Here is a requested link.....Saburo cabinets with EnABLe
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=137103
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=137103
Chilli Chang cabinet EnABL - Pt 3
G'day,
This follows on from the first two posts which start here.
OK so next step is to do the baffle, mouths and all external edges.
See the positioning of the patterns in the pic below (colour coded for your viewing pleasure)
Block Sizes
8mm x 4mm for mouths (red lines)
10mm x 5mm for Baffle and all External Cabinet edges (blue and green lines)
Cheers,
Alex
G'day,
This follows on from the first two posts which start here.
OK so next step is to do the baffle, mouths and all external edges.
See the positioning of the patterns in the pic below (colour coded for your viewing pleasure)
Block Sizes
8mm x 4mm for mouths (red lines)
10mm x 5mm for Baffle and all External Cabinet edges (blue and green lines)
Cheers,
Alex
Attachments
MisterTwister said:
G'day MisterTwister,
Very early on when I started exploring this I sought advice from Bud in the EnABL processes thread with regard to cabinet EnABL.
EnABLing the baffle edge is following the same principles that you follow with EnABLing near the edge of driver cones.
I have tried the pattern through the middle of the baffle, but it just sounded wrong to me for some reason. It sounds right on baffle edges.
Block size is again based on advice from Bud.
His suggestion was to use 18 block pairs and four (4) x baffle width as the circumference.
So, baffle width is measured edge to edge, and for mouths, measure the distance across from internal edge to internal edge.
Then just enter the numbers into the EnABL block size calculator.
Cheers,
Alex
GR Research M & W 130
Hi Folks,
Here we go again! GR Research M & W130, alleged mid and mid woofer only drivers.
I have read some negative comments about these drivers, from folks who
are certain that only fine waterfalls and nice numbers define "better" audio
reproduction. In the case of these drivers, don't believe it. Sitting nude on the usual stands, they provide a clear, delicately detailed and VERY musical presentation. So much so that I was reluctant to treat them, for fear that I would finally manage to degrade a speaker's performance with EnABL. I was finally convinced to proceed when I discovered how inexpensive it would be to hide my embarrassment.
Application of the pattern rings is straight forward and the, likely, PVA coating already on the cone surface, takes the poly paint very well. As usual, you need to find a pen point that is smaller than the width of the guide bars, for each pattern ring set.
Application of the gloss coat will be startling. The cone coating turns white!!!!! But only for a while. Two coats of Gloss on the cone and one over the center dome and you are done. These are the usual 50% cut materials with the first coat as a radial application. The pre-coat on the cone allows you to use a single side tamped brush load to cover 1/4 of the cone, brushing from dome joint to surround. The second coat should be applied in four stacked circular brush strokes per quarter, after the initial coat has dried and the worrisome white out response to the Gloss has once again turned clear.
The sound after treatment has the usual increase in low level information
content and the perceived sound field is very wide and transparent. And that is it, no other changes occur. Not because EnABL is not effective here, but because so little needed to be corrected. The driver, once treated, becomes an excellent full range driver, not it's original intent I was told. A crossover to a high frequency driver worked well anywhere from 4 kHz to 12 kHz just to add a measure of extra air and pull the upper registers up in level to the rest of the driver's performance.
These are not the best drivers I have ever dealt with, but, they are in the top five. And, when you consider their cost and either untreated or treated performance, they are a very desirable driver. Not a comment I will make about very many drivers
The usual pics can be found in the collection at,
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine for all pics.
I have attached the pattern guides, and they are for either driver.
Bud
Hi Folks,
Here we go again! GR Research M & W130, alleged mid and mid woofer only drivers.
I have read some negative comments about these drivers, from folks who
are certain that only fine waterfalls and nice numbers define "better" audio
reproduction. In the case of these drivers, don't believe it. Sitting nude on the usual stands, they provide a clear, delicately detailed and VERY musical presentation. So much so that I was reluctant to treat them, for fear that I would finally manage to degrade a speaker's performance with EnABL. I was finally convinced to proceed when I discovered how inexpensive it would be to hide my embarrassment.
Application of the pattern rings is straight forward and the, likely, PVA coating already on the cone surface, takes the poly paint very well. As usual, you need to find a pen point that is smaller than the width of the guide bars, for each pattern ring set.
Application of the gloss coat will be startling. The cone coating turns white!!!!! But only for a while. Two coats of Gloss on the cone and one over the center dome and you are done. These are the usual 50% cut materials with the first coat as a radial application. The pre-coat on the cone allows you to use a single side tamped brush load to cover 1/4 of the cone, brushing from dome joint to surround. The second coat should be applied in four stacked circular brush strokes per quarter, after the initial coat has dried and the worrisome white out response to the Gloss has once again turned clear.
The sound after treatment has the usual increase in low level information
content and the perceived sound field is very wide and transparent. And that is it, no other changes occur. Not because EnABL is not effective here, but because so little needed to be corrected. The driver, once treated, becomes an excellent full range driver, not it's original intent I was told. A crossover to a high frequency driver worked well anywhere from 4 kHz to 12 kHz just to add a measure of extra air and pull the upper registers up in level to the rest of the driver's performance.
These are not the best drivers I have ever dealt with, but, they are in the top five. And, when you consider their cost and either untreated or treated performance, they are a very desirable driver. Not a comment I will make about very many drivers
The usual pics can be found in the collection at,
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine for all pics.
I have attached the pattern guides, and they are for either driver.
Bud
I've just finished EnABLing the drivers (have to make that clear given my ravings about cabinet EnABL) on a pair of small two way speakers.
These use a 3 inch mid woofer, tweeter and 4 inch passive radiator instead of a port.
The subwoofer that went with them got destroyed some time ago.
I have Ed's EnABL kit which is terriffic to use.
Although, it ships with paint that goes on white and dries clear.
It was slow going for the first couple of drivers and I had to be careful not to go over the blocks I had already painted because they started drying clear by the time I got right around the driver.
I got faster at it, so it's no longer an issue and I like the stealth look.
I did the 3 inch woofer first.
These I had already treated with damar years ago, so I did a couple of light coats of mico gloss and then listened.
The micro gloss makes damar sound slow and lifeless by comparison. So, no more damar for me.
Then came the application of the EnABL blocks.
Interesting, I noticed the usual changes i have become accustomed to with EnABL, but it was not as dramatic as I expected. Then I applied the micro gloss coat over the top.
WOW!!!
What a difference!!
Clarity, detail - suddenly all the background muddle that you come to expect from speakers is gone.
I painted the pattern around the tweeter surround next.
Micro gloss first, then pattern and then micro gloss on top.
This took much of the edge off the tweeter and made things clearer in the highs but less offensive to the ears.
Finally, I EnABL'd the cones of the 4 inch passive radiators.
Again, these had been treated with damar years ago.
So, two light coats of micro gloss, EnABL blocks, then micro gloss on top.
Listening close to the PR's they now have a distinct and clear bass (well, mid bass) coming from them!
Before EnABL, the PR's had a muddy, disorderly sound.
EnABLing the PR cones brought a sense of order and clarity that was just not there before.
My only regret is that I had used damar previously.
I believe that the damar detracts from the magic I could have had from the driver EnABL process.
In spite of this, I'm delighted with the changes brought about by driver EnABL.
From here on i will be using the mod podge (puzzle coat) that dave from planet10 uses as his pre EnABL treatment.
I'll keep practicing on cheaper drivers until I have the calligraphy pen mastered, then I'll tackle my FE167E's.
Lastly, driver EnABL reveals subtle detail that you just can't get to with cabinet EnABL only.
However, combining driver EnABL AND cabinet EnABL brings about a tremendous synergy that has to be heard to understand.
Oh yeah, one more thing is that after driver EnABL, the speakers can be played much louder before any signs of distress are apparant (and these are not high quality speakers).
Loud and clean is really nice.
Cheers,
Alex
These use a 3 inch mid woofer, tweeter and 4 inch passive radiator instead of a port.
The subwoofer that went with them got destroyed some time ago.
I have Ed's EnABL kit which is terriffic to use.
Although, it ships with paint that goes on white and dries clear.
It was slow going for the first couple of drivers and I had to be careful not to go over the blocks I had already painted because they started drying clear by the time I got right around the driver.
I got faster at it, so it's no longer an issue and I like the stealth look.
I did the 3 inch woofer first.
These I had already treated with damar years ago, so I did a couple of light coats of mico gloss and then listened.
The micro gloss makes damar sound slow and lifeless by comparison. So, no more damar for me.
Then came the application of the EnABL blocks.
Interesting, I noticed the usual changes i have become accustomed to with EnABL, but it was not as dramatic as I expected. Then I applied the micro gloss coat over the top.
WOW!!!
What a difference!!Clarity, detail - suddenly all the background muddle that you come to expect from speakers is gone.
I painted the pattern around the tweeter surround next.
Micro gloss first, then pattern and then micro gloss on top.
This took much of the edge off the tweeter and made things clearer in the highs but less offensive to the ears.
Finally, I EnABL'd the cones of the 4 inch passive radiators.
Again, these had been treated with damar years ago.
So, two light coats of micro gloss, EnABL blocks, then micro gloss on top.
Listening close to the PR's they now have a distinct and clear bass (well, mid bass) coming from them!
Before EnABL, the PR's had a muddy, disorderly sound.
EnABLing the PR cones brought a sense of order and clarity that was just not there before.
My only regret is that I had used damar previously.
I believe that the damar detracts from the magic I could have had from the driver EnABL process.
In spite of this, I'm delighted with the changes brought about by driver EnABL.
From here on i will be using the mod podge (puzzle coat) that dave from planet10 uses as his pre EnABL treatment.
I'll keep practicing on cheaper drivers until I have the calligraphy pen mastered, then I'll tackle my FE167E's.
Lastly, driver EnABL reveals subtle detail that you just can't get to with cabinet EnABL only.
However, combining driver EnABL AND cabinet EnABL brings about a tremendous synergy that has to be heard to understand.
Oh yeah, one more thing is that after driver EnABL, the speakers can be played much louder before any signs of distress are apparant (and these are not high quality speakers).
Loud and clean is really nice.
Cheers,
Alex
planet10 said:
Do you mean these - Groundside Electrons?
MisterTwister said:add pigtails to where? I hope not to listener.
G'day dave,
Many thanks for the pigtail suggestion.
Bud actually put me onto the pigtails ages ago, but at the time my brain was overloaded by EnABL.
I just couldn't cope with another mind bending concept like groundside electron pools etc.
So last night, I made up a single pigtail using 2 x 20cm lengths of some good quality but old (15-18 years) OFC jumbo speaker cable.
From memory there is somewhere around 270-300 strands in each length.
So I looped both lengths and soldered all four (4) ends together which would give me around somehwere between 500 - 600 loops.
Soldered a single length of 16 gauge magnet wire onto the end and wrapped a bit of tape over the soldered part.
I connected it to both left and right speaker ground outputs on my amp so that the pigtail was in the middle.
Result? Wider soundstage, more low level detail, transients seemed crisper! Another layer of spurious noise was removed!
Put on Heath Ledger film called 'A Knights Tale' at a low volume level (after 11pm at night, kids in bed etc.).
The background noise I could hear on the soundtrack at a low listening level - wind in the trees, birds, animals, people talking in the background...amazing!
I think I could even hear the sound of cars driving on a freeway (not sure though, could have been just the wind).
Looks like I need to go buy some Litz wire and shoelaces!
Cheers,
Alex
Many thanks for the pigtail suggestion.
Bud actually put me onto the pigtails ages ago, but at the time my brain was overloaded by EnABL.
I just couldn't cope with another mind bending concept like groundside electron pools etc.
So last night, I made up a single pigtail using 2 x 20cm lengths of some good quality but old (15-18 years) OFC jumbo speaker cable.
From memory there is somewhere around 270-300 strands in each length.
So I looped both lengths and soldered all four (4) ends together which would give me around somehwere between 500 - 600 loops.
Soldered a single length of 16 gauge magnet wire onto the end and wrapped a bit of tape over the soldered part.
I connected it to both left and right speaker ground outputs on my amp so that the pigtail was in the middle.
Result? Wider soundstage, more low level detail, transients seemed crisper! Another layer of spurious noise was removed!
Put on Heath Ledger film called 'A Knights Tale' at a low volume level (after 11pm at night, kids in bed etc.).
The background noise I could hear on the soundtrack at a low listening level - wind in the trees, birds, animals, people talking in the background...amazing!
I think I could even hear the sound of cars driving on a freeway (not sure though, could have been just the wind).
Looks like I need to go buy some Litz wire and shoelaces!
Cheers,
Alex
I've received a question from Dinesh. I'd like to check my response to him against your experiences.
Dinesh asks if and what benefits he would realize in treating his Eminence Alpha's.
I've responded to him that the effects are greater on higher frequencies and that the lower range of the Alpha's would remain mostly unaffected.
Your comments, please.
Dinesh asks if and what benefits he would realize in treating his Eminence Alpha's.
I've responded to him that the effects are greater on higher frequencies and that the lower range of the Alpha's would remain mostly unaffected.
Your comments, please.
Hi Ed,
I have treated Beta and Delta 8 drivers from Emminenece. The Beta 8 requires some back side patterns to quell a strong Rlaeigh wave, circulating in the outer third of the cone. The Delta 8 does not have this problem.
While the leading edges of all sounds are helped by EnABL the trailing, or settling side of signals receives the lions share of the benefit, below middle C. If you listen to a single piano note, on an A/B comparison, you will find all you need to know about what effect EnABL is providing. Will not matter what piano key either.
However, that initial attack, after the hammer has lifted from the strings, is a "high frequency" event and as you move down in the scale the strings themselves have a slower rise time and so the major benefit shows up in the clarity of the sustained blend of the strings and their lack of deterioration in tone and clarity, as the note played dies away.
Bud
I have treated Beta and Delta 8 drivers from Emminenece. The Beta 8 requires some back side patterns to quell a strong Rlaeigh wave, circulating in the outer third of the cone. The Delta 8 does not have this problem.
While the leading edges of all sounds are helped by EnABL the trailing, or settling side of signals receives the lions share of the benefit, below middle C. If you listen to a single piano note, on an A/B comparison, you will find all you need to know about what effect EnABL is providing. Will not matter what piano key either.
However, that initial attack, after the hammer has lifted from the strings, is a "high frequency" event and as you move down in the scale the strings themselves have a slower rise time and so the major benefit shows up in the clarity of the sustained blend of the strings and their lack of deterioration in tone and clarity, as the note played dies away.
Bud
dlr, please go away. There is another thread set aside for people like you and please keep this thread for us people who are interested in learning and who have no desire for a p@*&#*g contest.
Mods, if this was out of line, nettiquette wise, please cut off thye top portion up till here of this post.
Ed,
Thanks a lot for opening up this discussion. I want to try Enabling and I have many questions. Perhaps some of which might have been answered, often it gets lost among the din.
Over the last year or so, Enabl has been gathering a pretty big following, which have included some of the most respected members of this community. I do not understand the physics of it, nor do I insist that I must, I just want to try and see.
I have an OB with JX92 and an Alpha 15 in a H Frame. I have heard that the effects of Enabl on Jordan JX-92 has been less than spectacular unlike the Fostex, so I am still thinking about it. However that leaves the baffle, and woofer and hence the question I asked Ed.
Bud, you mentioned Eminence 8 inchers, I am not sure I heard an answer on woofers in particular. Specially since my Alpha 15 when I rework the xover will have cutoff around 400Hz. Alex seem to report improvements on woofers. Can you please expand on it a little.
What is the best way to Enable an Alpha 15.
What is the best way to Enable an OB baffle.
Thanks a lot,
Dinesh
Mods, if this was out of line, nettiquette wise, please cut off thye top portion up till here of this post.
Ed LaFontaine said:
Ed,
Thanks a lot for opening up this discussion. I want to try Enabling and I have many questions. Perhaps some of which might have been answered, often it gets lost among the din.
Over the last year or so, Enabl has been gathering a pretty big following, which have included some of the most respected members of this community. I do not understand the physics of it, nor do I insist that I must, I just want to try and see.
I have an OB with JX92 and an Alpha 15 in a H Frame. I have heard that the effects of Enabl on Jordan JX-92 has been less than spectacular unlike the Fostex, so I am still thinking about it. However that leaves the baffle, and woofer and hence the question I asked Ed.
Bud, you mentioned Eminence 8 inchers, I am not sure I heard an answer on woofers in particular. Specially since my Alpha 15 when I rework the xover will have cutoff around 400Hz. Alex seem to report improvements on woofers. Can you please expand on it a little.
What is the best way to Enable an Alpha 15.
What is the best way to Enable an OB baffle.
Thanks a lot,
Dinesh
Dinesh,
I have a JX92S & have also been slow about enable treatment - partly based on the price of these drives & partly, as you said, the results for this driver were not as beneficial as with other drives. I think Bud clarified this at the time by saying that the Jordans were already pretty good anyway & maybe also that the effects were not as pronounced on the aluminium(?) baffles of the Jordans as with other baffles.
Maybe Bud can say more?
I also seem to remember soonsg(?) had done extensive work on the Jordans and was going to release some product or info?
I have a JX92S & have also been slow about enable treatment - partly based on the price of these drives & partly, as you said, the results for this driver were not as beneficial as with other drives. I think Bud clarified this at the time by saying that the Jordans were already pretty good anyway & maybe also that the effects were not as pronounced on the aluminium(?) baffles of the Jordans as with other baffles.
Maybe Bud can say more?
I also seem to remember soonsg(?) had done extensive work on the Jordans and was going to release some product or info?