Different M500 Maestro Series

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

September 27th, 2007, 04:27 PM
bfish

Thanks Todd, I thought I remembered Bill saying the same several years ago, but the more I thought about it, the less sure I was.

Fishing was just so-so, multi cold fronts and sporadic power generation made it tough, but I brought home a nice mess anyway. Now if I could only access my kitchen for its' intended purpose....

AbG, your horn looks like a 60 to me also. If you have a carpenters square, insert the corner in the mouth, if it's not a near fit with the final flares of the wide dimension, it's a 60.

The "pad" I refered to is whatever method is used in the XO to attenuate the H.E. HF to match the M.E. LF in the M500. Using that XO on your 98X4 will result in over-attenuated HF.

The recommended XO frequency for the 98X4 was likely chosen at the point which gives the nearest match of LF/HF directivity. Crossing below that point will give a much wider and less balanced polar response in the most important range.

For a ready-made Altec XO, one of the N1200s would be better that the M500, allowing better range of HF atten., and a more appropriate XO point. (Not just saying that because I want your M500 XO, a single's little/no help). Biamping is still the best by far. Until you get a pair though, passive would be the most cost-effective.

I remember some time ago, a member bought one 9864 and one 9894 on eBay. Might be worth tracking down to see if he'd sell one. Also, there's a possibilty of a stray still existing somewhere in AlPro's inventory. I think most Engines ended up flown in HOW apps.

To be truly fullrange though, they still need a sub and VHF. Just something to consider if planning purchases. No matter what you do, you'll likely not see the same cost-effectiveness of this purchase. http://www.hostboard.com/forums/
September 28th, 2007, 02:46 PM
Audio_by_Goodwill

Quote:

Originally posted by Todd W. White:
The 60-degree horn mouth is pretty much square. The 90-degree horn is more rectangular.

Mine is square, so it must be the 60..... so I have a 9864.

Quote:

Bill designed these - they were his idea, and belong to him. He still makes them, but the horns are hard to find.

I wondered if Bill could build these. I would think the frame would be completely different on the back side from all the other drivers.

Quote:

Although, he IS working on a 12-inch version for home use, replete with a newly designed cabinet.... http://www.hostboard.com/forums/

Any idea when it will be ready? How will it be marketed?

Quote:

[ September 26, 2007 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Todd W. White ]

Any chance we could be allowed to do that? Not having an edit feature is kind of a pain.
September 28th, 2007, 05:29 PM
Old Guy

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Audio_by_Goodwill:
What makes Biamping the best? I can see it having merits for a pro-audio installation, but for the home too? Elctronic XO's have a pretty steep slope, I believe.... can't that be duplicated with a passive? ....or is that not the issue? I think I've read of 18db/octave passive, although, I don't think I've ever heard of a 24.

Passive crossovers have inherent issues. They can be minimized. Lossy components, phase issues, just to start.

Where did you hear electronic xo's all have steep slopes? .

The DCX which is pretty cheap has 6,12.24,and 48 selectable.

to be fair I did lood at the $109 MSRP Behringer and it does have 24 db slopes...but that's a $79 over the counter item. Amazing for $79, but if you can afford something better..eveen a step up at Behringer gets you 3 way stereo and delays, still 24 db though. those are primarily SR units. @4 protects HF drivers better, but in some case may not "sum" properly.

That's why I like the DCX. that amount of control was impossible at any price not long ago.
September 28th, 2007, 06:20 PM
bfish

Blue cats, from 4-14 lbs. Directly below Lock & Dam 14 on the Arkansas River. Caught a 70 lb blue there years ago...on a Zebco!

On MR horns, the throat slot is vertical, so perpendicular to the slot should be 60 degrees. Just curious, what material is that horn of?

N1209 is 1200, N1285 is switchable 500/800/1200. Looks like the 1285 might be more appropriate, more versatile to have around too. I don't have either, or I'd sure offer to swap. Not in any hurry for M500 XOs, just another thing I have most of the parts for. Kinda silly really, eBayers part 'em out, I put 'em back together when the $ are right.

The biamp/passive XO thing can become a huge debate. I prefer the end result of biamping, and so did Altec, where the 98X4s are concerned anyway. Once you have the amps and an active XO or DSP, you can use them with most anything, not so with purpose-built passives. Most folks that biamp never go back...

If your Pioneer tweets are the old Pioneer/Fukuin PT series, they're very nice tweets. Not sure how well they'd like going down to ~7kHz though, memory says they crossed a little higher. They won't near reach the Engine's 130dB capability either, but you probably won't either...
September 29th, 2007, 03:24 AM
Audio_by_Goodwill

[quote]Originally posted by bfish:
Fishing was just so-so, multi cold fronts and sporadic power generation made it tough, but I brought home a nice mess anyway. Now if I could only access my kitchen for its' intended purpose....

What did you catch? Bass? Catfish? Blue Gill?

Quote:

AbG, your horn looks like a 60 to me also. If you have a carpenters square, insert the corner in the mouth, if it's not a near fit with the final flares of the wide dimension, it's a 60.

So it's the final flares...... I wasn't sure if it was that easy, and couldn't think of an easy way to do a quick measurement to check different angles. The carpenters square doesn't fit.... looks like the 60 degree pair of sides isn't the one I was expecting.

Quote:

The "pad" I refered to is whatever method is used in the XO to attenuate the H.E. HF to match the M.E. LF in the M500. Using that XO on your 98X4 will result in over-attenuated HF.

Ok gotcha

Quote:

The recommended XO frequency for the 98X4 was likely chosen at the point which gives the nearest match of LF/HF directivity. Crossing below that point will give a much wider and less balanced polar response in the most important range.

For a ready-made Altec XO, one of the N1200s would be better that the M500, allowing better range of HF atten., and a more appropriate XO point.

Should I assume the N1200 has a 1200hz crossover point?

Quote:

(Not just saying that because I want your M500 XO, a single's little/no help).

That's silly, of course it helps.... you just need to find a single XO twice :-) I figured we'd work something out as soon as I can figure out what I'd like to use in it's place.

Quote:

Biamping is still the best by far. Until you get a pair though, passive would be the most cost-effective.

What makes Biamping the best? I can see it having merits for a pro-audio installation, but for the home too? Elctronic XO's have a pretty steep slope, I believe.... can't that be duplicated with a passive? ....or is that not the issue? I think I've read of 18db/octave passive, although, I don't think I've ever heard of a 24.

Quote:

I remember some time ago, a member bought one 9864 and one 9894 on eBay. Might be worth tracking down to see if he'd sell one. Also, there's a possibilty of a stray still existing somewhere in AlPro's inventory. I think most Engines ended up flown in HOW apps.

I'll search again, but I didn't find a whole lot during a search last time.

Quote:

To be truly fullrange though, they still need a sub and VHF. Just something to consider if planning purchases. No matter what you do, you'll likely not see the same cost-effectiveness of this purchase. http://www.hostboard.com/forums/

The bass isn't too bad. Some of my CD's seem to have plenty, others don't. I assume it's the way they're being mastered nowdays. Still, bass isn't my first concern. I have noticed the lack of high frequencies. I do have a pair of Pioneer super tweeters that remind me of very little Altec multicells, that I might try.
October 1st, 2007, 04:07 AM
Audio_by_Goodwill

Quote:

Originally posted by bfish:
[QB]Blue cats, from 4-14 lbs. Directly below Lock & Dam 14 on the Arkansas River. Caught a 70 lb blue there years ago...on a Zebco!

70lbs! That's not a fish, that's a whale!

Quote:

On MR horns, the throat slot is vertical, so perpendicular to the slot should be 60 degrees. Just curious, what material is that horn of?

Fiberglass

Quote:

The biamp/passive XO thing can become a huge debate. I prefer the end result of biamping, and so did Altec, where the 98X4s are concerned anyway. Once you have the amps and an active XO or DSP, you can use them with most anything, not so with purpose-built passives. Most folks that biamp never go back...

I guess, I don't understand. If the slope is the same, and the crossover frequency is the same, what's the differance?

Quote:

If your Pioneer tweets are the old Pioneer/Fukuin PT series, they're very nice tweets. Not sure how well they'd like going down to ~7kHz though, memory says they crossed a little higher. They won't near reach the Engine's 130dB capability either, but you probably won't either...

They are a PT-406F from a pair of CS-88a's that I bought cheap because a woofer was blown and the cabinets were toast.

Would I really need to crossover at only 7khz?
October 1st, 2007, 03:25 PM
Audio_by_Goodwill

Quote:

Originally posted by Old Guy:
Where did you hear electronic xo's all have steep slopes?.

When electronic XO's are spoken about, usually I hear steep slopes mentioned. I thought a steep slope would be desired. Is that not the case?
October 1st, 2007, 04:09 PM
bfish

For the next logical step, check out Lenard Audio's XO ed page.

That oughtta keep you busy for a bit... http://www.hostboard.com/forums/
October 2nd, 2007, 03:10 AM
bfish

Quote:

Originally posted by Audio_by_Goodwill:

70lbs! That's not a fish, that's a whale!

That's all the excuse I need to brag a little;

http://members.cox.net/notthatstupid...4%20modrsz.jpg

That was back when I was lean & mean, a fish like that might whip me now...

Might as well order the whole enchilada. Rod Elliot pretty well covers it all in Biamp pt 1 and Biamp pt 2. Pour a bevarage and settle in for some study.

Re 7kHz XO, after looking back, no, 9864 doesn't lose -6dB till ~ 10kHz. The plot is based on summed single drivers though, with no XO/EQ in the way. With a passive XO, you could go way higher, (if you can ignore that big nasty dip at 10kHz). If you got hold of a 4024 or equiv XO/EQ, you should be able to get the claimed 18kHz as-is, no extra tweet.

Just play with it, with an eye on protecting your tweets, you're not gonna hurt the Engine.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page