Alex,
What sort of driver had you coated with Damar? What had you found with the effects of Damar. I ask because I have never used the material and because your next comment, about painting gloss over the Damar was so surprising.
Could you wax a bit more eloquently please? I do not remember ever just applying the gloss, without EnABL as an underpinning. This because I had tried so many coatings over the years, with so little success, most either robbed the driver of any sort of dynamics or made the poor dispersion worse and aggravated sharp peaks in response. What did the Gloss with Damar provide please?
Bud
What sort of driver had you coated with Damar? What had you found with the effects of Damar. I ask because I have never used the material and because your next comment, about painting gloss over the Damar was so surprising.
Could you wax a bit more eloquently please? I do not remember ever just applying the gloss, without EnABL as an underpinning. This because I had tried so many coatings over the years, with so little success, most either robbed the driver of any sort of dynamics or made the poor dispersion worse and aggravated sharp peaks in response. What did the Gloss with Damar provide please?
Bud
Dave, Bud and Alex, thanks for your inputs on Micro Gloss versus Damar, as well as on the paint issue. So it does appear that at this moment there is no point in trying to re-invent the wheel; what Bud has found out about Micro Gloss is not easy to replicate with any other material. It might take prolonged research and unless the EnABL process is understood better, this might be a vain pursuit. So I am going to look for Micro Gloss. Thanks again everybody.
I also take it that Fostex' Banana Pulp cone like in the 168ESigma which I have, will also benefit from the EnABL treatment, as well as Wool Cones.
I also take it that Fostex' Banana Pulp cone like in the 168ESigma which I have, will also benefit from the EnABL treatment, as well as Wool Cones.
BudP said:
G'day Bud,
Two drivers were fairly heavily treated with Damar previously and both have subsequently been EnABL'd.
I was wanting to learn what the addition of Micro Gloss to the whole cone would sound like.
1) RS 40-1354A Fullrange driver
I actually followed Bob Brines advice on treating this driver with Damar.
Damar tamed a lot of peakiness in the HF response and also improved the bass response as it makes the cone stiffer.
There was less garble in the sound once Damar had been applied to cone and whizzer.
The coating of Micro Gloss on the whole cone made things seem come more alive somehow.
Music became more lively and dynamic - which by contrast made the Damar sound somewhat dull and lifeless.
2) 3 1/2 inch mid woofer in Post #208
Very similar result with Damar. Less peakiness, more bass and less garble.
Micro Gloss again brought the sound to life again somehow that Damar doesn't. It's like Micro Gloss adds a certain sparkle.
I'm in the process of treating a pair of bookshelf speakers donated to me by a mate that went overseas.
Ultimately, one speaker will become fully EnABL'd (drivers, ports, cabinet) and the other will remain untouched so I can demonstrate the effect of EnABL.
The 5 1/2 inch woofers cones are paper but come with some sort of coating on them already.
I've put two coats of Micro Gloss (50% gloss/50% water) over the whole cone so far.
I'll try a get a listening session with these in the next day or two and post some comments.
Cheers,
Alex
Had a chance tonight to listen to the 5 1/2 inch woofers. A new and strange experience for me - listening to just the woofers with tweeters disconnected.
I moved to speakers around the other day and lost track of which one was painted with Micro Gloss!
The cones are white and come with a shiny coating of some sort, so by looking at them it is impossible to tell the difference.
Although, after the listening session I placed them side by side under a bright light - the dust caps are black and the one painted with Micro Gloss had the faintest hint of gloss.
Anyway, I picked the Micro Gloss one fairly quickly - clearer mids and highs. So for these woofers, Micro Gloss was a definite improvement.
However, it does make me wonder what would happen if you painted a peaky fullrange paper cone with Micro Gloss.
I've used dave's mod podge pre-EnABL treatment with good success.
For peaky drivers, I'm wondering if you could use Micro Gloss (50/50) to seal the cone, then thinner coatings of mod podge (as it wouldn't soak into the cone) to damp the self noise, then EnABL?
Dave, Bud - any thoughts?
Cheers,
Alex
I moved to speakers around the other day and lost track of which one was painted with Micro Gloss!
The cones are white and come with a shiny coating of some sort, so by looking at them it is impossible to tell the difference.
Although, after the listening session I placed them side by side under a bright light - the dust caps are black and the one painted with Micro Gloss had the faintest hint of gloss.
Anyway, I picked the Micro Gloss one fairly quickly - clearer mids and highs. So for these woofers, Micro Gloss was a definite improvement.
However, it does make me wonder what would happen if you painted a peaky fullrange paper cone with Micro Gloss.
I've used dave's mod podge pre-EnABL treatment with good success.
For peaky drivers, I'm wondering if you could use Micro Gloss (50/50) to seal the cone, then thinner coatings of mod podge (as it wouldn't soak into the cone) to damp the self noise, then EnABL?
Dave, Bud - any thoughts?
Cheers,
Alex
I'm a bit wary
Although I liked it a first, I found the presentation of my micro-glossed and enabl'd FE206Es "slightly" heavy and ponderous. Effects on shoutiness etc however were all positive.
Note the word slightly - but there was a definite damping down of those little whispery details that had wowed me when I first heard the drivers.
I ended up removing much of the microgloss using surgical alcohol wipes. THis seemed to take off thin layers of microgloss and I was careful to try to keep my work even between the drivers. To my delight each removal was accompanied with the return of more micro-details.
I never got all the microgloss off - there is still a very thin layer remaining, but I am utterly delighted with my efforts. EnABL plus vanishingly thin layer of microgloss did it for me. The previous shout and peakiness never returned
Bottom line - if I was starting from scratch now, I would use a much more dilute microgloss - say cut 10:1, apply it very thinly and have a long long listen before adding more. As always - YMMV
Although I liked it a first, I found the presentation of my micro-glossed and enabl'd FE206Es "slightly" heavy and ponderous. Effects on shoutiness etc however were all positive.
Note the word slightly - but there was a definite damping down of those little whispery details that had wowed me when I first heard the drivers.
I ended up removing much of the microgloss using surgical alcohol wipes. THis seemed to take off thin layers of microgloss and I was careful to try to keep my work even between the drivers. To my delight each removal was accompanied with the return of more micro-details.
I never got all the microgloss off - there is still a very thin layer remaining, but I am utterly delighted with my efforts. EnABL plus vanishingly thin layer of microgloss did it for me. The previous shout and peakiness never returned
Bottom line - if I was starting from scratch now, I would use a much more dilute microgloss - say cut 10:1, apply it very thinly and have a long long listen before adding more. As always - YMMV
Alex,
The only drivers I have applied a precoat to were DynaVox woofers and mid bass drivers. They are made with molded polypropylene cones and are very dead and information poor. The woofers needed a very thick coat of gloss, just to get a cone that energy would propagate from, with any sort of coherency. The EnaBL patterns applied over the gloss worked as always, removing the chaotic noise from the bass and eliminating in room hot spots. The mid bass drivers needed one coat only, before patterns, to make them extremely good, if somewhat dark drivers. They all work extremely well with the Vifa 3 inch domes, Radio Shack Linnaeum active horn surface tweeters and Pioneer half can piezo film super tweeters. All of which have a dark, liquid, character to their sound.
Alan,
Yes, exactly. All applications of Gloss should be done one coat at a time and listened to for at least 48 hours. It takes 24 hours before you know where the stuff is going and another 12 at least for the stuff to have finished it's chemical processes and quit changing. This is true even if you are copying one of my EnABL descriptions for a driver I have investigated.
Wiping the gloss back off for a deliberate purpose is something I use with voice coil covers that are difficult for one reason or another. Either vastly different materials, as in the Dayton D 175-8 drivers I am finishing up (and boy are they a surprise), or a differing surface calender that changes their "speed" and the eventual dispersion characteristics of the entire driver. Any dust cap that is an un-calendered open surface fiber will have to be precoated with either PVA or Gloss before the patterns can be applied.
Bud
The only drivers I have applied a precoat to were DynaVox woofers and mid bass drivers. They are made with molded polypropylene cones and are very dead and information poor. The woofers needed a very thick coat of gloss, just to get a cone that energy would propagate from, with any sort of coherency. The EnaBL patterns applied over the gloss worked as always, removing the chaotic noise from the bass and eliminating in room hot spots. The mid bass drivers needed one coat only, before patterns, to make them extremely good, if somewhat dark drivers. They all work extremely well with the Vifa 3 inch domes, Radio Shack Linnaeum active horn surface tweeters and Pioneer half can piezo film super tweeters. All of which have a dark, liquid, character to their sound.
Alan,
Yes, exactly. All applications of Gloss should be done one coat at a time and listened to for at least 48 hours. It takes 24 hours before you know where the stuff is going and another 12 at least for the stuff to have finished it's chemical processes and quit changing. This is true even if you are copying one of my EnABL descriptions for a driver I have investigated.
Wiping the gloss back off for a deliberate purpose is something I use with voice coil covers that are difficult for one reason or another. Either vastly different materials, as in the Dayton D 175-8 drivers I am finishing up (and boy are they a surprise), or a differing surface calender that changes their "speed" and the eventual dispersion characteristics of the entire driver. Any dust cap that is an un-calendered open surface fiber will have to be precoated with either PVA or Gloss before the patterns can be applied.
Bud
My point was, Bud, that 1 coat of 50:50 microgloss was far too much, and I much preferred the sound after about 6 or 7 vigorous removals with alcohol soaked wipes.
So I personally would recommend a more cautious approach, with a much lower concentration of microgloss rather than straight on with the full 50:50
So I personally would recommend a more cautious approach, with a much lower concentration of microgloss rather than straight on with the full 50:50
Enable on tweeters?
I was wondering if anyone can comment on the effect of enabling their tweeters.
I have had good results from enabling 10" drivers and the edge of the speaker baffle.
I have not attempted the tweeter. I have seas (i think) silk dome tweeters. Do you apply microgloss coat after the pattern here as well? What is the sound impact?
I was wondering if anyone can comment on the effect of enabling their tweeters.
I have had good results from enabling 10" drivers and the edge of the speaker baffle.
I have not attempted the tweeter. I have seas (i think) silk dome tweeters. Do you apply microgloss coat after the pattern here as well? What is the sound impact?
The sonic impact is the same for tweeters, mids, woofers, full range etc. The silk dome tweeters are usually VERY finicky about the amount of gloss you apply. No more than one 50% gloss / 50% water coating, or their efficiency will rise rather abruptly. Or, perhaps it is just the phase response that changes? In any event you usually end up taking any more than one coating of Gloss back off.
Basic pattern is as shown here
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/Fostex120A#5158153144724871474
You can put a pattern on the inside of the dome, just above the voice coil joint if you are brave and have taken these things apart before.
Also best to use a Rapidiograph technical pen on the silk, the sharp points of the 66 pen tip may just slide right through.
Bud
Basic pattern is as shown here
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/Fostex120A#5158153144724871474
You can put a pattern on the inside of the dome, just above the voice coil joint if you are brave and have taken these things apart before.
Also best to use a Rapidiograph technical pen on the silk, the sharp points of the 66 pen tip may just slide right through.
Bud
wlwowes,
There is an easy way to determine if the Seas tweeter needs EnABL or not. Set up your system with the tweeters mounted in their location and the crossover out where you can get to it.
Listen in stereo for an hour, with the tweeter in circuit. Then bridge the tweeter circuit and listen with the EnABL'd driver full range. Listen to the decay of chimes, upper range piano notes and brush on cymbal.
You are not listening for loudness here, nor are you listening for width of sweet spot. You are listening for completeness and "timing". The chimes will be the most telling, with the ringing characteristics of the driver causing a glass chime to sound like aluminum or wood and a metal triangle chime to sound like a struck cymbal.
So, listen to some chimes until you are familiar with their entire envelope from the EnABL'd driver (and your wife is looking at you with loathing) and then switch the dome on. If the chime sounds softened in initial strike, or the ringing has changed enough to mimic some other material, or portions of the sound seem "splayed out" in perceived size, but there are no other irregularities, this suggests the simplest pattern set and no gloss.
Next, hook in and then defeat the tweeter circuit and listen to piano upper range, hopefully with a very wide dynamic range. If some notes "burn" and loose their inner structure with the EnABL'd driver then using a tweeter is a very good idea. Listen to those same burn notes with the tweeter in circuit and notice how these notes are modified. If they become diffuse just after the key strike, but reduce the burn, without providing more internal information to the middle of the note and drop off quicker than the EnABL'd driver, during the decay portion of the note, this also suggests the basic pattern and perhaps, a minimal gloss coat. One that probably does not cover more than the bottom half of the dome.
Brushes on cymbals will finally determine Gloss or not, assuming you have found the characteristics I am describing from your Seas drivers, in comparison to the EnABL'd drivers running full range, regardless of loss in amplitude. After listening with the tweeter in circuit, defeat the tweeter and listen to known brush on cymbal work. You should find clear definition of a massive number of strike noises and a musical and "slick" sounding tone, underlying the swirling scrape of the brush tines across the cymbal. Hook up the tweeter and listen for the softness of the initial stroke and the underlying musical tone. If the brush sounds more like sanding block swipes the dome will require a mid dome ring in addition to the two others. If their is no musical undertone, gloss will be needed. If there is a sharply etched scratch to the leading edge of the brush strokes the dome will need one coat of 50% gloss and possibly two. However, if this is the case you probably will do better with a different tweeter.
The last statement really applies to metal dome tweeters, but I have had silk domes misbehave in this fashion too. In a general sense, if the Seas tweeter shows only marginal differences in accuracy, from that of the EnABL'd driver, you can get away with not treating it. The slight loss of information and general fuzziness to leading edges can be lessened by phase alignment positioning and crossover component type. Going to a tin and separate poly film cap, from Reliacap, in the PPFX range, will help here. Sometimes the use of a Panasonic photo flash cap will also help.
Any application of Gloss to any tweeter surface requires a small, thin paint brush. The Gloss must be fully tamped and drained and the brushing patterns are with a swirling stroke, with a number of passes to even out the material. You want an extremely thin coat and for some tweeters you want even less than that, by using an almost dry brushing technique from a thoroughly drained brush and very light pressure.
As always, you will be miles ahead from practicing on some inexpensive sacrificial domes. Plus you will be astounded at how good these things can sound, even the cheap ones, when relieved of their less optimal transform of energy into the air.
We have only just entered into multi way system discussion here. They are my favorites and can be made to perform with all of the coherency of a single driver, but with greater resolution and dynamic character, for far less cost than an equivalent single driver system.
And please, everyone remember that this is a hobby and we should be having fun.
Bud
There is an easy way to determine if the Seas tweeter needs EnABL or not. Set up your system with the tweeters mounted in their location and the crossover out where you can get to it.
Listen in stereo for an hour, with the tweeter in circuit. Then bridge the tweeter circuit and listen with the EnABL'd driver full range. Listen to the decay of chimes, upper range piano notes and brush on cymbal.
You are not listening for loudness here, nor are you listening for width of sweet spot. You are listening for completeness and "timing". The chimes will be the most telling, with the ringing characteristics of the driver causing a glass chime to sound like aluminum or wood and a metal triangle chime to sound like a struck cymbal.
So, listen to some chimes until you are familiar with their entire envelope from the EnABL'd driver (and your wife is looking at you with loathing) and then switch the dome on. If the chime sounds softened in initial strike, or the ringing has changed enough to mimic some other material, or portions of the sound seem "splayed out" in perceived size, but there are no other irregularities, this suggests the simplest pattern set and no gloss.
Next, hook in and then defeat the tweeter circuit and listen to piano upper range, hopefully with a very wide dynamic range. If some notes "burn" and loose their inner structure with the EnABL'd driver then using a tweeter is a very good idea. Listen to those same burn notes with the tweeter in circuit and notice how these notes are modified. If they become diffuse just after the key strike, but reduce the burn, without providing more internal information to the middle of the note and drop off quicker than the EnABL'd driver, during the decay portion of the note, this also suggests the basic pattern and perhaps, a minimal gloss coat. One that probably does not cover more than the bottom half of the dome.
Brushes on cymbals will finally determine Gloss or not, assuming you have found the characteristics I am describing from your Seas drivers, in comparison to the EnABL'd drivers running full range, regardless of loss in amplitude. After listening with the tweeter in circuit, defeat the tweeter and listen to known brush on cymbal work. You should find clear definition of a massive number of strike noises and a musical and "slick" sounding tone, underlying the swirling scrape of the brush tines across the cymbal. Hook up the tweeter and listen for the softness of the initial stroke and the underlying musical tone. If the brush sounds more like sanding block swipes the dome will require a mid dome ring in addition to the two others. If their is no musical undertone, gloss will be needed. If there is a sharply etched scratch to the leading edge of the brush strokes the dome will need one coat of 50% gloss and possibly two. However, if this is the case you probably will do better with a different tweeter.
The last statement really applies to metal dome tweeters, but I have had silk domes misbehave in this fashion too. In a general sense, if the Seas tweeter shows only marginal differences in accuracy, from that of the EnABL'd driver, you can get away with not treating it. The slight loss of information and general fuzziness to leading edges can be lessened by phase alignment positioning and crossover component type. Going to a tin and separate poly film cap, from Reliacap, in the PPFX range, will help here. Sometimes the use of a Panasonic photo flash cap will also help.
Any application of Gloss to any tweeter surface requires a small, thin paint brush. The Gloss must be fully tamped and drained and the brushing patterns are with a swirling stroke, with a number of passes to even out the material. You want an extremely thin coat and for some tweeters you want even less than that, by using an almost dry brushing technique from a thoroughly drained brush and very light pressure.
As always, you will be miles ahead from practicing on some inexpensive sacrificial domes. Plus you will be astounded at how good these things can sound, even the cheap ones, when relieved of their less optimal transform of energy into the air.
We have only just entered into multi way system discussion here. They are my favorites and can be made to perform with all of the coherency of a single driver, but with greater resolution and dynamic character, for far less cost than an equivalent single driver system.
And please, everyone remember that this is a hobby and we should be having fun.
Bud
Emminance Beta 8a
Looking at the provided FR plot from the mfg. you would think that this is probably a pretty good driver, great sensitivity, but with a couple of resonance nodes that might cause some problems at the top of the drivers FR band. In listening you find that the driver is actually better than the FR plot shows. However the driver is a very good example of that old saw about there being an information floor about 40 dB down from the drive signal, beyond which only hints of coherent information are available. There are very strong hints that this driver could be considerably better then it is from the factory.
Once you have applied all of the patterns, gloss coatings, and ever tacky acrylic adhesive, the driver is absolutely at the head of the class in tonal clarity, coherence of low level information for spatial description and, with one caveat, width of the sweet spot.
To begin the process just apply every one of the numerous patterns. For the cone, use the usual slightly smaller than block width pen tip. For the voice coil cover use another size smaller, due to creep in the fibrous cap materials. Be sure to apply the single backside ring also.
Once the patterns are dry listen to the drivers for a bit of time. You will notice that that upper FR peak is now very audible and in comparison to the rest of the FR quite irritating. This comes from a zone on the cone, between the mid cone ring and the outer cone ring. If you tap test the cone you will find a very orderly decay for the rest of the cone and in this zone the sound you normally have as a localized tick becomes a much louder sound and is emitted by the entire circumference of the cone, from this zone. You will be applying the glue compound to the back of this zone, in two layers, with no brush tamping or draining, so as thick a layer as the rather thin and watery compound will produce.
This material I use is from the scrap book section in craft stores. It is an acrylic paper glue with a modifier that keeps it permanently sticky, like post it notes. The material is distributed by Zig memory systems, which has nothing to do with electronic forms of memory, and is called 2 way glue. It starts out blue in color and dries clear.
This application will kill the resonance completely, without seeming to effect any other audible performance, other than dropping the noise floor in the top ranges of the FR.
I did coat the inner portion of the cone backside with one coating of the tacky glue, using the backside pattern rings as the dividing line for convenience. A thin coat of gloss is then brushed over the entire back side, this being a one side tamping and drain on the 1/2" wide brush I am using. No particular application pattern is required here, but radial application is easiest.
Gloss coat application, for the front, is a single coat applied circumferentialy, per sector, with three sectors, divided by the mid cone ring patterns, with two application bands between this ring set and the voice coil. After this has dried listen again.
Apply a single, well drained, one side tamped brush coat to the voice coil dome, with one brush load per quarter sector, as an approximate gauge for how much to use here. A rather wide variation here will not mean much. After applying the dome Gloss, apply the usual centrally located dot of PVA, 1/8" in diameter, with enough material to stick up proud . Turn the driver upside down to let this drop dry, with a rounded form to the proud surface. Then apply a half inch diameter coat of the sticky acrylic glue over the PVC and surrounding area. Once it is dry, coat the sticky area very lightly with Gloss, using a fine tipped brush that is well drained. Not quite dry brush here, but close..
The last Gloss coating is a circumferential application between the mid cone pattern ring and the cone to surround mating section, up on that surround mating section surface. Then another coating, out on the patterned mounting gasket, out beyond the surround and a very light coat of gloss on the corrugated surround itself. I do mean light, a dry brush technique is good here.
The end result will be one of the most information rich midrange's you can imagine, with amazing impulse response and with high frequency extension and smoothness that will present all but the very top end of brush on cymbal work. I would not be worried about crossing this driver with the knee at 7khz and a first order cross over at that. It will be more than refined enough to mate with even ribbon tweeters, anywhere between 1 khz and 7 khz.
The only caveat is that , due to the construction with separate voice coil dome, there is a slight null about 5 degrees off axis. From that point out to the usual 45 degrees off axis, the stereo spread is very wide and tall. As you slip sideways through the null, all of the channel specific information becomes localized, seemingly from a vertical bar, and the stereo spread collapses onto this vertical bar. So, for close listening, within 6 feet or so you will not want to be stuck right in front of either driver. The sound quality does not change at all, nor does the perceived height or depth, just the lateral staging disappears. Move further past the driver and the stereo image returns. Quite an unusual phenomena.
Gary Pimm, one of our respected members here on DIY, will have these drivers in his system by mid week of next week or so. Let us hope he will comment further upon their usefulness, in his high sensitivity, ultra full range system. I am certainly impressed with them and intend to use the 16 ohm delta 8 model with my Lowther PM6 A, 16 ohm drivers. I don't expect there to be a noticeable difference between those two in sound quality. If there is, I will return to the Beta 8a.
The Beta 8a ring patterns are attached below and pictures will be available later tonight on my Picasa site.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine
Bud
Looking at the provided FR plot from the mfg. you would think that this is probably a pretty good driver, great sensitivity, but with a couple of resonance nodes that might cause some problems at the top of the drivers FR band. In listening you find that the driver is actually better than the FR plot shows. However the driver is a very good example of that old saw about there being an information floor about 40 dB down from the drive signal, beyond which only hints of coherent information are available. There are very strong hints that this driver could be considerably better then it is from the factory.
Once you have applied all of the patterns, gloss coatings, and ever tacky acrylic adhesive, the driver is absolutely at the head of the class in tonal clarity, coherence of low level information for spatial description and, with one caveat, width of the sweet spot.
To begin the process just apply every one of the numerous patterns. For the cone, use the usual slightly smaller than block width pen tip. For the voice coil cover use another size smaller, due to creep in the fibrous cap materials. Be sure to apply the single backside ring also.
Once the patterns are dry listen to the drivers for a bit of time. You will notice that that upper FR peak is now very audible and in comparison to the rest of the FR quite irritating. This comes from a zone on the cone, between the mid cone ring and the outer cone ring. If you tap test the cone you will find a very orderly decay for the rest of the cone and in this zone the sound you normally have as a localized tick becomes a much louder sound and is emitted by the entire circumference of the cone, from this zone. You will be applying the glue compound to the back of this zone, in two layers, with no brush tamping or draining, so as thick a layer as the rather thin and watery compound will produce.
This material I use is from the scrap book section in craft stores. It is an acrylic paper glue with a modifier that keeps it permanently sticky, like post it notes. The material is distributed by Zig memory systems, which has nothing to do with electronic forms of memory, and is called 2 way glue. It starts out blue in color and dries clear.
This application will kill the resonance completely, without seeming to effect any other audible performance, other than dropping the noise floor in the top ranges of the FR.
I did coat the inner portion of the cone backside with one coating of the tacky glue, using the backside pattern rings as the dividing line for convenience. A thin coat of gloss is then brushed over the entire back side, this being a one side tamping and drain on the 1/2" wide brush I am using. No particular application pattern is required here, but radial application is easiest.
Gloss coat application, for the front, is a single coat applied circumferentialy, per sector, with three sectors, divided by the mid cone ring patterns, with two application bands between this ring set and the voice coil. After this has dried listen again.
Apply a single, well drained, one side tamped brush coat to the voice coil dome, with one brush load per quarter sector, as an approximate gauge for how much to use here. A rather wide variation here will not mean much. After applying the dome Gloss, apply the usual centrally located dot of PVA, 1/8" in diameter, with enough material to stick up proud . Turn the driver upside down to let this drop dry, with a rounded form to the proud surface. Then apply a half inch diameter coat of the sticky acrylic glue over the PVC and surrounding area. Once it is dry, coat the sticky area very lightly with Gloss, using a fine tipped brush that is well drained. Not quite dry brush here, but close..
The last Gloss coating is a circumferential application between the mid cone pattern ring and the cone to surround mating section, up on that surround mating section surface. Then another coating, out on the patterned mounting gasket, out beyond the surround and a very light coat of gloss on the corrugated surround itself. I do mean light, a dry brush technique is good here.
The end result will be one of the most information rich midrange's you can imagine, with amazing impulse response and with high frequency extension and smoothness that will present all but the very top end of brush on cymbal work. I would not be worried about crossing this driver with the knee at 7khz and a first order cross over at that. It will be more than refined enough to mate with even ribbon tweeters, anywhere between 1 khz and 7 khz.
The only caveat is that , due to the construction with separate voice coil dome, there is a slight null about 5 degrees off axis. From that point out to the usual 45 degrees off axis, the stereo spread is very wide and tall. As you slip sideways through the null, all of the channel specific information becomes localized, seemingly from a vertical bar, and the stereo spread collapses onto this vertical bar. So, for close listening, within 6 feet or so you will not want to be stuck right in front of either driver. The sound quality does not change at all, nor does the perceived height or depth, just the lateral staging disappears. Move further past the driver and the stereo image returns. Quite an unusual phenomena.
Gary Pimm, one of our respected members here on DIY, will have these drivers in his system by mid week of next week or so. Let us hope he will comment further upon their usefulness, in his high sensitivity, ultra full range system. I am certainly impressed with them and intend to use the 16 ohm delta 8 model with my Lowther PM6 A, 16 ohm drivers. I don't expect there to be a noticeable difference between those two in sound quality. If there is, I will return to the Beta 8a.
The Beta 8a ring patterns are attached below and pictures will be available later tonight on my Picasa site.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine
Bud
Soongsc,
We have been liberally applying that mid cone ring, that you originally discovered, to all drivers, not just the Jordans.
The same results for every driver to date. Added clarity, a release of a stodgy, clumsy character to all sounds, that was not even perceived as a problem, until it quit being one. The result is considerably closer to the continuous, grain free, nature of live sound, so, much appreciated. I have said it before, but this improvement that your testing has provided is every bit as useful as all of the rest of what I have ever done with EnaBL, so thank you once again.
The finished Jordan's had no Gloss coat on them at all. I did not think it was warranted. The sound is smooth, utterly without any metallic character, deeply transparent, lively and great "fun" to listen to. Not the best driver I have heard, but the top five categories, in my book, have gotten so crowded lately that even being found in the top ten means that the drivers produce music, without ANY glaring flaws and only a few small ones. On the order of one piano note, from an arpeggio, exciting a resonance node enough to overlay the internal structure of the mid portion of the tone, with a "glare" of monotone.
I am going to try out your other hot idea a bit later this year. A series of ring steps, continuous from the main nodal suppression ring out to the surround. If I obtain what I hope to, even those small resonance nodes should be dispersed and the overall noise floor pushed even farther down than it is now.
If I had your super repeatable test stand and locational set up, I might even be moved to provide Dave with some test data to take me to task for.
I doubt that the paint provides as much dispersion as your taller lumps of tooth paste provided. That would be of interest to me in a direct comparison. Everything we are encountering, here in North America and Australia, seems to point to a raised proud surface, in the neighbor of 0.002 to 0.005 inches, to be the critical aspect of these applied patterns. Something that those who applied the pattern just with tape were quite correct about.
The music is closer, the threat assessment correlator startlements are much fewer and the falling asleep to music aspect far more bliss full. Or perhaps it is just the onset of deafness and old age....
Bud
We have been liberally applying that mid cone ring, that you originally discovered, to all drivers, not just the Jordans.
The same results for every driver to date. Added clarity, a release of a stodgy, clumsy character to all sounds, that was not even perceived as a problem, until it quit being one. The result is considerably closer to the continuous, grain free, nature of live sound, so, much appreciated. I have said it before, but this improvement that your testing has provided is every bit as useful as all of the rest of what I have ever done with EnaBL, so thank you once again.
The finished Jordan's had no Gloss coat on them at all. I did not think it was warranted. The sound is smooth, utterly without any metallic character, deeply transparent, lively and great "fun" to listen to. Not the best driver I have heard, but the top five categories, in my book, have gotten so crowded lately that even being found in the top ten means that the drivers produce music, without ANY glaring flaws and only a few small ones. On the order of one piano note, from an arpeggio, exciting a resonance node enough to overlay the internal structure of the mid portion of the tone, with a "glare" of monotone.
I am going to try out your other hot idea a bit later this year. A series of ring steps, continuous from the main nodal suppression ring out to the surround. If I obtain what I hope to, even those small resonance nodes should be dispersed and the overall noise floor pushed even farther down than it is now.
If I had your super repeatable test stand and locational set up, I might even be moved to provide Dave with some test data to take me to task for.
I doubt that the paint provides as much dispersion as your taller lumps of tooth paste provided. That would be of interest to me in a direct comparison. Everything we are encountering, here in North America and Australia, seems to point to a raised proud surface, in the neighbor of 0.002 to 0.005 inches, to be the critical aspect of these applied patterns. Something that those who applied the pattern just with tape were quite correct about.
The music is closer, the threat assessment correlator startlements are much fewer and the falling asleep to music aspect far more bliss full. Or perhaps it is just the onset of deafness and old age....
Bud
BudP said:
Nah, it's the Alpha wave state that EnABL'd gear sets up in the brain - euphoria followed by deep relaxation, then - comatose!
Made some further progress with the 5 1/2" woofer.
If you recall, I'm only doing one of the woofers and leaving the other completely stock.
EnABL pattern is now fully applied to the front of the driver - except for - the mid cone pattern and the patterns on the reverse side of the cone. I'll will be doing these next.
These are the first drivers I have EnABL'd that didn't have any previous cone mods (like Damar) beforehand.
Dust caps really suck. I had to apply a few coats of micro gloss before the dust cap settled down. The waiting between coats is frustrating but necessary.
With hindsight, I should have used Mod Podge on the dust cap.
Listening impressions
Listening to woofers only (one side EnABL'd, the other stock) is very strange.
The EnABL'd woofer is much clearer and detailed than the stock woofer.
Interestingly, the better the EnABL'd woofer became, the more I could hear the effects of the cabinet (not EnABL'd yet).
Now I see why Bud does his drivers "naked on a stand".
Overall, the sound from the treated woofer has become much harder to locate in space compared to the stock woofer.
The cabinet effects make the treated woofer perform this strange 'appear and disappear' audible localisation act.
The audible localisation of the stock driver remains constant - it's always there.
More to come...
Cheers,
Alex
Alex from Oz said:
You will be amazed when you finsh both plus the baffle. I have, and there is almost never a time when the sound comes from the speaker. It is alive in the 3d sound stage, and its weird that there are these big boxes out front of the stage in the room apparently doing nothing.
G'day wlowes,
I am currently enjoying a pair of vintage (1970 something) HMV two ways donated to me by my father-in-law.
The cabinet is fully EnABL'd.
I pre-treated the bass cones with Mod Podge (as used by dave from Planet10) then applied EnABL and micro gloss.
The cone on these are rolled over at the edges to form a surround.
The tweeter is a cone tweeter.
If you haven't done so already, should also apply EnABL to ALL external edges and inside the cabinet - and ports as well!
Cheers,
Alex
I am currently enjoying a pair of vintage (1970 something) HMV two ways donated to me by my father-in-law.
The cabinet is fully EnABL'd.
I pre-treated the bass cones with Mod Podge (as used by dave from Planet10) then applied EnABL and micro gloss.
The cone on these are rolled over at the edges to form a surround.
The tweeter is a cone tweeter.
If you haven't done so already, should also apply EnABL to ALL external edges and inside the cabinet - and ports as well!
Cheers,
Alex