November 18, 2019 at 6:44 pm #10372
- I’m considering the idea of building a new 2.1 system for a TV system and I have (4) Dayton PS95’s that is like to use for the sound bar underneath the TV. Right now I’m using those speakers in a ported garage Bluetooth setup, full range with no crossovers. That said, I’ve seen a few builds where these speakers are used in a full range build, but there is a crossover being used. Question is… what is it being used for?
- The planned setup is create a wall mounted soundbar with (2) PS95’s per channel with the use of down firing passive radiators, powered by a Dayton DTA PRO 100. From there I’ll be adding a Dayton LS10 44 in a ported box powered by a Dayton SPA250DSP amp. Thoughts on the setup?
November 18, 2019 at 10:24 pm #10373
What you are referring to is a BSC. It is a baffle step compensation circuit. Basically, you will miss out on bass and midrange, depending on the size of the cabinet depends on the cutoff. I did a video on how to figure out a basic starting point, which may help. If you give us the baffle dimensions and your results, we can double check them.
As far as thoughts on the setup, the only concern I would have is using the LS10-44. That is a dual 4ohm driver, which means you either can run it at 8ohms or 2 ohms. Since the amplifier you are looking at is only capable of 4 ohms or higher, you would have to run that sub at 8ohms. This means you will only get half the wattage out of that amplifier (125w). You might be better off going witht he 10″ HF sub that is nominal 4 ohms.
November 18, 2019 at 10:34 pm #10374
Thanks for the quick replay!!
As I get closer to planning out the soundbar I’ll jump in with specs. That said, if the BSC setup is limiting bass and midrange, what fills in the midrange?
As for the sub, the LS10 44 fit the bill nicely because I’d be able to build an enclosure that fits underneath the couch and away from the curious hands of children. Is there another low profile sub you’d suggest?
November 18, 2019 at 10:46 pm #10375
Or utilizing that same amp, how about using the Wavecor SW280WA03 11” sub instead?<a href=" removed link ” target=”true”>Link
November 18, 2019 at 11:40 pm #10376
I think I did a poor job explaining myself on baffle step correction. once you put a speaker in a box, you’re mid-range and bass will be lower than your trouble. A baffle step compensation circuit compensates for that. Basically it’ll take everything after the point the baffle step ends and attenuates it down in order for you to have a flat frequency response. Without it, what you’ll have is a speaker that lacks mid-range and bass.
That wavecor would definitely work. Not to mention, I haven’t heard a wavecor driver I don’t like.
November 19, 2019 at 11:37 pm #10378
That makes more sense. Appreciate the clarification. I’ll start working on the baffle dimensions and get back to you about the BSC.
Thank you for help.
December 4, 2019 at 12:08 am #10453
Planning on building a single long narrow box, basically a soundbar, that’s using at least two PS95’s per side along with one of either of these speakers paired with a PS95’s:
This will be a sealed enclosure paired with a pair of Daytona 6.5” subwoofers, sealed enclosure, on the other side of the room.
December 4, 2019 at 5:54 pm #10459
Lets look at the Peerless and Tectonic while comparing to the PS95’s specs.
Most basic you’ll need is Impedance, Sensitivity, Qts, Fs and Vas to figure out the best match.
Impedance 8 ohms
Sensitivity 85.56 dB 2.83V/1m
(Fs) 119.8 Hz
(Vas) 0.03 ft.
Impedance 4 ohms
Sensitivity 85.98 dB 2.83V/1m
(Fs) 72 Hz
(Vas) 0.049 ft.³
Impedance 4 ohms
Sensitivity 81 dB 1W/1m
(Fs) 97 Hz
(Vas) 0.035 ft.³
Right off, you’ll notice the woofers are 4 ohm while the PS95 is 8 ohm. We can work with that, but keep it in mind.
Next is Sensitivity. Immediately you’ll see that the Tectonic is ~4.5 -5 dB down from the others. BUT, it is listed at a different spec. 2.83V/1m = 1W at 8 ohms, while 2.83V/1m = 2W at 4 ohms. In order to get 1W at 4 ohms, the voltage would be 2V. Which means the Peerless would go down to about 83 dB +-. Still more than the Tectonic, but not by much.
Now the rest are used in box calcs. Since you want a sealed box (Acoustic Suspension), I took the liberty of running some numbers. Starting with both the target box Q’s set to 0.9 (equal to or greater than the highest Qts in question) for apples to apples comparison, you get:
0.008 Cu.Ft. box at 185.1 Hz
0.149 Cu.Ft. box at 105.2 Hz
If I use the same box size for both based on the Tectonic, I get:
0.149 Cu.Ft. box at Qbox (0.39) 81 Hz
0.149 Cu.Ft. box at Qbox (0.9) 105.2 Hz
If I use the a different Qbox for the Peerless to get it up to a useable level, I get:
0.043 Cu.Ft. box at Qbox (0.5) 102.8 Hz
0.149 Cu.Ft. box at Qbox (0.9) 105.2 Hz
I chose 0.5 because that is about the lowest most designers would go for bass, which would give the tight quick bass normally associated with Jazz, but not overly deep. For reference, a Qbox of 0.7 is considered “flat” while Q’s higher than that start to form a hump in the bass above box resonance. Sometimes that helps, sometimes that makes it sound warm and mushy.
Since you are coupling the soundbar to subs, that’s not to bad. I’ll let you make up your mind on which would be best for your application.
December 4, 2019 at 8:25 pm #10462
Wow! Mind blown on the response. Thank You.
If I’m reading it right, the peerless speakers are more in-tune with what I’m looking for. Ultimately I’m looking to fill in the mid-tones a bit more, steering towards compartmental design where the PS95’s are more high-tone driver while the peerless fills in the mids and the takes care of the lows. Would you agree with that?
What box building software do you recommend? I was going to draw up the sound bar and sub box in sketchUp while using the speaker information to isolate the dimensions.
December 4, 2019 at 11:47 pm #10464
There’s one other thing that should be looked at before making concrete decisions like this, and that would be the graph provided for each driver.
Going with the provided info from PE, you’ll see that all 3 drivers have very similar frequency response graphs in the bass region. What this means is that they should all have somewhat similar output responses. The main reason you would want to put one of those woofers in there would be to have high power handling with better XMAX. So freeing up the PS95s for higher crossover frequency (say 300 to 400 Hz) would give them better transient response and ultimately more clarity in their intended range. Especially if it is to be used like a standard Soundbar with 4.1 channels. Even with 2.1 channels, it would add clarity.
As far as what I use for drawing up the boxes / designs, well, I’m an old school guy who still does that with pencil and paper. I do a lot of drafting with AutoCAD at work, so I relish the time I get to go back to the board and do something by hand. Put it this way, when I started in my job, we didn’t even have a 286 yet. Our specialized computer was a HP with a 12 button keyboard, microcassette and thermal print roll like a cashier’s tape. So I learned to draw with straightedge, circle templates and french curves. For calculations, I have a small cache of MS QUICKBASIC programs I’ve copied / modified / written years ago to blow through these scenarios.
Since I’ve never built a Soundbar, I’d like to hear from some others who have. Who’s up?
December 9, 2019 at 9:52 pm #10488
I’m at a bit of an interesting crossroad and hoping you can help point me in the right direction. Forewarned, I get that it’s a loaded question filled with personal bias. Also, feel free to tell me I’m wrong for considering these options. I’m trying to maximize the use of my tuner for the time being while I continue to build out the system. For the rear channel speakers, I’m likely going to install a pair of Dayton ME650’s down the road, largely due to the room configuration.
Initial thoughts were building a soundbar type enclosure that’s broken up into two different channels with three speakers on each channel (orientation = (1) ps95, (1) TEBM65C20F-4, (1) PS95) and it would hang on the wall underneath the TV. Couple that with a sub and I’ve got a 2.1 system. I’ve calculated the box volume for each channel to be 0.25 ft.³.
The alternative soundbar idea is utilizing the same speakers but break them up to be:
Channel One: (1)PS95, (1) TEBM65C20F-4
Center Channel: (2) PS95
Channel Two: (1)PS95, (1) TEBM65C20F-4
Based on initial calculations I should be able to pull off the external dimensions of 40″x4″x5.5″ with the internal space broken up into 3 compartments vs the 2 mentioned above.
@123toid Any chance you can help me sort out the BSC needed for speakers?
December 10, 2019 at 3:27 am #10490
I’ll definitely help you sort out the BSC when the time comes. A quick question. What are you trying to accomplish with having 1 ps95 and 1 TEBM65C20F-4 on a channel? Are you crossing them over? I think this will help me better know how to answer your question.
December 10, 2019 at 3:41 pm #10491
Let me preface this by saying that I’m only asking these questions to gain a better understanding of your vision. No disrespect or any other feeling intended.
I’m curious as to the choice of combining the 2 different “full range” drivers. Is it trying to get the best of both worlds? I’m not sure of your design intent. Perhaps it is the dispersion.
Major differences are their impedance and Sensitivity. The PS is 8 ohm and ~86 dB while the TEBM is 4 ohm and 81 dB. Here, again, is where the difference in stated rating parameters comes into play. ~86 dB @ 2.83v/1m and 81 dB @ 1w/1m (which works out to about 2v/1m), so theoretically, the 4 ohm should be slightly more loud if measured @ 2.83V across it. How much would have to be verified by measurement.
Wattage is another difference. 10 w vs 30 w (RMS). Proper combinations would make this a very small point to consider.
Looking at the supplied graphs, they have similar looking curves, but they are different. Here I have taken both graphs and matched up their grids as close as I could to compare apples to apples.
I’ll let you guys mull it over and we’ll talk a bit later, see how the thought processes play out.
As to box sizes/calcs, I haven’t had time to really get into it other than to verify that @ 0.25 CuFt, one driver will tune to 101 Hz and the other will tune to ~124 Hz.
I know you’ve already touched on it in an above reply, but the decision on these specific drivers is what I’m looking for. As I said, not to judge or anything, but to better understand where you are truly aiming.
December 10, 2019 at 8:56 pm #10494
My thought in this exercise was to pair the PS95 speakers I have (4) with a pair of speakers that would help fill in the mid to low tones while allowing the PS’s cover the high tones. In fairness, the purchase of the Tech’s was a bit rushed, taking advantage of a Parts-Express sale during Black Friday. That said, I’m beginning to understand this may not have been the best purchase and more so looking for a way out that does not include returning the speakers.
Another option would be running the Tech’s as the center channel speakers while allowing the PS95’s to be the left and right channels. Just a thought.
Apologies for my scatter-brainess. Up until this point my speaker building has been very limited and elementary at best, more so just basic garage speaker setups that include two speakers and zero consideration for crossovers of BSD’s. I’d rather invest time in learning and building rather than just purchasing.
December 10, 2019 at 8:56 pm #10495
December 11, 2019 at 7:17 pm #10499
I got what you are saying. ANd that makes sense. I really wouldn’t mix the drivers unless you plan to work up an entire crossover network for it. And that probably isn’t the best thing to do with full-range drivers like you have. Having said that, you could use the PS95’s on the side and the tech’s for the center. That is probably the best option if you do not want to go full out Ps95’s. If you did want to do PS95’s on the whole thing, you may consider using the tech’s for a small desktop speaker or even a bluetooth speaker or something like that. They look like they would be a good candidate for either of those.
December 11, 2019 at 9:18 pm #10500
I like the idea of moving the tech’s to the center channel and pushing the PS95’s to the left and right channels. On that note, would it still make sense to add BSD’s to each pairing? This is going to be a sealed enclosure with 0.2 ft.³ for the PS95’s and 0.12ft.³ for the tech’s. Though, having said that, because of the two speakers parameters, is the center channel going to over power the left and right channels? Would it just make better sense to purchase another pair of PS95’s?
December 11, 2019 at 9:28 pm #10501
I need to check some stuff when I get home for this reply. So when that happens, I’ll come back and edit this.
Sorry it took so long… (already 2 replies below this)
Since you are building a “soundbar” for the front, I think it’s be best to use the PS95’s (single driver for 8 ohm impedance) for the left and right and use the 2 TEBM’s (in series to make 8 ohm impedance). Done this way, the left and right will have 85.56 dB output while the center will raise to 84 dB. You could use the setup of the Yamaha to finish volume matching the channels.
So yes, I believe you were thinking along the right lines with your assessment earlier. Just know that you may want a supplemental tweeter with the TEBM’s to pull up the high end a bit.
As to the box volumes, if you model one for having BOTH TEBM’s in the same cavity, use the same Qts, Fs, but 2x’s the Vas. And when you model ALL boxes in the soundbar, try to get them tuned as close as you can to the same box frequency. That way, when you add the subs, they’ll be working the same with every channel.
How would I orient the drivers? I would think that I’d take into account the special characteristics of the 2 different drivers and their proximity to each other, along with their job in the overall scheme of use.
The TEBM’s have a wider dispersion than standard drivers (stated in their description) so, in center channel use, I’d leave them pretty much pointing straight ahead. If you add a tweeter to the center channel, put that in the very middle with a TEBM on either side.
The PS95’s, as the left and right front channels should be set as far apart as possible, and maybe even slightly angled outward to help spread the soundstage. It wouldn’t take much, maybe only a few degrees. You’d need to draw something up to scale showing the soundbar placement and the listening position (say, the full couch) to get an idea of what would cover the area best.
To the Yamaha. What I read in the specs is that it is basically a 8 ohm designed amp, capable of driving at 6 ohms. I didn’t see any real mention of 4 ohm loads anywhere, so that is why I suggested the speaker configuration I did (plus it helps to better match output levels).
December 11, 2019 at 9:59 pm #10503
You still would need a BSC on each pair of speakers. If you do not, you will loose a lot of mids. The circuits will be really cheap, so no worries there. Just keep in mind, the PS95’s don’t give a lot of bass. If you want that you will want different drivers or to add a subwoofer (which I thought you mentioned you were doing).
December 11, 2019 at 11:31 pm #10504
My thoughts exactly. Word is the PS95’s are more of a high tone driver and because of that adding a mid tone driver made sense. I just chose incorrectly.
Oh the joys of being quick on the trigger to purchase. 🤦♂️
December 12, 2019 at 6:34 am #10506
December 12, 2019 at 3:40 pm #10508
December 12, 2019 at 3:54 pm #10509
December 14, 2019 at 5:42 am #10513
December 14, 2019 at 6:35 am #10516
I was going to suggest that if they are to be used soley as a center channel, then they are most likely quite good enough since speech is the main objective of that channel. (Beat me to it! 🙂 )
If music were to be a very large part of the soundbar’s life, then I’d audition first to decide if one would be needed. With the PS95s on either side, it may be balanced enough as is. Only you would be able to decide if one was needed in the future.
December 14, 2019 at 2:19 pm #10519
Good to know. If a tweeter is added, how much of an impact do you think it will add?
The main purpose of this “soundbar” will be for TV usage with the occasional weekend ambient music listening while doing work around the house.
What information do you need from me for the BSDs?
December 14, 2019 at 2:24 pm #10520
December 14, 2019 at 3:27 pm #10521
The AMT series seems to be highly regarded among our segment of audio (hobby designer / builder). I’ve never used or heard them, but the graph looks very good, and they seem to fill in for the falling edge of the TEBMs. I don’t have access to my computer at the moment, so I can’t easily compile the graphs the way I did before, at least until later tonight.
Nick ( @123toid ), do you have experience with the AMTs?
Any other members have experience with them as well?
December 15, 2019 at 3:39 am #10522
Well, I was in the process of cleaning up and combining the graphs when I lost power at the computer power outlet. There were 4 graphs up and just about ready. All gone. C’est la vie.
Suffice to say, when I was looking at what the combinations would be, it really looks like you should give the initial build with just the PS95s and the TEBMs a listen before adding anything else. Or at least get some sort of measurement microphone to verify any problems you may or may not notice.
December 16, 2019 at 11:04 pm #10528
Got it. I’ll give it a go. Planning on taking some time off during the holidays and that’s when I’ll begin the build on the “soundbar”. Just need to creat an order for the items needed for the BSD and I’ll be good to go.
I’ve already begun building the dual 6.5” sub enclosure to accompany the soundbar.
December 17, 2019 at 4:43 am #10530
December 17, 2019 at 5:15 am #10531
December 17, 2019 at 5:54 am #10532
December 19, 2019 at 3:24 pm #10541
December 19, 2019 at 3:46 pm #10542
December 19, 2019 at 5:05 pm #10543
Center channel with Tech’s:
4.5” x 10” x 5.5”
Left and right channels with PS’s:
4.5” x 15” x 5.5”
December 20, 2019 at 4:47 am #10546
December 21, 2019 at 12:49 pm #10549
December 21, 2019 at 4:04 pm #10552
December 21, 2019 at 4:51 pm #10553
January 13, 2020 at 6:30 pm #10638
Thought I’d post an update for the living room setup.
The dual 6.5” sub enclosure has been built and currently in use. It’s amazing how two small subs can really fill a room and then some. The sealed enclosure is built out of 12ply 3/4” birch and then stained for protection. Sadly, I’ve already noticed my toddler playing on the speaker as if it’s a drum.
As for the sound bar, construction is finally moving along. Holidays and kids often does not leave time for speaker construction. The enclosure is being built out of 9ply 1/2” birch plywood, with added internal reinforcements. As of right now, the main Skelton/box has been constructed, but it was requested mid build that the box sit flush or at least somewhat flush against the wall which meant the back wall had to moved inset to accommodate the request. Positive bit though, managed to increase the overall length of the enclosure by 4” which in turn helps make up the difference with the back panel moving inset.
Through out the week I won’t be doing much with it, maybe build the BSCs so their ready and waiting for install.
Also wanted to say THANK YOU for all the help. You guys are awesome!
January 14, 2020 at 9:59 am #10641
Man that looks awesome! I really love the look of it. I would love to sit here and say, my toddler has never played any of my subwoofers…but that would be a lie. He may have even pushed in a cone…duh! I am starting to learn the value of covering them 🙂
I can’t wait to see the soundbar!
January 19, 2020 at 4:02 am #10650
January 20, 2020 at 5:07 am #10651
March 24, 2020 at 3:50 am #11014
Well, it’s about time I posted an update. Life and kids got in the way. Overall, the project came out great, other than a few wood finishing issues. Over on the sound front, I’m scratching my head a bit. Why? Because the sound coming out sounds a bit muffled. Not sure whether it’s bc of the tuner (Yamaha RX-V485) or the speakers.
Brand new, purchased from Parts Express. Ran the setup process twice, with supplied tuning mic, but the results were the same each time. I’ve since tweaked with the EQ settings, but still getting the muffled sound. Any Suggestions?
Anything I should be checking for as to whether or not the speakers are damaged or blown? Prior to the PS95’s being installed into this soundbar they were in a ported enclosure and hooked up to a Lepai 269FS. As for the Tech’s, they’re brand new.
March 24, 2020 at 12:01 pm #11015
Muffled, as in the sound is reduced from that driver or set? Or is it that the bass or some other frequency is reduced?
Might be possible one is wired out of phase. You can either check all your wiring, or make up a test file in something like Audacity, where you make a test tone (in the drop down menu) , put it on the left for a few seconds, the right for the same, and then both for the same. Do it in that same order for a number of other target frequencies, running the gamut.
Put your receiver in emulated mode (makes surround out of stereo signals) and play the file. It will be evident pretty quickly if one is out of phase.
What it does is tests each channel for:
1. Does it work?
2. Are they at the same acoustic level?
3. Most importantly, is one out of phase? (When both channels are driven)
If you suspect one of being out of phase, just reverse the leads and see what happens.
Of course you could do the old “battery test”, where you apply a battery to the terminals ( + to +, – to -, on the terminals outside the box) to see if they move in the same direction. That would be about the quickest way.
Keep us informed.
*** In certain situations, the room and seating position may dictate that a driver might need to be out of phase with another, in order that the sound reaching the listener actually be in phase. Not common, but not incredibly rare either. Just food for thought.
March 24, 2020 at 4:38 pm #11016
March 24, 2020 at 4:56 pm #11017
March 24, 2020 at 10:20 pm #11019
If they are in parallel, make sure they are + to + and – to -. If you oriented them terminal to terminal to shorten the length, but went straight across, then one is wire backward. You’d have to cross (“X”) the wires to be in phase. Here’s an example:
March 25, 2020 at 7:51 pm #11020
March 25, 2020 at 8:33 pm #11021Posted by: @jcaryphoto
This is taking into account matching the terminal identifiers or something else?
Yes, making sure the terminals are the same.
Parallel should be Positive (+) to Positive (speakers and amp), and Negative (-) to Negative (speakers and amp).
If you suspect one may be mis-marked, you can always verify by using the battery method and looking at the cone movement. This is also a good test once you have everything wired to verify all drivers in the chain move in the appropriate directions.
My graphic above assumes that the speakers are of identical voice coil polarity. The differing colors are just to illustrate the differences, not necessarily the absolute wiring via color identified polarity.
March 26, 2020 at 4:26 pm #11023
April 9, 2020 at 10:06 pm #11081
All righty. Pretty sure I sorted it out.
In order to establish a baseline, the BSC was eliminated from the circuit so it could be determined whether or not the tuner was the problem. Well, that fixed it. Tunnel sound has gone away and sound sounds normal. Now the question is… where did I go wrong with the BSD?
April 9, 2020 at 11:05 pm #11083
April 10, 2020 at 8:21 am #11087uncolaMember
also make sure your receiver /tuner isn’t applying audyssey or other automatic room correction or internal crossovers to them
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.