FWIW (to keep things in context) my BIBs (w/ same driver, same room, same position, etc) really don't measure much better than the frugals at all, they obviously suffer the same room problems at the same frequencies (~10db boost between roughly 100 and 250 hz). BIB response below, this is what I am listening to now, tight into the corners.
BUT... although they measure very similar they don't sound at all alike. The BIBs simply don't have the nasal hollow sound that I could not tweak out of the frugals without eq (and I did try the suprabaffle and rear deflectors but not the curved mouth). With careful positioning, I can (if I have to) listen to the BIBs without ANY eq OR sub, although I prefer to have both to flatten and extend response and add some bass weight.
I don't intend to make any sweeping statements about either design, apart from the fact that in my system the BIB works great and the frugals do not, and in the future I intend to take this 100 - 250 hz room problem of mine into account in the planning phase, rather than in the tweaking phase.
BUT... although they measure very similar they don't sound at all alike. The BIBs simply don't have the nasal hollow sound that I could not tweak out of the frugals without eq (and I did try the suprabaffle and rear deflectors but not the curved mouth). With careful positioning, I can (if I have to) listen to the BIBs without ANY eq OR sub, although I prefer to have both to flatten and extend response and add some bass weight.
I don't intend to make any sweeping statements about either design, apart from the fact that in my system the BIB works great and the frugals do not, and in the future I intend to take this 100 - 250 hz room problem of mine into account in the planning phase, rather than in the tweaking phase.
Aengus said:
It was in the context of a joke in keeping with the name of the cabs, and the pic was innocent enough I had thought ( wrongly of course)..
Just a Guy, perhaps your perceptions of your build will help to detract some of the negative press put on the BIB cabs.. Bottom line is both cabs are not perfect and have their faults, and one should be able to comment about and build either.. I have enjoyed your unbiased opinion of both cabs you built, and thank you for posting.
Dave
just a guy said:
My experience is that that kind of sound (if we are talking about the same cupped hands kind of sound) is from the inside of the box, often an early reflection or resonance. I really hate that kind of sound (the search for the cure for this in the RS 40-1197 lead to me making phase plugs)
dave
Right, dust cap/VC cavity resonances and eigenmodes (AKA standing waves) across the diaphragm are to be avoided as much as practical in wide BW drivers same as a horn's throat, mouth and entire path-length.
WRT the FH or any BLH with a relatively high acoustic XO, finding the right density damping material to line the mouth and/or damp the entire exit if it doesn't have some form of proper end correction is one of the main tuning tweaks required for a transparent transition. This more than anything IMO is why adding a small FLH makes them sound more balanced because it typically adds a bit of 'cupped' sound to its front radiation, i.e. done right they have a ~matching directivity through the acoustic XO BW and why a supra baffle can typically only partially 'cure' it if not relatively wide.
GM
WRT the FH or any BLH with a relatively high acoustic XO, finding the right density damping material to line the mouth and/or damp the entire exit if it doesn't have some form of proper end correction is one of the main tuning tweaks required for a transparent transition. This more than anything IMO is why adding a small FLH makes them sound more balanced because it typically adds a bit of 'cupped' sound to its front radiation, i.e. done right they have a ~matching directivity through the acoustic XO BW and why a supra baffle can typically only partially 'cure' it if not relatively wide.
GM
GM said:
would that be a good description of the Beauhorn Virtuoso?
or the shallow waveguide supra-baffle with rear-mounted driver
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
these are a slightly later version of the larger of the two pairs of cabinets shown in DaveCan's photo a few posts back (i.e. Ron Clark A126) - hair cut or not, Dave's not a little guy
how did the waveguide workout? sorry for going o.t. but since it was referenced my understanding is that the beauhorn virtusso's lowther has a doorknob phase(?) plug said to form yet another horn within the biradial front horn/blh. how are they comparable to A126sb/waveguide - slight flh loading? i'm interested in what you did with that A126 and probs with the fh because they are simm to the A166 which i'll most likely build for my 166esr. been told the iris wouldnt be a good/low qts 166esr. at present rons austin look best if in keeping with a single driver. unless i get sidetracted by another driver or idea.chrisb said:
chrisb said:
Well, my knowledge of the BV is limited to this article, so not exactly what I had in mind since he says it's highly 'colored', though in a pleasant way apparently, but I guess one could say it has a successful acoustic XO if that was the goal.......
Not being familiar with the horn's design details or auditioned one or followed the various threads about all I can say is that it's ~what I was referring to, though the WG seems too shallow for a typical BLH XO point and the mouth end correction is much too small, sharply terminated for max performance, i.e. the WG's mouth end correction would be the supra baffle, but it's such a small horn that I assume the supra baffle is all that's needed and the WG is to address some other response anomaly higher up.
GM
Or like:
earlier: http://www.roger-russell.com/eico/lowther.htm
later: http://www.lowther.com.hk/tp1.htm
later: http://www.savantaudio.com/lowtp1.html
?
I've experimented with my Austin 166s, using a 250 Hz LeCleach horn w/ 3" throat screwed on in front of the driver.
I really liked what it did for the mid-range.
Upsets the overall balance though (of course).
That seems to be the problem with compound horns, getting the balance right.
Didn't measure anything, but I'd guess it adds ~6dB to mids?
So, need to add higher sensitivety super tweeter & do something else for a woofer/sub...
Might be worth it though, it's a noticable improvement in something that already had pretty sweet mids for a cone driver.
r
earlier: http://www.roger-russell.com/eico/lowther.htm
later: http://www.lowther.com.hk/tp1.htm
later: http://www.savantaudio.com/lowtp1.html
?
I've experimented with my Austin 166s, using a 250 Hz LeCleach horn w/ 3" throat screwed on in front of the driver.
I really liked what it did for the mid-range.
Upsets the overall balance though (of course).
That seems to be the problem with compound horns, getting the balance right.
Didn't measure anything, but I'd guess it adds ~6dB to mids?
So, need to add higher sensitivety super tweeter & do something else for a woofer/sub...
Might be worth it though, it's a noticable improvement in something that already had pretty sweet mids for a cone driver.
r
Wedgies?
I finished building my first ever pair of speakers about 2 weeks ago and love their sound.
Haven't finished the deflector yet so there could be further improvements to come.
They were built from mdf because in the small town where I live there's no decent plywood to be had, however I'm in the process of sourcing some suitable ply to build better cabinets.
I'd like to build the wedgie version if it's an improvement.
Your thoughts please.
I finished building my first ever pair of speakers about 2 weeks ago and love their sound.
Haven't finished the deflector yet so there could be further improvements to come.
They were built from mdf because in the small town where I live there's no decent plywood to be had, however I'm in the process of sourcing some suitable ply to build better cabinets.
I'd like to build the wedgie version if it's an improvement.
Your thoughts please.
Horns are designed for a particular driver. Sometimes you get lucky and a different driver sounds good. I'm not sure what the frugel horn is optimised for the fostex drivers model horribly in them. I found a $5 Aiwa speaker at a surplus store that blows the FE126e out of the water when it comes to bass response in the Frugel horn. The Frugel horn was the first horn speaker I experimented with but when I learned how to use Hornresp I discovered it was a real waste of a fantastic set of drivers (the 126s) Your always better off custom designing a horn for the particular drivers you have.
Yes I am aware of that, I was being sacastic. The frugel horn is an greatly compromised design. The only way to truly realize the potential of the Fostex drivers(or any full-range driver for that matter) is with a compound horn that maximizes the speakers efficiecy and dynamic range. Despite what all the nay-sayers say (and this site is full of them) they are not difficult to design or impliment. The benefits of this design far out weigh any percieved problems (I don't know of any real problems).
Here's a thought: the gentleman is happy with his build. How about not trying to take the shine off it by pontificating on your own views immediately afterward? I might add that your remarks are your opinion only, not fact, as you present them.
For myself, I had little to do with the FH design, which was intended to meet a very specific requirement, but it's remarkable the number of people who have built them and are delighted with the results isn't it? Just to echo the above sentiment, nice job brendanr. Glad you're enjoying them. In response to your query re whether the wedgie version is superior or not, I suspect the jury's still out. On paper, it should have a slight advantage IMO, but whether or not that translates into an edge in practice is more open to question; it might have a slightly cleaner roll-off above the upper-corner.
For myself, I had little to do with the FH design, which was intended to meet a very specific requirement, but it's remarkable the number of people who have built them and are delighted with the results isn't it? Just to echo the above sentiment, nice job brendanr.
Glad you're enjoying them. In response to your query re whether the wedgie version is superior or not, I suspect the jury's still out. On paper, it should have a slight advantage IMO, but whether or not that translates into an edge in practice is more open to question; it might have a slightly cleaner roll-off above the upper-corner.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.