Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

drdna wrote:

I would not restrict myself to the idea that things need to be a certain way or a certain configuration of the drivers or ports based on theory alone. I think it is important to ask what is interesting about the sound that the new speaker introduces into the system and how it accomplishes this, then focus on refining this in the approach to the new mini monitors. Adrian

Well, it is not about the “ideas that things need to be a certain way but or a certain configuration of the drivers”. The Macondo frame mounted version and free-standing version would be different as the height of the tweeter much be different. If it mounted in frame then the tweeter shell be at the height of the Macondo’s tweeter and the dimensions are very firm and very strict. I would have much more liberty if it would be a free-stating version. Another problem that is in free-stating version some postulates that I accepted for MiniMe’s idea (like use 4” drivers) shell not be necessary rule.

From a different perspective you are right and if I am interested in the Sound of the speakers then why should I have those artificial boundaries. Well, here is where I thing the problem lies: I am interested about the sound of this thing but I am not sure if I go for “refining” and I do not really need a refine monitor. I mean I would like it to be better but I do not want to spend efforts, time and acquire knowledge to make it better.  I am OK to conceptualize the things, found the interesting drivers, outsource the building and then just to listen the results, perhaps playing a bit with posts and crossovers. I really do not want to do anything else and if I need better sound then from the MiniMe monitor then I just turn the Big Macondo on.

CO wrote:

I agree with Adrian. Dont think too much and set the speakers up and start changing from there, you know its going to change again anyway.. In that light it might be even better to start with a standard mdf cabinet to experiment with port configurations...

Yes, Collin, you are right and this is right way to do the things but I am, not going there- I will have just one shot and it will be it. I am not in the business of DIY speakers self-amusement and I do not see myself making a second MiniMe run. If the adjustable port idea will not work then I juts rise the port’s resonance frequency until it will be good and it will be it.

CO wrote:

You dont need these but you know its fun to do and a new possibility to learn from it. Its an sonic itch.

Yes, I agree there is some fun in it and I am very much would like to hear how those unique 4” woofers of mine would sound in an array of 4 drivers.

CO wrote:

What is the reason for placing them so close to the main system, also for injection ? Otherwise a completely different location could be more beneficial / educating since were not playing with horns here.

There are few reasons. If it will be a standalone version then it will be most likely 5X9X42. As you can see the 5” is very small frontal footprint and it is how I would like to have it. The Macondo’s upper bass channels are macro-imbedded into the hot spots of the room:

http://www.romythecat.com/LatestPosts.aspx?ThreadID=4421

...and it is the same location what I would like to put my MiniMe if they are standalone monitors. I run currently a single left-channel monitor from the hot spot and it files the whole room very beautifully. However, staging there the monitor need to be very small, thin and not obtrusive for Macondo own sound.

The idea that I have at the top of my head are like this: it is 5X9X42-43 in TMMMM configuration with one port at the bottom. It will be adjustable legs at the bottom to lift the port from the floor and to moderate the port “external loading” (I have no idea if it “works” I think it shell). So, I see nothing overly exiting about this idea, there are zillion speakers like this out there. Might will have “interesting drivers” and 5X9 (9 being a dept) footprint. Will the speaker “collapse” then it plays serious music (like all other small speakers do), will it compress, will it have any tone, will it distort at high volume and many other “ifs” – I have no idea. Generally, if it were a freestanding (and I slowly move toward this notion) then I would like to have a third channel- right under the RAAL 70-20RX tweeter I would like to have 4” MF driver. I would like to have something of tonal quality of JBL LE8 only 4” diameter and with sensitively of 95-98dB. I do not mind if it was an expensive driver. I presume that I might use this driver from 300-800Hz to 3000-5000K – a very good range for a good MF. Oliver, if you read it, did Görlich make 4-inchers? Does Scanspek has MF 4-inchers drivers with SD-1 motors that more then 89dB sensitively? I have no knowledge about MF 4-inchers if somebody have an idea feel free to share some leads…

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site