60 Degree DIY Mid Hi - AKA PM60

How does the pm60 behave with techno music? As for subwoofers, has anyone tried them with WSX? Are they better or worse than TH118? Has anyone tried a different trumpet? I love the aggressive design of the PM90 horn, is there another horn for the PM60?
Sorry for the many questions😊
 
The 90 degree version uses this horn -
https://www.rcf.it/products/product-detail/-/journal_content/56_INSTANCE_2MT9qNpeXdu4/20195/292733

The 60 degree version uses this horn -
http://www.eighteensound.com/en/products/horn/1-4/0/XT1464

There are very few suitable horns. The problem is finding a horn to fit into a relatively small box that has a cut off frequency low enough for the required crossover frequency of 650 to 700 Hz.

Both the PM90 and PM60 will work very well with Techno music. I would suggest raising the crossover to the Sub to around 120Hz for Techno and EDM.

Note: - the PM90 & 60 are not designed to have a flat frequency response and must be used with DSP and EQ-ed and time aligned.
 
Peter Morris said:
The 90 degree version uses this horn -
https://www.rcf.it/products/product-detail/-/journal_content/56_INSTANCE_2MT9qNpeXdu4/20195/292733

The 60 degree version uses this horn -
http://www.eighteensound.com/en/products/horn/1-4/0/XT1464

There are very few suitable horns. The problem is finding a horn to fit into a relatively small box that has a cut off frequency low enough for the required crossover frequency of 650 to 700 Hz.

Both the PM90 and PM60 will work very well with Techno music. I would suggest raising the crossover to the Sub to around 120Hz for Techno and EDM.

Note: - the PM90 & 60 are not designed to have a flat frequency response and must be used with DSP and EQ-ed and time aligned.
Click to expand...

If I used the horns http://www.eighteensound.com/en/products/horn/1-4/0/XR1464C would the cutoff frequency be too high?
And if instead I took this horn https://www.rcf.it/it_IT/products/product-detail/hf64/292713
The only difference would be in the mounting measurements, if I left behind, would it cause damage? Would other changes be needed?
 
Lorenzo Castelli said:
If I used the horns http://www.eighteensound.com/en/products/horn/1-4/0/XR1464C would the cutoff frequency be too high?
And if instead I took this horn https://www.rcf.it/it_IT/products/product-detail/hf64/292713
The only difference would be in the mounting measurements, if I left behind, would it cause damage? Would other changes be needed?
Click to expand...

Both of those horns have a smaller mouth than the recommended ones, therefore they will both provide less acoustic loading at the bottom end of their frequency response. That's exactly the opposite of what you want in a horn for these boxes.

In other words, if you have to ask then you should stick with the recommended horns.

HTH,
David.
 
Salmirabile said:
Hey everyone, I've only just stumbled across this build from Peter and thinks it's amazing how much detail there really is and can't wait to start building!

I also wanna say thanks to Peter for helping me out this morning with some info.

I've just finished drawing up the plans in sketchup as it really allows me to check out the design before i build it and I've also rendered a few pics to show what finish I might be going for.

I've attached the sketchup file for whoever wants it.

All the best
Sal
Click to expand...

You mean these plans? They lack some tricks, such as the internal curves. The original Peter Morris box is slightly trapezoid, this is rectangular
 

Attachments

David Sturzenbecher said:
Those details are covered in the posts. Make sure to read the 90degree and 60 degree threads. Both are required reading.
Click to expand...
I have read both conversations, I should stretch all the pieces a few mm per side so that I can make the shape engraved on the side walls. The question that concerns me is why the original is slightly trapezoidal and this is rectangular?
 
Lorenzo Castelli said:
I have read both conversations, I should stretch all the pieces a few mm per side so that I can make the shape engraved on the side walls. The question that concerns me is why the original is slightly trapezoidal and this is rectangular?
Click to expand...

The original is rectangular. There was never a fully trapezoidal version.

There are complete drawings available in one of my previous posts. They include the necessary pocketing:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h16is6mbjig6fcy/pm90_current.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vvhnwc5x73eos1/pm90_current.dwg?dl=0
 
Max Warasila said:
The original is rectangular. There was never a fully trapezoidal version.

There are complete drawings available in one of my previous posts. They include the necessary pocketing:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h16is6mbjig6fcy/pm90_current.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/8vvhnwc5x73eos1/pm90_current.dwg?dl=0
Click to expand...


Congratulations on your designs, really done well. Peter's PM60s are slightly trapezoidal in the back, you can see the old photos. Would you have these designs for the PM60? These concern the PM90
 
Pawel Ung said:
Hi Everyone, I was wondering if replacing the B&C compression driver to 18sound ND1460 http://www.eighteensound.com/en/products/hf-driver/1-4/8/ND1460. It has a fairly similar specification of spl, frequency reconstruction and 3 times cheaper in my case (tight on a budget). Anyways, 80W less of continuous power handling (200W to 280W). Worth trying?
Click to expand...
Short answer - No ... sorry ... this design requires a crossover point between the 12' drivers and the HF section of between 600 - 700Hz. The ND1460 will not be happy going that low and will not be capable of keeping up with 12' in mids. Thats why the recommend drivers are the BMS4594HE or the B&C DCX464 ... and as a cheeper option 4" diaphargm drivers from B&C, RCF and the 4594 or 4593

B&C DE1090TN - https://bcspeakers.com/en/products/hf-driver/1-4/8/de1090tn

RCF ND950 1.4 https://www.rcf.it/en_US/products/product-detail/nd950-1-4/292823
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pawel Ung
Hi guys, I have a question regarding FIR. I'm just starting to understand it and now I'm stuck between wanting to experiment and not knowing whether my DSP unit selection is optimal for my goal. I want to buy a FIR-capable DSP unit and start playing with it, while not having to buy another one in the future due to realizing that something doesn't quite match.
I'll have two PM60s triamped, so six channels total. And then two 18" subs - two more channels. I want to use the Lake LM26 for FIR processing in the future. And I'm wondering about the following:
A) is it 'ok' to use the six OUTs on the LM26 for 2SUB, 2MID,2MID-COAX and leave the 2HF-COAX (meaning the high frequency driver of the Coax) without FIR processing. It seems like I would need it more in the lower frequencies. By 'ok' I mean sacrificing my ability to carve out successively better audio quality.
B) The 12" in the PM60 will be driven by a Crown 4x3500HD (I actually will have 4xPM60, that's why 4Ch-amp, but that's not really relevant right now), which can do FIR, I can even import FIR settings via .csv file in Audio Architect. So ideally I would run the 2SUBS, 2MID-COAX, 2HF-COAX with the 6 OUTs of the LM26 and the 2MID via the FIR-capable Crown Amp. But I'm not sure whether that leads to potential problems (e.g. in phase or delay) if I run a different FIR unit within that midband.
Now I'm aware that there are FIR-DSP units by other brands that have 8OUTs, but I heard the Lake has the superior sound quality.
Any further advice is highly appreciated.
Thanks!!
 
Top Bottom