The Master Plan! (Rip Evolves into the 21st Century)

[Rip Van Woofer]

The mighty work of getting my system up to date, and making it rival the best on the cheap, has begun!

After buying the cheapo Pioneer DV563-A and finding it good, I sold my aging but still hoity-toity Arcam Alpha 8 CDP on eBay for a good price. Plus, my wife and I have been cleaning out the basement and I have unloaded several tchochkies gifted to me over the years that people apparently find "collectable". God, I love eBay.

So, I just bought myself another little Christmas present: a new-in-the-box-full-warranty (not refurb!) HK DPR-1001 7.1 receiver on eBay (hope it didn't fall off the back of a truck!) to serve as the center of my eventual multichannel system. I decided I liked the compact form factor since I will eventually be using it solely as a prepro.

Here's the Master Plan for my 5.1 music only system, subject to revision of course:

<b>Phase 1:</b> Install HK reciever, build diplole subwoofer according to Linkwitz's "Phoenix" design using two 12" Peerless XLS drivers. Power my current two main speakers with the HK's amps and drive the sub with my Adcom power amp (one channel per driver). Connect sub and amp to HK's sub output. I'll use the HK's Zone 2 feature to drive the background music Rat Shack in-wall speakers in our living room.

<b>Phase 2:</b> Build three (L, R, and C) biamped and upgraded versions of my current open-baffle dipole speakers, and active crossovers for each. Power each with DIY amps from Rod Ellott's plans and PCBs (I already have PCBs and most of the parts for four channels x 100 watts, design P3A). Tentative drivers: Peerless 850490 HDS 8" woofers, Seas 27TDC tweets. Amps to be integrated into the speaker stands. Build two temporary single-driver "ambience" rear speakers.

<b>Phase 3:</b> Build my "Audio Fortress of Solitude" in the basement, an acoustically isolated and optimized room of about 13' x 20' x 7.5'. Build rear speakers identical to fronts. Maybe build another dipole sub and associated amps.

Building the room may occur concurrently with the first "Phases" bit by bit, as time, budget, and wifely indulgence will allow. It will mostly be a DIY project, except for the AC wiring. I don't mess with things I don't understand that can kill me!

You can see my current system (pre-DV563-A) in this thread.

Stay tuned! Bwah-ha-ha-ha-haaaa!!

 

[Az B]

Sounds like a great plan, if a little lofty.

Be sure to take lots of pictures and keep us informed. This sounds pretty cool.

 

[surveyor]

The mighty work of getting my system up to date, and making it rival the best on the cheap, has begun!

After buying the cheapo Pioneer DV563-A and finding it good, I sold my aging but still hoity-toity Arcam Alpha 8 CDP on eBay for a good price. Plus, my wife and I have been cleaning out the basement and I have unloaded several tchochkies gifted to me over the years that people apparently find "collectable". God, I love eBay.

So, I just bought myself another little Christmas present: a new-in-the-box-full-warranty (not refurb!) HK DPR-1001 7.1 receiver on eBay (hope it didn't fall off the back of a truck!) to serve as the center of my eventual multichannel system. I decided I liked the compact form factor since I will eventually be using it solely as a prepro.

Here's the Master Plan for my 5.1 music only system, subject to revision of course:

<b>Phase 1:</b> Install HK reciever, build diplole subwoofer according to Linkwitz's "Phoenix" design using two 12" Peerless XLS drivers. Power my current two main speakers with the HK's amps and drive the sub with my Adcom power amp (one channel per driver). Connect sub and amp to HK's sub output. I'll use the HK's Zone 2 feature to drive the background music Rat Shack in-wall speakers in our living room.

<b>Phase 2:</b> Build three (L, R, and C) biamped and upgraded versions of my current open-baffle dipole speakers, and active crossovers for each. Power each with DIY amps from Rod Ellott's plans and PCBs (I already have PCBs and most of the parts for four channels x 100 watts, design P3A). Tentative drivers: Peerless 850490 HDS 8" woofers, Seas 27TDC tweets. Amps to be integrated into the speaker stands. Build two temporary single-driver "ambience" rear speakers.

<b>Phase 3:</b> Build my "Audio Fortress of Solitude" in the basement, an acoustically isolated and optimized room of about 13' x 20' x 7.5'. Build rear speakers identical to fronts. Maybe build another dipole sub and associated amps.

Building the room may occur concurrently with the first "Phases" bit by bit, as time, budget, and wifely indulgence will allow. It will mostly be a DIY project, except for the AC wiring. I don't mess with things I don't understand that can kill me!

You can see my current system (pre-DV563-A) in this thread.

Stay tuned! Bwah-ha-ha-ha-haaaa!!

But, but your not going to do the air brush thing to a HK are you Rip???

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Sounds like a great plan, if a little lofty.

To be honest, I am less than confident about building the room!

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Rip, I would really, really reconsider all the biamping. In all my years I have not found it to be worth the cost and you will be in level balancing hell. My god it is hard enough to correctly balance a sub to the mains and you want to do it to every driver in the system? I would really think about putting that money into some room treatment which will make the biggest difference in your system. (I will have an article in the next month or so on my room treating adventures.) Remember, when you set your A/V receivers speaker settings to small and route the bass to the sub, your are biamping. Having a sub that goes below 25hz powered with a quality amp combined with well designed fronts, center, rears and a treated room will put you in audio nirvana I promise Rip If after you have done all that and you are still not happy, then move on to biamping everything, but doubt by that time you will even want too.

 

[Az B]

I disagree about the biamping. Ok, partially. The room treatments should be done first.

But level matching hell? It took me less time to level match my biamped mains to the rest of the system than it took to do any other part of the conversion. Basically, in a 2 way bimamped system you simply set the level for each driver as if they were an independent speaker, except 3db lower than the goal total. When the drivers are summed, the output of both will be 3db higher, so they will be balanced with the rest of the system. And it's easy enough to double check the totalled output after everything else is done. It's really no more difficult that adding a couple more speakers to the setup.

Long story short, I would never go back to passive. It's worth the effort.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

But, but your not going to do the air brush thing to a HK are you Rip???

Well, since the HK is probably silver (did they make all-black versions?) I won't need to grab the silver spray paint. But hmmm....black lacquer speaker cabinets with orange flames....

 

[Az B]

Like these?

http://www.import-performance-parts.com/flames_graphics.html

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Az, we will have to agree to disagree about the level matching thing. Been there and done it. The only way you could ever hope to achieve a balanced system by biamping would be to use all matching amps and an RTA to check all frequency levels. Without that, you are shooting in the dark. Setting each driver with pink noise or a tone will just not be accurate. If amps are not matched, then a whole new set of issues comes into play. Of course one should use an RTA on a passive system as well. I can guarantee that in abx testing you would never be able to hear the difference between a biamped system and a well designed passive one. So in that case, it is just not worth the cost for the extra amps and effort to set it up correctly. Biamping beyond cutting the bass to your fronts, center and surrounds is just a waste, there is no benefit to sound quality if the passive xovers, speakers and amps are all well designed. The purpose for biamping is to gain some headroom and avoid phasing issues with passive xovers. This may have been an issue 20 years ago but with the quality of drivers today it is generally not. Once you have cut the bass from your main amps, you have gained all the headroom that is needed. The notion that an amp will sound better driving only a tweeter instead of a tweeter and a mid is ridiculous and I doubt anyone could offer any proof either sonically or electronically on this. Gene feel free to chime in on this anytime

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Jeff, we have to agree to disagree too. Basically, I've been reading about the benefits of active x-overs from people like Rod Elliott and Siegfried Linkwitz, and just have to try it for myself. And I'm a glutton for punishment!

I will be using identical DIY amps for the tweet and midbass/midrange drivers in the two-way satellites. If I decide to build Linkwitz's active x-overs with his PCB and documentation level matching (and time aligning) the two drivers should be fairly easy with the proper instrumentation (which I have or will borrow/acquire).

Hey, if nothing else I'll have bragging rights!

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Rip, remember that just because something might be able to be measured does not mean or translate to an audible difference. I know you know this of course. IMHO I think biamping to the tweeter level approaches if not surpasses audio snobbery. Myself I would rather put the extra effort into treating the room where the biggest difference will be noticed, but hey it's your money

 

[jeffsg4mac]

hmmm, taken directly from Rod Rod Elliotts page. " Generally speaking, the mid to high section needs to be retained since a typical biamp setup will only eliminate the bass to mid+high network.* These sections are nearly always completely separate networks, although it may not seem like it when you first have a look at the board." So he agrees with me

 

[Mudcat]

Hey, if nothing else I'll have bragging rights!

Until then, do I?

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2380

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Until then, do I?

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2380

Yow! OK, but I'm not building a home recording studio as part of my system...

Of course, how do we know you didn't just Photoshop that pic?

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

Jeff, you make some good points. I'm totally with you on the room (see "Phase 3"). I've done about all I can reasonably do with my current room's limitations. Only place to go is to a bigger, dedicated room.

Audio snobbery, you say? Mea culpa! That's part of it to be sure. Hey, I can't be a hardnosed objectivist all the time! Sure, part of it is just because I think it might be cool and...well, I just wanna, dang it! Heck, with the powered subs I'll in effect have a tri-amped system! Oooooh!

Hovever, Rod Elliot's point seems to be that if you already have a three-way speaker with a passive network and wish to biamp it (not tri amp it)it is simply more practical to build the active network between the woofer and mid. He doesn't imply that an active network between the mid and tweet is a waste. And Linkwitz is clear that he thinks active is the way to go all around if you're seeking ultimate performance, hang the cost or complexity.

Of course I realize that many superb speakers have been built with passive crossovers.

But I just hafta find out for myself!

Still, I have thought it might be interesting to do a blind (as much as possible in a home environment) A/B test between a passive and active version of the same speakers with all else being equal - same drivers, x-over slopes and filter alignments. But I don't have the technical mojo to do it. Specifically, I coudn't design a passive x-over network from the ground up to match the active one I'll be building. From the standpoint of DIY it seems to be easier to build and adjust active networks. I would like to see if such tests have been done and published. Anybody know of any?

However, maybe I could breadboard a temporary active network for one of my current passive speakers to match their existing passive crossover (Linkwitz-Riley 3rd order at about 2.6k, I think...need to double check, tho) and compare the two...hmm...wonder if the Southeast Mich. Woofer and Tweeter Marching Society would be interested?

A further note about the drivers: I'm hearing from an experienced builder in the DIY dipole community (yes, there is such a thing!) that the new Parts Express "Reference Series" woofers are worth consideration. The 8 inchers are only $45 ea!

I did some quick back of the envelope calculations: with the drivers I'm considering, and DIY active crossovers, including parts and materials I'll have a fully active 5.1 speaker system of very high performance for about $1300!* And I figure about another $125 per satellite speaker for the DIY amps if I shop well for parts. I already got the transistors for one two channel amp free as samples from OnSemi!

----

*Never mind what it is costing me in tools and test equipment and software! But I did get an old but servicable dual trace Tektronix 'scope free!

 

[Mudcat]

I got two Behringer CX-3400 crossovers that I'm not using anymore. 3-way stereo/4-way mono. Low hours (less than 40). Still have the boxes and manuals. Yours if you want/need. Reasonable cost plus shipping.

 

[annunaki]

Rip,

I am trying full active quad amping (tweeter, mid-range, mid-bass, subwoofer)in my car. I have heard many good things about it. Hopefully it will be worth the time and investment $1,896 of used and employee accomodation pieces. If some of it were new, and at retail, the equipment is worth $5228. That is without cables, wiring, enclosures or installation. All of which I am doing. I will probably even post some pictures once I begin the operation.

Anyway, I know where you are coming from on this. Sometimes you just have to give in and go for it. On the active vs. passive issue that is.

 

[Rip Van Woofer]

The HK receiver arrived yesterday. Yow! You young'uns will snicker no doubt, but the transition from a 30+ year old Dynaco preamp to this monster is like going from a model T to an X-wing fighter! Adjusting the volume without having to get my lazy butt out of the seat...what a concept! Hey, my handle isn't a pun on Rip Van Winkle for nothing.

Seriously, one nice feature of the remote is how easy it was to config it to work with my Pioneer DV-563A.

Looks so nice I won't have to airbrush flames on the sides!

I don't think it mixes drinks...but maybe I just haven't found that feature in the manual yet... But I will have to buy or build a phono preamp for my TT and old vinyl. A small price to pay for progress!

Because I have a line-level passive EQ circuit to correct for my speakers' dipole bass roll-off I'm running my speakers thru the Adcom power amp via the HKs preouts for now.

I'm still only in two channel stereo of course. But that will change.

Next step: DIY dipole powered sub.

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Rip, does that HK have main amp ins? Some HK's do or did. If so you can put the eq circuit in between, but you knew that right?

Never mind, just looked at all the new HK's. They dont have them anymore. Not sure who's would. Maybe NAD

 

[jeffsg4mac]

Hmm, Rip you should have bought an NAD, they do have them