Hi Mondogenerator.
The "TABAQ MICRO" prototype will be with Tang Band W2-803SM which I will recieve this week. This is a project to see what you can get out of these small drivers, could be used for back ground music in the kithcen. When you try to squeze "bass" out of small drivers, high Qts is needed (as you stated) and also a cabinet with a large volume, relatively to the driver.
I have never tried arrays, but has read about several interesting project in this area.
Hi from Bjorn
I
The "TABAQ MICRO" prototype will be with Tang Band W2-803SM which I will recieve this week. This is a project to see what you can get out of these small drivers, could be used for back ground music in the kithcen. When you try to squeze "bass" out of small drivers, high Qts is needed (as you stated) and also a cabinet with a large volume, relatively to the driver.
I have never tried arrays, but has read about several interesting project in this area.
Hi from Bjorn
I
i cant speak about that particular driver but both the w2-800sl and frs5x get to maybe 90db without a hp filter, although the frs5x with qts 0.7 sounds warmer and a vague semblance of bass is realistically reprnduced, the suffer with over excursion more severely, i believe as a direct result of the higher qts. I found that 1st order hp with 15-22uf saves the tone of the drivers as well as saving the coils! If i had around 8 or more arrayed per channel i believe they would be really rather good all things considered. I would not recommend running at any real volume without at least a capacitor, unless in groups of drivers. Whilst the model you quote isnt the same as the drivers im using, im sure there is little difference between them, in terms of max output over full audio spectrum
Thanks Bjorn, very interesting results, thank you for sparing the time to simulate. Im not sure that they would really dig THAT deep, but the smooth slow rate of roll off below Fs is definitely desirable to me.
I would imagine that 3 of these drivers together, would actually put out reasonable volume, if tuned appropriately, but I still think the xmax of 0.4mm may be a bit of a hindrance.
I would imagine that 3 of these drivers together, would actually put out reasonable volume, if tuned appropriately, but I still think the xmax of 0.4mm may be a bit of a hindrance.
Neither have I
I read an interesting thread a long time ago:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/181047-angled-array-two-drivers.html
This idea of an angled array of 2 drivers seemed interesting, and during discussion in other threads, I have thought/ have had suggested to me to perhaps experiment with a 3 driver array (IF that is strictly an array).
The centre driver high passed or not (depending on use), and the 2 surrounding drivers low passed at somewhere around the baffle step frequency, perhaps 1st order. A little like a miniature 3x2" MTM
On the desk I would try to move the port to the rear panel instead of the top/bottom. You simply extend the top to the rear panel outer surface (1,3 cm + wall thickness rear panel) and shorten the rear panel (1,3 cm + wall thickness top). I have done this with the "Ten Öre" (see picture). With 10 cm distance to the wall behind my desk it was okay.
Attachments
?
I don't want to be too insistent but just in case it was overlooked by anybody, I'm still looking for some input. I've heard many people trying to get away with the same volume for 2x drivers but that's not what I'm looking for, I'm "doubling my money" but I want to know what are the typical effects that come with this; i know the low end extension is the same but what about the overall sound... I've heard you get a little line array flavor even if you only have 2 drivers per channel.
You mean a Tabaq with the tang band w23-1287SI!?, that would be interesting, I have two of this drivers wich I wanted to use them in a sealed little box tunned to 200hz for a center channel... But a Tabaq design with this little driver it would a very interesting project...
Test folded TABAQ port down
I have tested the folded TABAQ. First with the opening facing upwards, then with the opening facing down with a plastic box 5 cm tall as a foot.
I can not hear the difference, so it works fine with a foot.
I have enclosed a picture from my "test lab"
I have tested the folded TABAQ. First with the opening facing upwards, then with the opening facing down with a plastic box 5 cm tall as a foot.
I can not hear the difference, so it works fine with a foot.
I have enclosed a picture from my "test lab"
Attachments
Hi skirmit, my original TABAQ is now playing with TB 4", so i can not do a direct test. However, the folded version with the 3" sound a little better in the treble. The 4" has a higer SPL and a more tight bass (like i like it).
You will not be dissapointet with the folded and the 3".
I will see if i can make a vidoe one of these days.
I have enclosed a measurement of the foldet TABAQ. Please note: This is an App on Android (AudioTool) and i get different readings on the smartphone and the TAB due to the build in mice.
You will not be dissapointet with the folded and the 3".
I will see if i can make a vidoe one of these days.
I have enclosed a measurement of the foldet TABAQ. Please note: This is an App on Android (AudioTool) and i get different readings on the smartphone and the TAB due to the build in mice.
Attachments
No real array effect
Last edited: