planet10 said:
Thanks!
The 127s in the Metronome and the 871s in the Needle seem to be playing in approximately the same ballpark, basswise. The 871 driver runs out of excursion a little too soon – is it safe to assume that the larger area and slightly larger Xmax of the 127s will give perceptibly more bass output before clipping?
If I understand correctly, the cabinet will affect how well Xmax is utilized. Perhaps fs as well? There's lots of little things to understand, so here's question two: What book do I need to read to understand this? Technical stuff is OK.
The free-air resonant frequency of the driver (Fs) and it's maximum linear excursion (Xmax) are ~constants. What different cabinets will have are different system-tuning frequencies (Fc or one of the other acronyms -the summed output of driver and enclosure), and will control the driver to different extents (i.e excursion at a given frequency will differ).
A reflex or MLTL will have greater driver excursion than a horn for a given frequency -the horn controls the driver better. For reference, the point of maximum excursion a driver will make in a BR or MLTL will be an octave above Fc.
I'd expect the 127s in a Metronome to give more extension & loudness capability than the Needles (and also probably be a fair bit smoother), but remember this is still a small 4 1/2in driver, so there's a limit to what it can do.
The Loudspeaker Design Cookbook is a good place to start, and easy to follow, though weak on QW & TL aspects of design. The old Badmieff / Davis text How to Build Loudspeaker enclosures is also a good reference, despite it being old, and preceeding the T/S parameter era (some things never change). Read everything you can by Martin King: www.quarter-wave.com and every post by Greg Monfort (GM) here and any other forum that you can find. If you want to go into the mechanics etc., then Harry Olson's 1943 text Dynamical Analogies remains a superlative work.
Hope this is of use
Scott
A reflex or MLTL will have greater driver excursion than a horn for a given frequency -the horn controls the driver better. For reference, the point of maximum excursion a driver will make in a BR or MLTL will be an octave above Fc.
I'd expect the 127s in a Metronome to give more extension & loudness capability than the Needles (and also probably be a fair bit smoother), but remember this is still a small 4 1/2in driver, so there's a limit to what it can do.
The Loudspeaker Design Cookbook is a good place to start, and easy to follow, though weak on QW & TL aspects of design. The old Badmieff / Davis text How to Build Loudspeaker enclosures is also a good reference, despite it being old, and preceeding the T/S parameter era (some things never change). Read everything you can by Martin King: www.quarter-wave.com and every post by Greg Monfort (GM) here and any other forum that you can find. If you want to go into the mechanics etc., then Harry Olson's 1943 text Dynamical Analogies remains a superlative work.
Hope this is of use
Scott
Scottmoose said:
Exactly the fuzzy kind of answer I was expecting to a fuzzy kind of question
If the Needles go to 8, and the 127s in a Metronome could be said to go to 9 - great. They don't need to go to 11
Exploring the capability space of full-range speakers one cheap and interesting build at a time. Looks like a nice and juicy hobby seen from here at the start of the path.
Scottmoose said:
Most definitely. All of it. Thank you.
I meant in relative terms when I said still a small 4 1/2in driver. They'll certainly go louder, cleaner & smoother than the Needles. 12 is about right I'd say... These Fostex drivers can take some punishment. 
I stuck a pair in a couple of 1/2 wave tuned TQWT that were far too large for them, and so long as we didn't try to challenge a long-throw 15in woofer in a tapped horn on the SPL front, they actually did a heck of a good job. Spanish guitar was especially impressive.
These Fostex drivers can take some punishment. I stuck a pair in a couple of 1/2 wave tuned TQWT that were far too large for them, and so long as we didn't try to challenge a long-throw 15in woofer in a tapped horn on the SPL front, they actually did a heck of a good job. Spanish guitar was especially impressive.
OK...now the important question...
Can the Metronomes with FE126e drivers rock when paired with a good subwoofer (e.g. Hsu STF-2)? (Or should that be 'RAWK' with appropriate secret metal devil sign?)
To clarify, my musical tastes tend towards the loud (The Thermals, Sleater-Kinney, White Stripes, early Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, Mary Timony, Bikini Kill, etc.), hence my mild hearing loss. Can the FE126e / Metronome (not bipole) handle this sort of music with aplomb, or is it more suited to 'quieter' music (small combo jazz, chamber music, etc.)? I like this kind of music as well, but my preference tends towards more aggressive music.
For reference, I currently use a custom Pete Millett hybrid preamp and modified Dynaco ST35 (or Robertson 4010 SS amp) with Axiom M22ti speakers and the aforementioned Hsu sub.
Thanks!
-Derek
Can the Metronomes with FE126e drivers rock when paired with a good subwoofer (e.g. Hsu STF-2)? (Or should that be 'RAWK' with appropriate secret metal devil sign?)
To clarify, my musical tastes tend towards the loud (The Thermals, Sleater-Kinney, White Stripes, early Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, Mary Timony, Bikini Kill, etc.), hence my mild hearing loss. Can the FE126e / Metronome (not bipole) handle this sort of music with aplomb, or is it more suited to 'quieter' music (small combo jazz, chamber music, etc.)? I like this kind of music as well, but my preference tends towards more aggressive music.
For reference, I currently use a custom Pete Millett hybrid preamp and modified Dynaco ST35 (or Robertson 4010 SS amp) with Axiom M22ti speakers and the aforementioned Hsu sub.
Thanks!
-Derek
My money would be on a couple of BR boxes with 10in drivers -
There is nothing wrong with BR alingment as long as the designer/listener is aware of the resonance range of the action. I like sealed just because of the action and tighter bass.
Maybe 2 sealed woofers with one slowly rolled off to blend the SPL would give a lower frequency with a tight bass line.
ron
There is nothing wrong with BR alingment as long as the designer/listener is aware of the resonance range of the action. I like sealed just because of the action and tighter bass.
Maybe 2 sealed woofers with one slowly rolled off to blend the SPL would give a lower frequency with a tight bass line.
ron
Ron's sealed idea would probably be better though.A pair of 10" drivers would be nice...
...but I gotta live with my wife. If I tried to put in a couple of huge bass bins, I'd be sleeping in the barn with the goats.
The Hsu is actually a pretty good fit for the room. However, there's a certain something about a full-range driver that I'm craving. Don't get me wrong, the Axioms are nice, and a killer deal at the price, but I find my cheap-*** ported 40-1197 boxes are more involving, warts & all.
...but I gotta live with my wife. If I tried to put in a couple of huge bass bins, I'd be sleeping in the barn with the goats.
The Hsu is actually a pretty good fit for the room. However, there's a certain something about a full-range driver that I'm craving. Don't get me wrong, the Axioms are nice, and a killer deal at the price, but I find my cheap-*** ported 40-1197 boxes are more involving, warts & all.
Well, if you are going to go multi then do it. IMO if you can overcome the impedance issue then another driver for LF rolled off (cap between the poles) or even four LF drivers ,series/parallel, with all the rolloffs blended makes sense.
Just look at the FR response of many LF drivers and if you roll them off in series you have a tunable response with a fairly simple enclosure with sub like performance. My only issue with sealed (not IB) is the lack of LF response, most sime i have run shows around 30 Hz difference between BR and sealed. If the drivers are there to produce the SPL at a given frequency and rolled off sequentially then you can achieve a fairly flat FR. It is a good substitute for horn loading.
Dont get me wrong , i like the fast response of BLHs, but the complexity of build puts off many builders. Then you have to deal with the inherent signal delay of the BLH or just live with it.
Multi way has it all over FR single drivers. The lack of cone breakup and loading is the question. I perfer to use WB and cover the important ranges with a SD.
ron
Just look at the FR response of many LF drivers and if you roll them off in series you have a tunable response with a fairly simple enclosure with sub like performance. My only issue with sealed (not IB) is the lack of LF response, most sime i have run shows around 30 Hz difference between BR and sealed. If the drivers are there to produce the SPL at a given frequency and rolled off sequentially then you can achieve a fairly flat FR. It is a good substitute for horn loading.
Dont get me wrong , i like the fast response of BLHs, but the complexity of build puts off many builders. Then you have to deal with the inherent signal delay of the BLH or just live with it.
Multi way has it all over FR single drivers. The lack of cone breakup and loading is the question. I perfer to use WB and cover the important ranges with a SD.
ron
Here's my very rough model of the Metronome/ANS10.I used heavy duty Advantech flooring from the dumpster at work and got carpet underlay free also.The driver cost $35.I had to change the cab. size to fit the driver and ended up placing it 32" from the floor.There is a little room to raise it up a bit so I'll probably cut a new front.Also need to make a BSC at some point.I actually liked it better in the quikie OB I had it in for a day.
