Rafal....
I don't know all the math or all the reasoning, but....
The JSE labs baffles (as interpreted from a Japanese site) stricly state that the dimensions are similar to Wharfedale SB2 and Quad ESL panels. So if you have any "scraps" of plywood, cut some 12" wide by 32" tall (or whatever your dimension for the front baffle is), and connect them to the inside of the baffles. When they are "open" your baffle will be approximately 35" wide, 32" tall. Use a couple of hinges to attach them. When critically listening, open them up, when not close them...
I don't know all the math or all the reasoning, but....
The JSE labs baffles (as interpreted from a Japanese site) stricly state that the dimensions are similar to Wharfedale SB2 and Quad ESL panels. So if you have any "scraps" of plywood, cut some 12" wide by 32" tall (or whatever your dimension for the front baffle is), and connect them to the inside of the baffles. When they are "open" your baffle will be approximately 35" wide, 32" tall. Use a couple of hinges to attach them. When critically listening, open them up, when not close them...
Re: Re: power handling
True, I added a CSS-WR125S (with a 1st order lowpass) to give a little more power in the bass, but it is still easy to reach X-max with bass heavy material - otherwise very pleasing.
maxro said:
True, I added a CSS-WR125S (with a 1st order lowpass) to give a little more power in the bass, but it is still easy to reach X-max with bass heavy material - otherwise very pleasing.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
a_men said:
Very open with a large sound-stage. The extra "woofer" gives enough bass, but sub-bass is of course limited with such small drivers, but still impressive considering the size. The only thing they lack, is air and transparancy in the very top octaves, this evening I will add an upward firing super tweeter and see (hear) what happens.
Re: changin dimensions...
Hi Stew,
I was digging in open baffle thread and found this post about smaller open baffle arrangement (23" wide and 35" tall), which I think will fit into my limited space.
Can I get your opinion about implementing this baffle dimension with 8" speaker ( I plan to use Hemp FR8C full range speaker)?
If you don't mind to help to understand better, what is the purpose to put the speaker off center like the one pictured in this thread? I don't have any experience at all building the speaker, this project would be my first time.....
Thanks in advance!
Joshua
Nanook said:
Hi Stew,
I was digging in open baffle thread and found this post about smaller open baffle arrangement (23" wide and 35" tall), which I think will fit into my limited space.
Can I get your opinion about implementing this baffle dimension with 8" speaker ( I plan to use Hemp FR8C full range speaker)?
If you don't mind to help to understand better, what is the purpose to put the speaker off center like the one pictured in this thread? I don't have any experience at all building the speaker, this project would be my first time..
...Thanks in advance!
Joshua
Re: Re: changin dimensions...
Go lower to go lower! The floor is an unavoidable boundary, might as well embrace it by mounting the driver right at the floor level. This greatly increases the apparent baffle size. Use a grille of course
You can search for JE labs open baffles, those are a squat baffle design.
Off-centering the driver distributes cancellation and diffraction artifacts over a larger range of frequencies, reducing the amplitude of any one artifact. It effectively smooths the response characteristics (on axis, anyway).
joshuajoshua said:
Hi Stew,
I was digging in open baffle thread and found this post about smaller open baffle arrangement (23" wide and 35" tall), which I think will fit into my limited space.
Can I get your opinion about implementing this baffle dimension with 8" speaker ( I plan to use Hemp FR8C full range speaker)?
If you don't mind to help to understand better, what is the purpose to put the speaker off center like the one pictured in this thread? I don't have any experience at all building the speaker, this project would be my first time..
Thanks in advance!
Joshua
Go lower to go lower! The floor is an unavoidable boundary, might as well embrace it by mounting the driver right at the floor level. This greatly increases the apparent baffle size. Use a grille of course
You can search for JE labs open baffles, those are a squat baffle design.
Off-centering the driver distributes cancellation and diffraction artifacts over a larger range of frequencies, reducing the amplitude of any one artifact. It effectively smooths the response characteristics (on axis, anyway).
Re: Re: Re: changin dimensions...
Hi Badman!
I really like to go for JE Lab setup but too bad my small room can not fit that arrangement....
Thanks for the explanation!
Joshua
badman said:
Go lower to go lower! The floor is an unavoidable boundary, might as well embrace it by mounting the driver right at the floor level. This greatly increases the apparent baffle size. Use a grille of course
You can search for JE labs open baffles, those are a squat baffle design.
Off-centering the driver distributes cancellation and diffraction artifacts over a larger range of frequencies, reducing the amplitude of any one artifact. It effectively smooths the response characteristics (on axis, anyway).
Hi Badman!
I really like to go for JE Lab setup but too bad my small room can not fit that arrangement....
Thanks for the explanation!
Joshua
Re: Re: power handling
I think Max is right: Excursion is the limiting parameter when
this driver is applied to fullrange OB.
But i had found some information on FR125s limitations,
please see here:
homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FAL/downloads/WR-FR125-measurements.pdf
I use this driver in a line array above 70 Hz. I use a
mono sub from 30 to 70 Hz, which makes live a lot
easier for my FRs .
If you want to see pics of my System you may visit
www.dipol-audio.de (its in a very raw stage, please
excuse ...)
All i can say is that the FR 125s is an amazing driver, not
even for that price.
1. It has in my opinion exactly the right size for a full
range driver. Drivers with larger cone diameter tend
to break up modes in the midrange. The midrange
performance of the FR is quite outstanding. It covers
what some people call "the critical band" very well.
2. Resonance Frequency and Xmax are very good for
a driver of that size. So it is able to cover the crossover
range to a (mono) sub very well, even with a low
order XO, which is preferable IMO.
3. Performance in the highs is OK, but the total amount of
energy radiated into the listening room is too low, due to
narrowing radiaion angle. In most rooms this is very
audible at larger listening distances, where the indirect
sound reflected from walls starts to dominate.
Experimenting with equalization
may help.
When you think of building a 1 1/2 way system -
as i understood the subsequent posts in this thread -
by combining a WR and a FR you may think of purchasing 2 FRs
per channel instead. In my experience sound differences between certain FR 125s drivers are quite high. Have you compared your left to the right speaker ?
Selecting and balancing them may improve performance a lot,
since left and right stereo channels should be as close as possible for imaging. Especially mids and highs should be performed by similar drivers on both channels.
If you use FRs only, your chance is better to find 2 good and similar ones for the mid-high range.
If you are an experimenter:
Instead of an inductor in series of one of the drivers in parallel
you can conect two FRs in row and shunt one of them
with a capacitor or capacitor-resistor combination.
This allows highs radiated predominantly by one driver
only - resuting in less interference and disturbance
in the polar radiation pattern - while driving
more current through the whole system at high frequencies.
If highs appeear too sharp and nasty, try to "don't let them point
to your ears" and see what happens in the rest of the room,
before changing the crossover again.
Of cause for this row connecion of two drivers, their
resonant frequencies should be about the same ...
When applying a sub, all of the advantages of the
FR are preserved and performance improves due to less distortion and phase intermodulation.
But i believe, that your OBs even in the present stage are very enjoyable loudspeakers, giving very good homogeneity - nearly unbeatable for the price and the effort spent.
Regards
Oliver
maxro said:
I think Max is right: Excursion is the limiting parameter when
this driver is applied to fullrange OB.
But i had found some information on FR125s limitations,
please see here:
homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FAL/downloads/WR-FR125-measurements.pdf
I use this driver in a line array above 70 Hz. I use a
mono sub from 30 to 70 Hz, which makes live a lot
easier for my FRs .
If you want to see pics of my System you may visit
www.dipol-audio.de (its in a very raw stage, please
excuse ...)
All i can say is that the FR 125s is an amazing driver, not
even for that price.
1. It has in my opinion exactly the right size for a full
range driver. Drivers with larger cone diameter tend
to break up modes in the midrange. The midrange
performance of the FR is quite outstanding. It covers
what some people call "the critical band" very well.
2. Resonance Frequency and Xmax are very good for
a driver of that size. So it is able to cover the crossover
range to a (mono) sub very well, even with a low
order XO, which is preferable IMO.
3. Performance in the highs is OK, but the total amount of
energy radiated into the listening room is too low, due to
narrowing radiaion angle. In most rooms this is very
audible at larger listening distances, where the indirect
sound reflected from walls starts to dominate.
Experimenting with equalization
may help.
When you think of building a 1 1/2 way system -
as i understood the subsequent posts in this thread -
by combining a WR and a FR you may think of purchasing 2 FRs
per channel instead. In my experience sound differences between certain FR 125s drivers are quite high. Have you compared your left to the right speaker ?
Selecting and balancing them may improve performance a lot,
since left and right stereo channels should be as close as possible for imaging. Especially mids and highs should be performed by similar drivers on both channels.
If you use FRs only, your chance is better to find 2 good and similar ones for the mid-high range.
If you are an experimenter:
Instead of an inductor in series of one of the drivers in parallel
you can conect two FRs in row and shunt one of them
with a capacitor or capacitor-resistor combination.
This allows highs radiated predominantly by one driver
only - resuting in less interference and disturbance
in the polar radiation pattern - while driving
more current through the whole system at high frequencies.
If highs appeear too sharp and nasty, try to "don't let them point
to your ears" and see what happens in the rest of the room,
before changing the crossover again.
Of cause for this row connecion of two drivers, their
resonant frequencies should be about the same ...
When applying a sub, all of the advantages of the
FR are preserved and performance improves due to less distortion and phase intermodulation.
But i believe, that your OBs even in the present stage are very enjoyable loudspeakers, giving very good homogeneity - nearly unbeatable for the price and the effort spent.
Regards
Oliver
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.