That's interesting, Dave - they are indeed a BR design. I used the parameters Bob posted at the start of the thread, and plugged them in to the formulas in this short pdf on the topic of bass reflex design:
http://www.electroziq.org/docs/Designing_Bass_Reflex_Loudspeaker_Enclosures.pdf
What would the actual tuning be?
And, thanks very much for the kind words, guys.
http://www.electroziq.org/docs/Designing_Bass_Reflex_Loudspeaker_Enclosures.pdf
What would the actual tuning be?
And, thanks very much for the kind words, guys.
I leave ML-TL design to those with MJK software but IIRC your box will be tuned lower than you think.
dave
What about Tang Band's own enclosure design for the 8W-1772? I found this on PartsExpress site- while looking at the 1772 page, I noticed that there was a link for "8W-1772 Horn Loaded Speaker Design" in same area as specification and warranty links. Here's the link.
http://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/tech-docs/W8-1772 news_rev2.pdf
I'm pretty sure I'm gonna do an 8W-1772 speaker project. I'm thinking of building TB's above mentioned enclosure- or JimOfOakCreek's 40 litre box build from this site (thanks Jim!).
I haven't looked at this entire thread yet, but in many searches of examples of 8W-1772 build projects, the TB HL design was not found- just stumbled on it today.
Tang Band's build sure looks heavy- 1" "HDF" (Masonite? 1"? didn't think there was such a thing). Will probably use 1" MDF. Exterior dimensions: 44" h, 12"w, and 22" d. It looks very much like a bigger version of Tang Band's D4-1 complete kit (which I had been considering @ $640, delivered).
This will be run with Bottlehead Paramount 300B SET's, 8w. That's kinda why I didn't get the D4-1's- 89db SPL vs 95db for the 1772's (that's the spec on PartsExpress site). Am also considering the Altec 604 8H, K, or GPA's in a 612 box.
I'm not anticipating trying to do much design work on this project- I know enough to leave that to those who know more than me. I'm trying to benefit from designs and builds that have already been worked out- and base my build on them.
Anyone got 1) opinions on TB's HL design 2) tips on MDF box building techniques 3) any other advice?
Thanks, Kip.............
http://www.parts-express.com/pedocs/tech-docs/W8-1772 news_rev2.pdf
I'm pretty sure I'm gonna do an 8W-1772 speaker project. I'm thinking of building TB's above mentioned enclosure- or JimOfOakCreek's 40 litre box build from this site (thanks Jim!).
I haven't looked at this entire thread yet, but in many searches of examples of 8W-1772 build projects, the TB HL design was not found- just stumbled on it today.
Tang Band's build sure looks heavy- 1" "HDF" (Masonite? 1"? didn't think there was such a thing). Will probably use 1" MDF. Exterior dimensions: 44" h, 12"w, and 22" d. It looks very much like a bigger version of Tang Band's D4-1 complete kit (which I had been considering @ $640, delivered).
This will be run with Bottlehead Paramount 300B SET's, 8w. That's kinda why I didn't get the D4-1's- 89db SPL vs 95db for the 1772's (that's the spec on PartsExpress site). Am also considering the Altec 604 8H, K, or GPA's in a 612 box.
I'm not anticipating trying to do much design work on this project- I know enough to leave that to those who know more than me. I'm trying to benefit from designs and builds that have already been worked out- and base my build on them.
Anyone got 1) opinions on TB's HL design 2) tips on MDF box building techniques 3) any other advice?
Thanks, Kip.............
I think your'e right- MDF: glorified cardboard. 1" birch veneer is probably available. I'm gonna start looking (Ganahl did'nt have it). Also: Baltic Birch 1"- if available, probably $$$$$. Maybe I have to convert to 3/4" material: too thin?
"Nagaoka-style BLH"- gonna check into that.
kipp - the BLH plan that you linked to looks very much like the Nagaoka family of horns that Dave referenced. Having built a couple of similar designs for Fostex FE166 and FE206 in the past, my first comment would be - possibly more labour involved in the build than the 1772 needs to work well.
Masonite is yet another of those building material brand names colloquially used as a generic product category name, such as Medite, ApplePly, Formica, Corian, etc. In the local area of our trade (commercial millwork), Masonite is generally used to describe thin (1/8" or 1/45" max) tempered hardboard.
To get anally pedantic about it: "Hardboard is produced in either a wet or dry process. The wet process, known as the Mason Method,leaves only one smooth side while the dry processed hardboard is smooth on both sides. Masonite is produced using the wet process only.
HDF can have a density of between 50-60lbs per cubic foot (1728"^3) , a 4x8' sheet of 1" thick material is 48x96x1= 4608 in^3,(2 2/3 cu ft) so yeah, an enclosure requiring a couple of sheets will quickly become an awkward and dangerous weight amount of material to try and manipulate.
I also happen to believe that a decent high ply count plywood - generically Baltic Birch, Apple, Russian, etc plywood sounds better than MDF. Yes, it costs more, and with the amount of bracing from the multiple lateral panels in a Nagaoka / Olson style horn / labyrinth, 18mm Baltic birch is not too thin.
Masonite is yet another of those building material brand names colloquially used as a generic product category name, such as Medite, ApplePly, Formica, Corian, etc. In the local area of our trade (commercial millwork), Masonite is generally used to describe thin (1/8" or 1/45" max) tempered hardboard.
To get anally pedantic about it: "Hardboard is produced in either a wet or dry process. The wet process, known as the Mason Method,leaves only one smooth side while the dry processed hardboard is smooth on both sides. Masonite is produced using the wet process only.
HDF can have a density of between 50-60lbs per cubic foot (1728"^3) , a 4x8' sheet of 1" thick material is 48x96x1= 4608 in^3,(2 2/3 cu ft) so yeah, an enclosure requiring a couple of sheets will quickly become an awkward and dangerous weight amount of material to try and manipulate.
I also happen to believe that a decent high ply count plywood - generically Baltic Birch, Apple, Russian, etc plywood sounds better than MDF. Yes, it costs more, and with the amount of bracing from the multiple lateral panels in a Nagaoka / Olson style horn / labyrinth, 18mm Baltic birch is not too thin.
chrisb:
HDF/MDF is out- don't know what they're thinking (or me for that matter).
So: some sort of 1" ply would be nice, but sofar all I find is shop grade ACX (not the end of the world). So you think 3/4" is OK- I will have to carefully alter the plans. AND the Baltic Birch sure looks nice.
OR use the 1" ACX- I could cover the front and rear with some sort of 1/4" pretty ply or veneer to hide the joints if I feel like making it look nicer. On the front if I cut out the max OD of the driver on the 1/4 front cover material- then the driver front frame face will be flush with the cabinet's front surface (6.0mm driver frame outer edge thickness is just a hair under 1/4"). Still- gotta wonder about the weight with 1" build- like you say; may be overkill.
I didn't know about these other multi-ply plywoods (apple, Russian)- will check.
Was at Newport Beach City Hall last week for the first time. They had recently built it and moved in. EVERY desk unit including shelving in front/above in the entire building is Baltic birch, including vertical supports (almost everywhere 2 X 1" Baltic birch sandwiched for 2" total thick). Many large free-standing tables (seemed wider than 8') with 2" thick sandwiched Baltic birch construction. All with semi-gloss clear laquer. EXTREMELY simple construction- when viewed from the back, simple cross section shaped like a staple. Felt solid like concrete. I may try to try to contact the contractors who built it to see about remnants.
I think about building OB with W8-1772 or W8-1808 & probably 2x Ciare NDH 15-4s per speaker (something like this PureAudioProject Trio 15 TB Speaker Forget Class A, this rates OMG$$$. Review By Rick Becker).
Still I don't know which W8-1772 or W8-1808 would be better for this project...any ideas?
Still I don't know which W8-1772 or W8-1808 would be better for this project...any ideas?
I think about bulding OB with W8-1772 or W8-1808 and 2x Ciare NDH 15-4s per speaker (something like this: PureAudioProject Trio 15 TB Speaker Forget Class A, this rates OMG$$$. Review By Rick Becker).
Still I don't know which to chose and which would be better W8-1772 or W8-1808...any ideas?
Still I don't know which to chose and which would be better W8-1772 or W8-1808...any ideas?
I've played with both in OB. A great sounding driver in either case.
The 1808 is more intended for this purpose and that's the direction to probably go. The higher Qts will probably help you blend a bit easier to the lower support of the big drivers.
The 1772 would tail off just a bit quicker and mean needing to cross a bit higher. It'd work and sound great though, no doubt.
Using two woofers for augmentation, I highly support. But give thought to how you like your stage height. If you put the 8" driver center, then the stage is down some. Above two big drivers means up some. I tend to like my soundstage to raised a bit, but it's personal what would be more enjoyable. You might differ, depending on what LF drivers you do too.
At least initially, I'd suggest playing with an electronic crossover and biamping. Experiment with the crossover. If inclined, then use what you learn if you want to go with a high level crossover. Depending on your listening level habits and which driver you pick and so forth, you'll probably find yourself crossing somewhere between about 80 to 200hz.
EV3
The 1808 is more intended for this purpose and that's the direction to probably go. The higher Qts will probably help you blend a bit easier to the lower support of the big drivers.
The 1772 would tail off just a bit quicker and mean needing to cross a bit higher. It'd work and sound great though, no doubt.
Using two woofers for augmentation, I highly support. But give thought to how you like your stage height. If you put the 8" driver center, then the stage is down some. Above two big drivers means up some. I tend to like my soundstage to raised a bit, but it's personal what would be more enjoyable. You might differ, depending on what LF drivers you do too.
At least initially, I'd suggest playing with an electronic crossover and biamping. Experiment with the crossover. If inclined, then use what you learn if you want to go with a high level crossover. Depending on your listening level habits and which driver you pick and so forth, you'll probably find yourself crossing somewhere between about 80 to 200hz.
EV3
Harsch XO. Most musical and amazing transients.
I've tried different XO combinations, they all seem dull. Then I go back to the Harsch, and it's all good again. That is what I use now for my 15" and W8-1772.
S. Harsch XO
I've tried different XO combinations, they all seem dull. Then I go back to the Harsch, and it's all good again. That is what I use now for my 15" and W8-1772.
S. Harsch XO
As I understand it's a better method to separate bands.
Given our assumption, what would be the impelmentation?
Two ways to do it.
1- with a mic and REW, measure the speakers and impedance, save frd and zma files. Get XSim, and pick the best place to implement the 4th and 2nd order XOs. Get the values of all the parts and buy those.
2- use a miniDSP HD. Implement the XO curves in there, and play around the 200-400 Hz to find the sweet spot for the XO.
Right now, I have method 2.
1- with a mic and REW, measure the speakers and impedance, save frd and zma files. Get XSim, and pick the best place to implement the 4th and 2nd order XOs. Get the values of all the parts and buy those.
2- use a miniDSP HD. Implement the XO curves in there, and play around the 200-400 Hz to find the sweet spot for the XO.
Right now, I have method 2.
Thank you for your response. I'm more interested in a passive XO and I was wondering if someone already did the math and give us all a nice gift
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.