Got ALL FUNKED UP yesterday

[jwc]

I'm interested in opinions between the MC250 and MC2100. Not to hijack this thread,since someone brought up they sounded different. Mine sounded pretty much the same.

Thanks

Tom

That is interesting. I've heard from many at the AK MAC forum agree they sound the same. Terry Dewick said the monster 2300 sounded like same too.

jc

[mark1101]

For those interested........I am posting some curves of the speakers in my avatar. JC and I came up with these final curves last Saturday as sort of "best sounding". It is easy with my EQ to get a razor flat response but I quickly found that perfectly flat does not sound very good. What you see was done on purpose.

The mic was 3 ft. from each speaker using pink noise with only one speaker running at a time in mono. I just merged the curves on one chart so you could see the response of both speakers. The actual averaging was 300 not 3 as shown. Notice the MWMs easily get down to 30Hz. and beyond. I am running Bob Crites K33 clones in them. The TADs can out to the 19-20K range. They have to be EQ'd down some. They are a little too hot up there.

[dtel]

Mark what is the crossover set at 400, 500 with the Tads ? Just wondering because when you look at that chart you can see how much closer both speakers are from that range up, compared to the bass bins.

I know thats not what you were really looking for but it just stood out when I looked at it, or does the bass just measure a little different from cabinet to cabinet because of the lower frequency. I remember hearing something about below certain frequency's bass measurements get more inaccurate than higher freq's ?

I didn't realize the MWM's went that low, did you adjust anything to help those numbers or is that normal.

[mark1101]

Dtel, the crossover is 500. The TADs are actually only rated to go down to 600 but I was told they can play as low as 300 really and with the ESNs and 500 I do not put them at risk. As for the EQ, I try to only "reduce" not "boost". So to get the curve you see I did a lot of reducing. The only place I boosted was at 30hz and 315hz., and not by very much, maybe 3-4db. The MWM has a big suckout at around 300. I found that you can't "force" the horn with more and more EQ. Radical EQ can get you a flat curve but it just causes distortion. The variations in the bass may be because of the room or because I put the mic at the height of the center of the HF horn at just 3ft away. Also, my equipment is probabaly not perfect either. My networks do have identical response though. I checked those a long time ago.

[dtel]

Dtel, the crossover is 500. The TADs are actually only rated to go down to 600 but I was told they can play as low as 300 really and with the ESNs and 500 I do not put them at risk. As for the EQ, I try to only "reduce" not "boost". So to get the curve you see I did a lot of reducing. The only place I boosted was at 30hz and 315hz., and not by very much, maybe 3-4db. The MWM has a big suckout at around 300. I found that you can't "force" the horn with more and more EQ. Radical EQ can get you a flat curve but it just causes distortion. The variations in the bass may be because of the room or because I put the mic at the height of the center of the HF horn at just 3ft away. Also, my equipment is probabaly not perfect either. My networks do have identical response though. I checked those a long time ago.

Thats pretty good if all you did was boost 3-4 db at 30 and 31 for that kind of bass, with the mic at the center of the HF horn that could have something to do with the bass being a little different from speaker to speaker, could have been a little of the room in there. Not that anything is wrong with that they just looked a little different from each other. Looking at that chart it does not explain the one thing I like most about the MWM, how big it sounds. [Y]

Overall it all looks great, bet it sounds even better than when I heard it, you have changed alot since then and having JC's helping is really nice also. It's always nice when someone with experience is there to confirm what you think your hearing, kind of tough with just one set of ears because you always wonder if it's right.

Really nice setup you have put together Mark, and thanks for getting me started in the MWM craziness, it's actually my favorite sounding speaker now.

[garymd]

Mark,

I think the size of your room has a lot to do with your power requirements. The VRDs (with Khorns) seem to be perfect for my basement when I want to crank it up. OTOH, my 299b is more than adequate in my family room with Cornwalls. I don't normally turn the Corns up too loud and it will distort beyond 12:00. I only tried that a couple times and it was just as an experiment. Once was when Greg (our Maine refinishing guru) was visiting and he made me do it! That was the first time I had ever tried and they definitely distorted.

There's something about feeling it in your chest every once in a while and the VRDs in UL have more than enough juice to get the job done. I can't wait to move that system to my other house where I can spread them out a bit more. The MC240s I used to own also had plenty of power and even the MkIIIs seemed to have more than enough. For years I ran my Corns with a Kenwood SS receiver @ 160 watts/channel. The mids and highs weren't as sweet but the chest-thumping bass was killer!

[mark1101]

Gary, I agree that around 50-60 wpc seems to be about right for the good sized rooms in my basement and for the other equipment I am using. In other words it seems to be enough and I have room left to go louder. The 50-60 seems to be the bottom though. Anything less I have tried just didn't satisfy me. I would be running it for all it's worth all the time and it would sound "pushed".

Watch out for those guys that come over and try to see how loud your system can go. []

[mungkiman]

I haven't heard your combo, but I'm a big fan of the MC250 and 2505