Thanks to all for the nice comments.
On Henry's drawing I'll agree that the two drivers need to be closer together for a better blend of the sound. Another idea would be to place the Alpair 6 (or maybe A5) in a open tube that on the back of the cabinet. It would be interesting as either a small sealed box or open back 'tweeter'. You have freedom on the crossover point between drivers to 'size' the enclosure for the A6 so that it would be less intrusive into the pipe for the A10.
One might choose to crossover high enough so that the baffle step compensation is achieved solely with the A10. This may also tend to reduce the volume needed for the A6.
On the port tube size: It is same diameter (2.06") as I used in my Jordan MLTL. I haven't heard any port noise from the recent A10 design nor from the Jordan design for years. I always check the port velocity during the design simulations. Not a worry in my mind.
Jim
On Henry's drawing I'll agree that the two drivers need to be closer together for a better blend of the sound. Another idea would be to place the Alpair 6 (or maybe A5) in a open tube that on the back of the cabinet. It would be interesting as either a small sealed box or open back 'tweeter'. You have freedom on the crossover point between drivers to 'size' the enclosure for the A6 so that it would be less intrusive into the pipe for the A10.
One might choose to crossover high enough so that the baffle step compensation is achieved solely with the A10. This may also tend to reduce the volume needed for the A6.
On the port tube size: It is same diameter (2.06") as I used in my Jordan MLTL. I haven't heard any port noise from the recent A10 design nor from the Jordan design for years. I always check the port velocity during the design simulations. Not a worry in my mind.
Jim
Re: Photo of Three MLTLs
nice looking speakers Jim
edit: probably not, in scottmoose's design the driver is much more towards the top of the line
edit2: I should look at the new threads first, before asking
it's here
nice looking speakers Jim
is that the same as presented by Scottmoose in this topic http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1711973#post1711973Jim Griffin said:
edit: probably not, in scottmoose's design the driver is much more towards the top of the line
edit2: I should look at the new threads first, before asking
it's hereHenkjan,
Thanks for the comments.
Actually I competed my design effort two months ago. But between then and vacation, illness, and such the boxes were not assembled until a week ago. While Scott's design is similar, I patterned mine after efforts that I completed a few years ago for the Jordan JX92S and 3" Tangband variants.
Jim
Thanks for the comments.
Actually I competed my design effort two months ago. But between then and vacation, illness, and such the boxes were not assembled until a week ago. While Scott's design is similar, I patterned mine after efforts that I completed a few years ago for the Jordan JX92S and 3" Tangband variants.
Jim
Jim sent us his plan for the MLTL using the Alpair 10 full range driver.
He's kindly given his consent to share the design to help DIY builders.
Here's Jim's suggestion on damping the box:
"The stuffing density is 0.5 pound per cubic foot. In my prototypes I used Acousta Stuf(Trademark) damping fiber but similar material will suffice. The stuffing should extend from below the driver to the top of the box. I place a coarse metal grid or screen on top of the internal brace to prevent the stuffing from falling below the brace and tease the material as I fill the cavity. No stuffing is placed below the internal brace"
PDF attached for downloading.
Cheers,
Mark.
He's kindly given his consent to share the design to help DIY builders.
Here's Jim's suggestion on damping the box:
"The stuffing density is 0.5 pound per cubic foot. In my prototypes I used Acousta Stuf(Trademark) damping fiber but similar material will suffice. The stuffing should extend from below the driver to the top of the box. I place a coarse metal grid or screen on top of the internal brace to prevent the stuffing from falling below the brace and tease the material as I fill the cavity. No stuffing is placed below the internal brace"
PDF attached for downloading.
Cheers,
Mark.
Re: transission line
There are many to be had but the enclosures are driver dependent. Have you selected a driver (speaker)? Since you're posting here, Mark Audio posted a design for the Alpair 10 just above yours. If not, perhaps you could start a new thread with some of the criteria such as size limitations, output expectations, sensitivity requirements and musical preferences.
PINTO said:
There are many to be had but the enclosures are driver dependent. Have you selected a driver (speaker)? Since you're posting here, Mark Audio posted a design for the Alpair 10 just above yours. If not, perhaps you could start a new thread with some of the criteria such as size limitations, output expectations, sensitivity requirements and musical preferences.
rlrohlfs,
I have no current plans to pursue a Mark Audio Alpair 10 with a ribbon design. The A10 would be a perfect mate with a ribbon much like the Jordan JX92S was. Such a variant should have lower driver cost vs. my Jordan/Aurum Cantus G2si design. But for me I would like to work a few other ideas before plowing similar ground.
Thanks for the thought.
Jim
I have no current plans to pursue a Mark Audio Alpair 10 with a ribbon design. The A10 would be a perfect mate with a ribbon much like the Jordan JX92S was. Such a variant should have lower driver cost vs. my Jordan/Aurum Cantus G2si design. But for me I would like to work a few other ideas before plowing similar ground.
Thanks for the thought.
Jim
Jim,
If im going to use the Alpair Bass with Alpair 5, what modifications should i do for the TL? since the parameters are little bit different.
And Mark pointed out the Cones are more stiff than the FR. Which we can see from the Mmd and Mms and so on.
Alpair 10 Bass
Imp-nominal 6Ω
Revc 5.4Ω
Fo 35.0Hz
Sd 8.99mM/N
Vas 21.0Ltr
Cms 1.84mM/N
Mmd 10.73g
Mms 11.22g
BL 6.25T.M
Qms 2.37
Qes 0.35
Qts 0.30
Levc 88.73µH
No 0.25%
SPLo 86.2d
Xmax(1way) 9mm
Power 35watts cont.70watts max
Alpair 10 FR
Imp-nominal 6Ω
Revc 5.4Ω
Fo 40Hz
Sd 9.0Kmm²
Vas 19.5Ltr
Cms 1.7mM/N
Mmd 8.75g
Mms 9.24g
BL 5.83TM
Qms 2.24
Qes 0.39
Qts 0.33
Levc 70.23µH
No 0.320%
SPLo 87.0dB
Xmax(1way) 8.5mm
Power 35watts cont. 70watts max
Thanks
If im going to use the Alpair Bass with Alpair 5, what modifications should i do for the TL? since the parameters are little bit different.
And Mark pointed out the Cones are more stiff than the FR. Which we can see from the Mmd and Mms and so on.
Alpair 10 Bass
Imp-nominal 6Ω
Revc 5.4Ω
Fo 35.0Hz
Sd 8.99mM/N
Vas 21.0Ltr
Cms 1.84mM/N
Mmd 10.73g
Mms 11.22g
BL 6.25T.M
Qms 2.37
Qes 0.35
Qts 0.30
Levc 88.73µH
No 0.25%
SPLo 86.2d
Xmax(1way) 9mm
Power 35watts cont.70watts max
Alpair 10 FR
Imp-nominal 6Ω
Revc 5.4Ω
Fo 40Hz
Sd 9.0Kmm²
Vas 19.5Ltr
Cms 1.7mM/N
Mmd 8.75g
Mms 9.24g
BL 5.83TM
Qms 2.24
Qes 0.39
Qts 0.33
Levc 70.23µH
No 0.320%
SPLo 87.0dB
Xmax(1way) 8.5mm
Power 35watts cont. 70watts max
Thanks
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.