Hi Moray!
I have been thinking exactly the same thing about the stamped steel basket legs and also figured that as long as I'm doing surgery that I might as well make a cone about 2 or 3 inches taller and stuff that in there as well. As I said earlier all I have to lose is some time and a few bucks for the speaker. Losing the time right now is the problem - I've been to tied up having fun doing other projects!!
Could be a good time to add that 10 KiloWatt 2 foot plasma tweeter too!
I have been thinking exactly the same thing about the stamped steel basket legs and also figured that as long as I'm doing surgery that I might as well make a cone about 2 or 3 inches taller and stuff that in there as well. As I said earlier all I have to lose is some time and a few bucks for the speaker. Losing the time right now is the problem - I've been to tied up having fun doing other projects!!
Could be a good time to add that 10 KiloWatt 2 foot plasma tweeter too!
Attachments
and your new suspension will be?
When you extend your cone? Ya know another thing you can do is to bury the talk from the spider, they sing all out of tune and very loud on top of it all. If you build up a felt dam layer by layer around the spider up to just clear of the voice coil you will be amazed at the clairity and detail that is there when you drop the output from the spider. The first proto's of the highwood point source all had spiders and since they were only behind a mylar diaphragm you heard every note. Our solution was to eliminate the spider all together, we used ferro fluid in the gap as a fluid bearing to stabilize the voice coil on the lower side and the diaphragm as a suspension on the top side.
Now something that I have never liked from a conceptual point of view about the Walsh style driver is that you will always have time smear since the wave you are listening to is jumping off of an angled surface. No way around it. So why not eliminate the the time smear and just not use a cone to begin with? Besides where is it written that you have to use a cone for a driver like this anyway? You can just as well use a tube as a cone. You can play with variable density/stiffness wall structure. Since the tube will be vertical and parallel sided you wont have any time smear as with the cone. Besides paper tubes are a whole lot easier to make that cones. A three ply laminate of fine balsa veneer would be fantastic. I should think that a cone the same diametre as the voice coil former would be just fine but there is no reason why you could not use a larger dia. tube if you figured that size matters (some do). Chew on that and tell me what you think about it. Regards Moray James.
When you extend your cone? Ya know another thing you can do is to bury the talk from the spider, they sing all out of tune and very loud on top of it all. If you build up a felt dam layer by layer around the spider up to just clear of the voice coil you will be amazed at the clairity and detail that is there when you drop the output from the spider. The first proto's of the highwood point source all had spiders and since they were only behind a mylar diaphragm you heard every note. Our solution was to eliminate the spider all together, we used ferro fluid in the gap as a fluid bearing to stabilize the voice coil on the lower side and the diaphragm as a suspension on the top side.
Now something that I have never liked from a conceptual point of view about the Walsh style driver is that you will always have time smear since the wave you are listening to is jumping off of an angled surface. No way around it. So why not eliminate the the time smear and just not use a cone to begin with? Besides where is it written that you have to use a cone for a driver like this anyway? You can just as well use a tube as a cone. You can play with variable density/stiffness wall structure. Since the tube will be vertical and parallel sided you wont have any time smear as with the cone. Besides paper tubes are a whole lot easier to make that cones. A three ply laminate of fine balsa veneer would be fantastic. I should think that a cone the same diametre as the voice coil former would be just fine but there is no reason why you could not use a larger dia. tube if you figured that size matters (some do). Chew on that and tell me what you think about it. Regards Moray James.
Hi Moray,
Interesting ideas you have there! If I go with a straight wall tubular type of speaker design for the "cone" (can't be called a "cone" now can it?) - and make it the same size as the VC it would be a great looking match to the SonoTube base unit. I should think about getting an endorsement or something from those guys!!
This might be a chance to try out my pneumatic speaker design I've been thinking about where I drive a "balloon" like transducer made of thin rubber and excite it with air pressure - hmmm.
If I were to take something like a condom that was 2 to 2 1/2 inches in diameter and 10 to 12 inches in length - fill it up with a few of pounds of air pressure and drive it with the motor of the Pioneer unit I would have something that would be able to oscillate from 20 Hz to 5 Khz, and handle 150 Watts of power.
12 inch long, 2 1/2 inch diameter, 20 to 5000 Hz, 150 watts, made from soft air filled rubber? I'm not sure how good a speaker it would make but there might be a secondary market for something like this.
I'll need to give it some thought. The wife could be very fond of it!!
My amp only puts out 75 watts per channel tho. Might be able to talk her into the bigger unit now!!
Interesting ideas you have there! If I go with a straight wall tubular type of speaker design for the "cone" (can't be called a "cone" now can it?) - and make it the same size as the VC it would be a great looking match to the SonoTube base unit. I should think about getting an endorsement or something from those guys!!
This might be a chance to try out my pneumatic speaker design I've been thinking about where I drive a "balloon" like transducer made of thin rubber and excite it with air pressure - hmmm.
If I were to take something like a condom that was 2 to 2 1/2 inches in diameter and 10 to 12 inches in length - fill it up with a few of pounds of air pressure and drive it with the motor of the Pioneer unit I would have something that would be able to oscillate from 20 Hz to 5 Khz, and handle 150 Watts of power.
12 inch long, 2 1/2 inch diameter, 20 to 5000 Hz, 150 watts, made from soft air filled rubber? I'm not sure how good a speaker it would make but there might be a secondary market for something like this.
I'll need to give it some thought. The wife could be very fond of it!!
My amp only puts out 75 watts per channel tho. Might be able to talk her into the bigger unit now!!
c2cthomas said:Hi ChrisB
Ok - I'll bite
I did see a tube bass speaker - but it was only 4.5 inch tall.
So show us a link or a photo or something already!!
Inquiring Wives want to know!!
http://www.ohmibod.com/ohmibod.html?gclid=CIrjmY6brYwCFRfOggodgHFqRg
check out the accessories
"I've got the music in me, I've got the music in me
I've got............"
any more and the moderators might shut the conversation down.
Hi ChrisB,
Very much along the lines of the device I was describing!
Brings a rather different perspective to the term "let the music move you"!
I do believe that my device driven by 150 watts of power would have a much deeper response however.
Guess that I'll be keeping an eye out for the iPod users to see if they have their earbuds plugged in!
Thanks for Sharing!
BTW - I really loved those speakers you did a few years back with the Heil AMT's and the 9" Fostex drivers that are on Dave's site - very nice.
Very much along the lines of the device I was describing!
Brings a rather different perspective to the term "let the music move you"!
I do believe that my device driven by 150 watts of power would have a much deeper response however.
Guess that I'll be keeping an eye out for the iPod users to see if they have their earbuds plugged in!
Thanks for Sharing!
BTW - I really loved those speakers you did a few years back with the Heil AMT's and the 9" Fostex drivers that are on Dave's site - very nice.
hmm, I lost sight of this thread when it split up.
Frame modification is a novel idea. I assume the cold rolled steel would be a rectangular section (?). Why not get the replacement members "cranked" 90 degrees on each end so the x-section seen by the sound wave is less?
If any effort is is put into the 3-ply balsa, the directional stiffness can be tweaked by varying the alignment of the layers.
Frame modification is a novel idea. I assume the cold rolled steel would be a rectangular section (?). Why not get the replacement members "cranked" 90 degrees on each end so the x-section seen by the sound wave is less?
If any effort is is put into the 3-ply balsa, the directional stiffness can be tweaked by varying the alignment of the layers.
Hi Mongo! Good to see you over here!
I was simply thinking of taking a hack saw to the existing stamped metal brace sections mid way up and then bending a outward pointing flange say around a 1/2 - 3/4 inch or so and then putting in some off the shelf aluminum spacers I can get down at yonder super home improvement hardware store. Probably use some 2 inch lengths and put some type of rubber bumpers on the ends to deaden things up a bit.
Using some Balsa wood is a good idea. I need to get some of that for another project anyway.
Thanks for the suggestion!
I was simply thinking of taking a hack saw to the existing stamped metal brace sections mid way up and then bending a outward pointing flange say around a 1/2 - 3/4 inch or so and then putting in some off the shelf aluminum spacers I can get down at yonder super home improvement hardware store. Probably use some 2 inch lengths and put some type of rubber bumpers on the ends to deaden things up a bit.
Using some Balsa wood is a good idea. I need to get some of that for another project anyway.
Thanks for the suggestion!
Attachments
a little OT, but WTF is this????? it look similiar to the walsh speakers...or not????
http://www.abtelectronics.com/product/12124.html
at least the main idea.......
http://www.abtelectronics.com/product/12124.html
at least the main idea.......
omni bass horn
Hello,
a new study, a basshorn for the DDD Driver,
or a new walsh.
Any comments?
http://www.hm-moreart.de/95.htm
Hello,
a new study, a basshorn for the DDD Driver,
or a new walsh.
Any comments?
http://www.hm-moreart.de/95.htm
Hi mamboni,mamboni said:
I have been considering switching to Ohms for a couple of years now. I have access to a pair of Walsh 5 mkII's and was wondering if you know the sonic differences between they and the mkIII's. I can't swing the cost of new mkIII's or even the $3,200 to upgrade mII's after buying them used.
I talked briefly with John(really nice guy) at Ohm today and he said the primary difference was cabinet size, the mkII's having a ~16"x18" footprint versus a 13"x13" base for the mkIII's. Also, he mentioned that the newer models uses a soft dome tweeter compared to the metal tweeter in the II's. Although, he wasn't clear whether the fullrange driver had actually changed.
He said the primary reason for the change was that the larger mkII's were meeting with significant WAF resistance and that the newer smaller footprint models were winning accolades. The problem was that under certain circumstances/rooms they required a subwoofer for full scale reproduction and home theater. Actually, he said that they found home theater enthusiasts were still adding poor quality subs to the 300's even though their LF response was deep enough.
So, they worked to develop the smallest possible footprint for the new 5 series driver while retaining LF response into the 20's. The result is a footprint nearly 30% smaller and visual appearance far, far, less imposing on room aesthetics.
Anyway, does anyone have experience with the mkII vs. mkIII drivers since they all use the same head unit?
More directly, do you think EnABL + your treatment would lessen the performance gap, if there is one?
I don't think it would be hard to replace the mkII's metal tweeters + capacitor with mkIII's version.
Hello,
what about a new approach for omnidirectional:
Monacor SPH30x + SP 60, parallel, serie, invers.
THE QUADRONE
http://www.hm-moreart.de/96.htm
opinions?
what about a new approach for omnidirectional:
Monacor SPH30x + SP 60, parallel, serie, invers.
THE QUADRONE
http://www.hm-moreart.de/96.htm
opinions?
Wolcott OmniSphere
Just for reference, Wolcott Audio produces a supposedly true 360 degree dispersion speaker called the OmniSphere. Has anybody ever seen or heard it? I'd assume it's pretty rare, but if it is up to the quality of their tube amps, then it should be superb.
How it compares to OHM Walsh's is anybody's guess.
Bottom
Just for reference, Wolcott Audio produces a supposedly true 360 degree dispersion speaker called the OmniSphere. Has anybody ever seen or heard it? I'd assume it's pretty rare, but if it is up to the quality of their tube amps, then it should be superb.
How it compares to OHM Walsh's is anybody's guess.
Top
Bottom
Searching the web last night, i came across this guy's ad for highly reconditioned/improved classic Walsh F+ & A+ speakers. I have no affiliation or experience with his products, so buyer beware. But, it might be interesting to get more info on his mods, especially those that are driver related.
c2cthomas said:
Given the fact that the basket just has to support the vertical force of the weight of the magnet in this configuration, and not have to support that magnet cantilevered off the end of the basket, as in a typical configuration, couldn't you just cut off some of the brace sections? Might be easier, if not optimum. - Pat
Hello Pat,
Thank you for your input. Currently things sound nice and sweet so I have not been in any rush to fix something that is not broken. I have thought over many ideas about this - but to what advantage?
My main problem is a proper way to go about extending the cone in length and still have the speaker operate properly. My best idea so far is to dissect the cone using a sawtooth pattern near the VC and surround and then glue in a new extended cone section made from a heavy bond paper used by artist for watercolor painting. My concern with this is where the new extension will bond and interface with the existing cone material. This is sure to cause some type of interference - but on the other hand with the proper design I might be able to use this to an advantage by employing a Mamboni pattern to help hold things together as well as providing some controlled stiffening.
I have also considered simply inverting the cone and letting it stick out of the speaker and remounting the speaker in a normal manner.
I have an extra speaker laying around that I keep meaning to get around to - but other events seem to keep diverting my attention away from playing around with things.
I can see that I shall need to put this project back onto the stove and warm it up a little. After all - some foods taste better the next day!
Thank you for your input. Currently things sound nice and sweet so I have not been in any rush to fix something that is not broken.
I have thought over many ideas about this - but to what advantage? My main problem is a proper way to go about extending the cone in length and still have the speaker operate properly. My best idea so far is to dissect the cone using a sawtooth pattern near the VC and surround and then glue in a new extended cone section made from a heavy bond paper used by artist for watercolor painting. My concern with this is where the new extension will bond and interface with the existing cone material. This is sure to cause some type of interference - but on the other hand with the proper design I might be able to use this to an advantage by employing a Mamboni pattern to help hold things together as well as providing some controlled stiffening.
I have also considered simply inverting the cone and letting it stick out of the speaker and remounting the speaker in a normal manner.
I have an extra speaker laying around that I keep meaning to get around to - but other events seem to keep diverting my attention away from playing around with things.
I can see that I shall need to put this project back onto the stove and warm it up a little. After all - some foods taste better the next day!