Golden Ratio Height

edjosh23 · 3rd February 2009, 04:41 PM

I'm interested in hearing why we don't use the golden ratio to determine the height of the cabinet. I've been building all of my cabinets with golden ratio cross-sectional areas but never a golden ratio height. Why is this?

I bought some FR6.5C for cheap and am going to be building some small cabinets for them on stands (look similar to the recommended FE167 design, except sealed). Since I'm building the stands for them the actual hight of the cabinet doesn't really matter much.

Thanks,

Josh

Scottmoose · 3rd February 2009, 04:47 PM

There are undoubtedly several reasons; however, if you want a couple, 1) it's not appropriate for all cabinet types, and 2), it might mean in some cases a larger footprint than is desired. And so on.

edjosh23 · 3rd February 2009, 04:51 PM

This is a sealed enclosure. I figure that since sound radiates in all directions from the back of the driver that the golden ratio would be helpful in terms of the hight of the cabinet.

On the other hand, if the Z is based on the golden ratio for a cabinet with a desired cabinet height, that would be more important than the actual hight be based on the golden ratio.

Josh

Bigun · 3rd February 2009, 05:39 PM

You don't need to use the Golden Ratio. Any irrational number can be used to build a box with incommensurate dimensions (i.e. don't share a common divider which might help set up standing waves). So you can use SQRT(2), SQRT(3) etc.

In reality, if you get the chance to make the inside surfaces of the box irregular (.e.g. glue some 'knobly bits' of wood) about, then sound waves don't really see the box as having a simple size and you can be a bit more relaxed the requirements of exact ratio's quite a bit.

My advice - let the box size be dictated by other factor such as Driver cut out size, aesthetic appearance, balance (i.e. not 'tippy'), port length (for BR).

planet10 · 3rd February 2009, 05:51 PM

I suspect that one of the major reasons for not making a box a rectangular golden prism is that the resulting shape is "inconvienient" in some respect. or some other more important constraint precludes it.

For instance in the FonkenPrime, one of the constraints was a minimum width baffle. That fixed one of the dimensions. One of the others was determined using the golden ratio. The last one falls out because of the required volume.

The Classic Golden Ratio Fonken shows what happens when the Goldn Ratio (internal) becomes the highest priority.

dave

edjosh23 · 3rd February 2009, 06:04 PM

Bigun,
I'm actually planning on doing that as well.

Dave,
As you may remember from helping me with the BiTonkens I have been using the golden ratio to find the cross sectional area for years, but I've never used to find the height.

Well I think I'll try it out for this project. I'm not going to mind the odd shape, even though it may look a little... fat.

Josh

chrisb · 3rd February 2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by planet10
I suspect that one of the major reasons for not making a box a rectangular golden prism is that the resulting shape is "inconvienient" in some respect. or some other more important constraint precludes it.

For instance in the FonkenPrime, one of the constraints was a minimum width baffle. That fixed one of the dimensions. One of the others was determined using the golden ratio. The last one falls out because of the required volume.

The Classic Golden Ratio Fonken shows what happens when the Goldn Ratio (internal) becomes the highest priority.

dave

What I think he means by the last sentence is that the sonics of the GR were a bit underwhelming compared to the Prime - most notably in the in the imaging and smoothness of roll off at the bottom end (midbass on down) . We can speculate for the reasons, but the Prime enclosure seems to disappear more.

edjosh23 · 3rd February 2009, 06:22 PM

chris,

Can you point me in the right direction to find the primes. I don't see them on p10hifi.

Josh

chrisb · 3rd February 2009, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by edjosh23
chris,

Can you point me in the right direction to find the primes. I don't see them on p10hifi.

Josh

http://homepage.mac.com/tlinespeaker...-1v01a-map.pdf

Note the bottom right enclosure is with CSS FR125 (pre EnABL) - only minor differences in port slot dimensions required. Very different presentation.

edjosh23 · 3rd February 2009, 08:06 PM

I didn't know those were called FonkenPrime.

Do you guys not attribute that to the ports?

The GRs have the wider baffle and drivers off centered. I would think that with the golden ratio cross sectional area and what i just stated would help the GRs to be the better contender.

Josh

3rd February 2009, 04:41 PM	#1
edjosh23 diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Raleigh/Atlanta	Golden Ratio Height I'm interested in hearing why we don't use the golden ratio to determine the height of the cabinet. I've been building all of my cabinets with golden ratio cross-sectional areas but never a golden ratio height. Why is this? I bought some FR6.5C for cheap and am going to be building some small cabinets for them on stands (look similar to the recommended FE167 design, except sealed). Since I'm building the stands for them the actual hight of the cabinet doesn't really matter much. Thanks, Josh

3rd February 2009, 05:39 PM	#4
Bigun diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: K-W Ontario Blog Entries: 2	You don't need to use the Golden Ratio. Any irrational number can be used to build a box with incommensurate dimensions (i.e. don't share a common divider which might help set up standing waves). So you can use SQRT(2), SQRT(3) etc. In reality, if you get the chance to make the inside surfaces of the box irregular (.e.g. glue some 'knobly bits' of wood) about, then sound waves don't really see the box as having a simple size and you can be a bit more relaxed the requirements of exact ratio's quite a bit. My advice - let the box size be dictated by other factor such as Driver cut out size, aesthetic appearance, balance (i.e. not 'tippy'), port length (for BR). __________________ "The test of the machine is the satisfaction it gives you. There isn't any other test. If the machine produces tranquility it's right. If it disturbs you it's wrong until either the machine or your mind is changed." Robert M Pirsig.

3rd February 2009, 05:51 PM	#5
planet10 frugal-phile(tm) diyAudio Moderator Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III Blog Entries: 4	I suspect that one of the major reasons for not making a box a rectangular golden prism is that the resulting shape is "inconvienient" in some respect. or some other more important constraint precludes it. For instance in the FonkenPrime, one of the constraints was a minimum width baffle. That fixed one of the dimensions. One of the others was determined using the golden ratio. The last one falls out because of the required volume. The Classic Golden Ratio Fonken shows what happens when the Goldn Ratio (internal) becomes the highest priority. dave __________________ community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
√½ instead of the golden ratio	Key	Multi-Way	19	18th March 2009 09:36 AM
The Golden Ratio Stage	Stee	Solid State	7	22nd February 2009 08:46 PM
W4-1320SB Golden Ratio BR	sharpi31	Full Range	4	8th December 2005 09:50 PM
Golden Box Ratio - Important or not?	Ornlu	Subwoofers	5	27th May 2005 06:52 AM
Golden ratio - Example?	icebear	Multi-Way	5	17th April 2004 08:40 PM


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

3rd February 2009, 04:47 PM	#2
Scottmoose diyAudio Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK	There are undoubtedly several reasons; however, if you want a couple, 1) it's not appropriate for all cabinet types, and 2), it might mean in some cases a larger footprint than is desired. And so on.

3rd February 2009, 04:51 PM	#3
edjosh23 diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Raleigh/Atlanta	This is a sealed enclosure. I figure that since sound radiates in all directions from the back of the driver that the golden ratio would be helpful in terms of the hight of the cabinet. On the other hand, if the Z is based on the golden ratio for a cabinet with a desired cabinet height, that would be more important than the actual hight be based on the golden ratio. Josh

3rd February 2009, 06:04 PM	#6
edjosh23 diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Raleigh/Atlanta	Bigun, I'm actually planning on doing that as well. Dave, As you may remember from helping me with the BiTonkens I have been using the golden ratio to find the cross sectional area for years, but I've never used to find the height. Well I think I'll try it out for this project. I'm not going to mind the odd shape, even though it may look a little... fat. Josh

3rd February 2009, 06:22 PM	#8
edjosh23 diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Raleigh/Atlanta	chris, Can you point me in the right direction to find the primes. I don't see them on p10hifi. Josh

3rd February 2009, 08:06 PM	#10
edjosh23 diyAudio Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Raleigh/Atlanta	I didn't know those were called FonkenPrime. Do you guys not attribute that to the ports? The GRs have the wider baffle and drivers off centered. I would think that with the golden ratio cross sectional area and what i just stated would help the GRs to be the better contender. Josh

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read