Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
OP
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
I gave the measurements to a friend in the HVAC business and he's getting a quote on parts. Parts should run somewhere around $200 + labor.
Most of the visible duct work here would be cut out. Then 3 pieces would be installed. The bottom piece would be a 7 inch offset to the rear side of the cavity. The top piece would be a square corner that contains deflectors. These would be joined with a 14 x 8 inch sheet metal column.
Flexable duct is not recommended in the main duct work coming out of the furnace.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,703
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,703 |
Well that's good news that you have it figured out. I could understand labor costing a few bucks but curious why parts for that would be $200.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
OP
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
I was told the parts have to be custom made. I'm not sure why. It seems like they would be ready available to me. But it's around $80 per top and bottom part for $160, then the middle part and misc whatever.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,955
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,955 |
Hmmmmmm. Custom assembled but I wouldn't think custom made. There seems to be enough pre-made parts of all shapes and angles to accommodate what needs to be designed here. Just a few examples from my first search. Of course, I may be greatly oversimplifying and I'm probably the type of customer these contractors really hate for doing so. Perhaps the 90 degree fitting with the deflector in it but I can't see that being complicated or hard to find.
With great power comes Awesome irresponsibility.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,863
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,863 |
murph, a hard 90 would cause problems with the air flow... air doesn't like to do sharp 90 degree bends, if you were to put a 90 in there it would greatly reduce the CFM rating of his HVAC system... this is probably the reason for the custom part, maintain the CFM rating with non-standard parts... you will need the same overall volume inside the duct, with a non-standard shape....
I believe this is the reason for the "custom" work...
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
OP
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
After 3 evenings of listening to something with my current setup...
2 pairs of M22 mains VP160 under M2 over EP350
here's my observation so far...
The M2 and VP160 is a poor tonal match. With the VP100 and VP150, I couldn't even tell that the M2 was working. With the VP160, it's obvious that the tonal quality of the M2 is much, much higher than the VP160. it gives certain voices a colored upper end sound (a tinny sound, if you will). An M3 might make a better match for my upper center channel, but I wouldn't know without trying one first.
The M22 and VP160 combination is working good together. That might be good news for those that want a VP160, but don't want to swap out their M22 mains. The VP160 adds a lot of missing dimension, especially for special effects where a loud noise gets blasted in the center channel. For music, it also adds in some mid bass that I was having a hard time hearing before.
So, overall, I'm quite pleased I've added the VP160 center channel to the mix.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 901
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 901 |
I want to hook up my 160 above and my 150 below but Brent said I should hook them up in series instead of parallel with my 5500 onkyo amp. Any thoughts on this JohnK?
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,181 Likes: 1
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,181 Likes: 1 |
Interesting report Brian, thanks. How is the tonal match between the VP160 and the M22's? I know you said they work well together. I guess I'm surprised since the M2 and M22 have a good tonal match to each other but the 160 does not play nice with the M2 but does with M22? Maybe it's more obvious as they are both being run as center channels with same input signal?
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
OP
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
Series = 14 ohms. Parallel = 3.43 ohms. (Note: 2 8ohm parallel = 4 ohm).
Calculation follows:
vp150 = 6 ohms vp160 = 8 ohms
To calculate Series, it's total ohms 6 + 8 = 14 ohms.
To calculate Parallel, it's done this way: 1 / (1/6) + (1/8) = 1 / (4/24) + (3/24) = 1 / (7/24) = 1 / .2916 = 3.43 ohms.
(I've been running my center M2 + VP150 at 3.43 ohm with a Pioneer Elite for months with no problem.)
Last edited by CatBrat; 02/09/12 09:15 PM.
|
|
|
Re: In-Cabinet VP160
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015
axiomite
|
OP
axiomite
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 6,015 |
How is the tonal match between the VP160 and the M22's?
I'm not finding something that sounds 'wrong' with VP160 + M22, like i did with the M2. So, to me, there is a good tonal match. If I were to do some sort of A/B comparison I would probably hear a difference, but with both of them playing at the same time, I can't detect any tonal miss-match. I hope that answers your question.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,484
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
1,228
guests, and
6
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|