
    Last edited by Anti K; 01-31-2021 at 04:47 AM. Reason: type

  11. #56
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.db View Post
    I like your idea of using 18" subs per sides

    why use the 2216? Wouldn´t it make more sense to use a dedicated midwoofer?
    Talking about sound is talking about physics.
    Piston moves the air.

    Piston area, piston movement:

    Two examples.
    1) Piston area S , movement length L.
    2) 1/2 smaller piston -> so, it has to make twice length movement =2L.
    To move same amount of air.


    Now comes in a very exciting discipline like physics!
    Einstein formula: E = mv2
    1/2S piston has to make 2x longer distance in same timewindow (same Hz), it means it has to move itself basically 2 times faster.
    Rise 2X speed takes 4x energy!
    (3X speed takes energy rise 9X!)

    12'' has just 60% of area of 15'' imho
    Math is another funny discipline. 2X bigger area has just 1,4X bigger dia (square root of 2)

    Same story why most experienced people prefer 4'' Dia to smaller siblings...

    Yes, bigger is heavier as well, but in my best undertandigs, Einsteins v2 is a key question comes first...
    And secondly - longer 'walk' brings in problems with motors homogenous area of magn.field.

    ...somehow people who are musicians itself, or sit in studios; at the most sensitive area of human ear there is nothing but 4''CD+15''W . Today. Period.
    And physics explain why.

    PS: not try make a wise-talk here. It's just the way I'm thinking. The physics way.
    PPS: but agree with You Dr.db, reinforcement of big arenas, open air concerts - Vertec stuff - I do not reach there in my head. there are 10'' woofer packed like CD's into additional enclosure, waves are 'kicked out' from narrow slits. This is already beyond my understandings and didn't research it as well...
    Last edited by Anti K; 01-31-2021 at 04:06 AM. Reason: type

  12. #57
    Senior Member pos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    2,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti K View Post
    Period.
    Not quite.

  13. #58
    Senior Member Anti K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by pos View Post
    Not quite.

    yes pos, have to agree, there is always a taste-thing (what is too often not even affected from taste itself, but wife, friends, money, nomoney...)

    But let imagine for a moment:
    A huge stuff-rental company decides advertise himself.
    And gives for young studios an unimagible opportunity: With some rules and pre-advertising they pic up between thousands of them just 10 studios, and then these 10 can choose freely (and make some pre-test-listening) some speaker-stuff for $0/0€ for unlimited time.

    In the 'menu' are M2, Yamaha-stuff, Genelec etc.
    Interesting, what would be the choice(s)?

  14. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Germany / Hamburg
    Posts
    650
    These are some good arguments you have made.

    I have owned the 12" woofer of your 4429, the 1200fe. It is an awesome woofer, for shure. But it is not specific what I had in mind.
    The 1200fe as the 2216 both are very well designed woofers. But both are designed to deliver great mids AND bass.
    Just imagine the same effort was put into a woofer that was designated to the mids only!

    If you want the woofer to produce a decent amount of bass, the q-factor cannot be to low. QTS should be around 0,3... So the magnet strength of the motor cannot be too strong, otherwise you end up with a QTS < 0,2 and the woofer will roll off pretty fast in the bass teritorry.
    What Im trying to say, when you want a woofer to deliver decent bass response you have to compromise in the midrange performance.
    You cannot use a very strong motor...
    You cannot use a light cone...
    Im just wondering, if you won´t use the woofer in the bass region anyway, why would you compromise and stuck with a heavier cone, less sensitive driver in the mids?

    But maybe the 2216 still sounds better in the midrange than the other high sensitivity woofers, as it was specifically designed for studios. The high sensitivity woofers are puplic adress woofers and probably not as sophisticated for sound quality...

    Another example:
    I own TAD 1603 15" woofers and JBL E-145 15" woofers.
    I use the TADs, because they play great mids and lows. But if I had subwoofers, I would use the JBLs as these sound better in the midrange.

    The 1200fe...
    A very very good sounding woofer. But it has a relativly low sensitivity. It is more a hifi-woofer in that respect. It won´t be able to keep up with a 18" woofer spl-wise...

    Comparing 12" to 15"...
    You are correct with your assumptions, no arguments with that!
    But if you use a high sensitivity 12" with a 4" voicecoil crossed above 80hz, it will keep up with the 18" sub very well.
    Using a 15" woofer would be needed if you where to use double 18" woofers...
    With that 80hz crossover or higher, you would reduce cone-movement a lot which further reduces the need for a 15" woofer e.g. more cone area.

  15. #60
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,570
    In case you have not seen this it's a good reference. Might give some ideas and there is quite a bit of good info that you may find useful.

    http://www.audioheritage.org/html/pe...rews-clues.htm

    Looking at the vintage 4 ways the best part of those systems in my mind were the 10" drivers used. With such a large space you could do a Drew's Clues like system or do a close smaller space system and go with a distributed music system as fill if you ever want to use the entire space and not cook the people up front to reach the guys in the back.


    Another example:
    I own TAD 1603 15" woofers and JBL E-145 15" woofers.
    I use the TADs, because they play great mids and lows. But if I had subwoofers, I would use the JBLs as these sound better in the midrange.
    The 2216 is really impressive for it's clarity and dynamics. Especially the clarity. The best woofers I ever owned were my E-145's but they always needed subs. Imagine a driver with the clarity of an E-145 and the reach of 2235's down low. That's what you have in the 2216nd.

    Rob
    "I could be arguing in my spare time"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •