audionut said:
Me? For the cost of a set of Thor components one could have a set of Fostex FE208eSR shipped over from Japan and have change left for super-tweeters if needed... (as it is i could buy/build an entire system i'd be happy with, with just the driver budget)
The Thors have a number of features which i personally tend to dislike... woofers with severe break-up modes, MTM, dome tweeter, and a crossover... but as an example of the school of design they come from, i expect they are superb (with one of the proper boxes)
dave
iondrive said:
Ha! I damned well knew it! (sorry for the language, but this is the final confirmation I've been wanting) MathCad does not tell a lie. Those stuffing densities cripple the LF, as we knew it would. Can't get around the physics. All of which suggests to me that Augsperger's original articles (must seek those out at some point) referenced 'proper' TLs completely damping out the back wave of the driver.
The MLTL versions should be a good match for the lined Thor, albeit a much easier build, with superior dynamics (so long as Dave's swiss-cheese bracing is used to couple to magnets to the cabinet) and far less ripple. Fat Thor should be similar to how you describe the lined Thor, albeit with a considerable sight more LF grunt.
audionut said:
I'm with Dave on this one, albeit I'd probably take a slightly different approach. Couple of 'standard' 208ESigmas for me (although I'd get Dave to work on them), in a double back-horn of my own design with hyperbolic flare, additional horn-loaded supertweeters, and a pair of suitably proportioned woofers to handle everything below ~70Hz down to 10Hz. Either TL or pipe-horn loaded, as we'll roll them off above this point so their response higher up isn't too critical. Total price for the drivers will be similar to the Thor kit, minus cabinet. The XO to the tweeter is fairly simple, the LF one less so, which will make it more expensive, and certainly it's more cabinet work. But also goodnight Mr Thor. OK, so it's probably too hugeous for most people, but if I had the cash, that's what I'd be doing.
Unfortunately yes. I suppose I could bash a couple of rooms through. That's why sheds are important -they give you somewhere to sleep. 
Nice to dream & it's doable for the money (just).
Seriously though, for the money, I'd still do something other than a Thor variation, but that's just a reflection of my taste in reproduction & what I value most. Whatever I did, it would either be horn loaded, or a dipole, as those give me something other types can't. 208ESigmas with tweeters or maybe 168ESigmas with separate woofers would play a prominent role I suspect. As ever, YMMV.
Nice to dream & it's doable for the money (just). Seriously though, for the money, I'd still do something other than a Thor variation, but that's just a reflection of my taste in reproduction & what I value most. Whatever I did, it would either be horn loaded, or a dipole, as those give me something other types can't. 208ESigmas with tweeters or maybe 168ESigmas with separate woofers would play a prominent role I suspect. As ever, YMMV.
Poor Man's Thor
How about redesigning a Thor variant around a different set of drivers, like SEAS L18 and a lesser tweeter that the Millenium (many choices there!)
The component cost could be reduced towards $400USD while retaining most of the performance. And the project would be truly DIY, instead of a commercial kit
Just thinking out loud....
- Rob
planet10 said:
How about redesigning a Thor variant around a different set of drivers, like SEAS L18 and a lesser tweeter that the Millenium (many choices there!)
The component cost could be reduced towards $400USD while retaining most of the performance. And the project would be truly DIY, instead of a commercial kit
Just thinking out loud....
- Rob
Hi,
I personaly haven't heard anything better than the Thors. Okay maybe I have, I was at an exhibition here in Sofia of world's best speaker system, or maybe one of the more expensive (500k euros). Anyway, the system consisted of Wilson Audio's Alexandria X-2 (here 145k euros) 500 kilos each, preamp Wavac PR-T1 and poweramps Wavac HE-833 mk.II) and such, with the best from dCS(CD, transport etc.).
The system really sounded marvelous, but I couldn't say that the treble were substantially better than Seas Millennium Tweeter (T25CF002) (I had previously Seas Trym kit).
The point is Thor has the best price/performance ratio of everything I have ever heard, and it sounds terribly good. By the the end of next week I will have listened to the best of DIY in Bulgaria, horns with clones of the aforementioned Wavacs and such, but one strong point for the Thor design is that it is small, compared to a horn one.
I have but several questions
Regarding the Short Thor design, the two vertical lines on the drawing (at 1/3 and 2/3 approx from the depth) are not solid boards but swiss cheesed ones, right? Also must the single bracing on the Small Thor be also with holes?
Is it true that the best LF comes from TL, and not from horns? I was told that TL is the only resonance free enclosure, and the horn enclosure can give powerful bass, but only if the LF played matched the LF tuning of the box (i.e. something like the bass reflex)? Or if put another way, the TL (Thor) enclosure only boosts the LF that the speakers produce, whereas bass reflex and horns resonate on some frequency always with the same timbre, so for example you can't tell the difference between double bass and bass guitar, if both instruments play a tone at the tuning frequency?
Thanks in Advance
Konstantin
P.S. Sorry if I ask stupid questions, but I am new to loudspeaker building and I haven't found this far a good source to learn about different enclosure types and their pros and cons.
Could anybody point me to some place on the web to read the basics from A to Z, so I can contribute to this forum?
I personaly haven't heard anything better than the Thors. Okay maybe I have, I was at an exhibition here in Sofia of world's best speaker system, or maybe one of the more expensive (500k euros). Anyway, the system consisted of Wilson Audio's Alexandria X-2 (here 145k euros) 500 kilos each, preamp Wavac PR-T1 and poweramps Wavac HE-833 mk.II) and such, with the best from dCS(CD, transport etc.).
The system really sounded marvelous, but I couldn't say that the treble were substantially better than Seas Millennium Tweeter (T25CF002) (I had previously Seas Trym kit).
The point is Thor has the best price/performance ratio of everything I have ever heard, and it sounds terribly good. By the the end of next week I will have listened to the best of DIY in Bulgaria, horns with clones of the aforementioned Wavacs and such, but one strong point for the Thor design is that it is small, compared to a horn one.
I have but several questions
Regarding the Short Thor design, the two vertical lines on the drawing (at 1/3 and 2/3 approx from the depth) are not solid boards but swiss cheesed ones, right? Also must the single bracing on the Small Thor be also with holes?
Is it true that the best LF comes from TL, and not from horns? I was told that TL is the only resonance free enclosure, and the horn enclosure can give powerful bass, but only if the LF played matched the LF tuning of the box (i.e. something like the bass reflex)? Or if put another way, the TL (Thor) enclosure only boosts the LF that the speakers produce, whereas bass reflex and horns resonate on some frequency always with the same timbre, so for example you can't tell the difference between double bass and bass guitar, if both instruments play a tone at the tuning frequency?
Thanks in Advance
Konstantin
P.S. Sorry if I ask stupid questions, but I am new to loudspeaker building and I haven't found this far a good source to learn about different enclosure types and their pros and cons.
Could anybody point me to some place on the web to read the basics from A to Z, so I can contribute to this forum?
iondrive said:
Depends on the design & on the room... a TL that produces low bass can fit into a refrigerator sized box, a horn that goes as low would need to be built out into the yard... cost & size no object a horn probably produces the best bass... a TL produces no extra bass over a sealed enclosure if it is made to be resonance free... that bass might be more tubeful thou ... most TLs are resonant enclosures... and do keep in mind that in the broadest sense a horn is a TL (in the sense that TL space = QW space)
dave
Time for bed methinks.
planet10 said:
I just did an informal survey (i took a buch of holey braces as drawn and calculated the percentage that is holes) ... i'd put the practical limit at about 50% now. How much tou can get is dependent on the number of large holes, the size and number of driver cut-outs and other clearances, and whether you take care to preserve direct paths of force
dave
Attachments
By your diagrams I would say that some of the braces above are on the verge if not crossing. I guess we would have to be careful not to create a weak "path" amongst ajoining points in the interior cabinet. This is probably even more important than the actually percentage.
However, very difficult to assess with just the eye.
Then would there be a minimum holeage for proper air movement.....or in this case the least interference is the best? I guess what I am asking is there a point where removing more material will have no effect?
Thanks for taking the time out,
Mike
However, very difficult to assess with just the eye.
Then would there be a minimum holeage for proper air movement.....or in this case the least interference is the best? I guess what I am asking is there a point where removing more material will have no effect?
Thanks for taking the time out,
Mike
