Speaker builder wanted - Dennis Murphy CAOW 1
- Thread starter Spenagio
- Start date
Speaker cabinets can be constructed by a local joiner or possibly carpenter. Some specialise in speakers but I think many would take on the job. For a modest 2 way design it is likely to cost significantly more than a commercial equivalent though. Can I ask why you want to pay someone to build this particular DIY design rather than simply buying a commercial equivalent?
andrewsutton
pfm Member
IPL Acoustics list a couple of guys who will build IPL kits.
One might be persuaded.....
Cheers Andy.
One might be persuaded.....
Cheers Andy.
S-Man
StrivingON
What would you say is the commercial equivalent?
It is a passive 2 way with a small modest midwoofer and a tweeter in a ported box. There are an almost infinite number of commercial equivalents given this is perhaps the most popular budget speaker configuration on the market. My suspicion is that the OP considers the design to possess something that is particularly attractive and this prompted my question. The high price of the tweeter relative to the rest of the components is something that sticks out as odd since in a design like this it is the midwoofer that is pushed beyond it's comfortable operating region at both the high and low frequency ends.
S-Man
StrivingON
Can't argue that it's a passive 2 way with a small modest midwoofer and a tweeter in a ported box!
However, it is an exceptionally well implemented passive 2 way with a small modest cost but excellent perfomance midwoofer and a high quality tweeter in a ported box.
I built a pair many years ago as a neutral measuring reference for mid and treble. I now use it in a semi-active system from ~100Hz upwards (ports blocked) and have yet to find a 2-way speaker that sounds better in this configuration. I have tried E3PSR, LS50, LS3/5A, ESL57, ESL63 and JR149s. Surprisingly the JRs are the only ones in the same league.
Even as a 2-way it's rather good. So I don't agree that there are an almost infinite number of commercial equivalents - maybe on paper, but not in practice!
However, it is an exceptionally well implemented passive 2 way with a small modest cost but excellent perfomance midwoofer and a high quality tweeter in a ported box.
I built a pair many years ago as a neutral measuring reference for mid and treble. I now use it in a semi-active system from ~100Hz upwards (ports blocked) and have yet to find a 2-way speaker that sounds better in this configuration. I have tried E3PSR, LS50, LS3/5A, ESL57, ESL63 and JR149s. Surprisingly the JRs are the only ones in the same league.
Even as a 2-way it's rather good. So I don't agree that there are an almost infinite number of commercial equivalents - maybe on paper, but not in practice!
divedeepdog
pfm Member
I heard them against a pair of Graham LS5/9's, preferred the CAOWS.
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
The midwoofer has a basic motor with highish distortion by modern standards. The cone is damped paper with a smooth and easy to use response which is resonant over much of the passband. It is an OK standard range driver which doesn't excel in any respect that I can see.
The tweeter is a small 3/4" soft dome with a good performance (for a small tweeter) but at a price of £140 is out of place in a modest 2 way design. A £30 SEAS 1" fabric dome or even a 3/4" fabric dome if you must would seem more appropriate.
The speaker design itself looks fine and straightforward given both drivers are well behaved. However, it is still a ported 5" 2 way which is fine for a small budget speaker but not for a high fidelity speaker. The porting will be tuned high and will be audible, the compressible resonances will fall in the passband and are likely audible, midrange leakage through the port may be audible, the bass response will be inadequate and obviously so, the 3/4" tweeter will spray sound everywhere which may sound attractive but is not neutral in the sense of following what music does to the extent that is possible with stereo, etc...
It is a decent DIY budget design that appears to be £200 too expensive per pair because of the chosen tweeter. The additional cost to employ someone competent to build it will increase the price substantially. This is of course from the perspective of technical performance for the price which may be largely inappropriate in the way it is for LS3/5A enthusiasts. Nothing wrong with having different objectives. I may be partial to mine but others seem happy enough with wildly different ones that make no sense to me.
This has echoes of LS3/5A enthusiasm which I don't understand.
I have only casual knowledge of commercially available 5" ported 2 way speakers because it isn't a configuration that works for me. If one is limited to a 2 way due to cost considerations then 6.5-8" midwoofers possibly even a 10" with a large tweeter are better performing configurations particularly with a waveguide on the tweeter. If they are to be satellites with subs then sealed avoids the issues with ports but again one would still need more cone area to crossover cleanly to a sub. An exception might be sitting close at a desk where 5" might just about be enough when crossed to a sub. I would still lean more towards a coaxial with a larger cone diameter if space permitted.
My suggestion would be to switch to a more appropriate configuration for the task you want the speakers to perform (which admittedly isn't much of an answer).
S-Man
StrivingON
This seems rather at odds with the comments in your earlier posts e.g.:
So the reality is that you have minimal knowledge of these "almost infinite number of speakers".
Been there and I believe that the hole in the midrange (off axis) of trying to cross two such dissimilar sized drive units is a problem that is not solved yet. I remember taking my CAOW1s to World Audio to listen to their WD25Ts. I think Peter Commeau did a revised crossover for the WD25s after hearing the comparison. I doubt that it fixed the issues completely.
All largely irrelevant for me as I 'm using these 2-ways as 3-ways.
However, for the OP, I expect he has his reasons for wanting to have a pair of CAOW1s. And even as 2 -way ported boxes they are very good.
(If you read some of my other posts you will see that I often dismissively refer to ports as "fart holes", however sometimes it's better to have some bass even if the quality is not ideal).
Since you are so knowledgeable about speakers I guess that you already know that some manufacturers actually design-in extra 2nd HD into the bass/mid to make the bass sound a bit tighter?
No. I have a reasonable knowledge of the science and engineering of the speakers. What I would consider the important stuff about what they are and how they work. What I have little interest in are details about brands which is what you asked about.
It is solved and by more than one approach. Waveguides, beamforming with mulitple drivers and variable slope FIR crossover slopes are three alternative ways to address it. At least for those with an interest in the engineering of speakers.
The OPs reasoning would be interesting to know given the price he would likely have to pay to have a pair made for him. For the price I can see nothing to suggest they have a very good technical performance since the configuration precludes it even before considering the components involved. That is not say they are not very good high end speakers against a different criteria. The LS3/5A is an example of a speaker with a modest technical performance using poor drivers by modern standards that is clearly a very good high end speaker. I may not know why but it clearly is to a substantial number of people.
Looks like probable audiophile marketing to me although without context it is not possible to say with confidence. Although we are fairly insensitive to low frequency distortion our ears become strongly insensitive with falling frequency making the fundamental quiet and sometimes even silent relative to the harmonics. This places an emphasis on keeping distortion at modest levels at the high deflections required by low frequency drivers in high fidelity designs. However, at low frequencies the brain does have a tendency to fill in the fundamental from the harmonics and a few decades ago Philips (I think but could be wrong) was working on this for use in small consumer products. Not high fidelity though. Don't know if any products saw the light of day but the odd paper did.
S-Man
StrivingON
Replace "LS3/5A" with "JR149" and I would agree.
The popularity of the LS3/5A is surprisinging to me.
I would suggest that, likewise, the CAOW1 is more than the sum of its parts.
Apologies to the OP for the OT content.
I would offer to build a pair for you, but my woodworking skills are only adequate for my own use!!
Well, I pop my head around the door a few days later and look what’s happened
Actually quite interesting to follow the debate, makes perfect sense on either side of the fence.
My request is based on hearing a set a few times and being very impressed at the clarity of the tweeter particularly without sounding harsh. I need a relatively small speaker, that doesn’t give up the lower range totally, so thought I’d give them a try.
As to what competes out there in the market, current demos have included bookshelf speakers ranging from £1k-£5k, and my findings are that you need £2.5k to get a sound with similar resolve.
A bookshelf speaker that does intrigue more than a lot of the mainstream fodder is the Buchardt s400, but these are direct order only.
Actually quite interesting to follow the debate, makes perfect sense on either side of the fence.
My request is based on hearing a set a few times and being very impressed at the clarity of the tweeter particularly without sounding harsh. I need a relatively small speaker, that doesn’t give up the lower range totally, so thought I’d give them a try.
As to what competes out there in the market, current demos have included bookshelf speakers ranging from £1k-£5k, and my findings are that you need £2.5k to get a sound with similar resolve.
A bookshelf speaker that does intrigue more than a lot of the mainstream fodder is the Buchardt s400, but these are direct order only.
RustyB
Registered Ginga
Using a modestly priced, but well performing mid/bass combined with a much more expensive tweeter has been a successful formula for a number of commercial designs.
In particular Vifa's M18, typically used with a Scanspeak 9000 series HF (eg Ruark Equinox, Dali Grand Coupe), and Dynaudio Esotar 260 (Totem Tabu).
Deficiencies in the treble region tend to be the most irritating. The OW1 is a superb performer.
In particular Vifa's M18, typically used with a Scanspeak 9000 series HF (eg Ruark Equinox, Dali Grand Coupe), and Dynaudio Esotar 260 (Totem Tabu).
Deficiencies in the treble region tend to be the most irritating. The OW1 is a superb performer.
Paul Burke
pfm Member
Would quite happily take on a commission, but having bespoke items made by professionals is never going to be cheap.
There’s number of good kits out there with knock up boxes supplied, and someone with a little skill can build a decent 2 way on a budget
This is a kit I built as a bit of a project, though ofc did the boxes myself, I thought I’d try 25mm birch ply for them. They’re not the cheapest 2 way as both the drivers are quite a price, I wanted to hear them for myself, and they are very good, within the constraints of using a 5.5” midwoofer and ported design
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=333241716967
There’s number of good kits out there with knock up boxes supplied, and someone with a little skill can build a decent 2 way on a budget
This is a kit I built as a bit of a project, though ofc did the boxes myself, I thought I’d try 25mm birch ply for them. They’re not the cheapest 2 way as both the drivers are quite a price, I wanted to hear them for myself, and they are very good, within the constraints of using a 5.5” midwoofer and ported design
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=333241716967
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.