Bud,
Had a serious listening section today and found the sound of the violin/piano and the saxphone more lush and warm and had a feeling that the texture of those instruments are more delicate too. Sadly the glare / shout of the highest notes are still there. It seems that is coming from the center of the cone/whizzer and bullet plug area. Is the congestion I talked about is actually beaming??
Regards
Albert
BTW I didn't put any glue on yet.
Alberti,
High frequency disruptions come from two places. Only one of them makes sense, but the other is usually the bigger culprit.
The two areas are:
1.) Out at the edge of the main cone. The culprit is a Raleigh wave, created by the glue joint overlap with the cone. This structure of emission appears to affect the dispersion and resonance of energy that arises out of the center portion, in this case the whizzer. We need to make sure this area is controlled before investigating the whizzer and beak. This is the one that makes no sense.
2.) Whizzer zones. At the base of the whizzer and out at the top of the whizzer. Both of these areas usually have Raleigh waves and need to be tamed. However, this is only true on whizzers that are not an exponential horn, smoothly curving off of the voice coil. The Audio Nirvana 15 inch driver has this exponential horn type of whizzer and other than three ring sets nothing more is needed. I cannot tell which kind the 12 inch driver has, but my bet is on a more abrupt flare.
For the main cone you must apply a single coat of Zig 2 way acrylic glue, on the back side. This coat extends from the cone/surround joint 10mm down the cone and no further. If the joining surface is on the back side, then this 10mm zone starts at the first break for the initial pleat of the surround. If on the front it starts at the cone edge on the back.
The glue is a bit runny so an 8mm brush loaded and then drained on one side will be enough for 1/4 of a painted ring. Try to make the coat even, but perfection is not needed. Allow this to dry for at least 2 hours and then listen. If you hear no particular change do nothing more. If the sound changes character tell me what has occurred and I will offer advice on your next step. I have yet to work with a cone 8 inches and larger that does not have this problem and recently encountered a 4 inch cone with a drastic problem of this sort.
Bud
High frequency disruptions come from two places. Only one of them makes sense, but the other is usually the bigger culprit.
The two areas are:
1.) Out at the edge of the main cone. The culprit is a Raleigh wave, created by the glue joint overlap with the cone. This structure of emission appears to affect the dispersion and resonance of energy that arises out of the center portion, in this case the whizzer. We need to make sure this area is controlled before investigating the whizzer and beak. This is the one that makes no sense.
2.) Whizzer zones. At the base of the whizzer and out at the top of the whizzer. Both of these areas usually have Raleigh waves and need to be tamed. However, this is only true on whizzers that are not an exponential horn, smoothly curving off of the voice coil. The Audio Nirvana 15 inch driver has this exponential horn type of whizzer and other than three ring sets nothing more is needed. I cannot tell which kind the 12 inch driver has, but my bet is on a more abrupt flare.
For the main cone you must apply a single coat of Zig 2 way acrylic glue, on the back side. This coat extends from the cone/surround joint 10mm down the cone and no further. If the joining surface is on the back side, then this 10mm zone starts at the first break for the initial pleat of the surround. If on the front it starts at the cone edge on the back.
The glue is a bit runny so an 8mm brush loaded and then drained on one side will be enough for 1/4 of a painted ring. Try to make the coat even, but perfection is not needed. Allow this to dry for at least 2 hours and then listen. If you hear no particular change do nothing more. If the sound changes character tell me what has occurred and I will offer advice on your next step. I have yet to work with a cone 8 inches and larger that does not have this problem and recently encountered a 4 inch cone with a drastic problem of this sort.
Bud
Last edited:
For the main cone you must apply a single coat of Zig 2 way acrylic glue, on the back side. This coat extends from the cone/surround joint 10mm down the cone and no further. If the joining surface is on the back side, then this 10mm zone starts at the first break for the initial pleat of the surround. If on the front it starts at the cone edge on the back.
Bud,
If I look at the speaker at the front, the surround is sitting on top of the cone.
Does it mean it's on the front, then I have to start at the cone edge on the back - " edge " is it the joint of surround to the metal rim??
Albert
Bud,
If I look at the speaker at the front, the surround is sitting on top of the cone.
Does it mean it's on the front, then I have to start at the cone edge on the back - " edge " is it the joint of surround to the metal rim??
Albert
Hi Alberti,
With the surround glue surface on the front, you should start at the edge of the cone on the back. You may also need to coat the first portion of the backside of the surround at the cone edge, but not at this time. It is also quite possible that a second coat will be applied to the back side of the cone that is wider than the first. We are carefully exploring the driver characteristics. Were I to be treating this driver, these are the steps I would take too. I am just more used to hearing the results, but your descriptions should suffice.
Bud
With the surround glue surface on the front, you should start at the edge of the cone on the back. You may also need to coat the first portion of the backside of the surround at the cone edge, but not at this time. It is also quite possible that a second coat will be applied to the back side of the cone that is wider than the first. We are carefully exploring the driver characteristics. Were I to be treating this driver, these are the steps I would take too. I am just more used to hearing the results, but your descriptions should suffice.
Bud
Bud,
Have the glue applied at the back of the drivers from the cone/surround joint 10mm down. I'll let them set for 10 hours and fire them up tonight.
Albert
Hi Alberti and Bud,
I've been following the thread here, also having the AN12 drivers. I'm just curious on one point, how many hours do you have on your drivers so far? I haven't enabled my drivers yet but have been running them in open baffle for well over 300 hours at this point and have found "shout" issues much improved over time. I am wondering if part of the "shout" is related to driver break in. The wizzer on the AN12 looks to me the same "exponential" flare as the AN15 as best as I can tell from pictures of the 15.
I've been following the thread here, also having the AN12 drivers. I'm just curious on one point, how many hours do you have on your drivers so far? I haven't enabled my drivers yet but have been running them in open baffle for well over 300 hours at this point and have found "shout" issues much improved over time. I am wondering if part of the "shout" is related to driver break in. The wizzer on the AN12 looks to me the same "exponential" flare as the AN15 as best as I can tell from pictures of the 15.
Ed Schilling from the Horn Shoppe made a couple relevant comment on this. He uses a Fostex 126 driver for his back loaded horns and his initial comment upon receiving an EnABL'd pair was that they sounded like a well broken in pair of drivers, right out of the box. After a period of time he added that the major difference between the two sets was information coherence, that the well broken in units sounded confused in comparison with the EnABL'd drivers. Otherwise he thought they were very comparable.
Bud
Bud
Hi Bud,
That makes a lot of sense to me, breaking in opens things up, and enabling clarifies things by removing various resonances. I have my AN 12's crossed over to a pair of Goldwood 18 inch woofers ala MJK's H frames. Any experiences with the enable process when applied to subwoofers such as these?
That makes a lot of sense to me, breaking in opens things up, and enabling clarifies things by removing various resonances. I have my AN 12's crossed over to a pair of Goldwood 18 inch woofers ala MJK's H frames. Any experiences with the enable process when applied to subwoofers such as these?
Large cone drivers are strange. They seem to have a lot of noise rumbling around in them when used in enclosures. Applying EnABL does limit this to a great degree. In addition the room modes change and the bass notes extend into other rooms readily.... too readily for my wife, so I now have two 6 1/2 inch CSS XBL woofers per side, in an opposed firing, slant load, transmission line designed and built by Chrisb and Dave D at Planet 10.
I do not know how my experience with large woofers in enclosures will translate into open baffle, though I would be surprised to find that it was worse than untreated drivers. Bass transient pressure levels might get a bit frightening....
Bud
I do not know how my experience with large woofers in enclosures will translate into open baffle, though I would be surprised to find that it was worse than untreated drivers. Bass transient pressure levels might get a bit frightening....
Bud
I'd like to record my listening impressions now.
I had the opportunity to bring home two pairs of EL70s in identical vented enclosures, provided by Planet10. I was told they have been T/S matched and everything about them was as identical as possible, except that one had been enabled, and the other was stock. I had them in my home a couple days.
I'd like to be upfront about any biases or issues with my listening before my review:
1. I wanted enable to do wonders for me. I live close to Planet10 and want anything that can improve my system. What a combo I thought.
2. I love the EL70. I have a pair personally, and I'm crazy for it.
3. It took me roughly 3 minutes to change speaker combinations.
4. I used a mixture of Jazz, rock, spanish guitar, classical, and a movie (The Usual Suspects) to test.
5. I had previously scoured the enable threads and paid close attention to Bud's technical descriptions of the process and watched several youtube videos related to the process. At first I was very sceptical, but eventually with enough reading, I thought the technical descriptions made enough sense. To me it was the same thing as diffusion on a wall or something. Most important, I didn't disagree with the technical agruements for enable prior to listening.
6. I had certain expectations of what enable could do, such as:
- Reduce/eliminate room modes;
- Make my speakers dissappear;
- Increase driver linearity;
- Vastly improve off axis dispersion;
- Increase soundstage, detail, clarity, etc.
Some of these expectation I did not believe would happen, such as reduce room modes or increase driver linearity. I mean, those are motor and room related, enable doesn't affect those I thought. But one thing that caught my interest was the off axis bit. Enable seems popular among full range users, and most full rangers have off axis issues up high. So I thought possibly it does deliever on this point. Maybe the dots diffuse any off axis cancellations. I thought it somewhat makes sense.
Ok, with that out of the way, my impressions...
Simply put, there was very little difference between the two. It was such a small amount of difference I had to switch back and forth between speakers at least a dozen times before I felt like I could say there was a difference. Likely on the same level as changing a capacitor brand or a speaker cable. So yes, I heard a difference.
The difference was within the treble range only. I've said else where it was akin to reduced CSD. The treble wasn't as splashy. I must reiterate that it is difficult for me to describe it, because the difference was so small.
Nothing else changed about the sound.
Some things I noticed with both the pairs that goes against some of the improvements I was told would occur, were as follows. Power compression, the speakers were not linear up to the point of blowing the cone out of the speaker. Room modes were still present and as the same in both speakers. I should have measured the room with both just to show this, but I didn't. Off axis performance was identical, with treble sharply falling off when I stood up out of my LP. This was measured to be the case. The speakers remained the same obvious speakers and did not take on any form of the invisible speaker by becoming like I had live music right in front of me. Not even close actually. Again, this was just the same between both pairs.
I'll say it again, the difference was detectable only in the treble range (cymbals, guitar harmonics, esses from vocals, etc.). Not other frequency range was observed to be different.
Perhaps this is better suited to the technical thread, but after I auditioned them, I gave it some thought. My observations make sense. If the change I heard is from enable and not from Planet 10's other driver modifications or driver variation, it makes sense that enable would change very short wavelengths. They are very small dots after all.
In conclusion, I THINK there is a very small difference when enable is applied. So then is it better? I thought so. Is it worth it? No. My time is better spent learning to veneer or refining a cross over. I do think it looks cool though.
I would like to have the opportunity to do more enable comparisons. I'm lucky Dave is an understanding person, because he hasn't made a cent off me yet and I haven't embraced his affinity for enable, however he continues to help me in my DIY hifi hobby and offer opportunities to hear his commercial and personal offerings at any time.
I hope to hear more enable and be able to hear an improvement
I had the opportunity to bring home two pairs of EL70s in identical vented enclosures, provided by Planet10. I was told they have been T/S matched and everything about them was as identical as possible, except that one had been enabled, and the other was stock. I had them in my home a couple days.
I'd like to be upfront about any biases or issues with my listening before my review:
1. I wanted enable to do wonders for me. I live close to Planet10 and want anything that can improve my system. What a combo I thought.
2. I love the EL70. I have a pair personally, and I'm crazy for it.
3. It took me roughly 3 minutes to change speaker combinations.
4. I used a mixture of Jazz, rock, spanish guitar, classical, and a movie (The Usual Suspects) to test.
5. I had previously scoured the enable threads and paid close attention to Bud's technical descriptions of the process and watched several youtube videos related to the process. At first I was very sceptical, but eventually with enough reading, I thought the technical descriptions made enough sense. To me it was the same thing as diffusion on a wall or something. Most important, I didn't disagree with the technical agruements for enable prior to listening.
6. I had certain expectations of what enable could do, such as:
- Reduce/eliminate room modes;
- Make my speakers dissappear;
- Increase driver linearity;
- Vastly improve off axis dispersion;
- Increase soundstage, detail, clarity, etc.
Some of these expectation I did not believe would happen, such as reduce room modes or increase driver linearity. I mean, those are motor and room related, enable doesn't affect those I thought. But one thing that caught my interest was the off axis bit. Enable seems popular among full range users, and most full rangers have off axis issues up high. So I thought possibly it does deliever on this point. Maybe the dots diffuse any off axis cancellations. I thought it somewhat makes sense.
Ok, with that out of the way, my impressions...
Simply put, there was very little difference between the two. It was such a small amount of difference I had to switch back and forth between speakers at least a dozen times before I felt like I could say there was a difference. Likely on the same level as changing a capacitor brand or a speaker cable. So yes, I heard a difference.
The difference was within the treble range only. I've said else where it was akin to reduced CSD. The treble wasn't as splashy. I must reiterate that it is difficult for me to describe it, because the difference was so small.
Nothing else changed about the sound.
Some things I noticed with both the pairs that goes against some of the improvements I was told would occur, were as follows. Power compression, the speakers were not linear up to the point of blowing the cone out of the speaker. Room modes were still present and as the same in both speakers. I should have measured the room with both just to show this, but I didn't. Off axis performance was identical, with treble sharply falling off when I stood up out of my LP. This was measured to be the case. The speakers remained the same obvious speakers and did not take on any form of the invisible speaker by becoming like I had live music right in front of me. Not even close actually. Again, this was just the same between both pairs.
I'll say it again, the difference was detectable only in the treble range (cymbals, guitar harmonics, esses from vocals, etc.). Not other frequency range was observed to be different.
Perhaps this is better suited to the technical thread, but after I auditioned them, I gave it some thought. My observations make sense. If the change I heard is from enable and not from Planet 10's other driver modifications or driver variation, it makes sense that enable would change very short wavelengths. They are very small dots after all.
In conclusion, I THINK there is a very small difference when enable is applied. So then is it better? I thought so. Is it worth it? No. My time is better spent learning to veneer or refining a cross over. I do think it looks cool though.
I would like to have the opportunity to do more enable comparisons. I'm lucky Dave is an understanding person, because he hasn't made a cent off me yet and I haven't embraced his affinity for enable, however he continues to help me in my DIY hifi hobby and offer opportunities to hear his commercial and personal offerings at any time.
I hope to hear more enable and be able to hear an improvement
Thanks for an honest review, we could use a lot more like this instead of the over the top types that are abundant on here. It's obvious that you heard very little improvement if any which makes sense considering the little dots being painted on a driver cone.
Bud,
I'm enjoying my music for almost an hour now. The above treatment doesn't work at all. Can I go ahead to put glue at the back on the surround to the edge ?
Albert
I hope to hear more enable and be able to hear an improvement
Speakers were matched to within less than 1/10th dB -- that was my biggest criteria
I look forward to you commenting on the differences in soundstage/imaging.
dave
PS: blind i can tell you which speaker (of the 2 pair Ryan borrowed) is which, given appropriate source, very quickly.
Albert,
No, you should not. The next place to investigate is the backside of the whizzer. You will need a small diameter brushes as you want to paint two rings there, each as close to 6mm wide as you can get. One down as close to the base as you can get, the other right at the top and if there is a "witches hat brim" there, the back side of that. Again just one coating. If there is not enough room to get a brush onto the surface closest to the main cone, on the back, then you should apply the ring onto the front side, again as close to the join with the voice coil as you can get. The final location will be the top portion of the whizzer on the front side. The area from the top of the pattern to the final edge will need one coat. I wouldn't do them all at once. Instead, work from the join out to the edge, back first and then the front.
Bud
No, you should not. The next place to investigate is the backside of the whizzer. You will need a small diameter brushes as you want to paint two rings there, each as close to 6mm wide as you can get. One down as close to the base as you can get, the other right at the top and if there is a "witches hat brim" there, the back side of that. Again just one coating. If there is not enough room to get a brush onto the surface closest to the main cone, on the back, then you should apply the ring onto the front side, again as close to the join with the voice coil as you can get. The final location will be the top portion of the whizzer on the front side. The area from the top of the pattern to the final edge will need one coat. I wouldn't do them all at once. Instead, work from the join out to the edge, back first and then the front.
Bud
Dave, soundstage and imaging didn't change. Perhaps the image was a tad sharper in the treble because of the change, but not describable to me. Perhaps more listening would allow me to hear more differences.
I should note for those that enable their drivers and think wow. I started with the stock and then the enable. I thought WOW when I hooked them up. Then I went back and realized they were the same and that placebo got me. Careful, it's likely this happens to most people.
I should note for those that enable their drivers and think wow. I started with the stock and then the enable. I thought WOW when I hooked them up. Then I went back and realized they were the same and that placebo got me. Careful, it's likely this happens to most people.
So this is a good start. Normally I mod only one channel to see if I get somewhat disorientated with a feeling that each ear might be in a different room, then swap channels or speakers to see if the effect is similar. Also varying the listening volume also helps.
I have found that sometimes interaction between the amp and speaker can also effect sound enough to mask out some improvements. So if we are looking for improvement, we cannot assume that the problem is only in one place.
Last edited: