454Casull said:which means a heavier cabinet will re-emit less sound than a lighter cabinet,
Not necessarily. A heavier cabinet may also just store more energy and dissipate it over a longer period.
dave
planet10 said:
Not necessarily. A heavier cabinet may also just store more energy and dissipate it over a longer period.
dave
Use K3 instead of MDF for some good models of this effect
your both right.
it takes more energy to move more weight. so, it'll take longer for for say, a sustained 20hz wave to move a 20kg cabinet as opposed to a 10kg cabinet.
so this means... that the cabinet frquency will be lower with more weight.
but the resonent frequency will be higher.
if i'm right.. then this means running a heavier cabinet to try and push both of these frequencies out of the audible range is ideal.
so yeah... that's what i meant by running two opposing woofers,(generally the bass woofer, they're heavier) out of phase with each other. this would cancel the tendency for the cabinet to "sway" front to back, colouring the sound.
you coalso just worry about building a structurally sound cabinet and not worry so much as the baffle vibrating. (you'd have two faces of force distibution as opposed to one)
it takes more energy to move more weight. so, it'll take longer for for say, a sustained 20hz wave to move a 20kg cabinet as opposed to a 10kg cabinet.
so this means... that the cabinet frquency will be lower with more weight.
but the resonent frequency will be higher.
if i'm right.. then this means running a heavier cabinet to try and push both of these frequencies out of the audible range is ideal.
so yeah... that's what i meant by running two opposing woofers,(generally the bass woofer, they're heavier) out of phase with each other. this would cancel the tendency for the cabinet to "sway" front to back, colouring the sound.
you coalso just worry about building a structurally sound cabinet and not worry so much as the baffle vibrating. (you'd have two faces of force distibution as opposed to one)
exhausted mule said:so yeah... that's what i meant by running two opposing woofers,(generally the bass woofer, they're heavier) out of phase with each other. this would cancel the tendency for the cabinet to "sway" front to back, colouring the sound.
For that to work they need to be mechanically out of phase & electrically in phase... otherwise you get no bass.
dave
AndrewJ said:I found the white paper I wrote on driver isolation.
I hope I have attached it to this note!
It shows the measurements I made on the box vibration and magnet acceleration when the driver is mounted in free air fully suspended, and when it is mounted in a box.
Regards
Andrew
I understood most of that.
I must be learning something
I can see the obvious benefits in decoupling but how decoupled is decoupled IYSWIM?
I have no idea what E.A.R. type E-610-1 isolation grommets are and neither has Google.
I normally mount drivers on a layer of silicone rubber with a cork gasket on top and use T-nuts and socket cap bolts or just MDF screws - I assume the grommets don't have a rigid fixing between the driver and the baffle - like insulated PCB spacers but made of rubber?
Here's the website for EAR: http://www.earsc.com/ .
Are there other manufacturers of similar products?
It seems like the tricky part is properly supporting the driver with well distributed forces while mounting the driver loosely enough to have a resonant frequency below the bandpass of the driver. B&W went to interesting lengths with this one, mounting the midrange driver via a single axial tension rod.
Are there other manufacturers of similar products?
It seems like the tricky part is properly supporting the driver with well distributed forces while mounting the driver loosely enough to have a resonant frequency below the bandpass of the driver. B&W went to interesting lengths with this one, mounting the midrange driver via a single axial tension rod.
Why?planet10 said:
Not necessarily. A heavier cabinet may also just store more energy and dissipate it over a longer period.
dave
Also, F = ma, SPL is proportional to a, higher m = lower a.
454Casull said:Why?
More mass to store energy in. Lower resonances where there is more energy to store.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- Idea? Counterbalancing cones. :)