I have just completed the EnABLe process on the 5 1/2 inch by 24 inch speaker baffles of my Saburo's with Planet10 126En's. I applied one eighth inch wide black automotive stripeing tape and then cut the "dots" with a razor knife.
I am listening now and have notice another level of sound purity.
The only way I can describe it is that every individual sound I hear now has its own space. There is no sense of any one sound intefering with another. The bass also sounds more tight and distinct.
I can't explain why this works either.....but my ears are very happy with the results
I am listening now and have notice another level of sound purity.
The only way I can describe it is that every individual sound I hear now has its own space. There is no sense of any one sound intefering with another. The bass also sounds more tight and distinct.I can't explain why this works either.....but my ears are very happy with the results
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Photo links at end of post. I used a pattern that I printed off a thread on this site (sorry, don't have the thread). As I said, the tape is one eighth inch wide. Each section of two dots is one half inch long with one sixteenth space between them. This is the same pattern size that is used with a Fe167 speaker. The pattern is applied around the perimeter of the baffle as you can see in the pictures. The dots are not perfect......there has been some discussion that this is a good thing. The changes in sound are like magic.
http://s486.photobucket.com/albums/rr226/soundsinthestix/
http://s486.photobucket.com/albums/rr226/soundsinthestix/
cum-on Dude, "magic"? we all know there's no such thing 
I think the degree of improvement will vary more than on the drivers themselves - but to be honest that's based on a sample of only one pair of enclosures - the Fonkens - that have a fairly benign baffle diffusion signature. The stock vs treated drivers are worlds apart, but the treatment to the boxes in this case was less so.
I think the degree of improvement will vary more than on the drivers themselves - but to be honest that's based on a sample of only one pair of enclosures - the Fonkens - that have a fairly benign baffle diffusion signature. The stock vs treated drivers are worlds apart, but the treatment to the boxes in this case was less so.
soundsinthestix said:I am listening now and have noticed another level of sound purity.
YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!
G'day soundsinthestix,
Thanks for your post and pics!!!
Please post a link to this in the EnABL listening impressions thread.
I have been exploring and posting my results for EnABL on cabinets, ports, baffles and mouths for over 12 months with EXACTLY the results you describe.
There is so much more you can do with cabinet EnABL - mouths, all external edges - even internal panels.
Each time you add more EnABL to the cabinet you will notice an audible improvement.
Cheers,
Alex
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Those are nice looking speakers.
This stuff is really interesting and doesn't look destructive so I could play with my expensive home stereo speakers.
However, since I'm going to DIY some speakers I can be a bit braver and modify the baffle surface. I am wondering
a) would it also work if these features were depressions in the surface instead of raised areas, e.g. something I could do with small router/dremel etc. ?
b) do you think there would be benefits if the baffle surface were not smooth, but had some v-grooves or was 'ribbed for pleasure' across the surface to detach traveling waves before they reach the baffle edge ?
This stuff is really interesting and doesn't look destructive so I could play with my expensive home stereo speakers.
However, since I'm going to DIY some speakers I can be a bit braver and modify the baffle surface. I am wondering
a) would it also work if these features were depressions in the surface instead of raised areas, e.g. something I could do with small router/dremel etc. ?
b) do you think there would be benefits if the baffle surface were not smooth, but had some v-grooves or was 'ribbed for pleasure' across the surface to detach traveling waves before they reach the baffle edge ?
Bigun,
To my knowledge no one has tried troughs. It is covered in the patent as a possible way to apply the pattern however. So, try it out. There is a fair amount of evidence showing up that the protruding pattern works well with height from .005 to .25 inch for the pattern blocks. My own experiments and long term application has always used paint, just as with the patterns on drivers. This is only a subtle change and I used it to make the boxes disappear as the perceived source of one channel or the other. This did entail treating all exterior surfaces with the pattern.
Also, recently, another experimenter applied the patterns inside of the boxes using 1/4" square balsa wood strips, cut to appropriate lengths and run vertically down the middle of the side panels and across the top and bottom. The benefit here appeared to be in more stability in imaging and an extension of the back of all possible sound stage representations.
Bud
To my knowledge no one has tried troughs. It is covered in the patent as a possible way to apply the pattern however. So, try it out. There is a fair amount of evidence showing up that the protruding pattern works well with height from .005 to .25 inch for the pattern blocks. My own experiments and long term application has always used paint, just as with the patterns on drivers. This is only a subtle change and I used it to make the boxes disappear as the perceived source of one channel or the other. This did entail treating all exterior surfaces with the pattern.
Also, recently, another experimenter applied the patterns inside of the boxes using 1/4" square balsa wood strips, cut to appropriate lengths and run vertically down the middle of the side panels and across the top and bottom. The benefit here appeared to be in more stability in imaging and an extension of the back of all possible sound stage representations.
Bud
I am also a bit confused about how the boundary layer works for the effect.
And working with tape makes me less squeamish than pen and paint.
Were these Saburos a/b tested for with and without?
For ongoing discussion, I'd like to know what should be done with the BIBs and have that part of the big BIB thread.
And working with tape makes me less squeamish than pen and paint.
Were these Saburos a/b tested for with and without?
For ongoing discussion, I'd like to know what should be done with the BIBs and have that part of the big BIB thread.
Lon
I do not think that current boundary layer understanding points to what is occurring here. Once again, we need to look at these particular movies on resonance vibrations.
http://youtube.com/user/shermph
The resonance 1 through 4 labeled clips
Please note that the powder is being transferred by energy that is recoupling to the vibrating surface some distance from it's point of arising. This is forming a feedback cell that is arising from the area recognized as the boundary layer between diaphragm and adjacent air. Much argument about this boundary layer's existence occurred in the original thread and the nay point of view was that the mesh of "masses on springs" model of diaphragms could not, by definition, support the arising of any boundary layer formation and thus feedback formation off of the cone surface. This would of course disallow what is being shown in these movies on resonance.
I am still quite certain that there is a misunderstanding or an incomplete understanding of boundary layer events. In addition it seems pretty obvious to me, and now to a growing number of others, that a more integrated understanding of the rooms resonant response to these events, on the cone and baffle surface, is essential to understanding how a speaker propagates it's energy.
I am actually beginning to think about the event as a mass of bubbles with the smaller ones nearest the driver / box surface and the largest at the room boundaries, with the energy transmission actually following this pattern, thus creating nulls and hot spots in the listening area, in accordance with voids and surfaces in the bubble mass structure. Once the drivers and box are patterned, these hot spots and nulls disappear, throughout the room.
In any case look at those resonance movies and think about their implications please.
Bud
I do not think that current boundary layer understanding points to what is occurring here. Once again, we need to look at these particular movies on resonance vibrations.
http://youtube.com/user/shermph
The resonance 1 through 4 labeled clips
Please note that the powder is being transferred by energy that is recoupling to the vibrating surface some distance from it's point of arising. This is forming a feedback cell that is arising from the area recognized as the boundary layer between diaphragm and adjacent air. Much argument about this boundary layer's existence occurred in the original thread and the nay point of view was that the mesh of "masses on springs" model of diaphragms could not, by definition, support the arising of any boundary layer formation and thus feedback formation off of the cone surface. This would of course disallow what is being shown in these movies on resonance.
I am still quite certain that there is a misunderstanding or an incomplete understanding of boundary layer events. In addition it seems pretty obvious to me, and now to a growing number of others, that a more integrated understanding of the rooms resonant response to these events, on the cone and baffle surface, is essential to understanding how a speaker propagates it's energy.
I am actually beginning to think about the event as a mass of bubbles with the smaller ones nearest the driver / box surface and the largest at the room boundaries, with the energy transmission actually following this pattern, thus creating nulls and hot spots in the listening area, in accordance with voids and surfaces in the bubble mass structure. Once the drivers and box are patterned, these hot spots and nulls disappear, throughout the room.
In any case look at those resonance movies and think about their implications please.
Bud
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Chops,
That is an excellent question. In the various formats I have tried and have also been tried in commercial systems the foam and felt were somewhat successful in controlling some emission problems, but it always seemed to be a reduction of the problem with reference to the signal heard rather than a solution to the problem. There were always more losses than gains from my experiments. Radiation patterns became slightly less focused but transient information seemed less intelligible. there was a bigger sweet spot but drums cymbals, stringed instruments and spatial definition noises became thuds scratch sounds and very anechoic respectively.
Putting the EnABL pattern on reduces the tonal based beaming and provides what is usually on axis only balances across the included angle of a cone driver and quite often wider than that. At the same time eliminates all of those room nodes, provides spectacular amounts of coherent low level information for spatial reproduction and removes rather than subdues emission characteristics that limit intelligibility.
Sounds like hocus pocus to me too, trust me. The only way you can actually know what to think is to participate. Get a kit from Ed LaFonntaine, open up a boom box and treat the drivers to a minimalist set of patterns. Then you will know.
Bud
That is an excellent question. In the various formats I have tried and have also been tried in commercial systems the foam and felt were somewhat successful in controlling some emission problems, but it always seemed to be a reduction of the problem with reference to the signal heard rather than a solution to the problem. There were always more losses than gains from my experiments. Radiation patterns became slightly less focused but transient information seemed less intelligible. there was a bigger sweet spot but drums cymbals, stringed instruments and spatial definition noises became thuds scratch sounds and very anechoic respectively.
Putting the EnABL pattern on reduces the tonal based beaming and provides what is usually on axis only balances across the included angle of a cone driver and quite often wider than that. At the same time eliminates all of those room nodes, provides spectacular amounts of coherent low level information for spatial reproduction and removes rather than subdues emission characteristics that limit intelligibility.
Sounds like hocus pocus to me too, trust me. The only way you can actually know what to think is to participate. Get a kit from Ed LaFonntaine, open up a boom box and treat the drivers to a minimalist set of patterns. Then you will know.
Bud
soundsinthestix said:
Thanks soundsinthestix.
Bud Purvine (BudP) is the man to thank - my work is just an extension of what he has been doing for many years AND Bud gave me some valuable guidance early on that I've followed and built upon.
Keep us posted with the changes as you add more EnABL to the cabinet.
I can draw up some application ideas for you to try if you're interested.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BudP said:
G'day Bud,
Good to see you into the fray again!
It's interesting that dave from planet10 used paint on the baffle of his Fonkens and found the results subtle as well.
soundsinthestix's results using pin stripe tape concur with my results using PVC duct tape.
The effect is clearly audible and dramatic. Definitely not subtle.
For some reason tape seems to be more effective for EnABL on ports and cabinets.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
G'day Chops,
soundsinthestix has described the effect of baffle EnABL over and above what he already had with the EnABL'd drivers.
Both of you have the planet10 EnABL'd drivers - and you know how amazing they are.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
loninappleton said:
G'day Lon,
Tape seems to be the more effective choice for cabinet EnABL (for the moment anyway).
As far as A/B testing goes it's very simple if you have a matching pair.
Basically, EnABL the cabinet (baffle, port, edges etc.) of one speaker then listen to them in stereo.
The speakers usually sound strangely unbalanced.
Then EnABL the other speaker and the magic becomes very obvious.
Your set-up is more unique, but, EnABLing one cabinet should still give you that same strangely unbalanced effect.
I'm happy to draw up some cabinet EnABL for BIB's if you like.
Cheers,
Alex
Alex, thanks for your reference to BudP. I have done more searching and see the work he has done as well. Thanks BudP.
I did EnABLe one Saburo before the other.....so I was able to A/B the two of them. Very noticeable difference.
I also listened very close to the edge of the baffle, and compared each speaker. The EnABLed speaker was much more "clear".
I have a pair of older FE164's that I think I will do the Planet10 treatment to......put in Scottmoose's Half-Chilles......and do the complete EnABLE process to drivers and cabinets. If you have a better suggestion let me know.
I did EnABLe one Saburo before the other.....so I was able to A/B the two of them. Very noticeable difference.
I also listened very close to the edge of the baffle, and compared each speaker. The EnABLed speaker was much more "clear".
I have a pair of older FE164's that I think I will do the Planet10 treatment to......put in Scottmoose's Half-Chilles......and do the complete EnABLE process to drivers and cabinets. If you have a better suggestion let me know.
The FE164 can be used in any speaker that would suit the FE167E - so you have plenty of choices.
If you are building from scratch, then you should try EnABLing all internal panels before or during construction.
I made up some sheets of clear Contact (the self adhesive stuff you use to cover school books etc) completely filled with the EnABL pattern using PVC duct tape blocks.
I stuck these sheets onto the internal panels of my Voigt pipes.
The sound is so fast, clean and non-boxy - almost like there is no cabinet there at all.
Cheers,
Alex
If you are building from scratch, then you should try EnABLing all internal panels before or during construction.
I made up some sheets of clear Contact (the self adhesive stuff you use to cover school books etc) completely filled with the EnABL pattern using PVC duct tape blocks.
I stuck these sheets onto the internal panels of my Voigt pipes.
The sound is so fast, clean and non-boxy - almost like there is no cabinet there at all.
Cheers,
Alex
Alex,
Yes knowing the pattern for a BIB would be interesting.
Lon (who can always do with a few less "basicallys."
[BudP
Youtube never runs for me without being herky jerky. It's the only form of stream that isn't smooth so I couldn't really follow the Voice Over.]
I should be getting in touch with Ed pretty soon. I'm putting together an MLTL for the FE167e.
Yes knowing the pattern for a BIB would be interesting.
Lon (who can always do with a few less "basicallys."
[BudP
Youtube never runs for me without being herky jerky. It's the only form of stream that isn't smooth so I couldn't really follow the Voice Over.]
I should be getting in touch with Ed pretty soon. I'm putting together an MLTL for the FE167e.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.