# Considerations for home theater in a new home



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

I am moving, and my mind has already turned to my HT setup. Immediately, the DIY instinct took over.

I was wondering if anyone might give their thoughts on a DIY design - 5.1 or 7.1 (possibly 5.2 or 7.2) - for a large, and odd-shaped room. I will post floor plans when I get them.

My preference is for an MTM (or variant, thereof) arrangement. Such as the "Impressario" listed at Parts Express. Only problem is, that system doesn't seem to list a complete parts list or build plan. (only materials and plan for the mains) 

Of course, something similar is cool. It's just got to sound fantastic, and be cheap. (relatively speaking)

My budget is about $2K for a DIY build.


----------



## Guest (Jul 14, 2010)

Zaph audio has a line of HT speaker kits at madisound.com You can choose from TM, MTM, and MMTMM.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Generic said:


> Zaph audio has a line of HT speaker kits at madisound.com You can choose from TM, MTM, and MMTMM.


Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information...

We are also looking for a design that fits well into a contemporary/eco motif. (speaking more to the enclosure design) By "eco", I mean lots of natural materials, like concrete, terrazzo, bamboo, etc. If anyone has great ideas for a enclosure designs, I'd appreciate them. The enclosures don't have to be made from those materials, but consider the design and earth tones used in the theme, and suggest something that would suit that. Art deco is good, also... BTW - I don't consider the enclosure build as part of my budget.

Thank you again.


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

solid7 said:


> Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information...
> 
> We are also looking for a design that fits well into a contemporary/eco motif. Art deco is good, also... BTW - I don't consider the enclosure build as part of my budget.
> 
> Thank you again.


Huh? So does that mean a single full range or line array? How is one speaker (thinking baffle only with regards to where the drivers are mounted) better than another for different decorating styles? Isn't that all in how the enclosure is built and finished? So wouldn't an MTM work equally as well as an MTMWW?


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

looneybomber said:


> Huh? So does that mean a single full range or line array? How is one speaker (thinking baffle only with regards to where the drivers are mounted) better than another for different decorating styles? Isn't that all in how the enclosure is built and finished? So wouldn't an MTM work equally as well as an MTMWW?


I don't really understand your question. (questioning?)

All that I really said was, I appreciate the link to the resource - but I am looking for a full set of plans - not just a speaker kit. The idea was to also introduce an implementation - not just a parts source. And in addition to that, I would like to find something that fits (oro could be made to fi) the motif. Looking for IDEAS...

Is that clearer?


----------



## mdrake (Jan 31, 2008)

Is this the kind of look you are after? 










or this


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Not quite what I am looking for in a design, but yes, you are on the right track! My friend has some original artwork, and I hope that I can get permission to post it. When I first saw it - not to insult him - but my mind immediately thought speakers... I will post pics if he allows me.

I like the sound of MTM, MTMW, so on, so forth. I don't need a complete space age concept. Melding traditional sound with killer (themed) design is a my goal. Even if it might be considered "hard to make", I don't mind. And to reiterate, I would like to base my concept around the Impressario on PE. (or something very similar - with a full HT setup in mind)

Thanks for those.


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

solid7 said:


> I don't really understand your question. (questioning?)


Well, someone mentioned a TM, MTM, or MMTMM and you responded with "Thanks for that - but let me introduce a bit more information..." as in non of those configurations would work for you.

So I asked wondered why certain configurations wouldn't work. 

Because fashion is being chosen over function, you need to find a cabinet styling/finish that will work, then find a kit that will work with that cabinet. And then post pictures of the project.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

looneybomber said:


> Because fashion is being chosen over function,


I never said that. In fact, that is a completely false statement. I even stated that my preference was for an MTM, or "variant thereof". (in my mind, that could be MTMW, or WWWWWWWMMMMMMMMMTTTTTTTTTTTTMMMMMMMMMWWWWWWW, or whatever else, for that matter)


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

First off the enclosure design (the shape) is not relevant to this situation at this time. What is relevant is what kind of a speaker system (that is size of box and components to put into it I.E drivers and Xover) you want to build that will produce the sound you want. And for that you have some choices to make. Once you have decided on the parts, then you can decide on the shape and look of the boxes while maintaining the internal enclosure volume. That part of the situation is the Y in the DIY.
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=211558&AID=1482282&PID=2777698


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

solid7 said:


> I never said that. In fact, that is a completely false statement.


So apparently we have a misunderstanding. No reason to get all worked up. 

What about something like this.
http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=35905

A 5.0 setup will cost around 360+enclosures. That leaves quite a bit for the subwoofers.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

looneybomber said:


> So apparently we have a misunderstanding. No reason to get all worked up.
> 
> What about something like this.
> http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=35905
> ...



Worked up? :nono: Emotionless posts being misinterpreted, I am afraid. I'm not riled, in the least...

That was one of the projects that I came across, and thought to possibly use. One thing for sure - I think I am going to lock in on the MTM concept. (for simplicity's sake) Unless someone wants to talk me out of it. I have an IB sub currently, and a PR sub in the works.

Do I need to also do MTM for surrounds, or can they be simplified to TM? Center channel - does it want to be more like a WMTMW?


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

Well if you have 2k to spend, and already have your subwoofer(s), you could step up to say the Natalie P's? They've been well regarded MTM's, much like the Statements have been well regarded WMTMW's. Both are good performers in their class.

For surrounds, you don't have to build identical MTM's and could instead build the smaller TM varient, it's up to you.

For a center, MTM's have their weakness, but the only way to improve on them, is to make a 3way WT/MW where the tweeter is above the mid with woofers flanking. For example, http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=28262
However, even though the horizontal MTM's weakness is off axis response, if you're never off axis or at least remain close to the sweet spot, then it won't matter.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

looneybomber said:


> Well if you have 2k to spend, and already have your subwoofer(s), you could step up to say the Natalie P's? They've been well regarded MTM's, much like the Statements have been well regarded WMTMW's. Both are good performers in their class.
> 
> For surrounds, you don't have to build identical MTM's and could instead build the smaller TM varient, it's up to you.
> 
> ...



Call me a-nal, but I crave symmetry, and I don't have the depth to install the config you mentioned. I have a design for a WWMTMWW, which was originally deisgned as an on-wall unit. I am talking to the original designer about modifying this, as I have all of the components, and a finished enclosure. Would this be a wise choice? Nevermind the fact that I have components - I'm looking for a grand finish, so don't be afraid to tell me it's no good.

By the way, the designs that I currently have for the mains and center are based on Dayton RS150-4, (woofer) Peerless 810921, (tweeter) and Peerless 830860'. (mid) The mains are WWMTM, and the Center is as mentioned avove...


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

Someone is confused...


solid7 said:


> My preference is for an MTM (or variant, thereof)"(in my mind, that could be MTMW, or WWWWWWWMMMMMMMMMTTTTTTTTTTTTMMMMMMMMMWWWWWWW, or whatever else, for that matter)


Now you are saying


solid7 said:


> Call me a-nal, but I crave symmetry, and I don't have the depth to install the config you mentioned. I have a design for a WWMTMWW, which was originally deisgned as an on-wall unit..


You never said anything about an in wall, or on wall installation, so why would you not have the room for an MTM?:huh:


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

buggers said:


> Someone is confused...
> 
> 
> Now you are saying
> You never said anything about an in wall, or on wall installation, so why would you not have the room for an MTM?:huh:



I apologize for the fact that you are confused.

I was replying directly to what looneybomber said. (not having the depth in my chosen location to place the configuration that he recommended) I said I have a design that was *originally* an on-wall, which meant that I was alluding to the fact that I *already* have components to work with. Anything else that you may have tried to get out of that statement is irrelevant.

Not having room for MTM? I just don't understand where that came from... I have about 11 inches of space to fit a center channel in, and I am shooting for a certain aesthetic, so I don't want to cram a deep box into that space. So what I am getting at, is that I have a preference for a slimmer configuration - such as my designed WWMTMWW profile.

Mind you, I have a design, but not a finished build. (only an enclosure) My current enclosure - which was meant to go on-wall - was only 9" deep. My new home and room will not utilize an on-wall enclosure. I am hoping that I can modify the crossover and enclosure to accommodate this new found freedom.


----------



## mdrake (Jan 31, 2008)

solid7 said:


> I apologize for the fact that you are confused.
> 
> I was replying directly to what looneybomber said. (not having the depth in my chosen location to place the configuration that he recommended) I said I have a design that was *originally* an on-wall, which meant that I was alluding to the fact that I *already* have components to work with. Anything else that you may have tried to get out of that statement is irrelevant.
> 
> ...


Do you have any pictures of designs that you like? Have you seen any kits that you like? 
I think it would be easier to find a kit and drivers you like and then try to marry them to a design rather than working the other way around. 

Matt


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

mdrake said:


> Do you have any pictures of designs that you like? Have you seen any kits that you like?
> I think it would be easier to find a kit and drivers you like and then try to marry them to a design rather than working the other way around.
> 
> Matt



I have a complete design, (not yet built) using the drivers that I mentioned earlier. I have the drivers that I listed earlier in hand. I will try to post pics of my new enclosure proposal in the coming days. The design that I like is the Impressario, as mentioned previously. However, my custom design is a much bigger design. And it is currently on-wall, and that has to change.

http://www.parts-express.com/projectshowcase/indexn.cfm?project=Impresario

Once again, to reiterate - the unbuilt design that I have consists of the following:

Center - WWMTMWW
Mains - WWMTM

Dayton RS150-4 (woofer)
Peerless 810921 (tweeter)
Peerless 830860 (mid) 


Whatever enclosure that I design will use a stacked layer construction of baltic birch plywood, with solid face baffle. (I have a proven construction method, and I like how it looks)


----------



## mdrake (Jan 31, 2008)

> Whatever enclosure that I design will use a stacked layer construction of baltic birch plywood, with solid face baffle. (I have a proven construction method, and I like how it looks)
> Read more: Considerations for home theater in a new home - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com
> ​


Make sure to take pictures!!! :T Are you planning on going with active or passive crossovers? If active the onwall design could in fact work.  

Matt


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

mdrake said:


> Make sure to take pictures!!! :T Are you planning on going with active or passive crossovers? If active the onwall design could in fact work.
> 
> Matt


As far as I know, the crossover will be passive.

I have to admit, though - I am not much of a speaker designer. My forte is really the design and build of the enclosure. But yes, I will definitely post pics.

The on-wall design is scrap. It was meant for my old house, which had a small room, and not enough space for free standers.

Still wondering about that CC, though. I should keep that concept, if it works...


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

Forgot to add - this thread started to chronicle my build process for my "on wall" design. I will build in a similar way, but with plywood, instead of MDF.

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/21112-experimental-wall-design.html


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

Designing any speaker system is not about the box design. There are programs that will dictate the internal volume for that. The external shape is up to the builder to figure out ( with the exception of the width and height of the baffle due to BSC). 
What a speaker design is really about is designing of the crossover. A good xover can take not so good drivers and make them sound good, while a xover will take the best drivers and make them sound like .
My advice is to take a proven design and build that first.


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

buggers said:


> My advice is to take a proven design and build that first.



Yes, I already understand all of what you said. So going from there, based on the above quote, how about some recommendations for TYPES of configurations for a larger room? I've got the Dayton MTM and Natalie P's, both viable options. What about 2-way vs 3-way systems? (in an HT setup) Or maybe even 3.5 way?

I don't listen to much music, but I also don't want to count it out. I don't really understand all of the advantages vs. disadvantages of each type, other than the simplicity of build.

I would like to limit the size of the largest driver used to 6" max. I would prefer not to build a giant floor standing speaker, but I will entertain just about anything right now. (until I find something that really grabs me)

Thank you.

BTW - I can't believe it, but I found EXACTLY what I want to do for the enclosure. In fact, I already had the base profile designed before I found this. (I guess form really does follow function) As soon as I can lock in on my project specs...

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=23805&page=3&pp=35


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

Yep that's a nice looking box using the plywood layers. The only problem is people have had some issues with the layers coming loose but it does look cool:T
I can recommend the Sealed Modula MTM cause I have that as my mains right now, but I can also rec the MTM NatP cause that is what i have for my surrounds. I recommend a bass bin under those main speakers like the one in my avatar, but of course you might not want dual 15's like mine.... You could do dual 6's or whatever size you prefer.
For surrounds a TM is just fine. By the way the Modula is sort of the NatP's more expensive brother...
I always recommend that people concentrate on the front main speakers first and then add the surround channels as funds become available, but that is because I listen to a lot of music, so your situation may be a little different. You are obviously going to have a sub, so build the speakers sealed for an easy build.
Another recommendation I would give you is the statements, ( even though i have not listened to them) simply because soooo many people have built them and loved them. These are a more complicated build.
I will say that any of these builds are worthy of consideration http://htguide.com/forum/forumdisplay.php4?f=39
as I have built several of them:T
And a couple more.
http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/
http://www.zaphaudio.com/


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

buggers said:


> Yep that's a nice looking box using the plywood layers. The only problem is people have had some issues with the layers coming loose but it does look cool


I have only had issues with layer separation with MDF. Do you have any links to documented damage of the laminated plys?




buggers said:


> I recommend a bass bin under those main speakers like the one in my avatar, but of course you might not want dual 15's like mine....


Even with a subwoofer? (most likely 2)

Thanks for the other recommendations.


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

I don't remember who had the issues with the ply.
Well if you don't listen to much music you could probably do without the bass bins. I just like them cause I like to rock:hsd:


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

buggers said:


> I don't remember who had the issues with the ply.
> Well if you don't listen to much music you could probably do without the bass bins. I just like them cause I like to rock:hsd:


I would love to have them, but it's not in the plan for now. ON another note, I did find the CC that I want, based on your recommendation.

http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/2CC.html

How about a recommendation for mains to marry with it? (not a full size tower - otherwise, I'd go with the mating mains they kit/sell) Or, would this kit work well also for mains?

They could be very beautiful...

PS - the way to prevent delamination of plys in your finished stack, is to have some extra "guide holes" like the ones used to put the stack together. Instead of filling it with a wood dowel, you put a T-nut on one side, all thread through the hole, and a carefully counterbored and tensioned washer nut on the other side. The plys won't come apart - even on MDF. Trust me


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

I don't believe you can use that for the mains, but check with Jed about that.
In keeping with a similarly voiced system I would stick with his speaker systems. http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=27583 using the D44 for your mains, and D4 for the surrounds because they are using the dome tweets.
Shoot Jed an email and see what he thinks:T


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

buggers said:


> Shoot Jed an email and see what he thinks:T


Already one step ahead of you.


----------



## 1Michael (Nov 2, 2006)

Cool, let us know what he says:T


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

solid7 said:


> How about a recommendation for mains to marry with it? (not a full size tower - otherwise, I'd go with the mating mains they kit/sell) Or, would this kit work well also for mains?


So if you don't want a vertical tower, that leaves you bookshelf or horizontal speaker. Were you thinking of using 3 "center channels" like this?









Or were you thinking of matching up the Dynamic 2cc with a small'ish bookshelf to be used as L/R's?

If you are wanting bookshelfs, Jed used to have a small 3way Dynamic speaker that would be used as surrounds, but since he's come out with his MK2 Dynamics, that speaker has been done away with. If there's a demand for it, I bet he will redesign that speaker too.

I saw you were wanting a similar profile to the Paradigm Studio v5's and Sonas Faber Amati, I've asked a few questions about that in this thread.
http://clearwave.forumotion.net/kit-discussion-f1/4cc-question-t75.htm


----------



## solid7 (Jan 31, 2008)

looneybomber said:


> So if you don't want a vertical tower, that leaves you bookshelf or horizontal speaker. Were you thinking of using 3 "center channels" like this?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When I said vertical tower, I just meant that I don't want a tall vertical speaker. I still want L/R used in a vertical configuration, but not floor standing. Sorry if I mixed terms.

What you have there is cool. I just would want to stand up the mains. 

I have a set of stands designed already for whatever speaker enclosure I end up using. It can be modified based on final configuration placement.




looneybomber said:


> I saw you were wanting a similar profile to the Paradigm Studio v5's and Sonas Faber Amati,


You are correct. A profile very much like that.


----------



## looneybomber (Sep 20, 2006)

If looking for a timbre matched bookshelf to go with the Dynamic 2cc, check out if Jed will redo the Dynamic 1s.
http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/Dynamic/1S.html

It looks like he may be able to come up with something according to that last paragraph.

BTW, Jed's kits are nice because you pay the price you normally would from Parts Express or Madisound, but it comes with a prebuilt crossover. They're also customizable. With my Dynamic 4cc, I picked my own binding posts, deleted some of the items in the "kit", and had it modified to be bi-ampable. Whatever can be had from Partsexpress and Madisound can be included in the kit.


----------

