# Anarchy MTM Build



## Zeitgeist

I'm in the early stages of building a pair of Anarchy MTM's for music. They'd be great for HT, but I'm going to be building all my HT speakers based around B&C 8CXTs.

Woofers:
Ordered from Kevin. The Anarchys are ordered should get them Friday.

Tweeters:
I was thinking about DC28F. But then I started reading about the RS28F vs DC28F, and there seemed to be a number of people that strongly preferred the RS. So... then I was shifting towards the RS28F. But, my thought then is if I'm going to pay $55-60 for the RS, why not just spend the $80/driver for the ScanSpeak Discovery D2608/9130 (Peerless HDS 810921).

Anyone have any comments on the RS28F driver? (EDIT: Looks like the RS28F is backordered till Jan...  )

Crossover/Amps:
I've had so much fun playing with the MiniDSPs for my 3ways, that I'm thinking about going active for these as well. Possibly driving them with a pair of Dayton APA150s (sweet little amps). If I find a sweet spot for the crossover settings I might build a passive version.

Enclosure:
Targeting 1-1.5 CuFt, ported. I really want TALL cabinets 45" or so, so I might need to close off a portion of the tower. Bigger than 1.2-1.5 Cuft is just too big. I've thought about putting some weight in the bottom as well - I'm concerned that it might be a little top-heavy with the Anarchys being mounted fairly high.


----------



## GranteedEV

Even though it costs more, I'm not convinced there's many better 1" DOME tweeters than the RS28 until you get into ridiculous Beryllium Aircirc territory. The RS28 is that good with world class bottom end and smooth response. Not many other tweeters that can cross at 1.2khz. The best impovements to be had would be to go smaller (IE hiquphon) or into pricey ribbon territory (NeoCD3, 140-15D).

My choice for a tweeter worthy of the Anarchy would however be the new CSS Planar 2. It'll work effortlessly crossed around 900hz with dynamics to spare and that will give your speakers a very smooth power response.

Another option you ought to look into is the SEOS-6 waveguide + the $50 3/4" B&C compression driver.


----------



## Zeitgeist

GranteedEV said:


> Even though it costs more, I'm not convinced there's many better 1" DOME tweeters than the RS28 until you get into ridiculous Beryllium Aircirc territory. The RS28 is that good with world class bottom end and smooth response. Not many other tweeters that can cross at 1.2khz. The best impovements to be had would be to go smaller (IE hiquphon) or into pricey ribbon territory (NeoCD3, 140-15D).
> 
> My choice for a tweeter worthy of the Anarchy would however be the new CSS Planar 2. It'll work effortlessly crossed around 900hz with dynamics to spare and that will give your speakers a very smooth power response.


Cool, OK, glad to know I'm not crazy for thinking about the RS28. The more designs I look at, the more I see just a handful of tweeters and woofers get used over and over in very highly rated designs.

You have me thinking about tweeter alternatives. I found the Planar 2 on CSS's site, but didn't see a datasheet. You have any links w/more info?

I like the idea of crossing lower..


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> I found the Planar 2 on CSS's site, but didn't see a datasheet. You have any links w/more info?


It's vwry very new so I'm not sure if anyone's really messed with it ITO measurements. I know Nathan Funk has used it in his new 8.2 Monitors though. ...Try asking CSS for more info via email.

And yeah, if you can take the crossover below 1khz it can only mean good things in terms of stereo imaging / sensitivity to crossover error. it also pushes the anarchy breakup out of the way a bit more.


----------



## Zeitgeist

OK. Was just surprised I couldn't find anything other than an order page.


----------



## Zeitgeist

I received a PDF about the Planar 2 - and it's attached.

Broad frequency response (480hz+), sensitive (103db), 55-120watts. NICE.

Would love to see a distortion plot, but looks promising!


----------



## Zeitgeist

I might go with the Planar 2 (or some other very nice Ribbon). I started reading up on ribbons and few of them play very low. Then I started considering compression drivers and saw the same problem. Horns rarely play below 1500.

I might even consider active for this build too. I bought a second Dayton Audio APA150 (which I swear were Emotiva BPA-1s in a former life) 

But... probably given the cost of the Planar 2 - it'll drastically slow down the speed of the build (due to cost). But I think the Anarchys will be great as woofers - so I don't want to make sacrifices on the tweeters.


----------



## Jstslamd

Hivi has a few decently priced planar tweets that would probably go well with them.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Jstslamd said:


> Hivi has a few decently priced planar tweets that would probably go well with them.


From what I could see most of the Hivi planars coverage starts at about 1500hz.

The Planar 2 seems to be good to closer to 1000 hz.


----------



## Owen Bartley

That Planar 2 looks like an awesome tweeter, and a formidable match to the Anarchy. I hope you do hold out for them, just because I want to see what the result would be! I'm sure the completed speaker would be capable of serious output.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Owen Bartley said:


> That Planar 2 looks like an awesome tweeter, and a formidable match to the Anarchy. I hope you do hold out for them, just because I want to see what the result would be! I'm sure the completed speaker would be capable of serious output.


I think I am going to hold out... since it looks like a very good match - and the feedback seems to be that it's a great driver.

So....... I'll revive this thread in the future when I get the money for a pair.

I want to build 4 MTM surrounds within the next year - so I'll be juggling these drivers with the priority of building the surrounds...


----------



## Zeitgeist

Owen Bartley said:


> That Planar 2 looks like an awesome tweeter, and a formidable match to the Anarchy. I hope you do hold out for them, just because I want to see what the result would be! I'm sure the completed speaker would be capable of serious output.


Anyone have any other suggestions?

I'm starting to second guess getting the planar 2, seeing as (I think) it went up $30. At $245/ea with shipping, and still very little information out there (about the driver, or people who have used it) - not sure if it's ideal.

I'm thinking about looking for alternatives...


----------



## Jstslamd

Back to those hivi's they have one set with a ribbon tweet too.


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> I'm starting to second guess getting the planar 2, seeing as (I think) it went up $30. At $245/ea with shipping, and still very little information out there (about the driver, or people who have used it) - not sure if it's ideal.


FWIW, HTS member Mark Krevchenko has used it in a MMTMM design. There's a thread on DIY audio for the Ottawa 2012 get together where a few people gave their impressions. Maybe he can chime in..?

Also dthomas at the tech talk forums measured the Harmonic Distortion:


----------



## Zeitgeist

GranteedEV said:


> FWIW, HTS member Mark Krevchenko has used it in a MMTMM design. There's a thread on DIY audio for the Ottawa 2012 get together where a few people gave their impressions. Maybe he can chime in..?
> 
> Also dthomas at the tech talk forums measured the Harmonic Distortion:


Thanks for mentioning that someone else has actually used it!  I trust that it's good even if I'm whining about the price.

OK, I'm not afraid to look like an idiot, but I've always struggled with understanding HD graphs and what looks good and what doesn't. Like what is considered low distortion and what isn't?

Edit: Found how OmniMic color codes the different orders... (so that helps a little) Red = Second order, Pink = Third order, Green = Fourth order, and Light Blue = Fifth order:


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> OK, I'm not afraid to look like an idiot, but I've always struggled with understanding HD graphs and what looks good and what doesn't. Like what is considered low distortion and what isn't?
> 
> Edit: Found how OmniMic color codes the different orders... (so that helps a little) Red = Second order, Pink = Third order, Green = Fourth order, and Light Blue = Fifth order:


In general, the 2nd and 3rd harmonics should be at least 40db below the fundamental and the 4th and 5th should seem to be under control, and below the level of the 2nd and 3rd. Designs with controlled 4th/5th/6th/7th etc show good motor design as far as flux control is concerned. 2nd and 3rd distortion is generally the driver material itself as motors don't contribute significant low order distortion.

For instance, the Seas Excel drivers have some of the best motor design in the world with their faraday sleeves/rings/phase plug etc.










You can see that at 5khz the magnesium cone is breaking up. That happens to be the 3rd harmonic of ~1.7 khz which you notice also peaks. And yes, it's also the 4th (or 5th?) harmonic of 1khz. You get the picture. Metal cone drivers like this, and the Anarchy, need to have their cone breakup a good 24 to 40db down in level from the fundamental. At 1.7khz the 3rd harmonic (cone breakup) is exactly 40db down from the fundamental but may rise at higher SPLs. A 24db/octave at 2khz, will get the cone breakup around 24+db down in level, which you might not be comfortable with. A notch filter will help.

I honestly don't know if there's a whole lot you can draw from H.D. plots, though. In general, a good H.D. plot will show each higher order harmonic to be lower in level than the order below it. Distortion is only an apparent problem with 4th/5th order is shown exceeding 2nd/3rd order.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Thank you for such a detailed and articulate explanation!

I've read that you can't read too much into HD measurements -- in terms of how a driver will really sound - so they can be over-emphasized... but good to know regardless.

Thanks a bunch!


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> I've read that you can't read too much into HD measurements -- in terms of how a driver will really sound - so they can be over-emphasized... but good to know regardless.


I kind of think that when you get to most excellent modern drivers with well designed flux control, suspensions, motors, and sufficiently pistonic cones, there's not all that much real thing as "sound of the driver", only the sound of the speaker as a whole, except when the driver is played outside its SPL limits. And also that when the speakers have similar on/off axis response (not only horizontally but vertically) there isn't really much sound of the speaker, only the sound of the speaker playing into the room. 

It's when something like a paper cone gently _breaks up_ (or metal cone aggressively breaks up), or directivity is mismatched, that you hear immediate differences.

I think a lot of problems with design is using drivers too low for their own good, and also too high. Find the right passband and don't go too far outside of that range.


----------



## fbov

Zeitgeist said:


> I'm in the early stages of building a pair of Anarchy MTM's for music. ...
> Tweeters:
> I was thinking about DC28F. But then I started reading about the RS28F vs DC28F, ...ScanSpeak Discovery D2608/9130 (Peerless HDS 810921)....


Perhaps this would be of interest... 
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=230063
"This is the cleanest Cumulative Spectral Decay waterfall I have ever measured....
"This is world class distortion. " - Jeff Bagby (referring to CSD and HD plots)

And it's XBL2, too.

Have fun,
Frank


----------



## Zeitgeist

fbov said:


> Perhaps this would be of interest...
> http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?t=230063
> "This is the cleanest Cumulative Spectral Decay waterfall I have ever measured....
> "This is world class distortion. " - Jeff Bagby (referring to CSD and HD plots)
> 
> And it's XBL2, too.
> 
> Have fun,
> Frank


I read that thread too - Appreciate the link. I still think that the Planar 2 is a perfect choice... Just need to finish my other projects to free up the cash. You get what you pay for... 

That thread was entertaining because it's basically clearly stated "excellent, excellent driver" and then wanders off into troll land! Like the fact that it's made in China matters in terms of how it sounds... That's thrown up anytime people don't have a credible criticism.


----------



## Zeitgeist

No where closer to getting Planar 2s, but built the cabinets... 2nd one is drying now. 

Will post a picture later. 

Now I just need to decide on veneer and eventually get the Planar 2s. Probably inclined to do MiniDSP/Active until I confirm that the crossover is happy.


----------



## Zac911

Just curious if you have used these before or given them any thought--

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=264-713


----------



## Zeitgeist

Funny, I've looked at the Neo8 a bunch of times. I never realized how low the FR on it went. Not bad.

I really want to build a line array at some point, maybe with an RD50.

I'm going to stick with the Planar 2, but that definitely has caught my attention for maybe using the Neo 8 in some other build.


----------



## Zac911

There are actually 3 versions of the Neo8. Two are at PE NEO8 and NEOPDR and one at Meniscus NEO8S which has some of the technology from the Neo10 in it, so you can cross it even lower and feed it more power. The PDR from PE has much greater dispersion. Fantastic drivers. I like them so much I want to do an A-Pillar install in my car consisting of the Neo3 and Neo8.


----------



## Zeitgeist

I was familiar with the PDR, but never heard of the NEO8S. Interesting.

Are there any downsides to the PDR version vs the non PDR (older?)?

I wouldn't think that better dispersion would ever be a bad thing?


----------



## Zac911

Zeitgeist said:


> I was familiar with the PDR, but never heard of the NEO8S. Interesting.
> 
> Are there any downsides to the PDR version vs the non PDR (older?)?
> 
> I wouldn't think that better dispersion would ever be a bad thing?


The PDR seems like the way to go. I really like what I see from the CSS planar, but it's always nice to HEAR it as well. I only threw out the BG since the costing was significantly less. I hate it when I get too far into a project with fabrication and find what may be a better option. Sorry I brought it up. I was just curious if you had used them before.


----------



## Zeitgeist

No, please don't apologize! Glad to see another option.

I've gotten used to my bigger, multiple speaker, multiple driver builds taking a while... That's what I get for liking expensive drivers!

I want to hear the Planar 2 as much as use it... It can't be bad!


----------



## Zac911

Zeitgeist said:


> No, please don't apologize! Glad to see another option.
> 
> I've gotten used to my bigger, multiple speaker, multiple driver builds taking a while... That's what I get for liking expensive drivers!
> 
> I want to hear the Planar 2 as much as use it... It can't be bad!


Apologize again if I came off the wrong way-- What I meant was is that it gets frustrating waiting for all these killer options to finally become available. Many times while waiting I end up changing my plans even though I started building cabs or fabricating other pieces. I really like what CSS does. I would love to get my hands on their new 15 if they can ever find a good build house for it.


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> I was familiar with the PDR, but never heard of the NEO8S. Interesting.
> 
> Are there any downsides to the PDR version vs the non PDR (older?)?
> 
> I wouldn't think that better dispersion would ever be a bad thing?


The PDR has wider dispersion at the top of its band... but that comes at a cost. It's basically a giant faceplate "blocking" the diaphram". So sensitivity/power handling is sacrificed. It's essentially a "Neo6" or something along those lines, if you get my drift.


If you're doing a 3-way with the Neo8 as a mid, the non-PDR makes more sense.

FOr a two-way with the Neo8 as a tweeter, the PDR makes more sense.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Zac911 said:


> Apologize again if I came off the wrong way-- What I meant was is that it gets frustrating waiting for all these killer options to finally become available. Many times while waiting I end up changing my plans even though I started building cabs or fabricating other pieces. I really like what CSS does. I would love to get my hands on their new 15 if they can ever find a good build house for it.



You haven't done anything at all  I'm happy for any suggestions. Besides, GranteedEV seems to have so much fun telling me how to spend my money!! (JUST KIDDING!!!)

I only knew CSS before from their sub offerings, very excited to see some high performance low distortion tweeters.


----------



## Zeitgeist

GranteedEV said:


> The PDR has wider dispersion at the top of its band... but that comes at a cost. It's basically a giant faceplate "blocking" the diaphram". So sensitivity/power handling is sacrificed. It's essentially a "Neo6" or something along those lines, if you get my drift.
> 
> 
> If you're doing a 3-way with the Neo8 as a mid, the non-PDR makes more sense.
> 
> FOr a two-way with the Neo8 as a tweeter, the PDR makes more sense.


Thanks for the explanation. I wasn't sure how it actually achieved the different dispersion. That's exactly what I was trying to find out.


----------



## mdrake

Those CSS planar 2"s are very interesting. I cant wait to hear your feedback on them!

Matt


----------



## Zeitgeist

I've had the cabinets built and painted for a month or two now with the Anarchys loaded and 3" ports...

Getting the CSS Planar 2's via USPS on Monday. Can't wait.

Planning on using MiniDSP until I decide on a crossover.


----------



## Jstslamd

Lets see them!!


----------



## Zeitgeist

Jstslamd said:


> Lets see them!!


I know! I need to put up pics... I'm sorry!

The CSS Planar 2s came today (well, Sat really). IMPRESSIVE!!!
I apparently glossed over "... aluminum horn." The picture makes it look plastic on CSS's site.

It's not thin aluminum either. It's SOLID. I'm impressed.


----------



## Zeitgeist

I had to provide some kind of picture 

And a can of compressed air for scale.


----------



## Zeitgeist

I still need to mount the Planars...... Just been super busy, they've been sitting on top of the towers looking very sad!

Hopefully in the coming week.


----------



## GranteedEV

do you have a pic of the magnet for the planar?


----------



## Zeitgeist

GranteedEV said:


> do you have a pic of the magnet for the planar?


I attached pics of the side/back. Was that what you wanted?

And the cabs that I need to install the Planar's into. I've been trying to finish 4 other sets of speaker cabs - to get them out of the living room so this has taken a back seat (translation: low priority, taking too long!)

The gap between the woofers seems huge - but it's not much bigger than the Planars. CTC spacing will still be pretty large though. I'm guessing you still use the physical center of a planar for CTC spacing? Or can you use the whole element?


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> The gap between the woofers seems huge - but it's not much bigger than the Planars. CTC spacing will still be pretty large though. I'm guessing you still use the physical center of a planar for CTC spacing? Or can you use the whole element?


Planars are tricky when it comes to that topic - I can't concisely answer that question without putting some serious thought and research into it. 

I'll say this though - a 1khz or whatever crossover has a pretty big wavelength. Lobing may not be too bad at all. I would definitely recommend even order / in-phase acoustic slopes though. That way, even if there were an issue from CtC spacing making itself known in the vertical polars, it'll be in the form of an inoffensive dip, not a peak (what I'd recommend for _all_ M-T-M speakers).

Of course, you could always just route out a second baffle and glue it to the top of the current one with the tightest possible driver spacing. Added bonus being a thicker baffle.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Once I get it in there.. going to use a MiniDSP at least for a while, so should give me some time to play with crossovers. I'm thinking I'll eventually build a passive.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Finally got the holes cut/routed for the Planars -- and have the drivers reinstalled in one cab. Will hopefully get other cab put back together and get a picture up tomorrow (mon)

Spent a good hour playing with a Dayton APA-150 for amplification and a MiniDSP. Toyed with 2nd and 4th order crossovers and tweaking between 900-1100 hz. Found 1000-1100 with 2nd order to sound best (Planar 2 recommends 2nd order 1000hz). Will likely build a passive crossover - to keep things simple. I'm sure that I'll need a small L-pad, the Planar is quite sensitive (102db+-2)

The Anarchys really belt it out (listened to everything from Diana Krall to Bob Marley to Beastie Boys) - and the Planar 2 sounds sweet. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the Planar 2's dispersion (I'm never one to sit and listen on axis) -- but extremely happy so far. They sound great. Very happy that I spent the extra money for robust tweeters.

I think the bass (instrument) on a couple Diana Krall songs is a great test of clarity - sounded flawless...... and they can keep up with some of the deeper stuff like Cake/Beastie Boys/whatever.


----------



## GranteedEV

Zeitgeist said:


> The Anarchys really belt it out (listened to everything from Diana Krall to Bob Marley to Beastie Boys) - and the Planar 2 sounds sweet. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the Planar 2's dispersion (I'm never one to sit and listen on axis)


Have you tried cross-firing them? Also, some aggressive (IE 1" to 1.5") corner roundovers or large (IE 1.5"+) 30 degree bevels should improve the tweeter response and imaging.

Out of curiosity, which diana krall song?


----------



## Zeitgeist

GranteedEV said:


> Have you tried cross-firing them? Also, some aggressive (IE 1" to 1.5") corner roundovers or large (IE 1.5"+) 30 degree bevels should improve the tweeter response and imaging.
> 
> Out of curiosity, which diana krall song?


I only got a chance to play them in stereo the other day.. Now that I have a couple Dayton APA150 amps to use I have enough channels.

I actually thought about some large roundovers or bevels when I first built the cabinet, but that would have meant I had to do a thicker front baffle. When I built the cabinets I was trying to keep the weight down. I'm seriously thinking about building new cabinets and making it heavier and better braced. 

I don't even know what the real FR of the Planar 2 really is, I need to measure it. 

It was actually a few different Diana Krall songs..


----------



## Zeitgeist

........and the way overdue picture....


----------



## fusseli

Wowzers, those make a statement! :clap:


----------



## Zeitgeist

fusseli said:


> Wowzers, those make a statement! :clap:


Thanks 

Low WAF though.. but hey, I like them!


----------



## kadijk

Very nice! I've been following along. I got to see those tweeters at Bobs house when I stopped in...they are impressive to see...I'm sure they're impressive to hear.


----------



## Zeitgeist

kadijk said:


> Very nice! I've been following along. I got to see those tweeters at Bobs house when I stopped in...they are impressive to see...I'm sure they're impressive to hear.


Nice to hear from someone else who has seen the tweeters.. Seems like there still aren't that many out in the wild..

The Planar 2s are definitely not the weak link! They're crystal clear.


----------



## critofur

Zeitgeist said:


> ...then I was shifting towards the RS28F. But, my thought then is if I'm going to pay $55-60 for the RS, why not just spend the $80/driver for the ScanSpeak Discovery D2608/9130 (Peerless HDS 810921).


I have seen people strongly prefer the RS28F over the Peerless HDS, I have not seen anybody say the opposite. More expensive is not always better. I'm sorry I have not had the chance to evaluate the Peerless HDS tweeter myself, but it seems that the RS28 would be a little better for a crossover as low as 1Khz or 1.5Khz...


----------



## critofur

GranteedEV said:


> ...Also, some aggressive (IE 1" to 1.5") corner roundovers or large (IE 1.5"+) 30 degree bevels should improve the tweeter response and imaging.


Generally, one of the advantages to waveguides is not needing to do that.



Zeitgeist said:


> I only got a chance to play them in stereo the other day.. Now that I have a couple Dayton APA150 amps to use I have enough channels.
> 
> I actually thought about some large roundovers or bevels when I first built the cabinet, but that would have meant I had to do a thicker front baffle. When I built the cabinets I was trying to keep the weight down. I'm seriously thinking about building new cabinets and making it heavier and better braced.
> 
> I don't even know what the real FR of the Planar 2 really is, I need to measure it.


Hard to imagine a speaker ending up anywhere near optimal without measurements.

You could start with the cabinets you have and add more bracing. You could saw the front baffle off in order to be able to glue another layer on behind, then glue the whole thing back on the cabinet.

Many people underestimate the importance of the enclosure, but, my highest priority would be trying to get good measurements.


----------



## a|F

Zeitgeist said:


> Nice to hear from someone else who has seen the tweeters.. Seems like there still aren't that many out in the wild..
> 
> The Planar 2s are definitely not the weak link! They're crystal clear.


You never gave us final impressions or how the crossover worked out...?


----------



## Mike Edwards

a|F said:


> You never gave us final impressions or how the crossover worked out...?


yes, I second this. update on how the crossover turned out. that's always the bane of my speaker building


----------

