+95db design

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
AdamThorne said:
The speaker-level filter would have some resistive losses that wouldn't be present with the line-level. This would help... mmmmaybe just a little bit? Also the load would be simpler for the amp.

Indeed. And that PLL parts are smaller and can be higher quality. And that the load they see is much less reactive, the filter just works better all make the PLLBSC a better solution.

Except for any extra grunt you get by not exposing the output end of the amp to a cross-over/filter, you gain no advantage in terms of levels (ie it is a quality vrs quantity thing, extra quality, no extra quantity)

dave
 
ecir38 said:
This don't look bad, although the guy I work with says it looked like a gumball machine or parking meter.

http://www.pmillett.com/ax_fullrange.htm


IINM, that's one of the standard Fostex "recommended" designs - in this case for the FE167.

I'm sure you could do far better with this previously referenced design. When used as intended, i.e. within .5 meter from back wall, I'm comfortable in suggesting that BSC will not be necessary.


http://homepage.mac.com/tlinespeakers/FAL/downloads/demetri-1v0-map-011207.pdf

Note this will work with FE167, FE207 and as demonstrated by AudioMagus at October's RMAF, with the Hemp 8" FR as well.

http://www.audiomagus.com/content/view/100/122/
 
Re: Re: not REALLY needed.

ecir38 said:


Was this with the FE167e? which box? By modified, do you mean enabled or phase plug?


Yes, the FE167E in a "GR" = "golden ratio" dimensioned version of the factory recommended vented enclosure, in Baltic Birch plywood. AFAIK, the drivers had phase plugs and some duct seal basket damping, but not yet EnABL - patterns for the larger diameter drivers weren't completed as of August.
 
ecir38 said:

Found it, he says that one looks like a first generation R2D2. :)


vinylkid58 said:



I wish I could borrow a pair to stick in the front room, the look on my wife's face would be priceless.:D

Jeff


OK boys, if you want to shock and awe your significant other with a DIY design both highly sensitive and monstrously fugly you could always show them a picture of the Kleinhorn, with the El Pipe-O subs (about page 3 or so, I think - to document the unusual neatness of the listening room)

http://www.passdiy.com/pdf/KleinHorn2.pdf


Kinda makes the Ron Clark Austin 126 look like mantle radio extension speakers
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Re: Re: not REALLY needed.

ecir38 said:
Was this with the FE167e? which box? By modified, do you mean enabled or phase plug?

Driver was pre-Enable... phase plugs and puzzlekoat on the cones. Box was the standard Fostex BR (15 litre) in golden ratio format with a holey driver brace. Tuning was a bit lower than factory (2.5" long port vrs 2"). Used as a quick & nasty box to work thru the driver mods. Worked well for what it was.

Scott has a larger BR for the FE167 (i'm thinking that both the 3/4 & 1 ft^3 curved back PE boxes could be made to work.

Bigger will get you more out of them... Iris or Chili Chang would good. A Met or Demetri too (i have a slightly smaller monolith for FE167 in the queue)

dave
 
Ex-Moderator R.I.P.
Joined 2005
Bipole dobbel horn, just an idea:)
 

Attachments

  • bipole.jpg
    bipole.jpg
    16.8 KB · Views: 577
which box?

because chrisb actually built the boxes, obviously he is right.

like I said, my head banging bro kicks them with a 2 watt/channel Decware SE84C amp, and doesn't ask for more (at least he hasn't complained to me--and they were a gift to him because I couldn't stand the thought of him listening to the Marantz HD440 (?) s and the old AR loudspeakers he has (although it does push even those along OK), or any multiway for that matter.

still hasn't finished them :)

stew
 
defect9 said:
would it be too late in this thread to throw out this as an options for efficient speakers? http://www.hammerdynamics.com/

-Jared

I keep coming back to the Hammerdynamics kit as one of the 'might have beens' in audio. The idea still interests me, and the main driver seems great, the XO and box less so, according to some who've built it (Dave burned a pair). Without a complete set of accurate T/S parameters for the drivers it's difficult to know how to best optimise them.
 
Scottmoose said:


I keep coming back to the Hammerdynamics kit as one of the 'might have beens' in audio. The idea still interests me, and the main driver seems great, the XO and box less so, according to some who've built it (Dave burned a pair). Without a complete set of accurate T/S parameters for the drivers it's difficult to know how to best optimise them.

I built the pair of cabinets that Dave recycled to the carbon gods several years ago for a buddy who has now moved on through several generations of Fostex driver systems (HornShoppe Horns, C&C Abbys and FE206ESR BLH).

There were many aspects of this design that didn't make sense then, and still don't.

Frank spent the best part of a year and several hundred extra dollars tweaking the XO, and could never get them sounding right.
To be fair, they might well have needed a larger room and further listening position than Frank's venue would permit. In the same space, the Hornshoppe Horns (with FE108E) were nothing short of magic. There is such a thing as too much speaker for the room.

The Super12 was a valiant design effort by a true aficionado which still appeals to some, but unless you have the opportunity to hear a pair for yourself, I'd recommend something else.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.