Thread split off from http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/128681-wood-varnish.html?highlight=wood+varnish 
Hi guys!
I'm new to this thread as well, but I've build speaker cabinets, speaker elements(I've wind the coil myself and then I buy the cone, the suspension, the magnet, basket etc., I'm "tube-crazy", so it's a great way to get the perfect match for the output trafo and speaker, all properties of the speaker, from induction to Vas, is under your "spell" - ctrl).
There's so many different opinion and ways to choose the "right" material as there are "builders/designers".
Personal I all most always use MDF and sheep wool. I've experimented with concrete, black-oak etcetera. To put all the resonance frequencies to use, in some fashion... And I've manage to get a small 4" full range speaker, to produce base like an 18", but I always end up building(for those who order amps and speakers from my little company) cabinet with MDF, and then "dress up" the cabinet with, whatever wood the customer/you want, except for the front, because if you use a very hard wood(or fiberglass, eeekh... what a terrifying thought....) the measured values of the speaker-element in question will change. What you get from the datasheet of a speaker-element is based on an infinity baffle, absolutely no resonance fq from the cabinet.
What you want to do with your cabinet is to change those data, and perhaps get a higher resolution from the base/mid-range element(s), or for a subwoofer, you might want to force the element to play beyond its resonance frequency, and so on...
My advice for beginners is to use MDF and veneer, and closed or ported cabinets. And of course, use the Volume(liters) specified in the datasheet, a ported cabinet always becomes much bigger than a closed, depending on the ports length and diameter... A vented speaker, is often much "easier" to drive than a closed, especially the lower frequencies... But in "my world" there's no better material than MDF to use as housing, than you can dress it with whatever your fancy, veneer, plywood, "real" black-oak, mahogany, cherry bla bla bla.... And there are many "damping materials", but I found that real wool is the best, but I'm very old fashioned... there are synthetic damping that are many times superior to wool!
But wool and MDF and "mid-fi"-speakers, like Zachery, Vifa(they have many hi-fi elements too, though I'm Swedish, the Danish knows how to make speakers!) , Scanpeak, Preeless and even Cerwin-Vega(though I've never "understood" their slogan, "Loud and Dirty"... but that's just me...).
And A closed or vented cabinet is a good beginning, and don't use too elaborate filters, a 12dB/Oct and a Zobel is often enough. To start with, I would use a 6dB/Oct, damping and Zobel, and only Zobel on the base/mid-range speaker if you're building a two-way speaker...
Zobel/Passive/Low/Bandpass/High - link
Visit ESP, you can get much good ideas and info there!
Have fun, "try and error" is my way, and the best way, build, build and build, each mistake will learn you something new!
Hi guys!
I'm new to this thread as well, but I've build speaker cabinets, speaker elements(I've wind the coil myself and then I buy the cone, the suspension, the magnet, basket etc., I'm "tube-crazy", so it's a great way to get the perfect match for the output trafo and speaker, all properties of the speaker, from induction to Vas, is under your "spell" - ctrl).
There's so many different opinion and ways to choose the "right" material as there are "builders/designers".
Personal I all most always use MDF and sheep wool. I've experimented with concrete, black-oak etcetera. To put all the resonance frequencies to use, in some fashion... And I've manage to get a small 4" full range speaker, to produce base like an 18", but I always end up building(for those who order amps and speakers from my little company) cabinet with MDF, and then "dress up" the cabinet with, whatever wood the customer/you want, except for the front, because if you use a very hard wood(or fiberglass, eeekh... what a terrifying thought....) the measured values of the speaker-element in question will change. What you get from the datasheet of a speaker-element is based on an infinity baffle, absolutely no resonance fq from the cabinet.
What you want to do with your cabinet is to change those data, and perhaps get a higher resolution from the base/mid-range element(s), or for a subwoofer, you might want to force the element to play beyond its resonance frequency, and so on...
My advice for beginners is to use MDF and veneer, and closed or ported cabinets. And of course, use the Volume(liters) specified in the datasheet, a ported cabinet always becomes much bigger than a closed, depending on the ports length and diameter... A vented speaker, is often much "easier" to drive than a closed, especially the lower frequencies... But in "my world" there's no better material than MDF to use as housing, than you can dress it with whatever your fancy, veneer, plywood, "real" black-oak, mahogany, cherry bla bla bla.... And there are many "damping materials", but I found that real wool is the best, but I'm very old fashioned... there are synthetic damping that are many times superior to wool!
But wool and MDF and "mid-fi"-speakers, like Zachery, Vifa(they have many hi-fi elements too, though I'm Swedish, the Danish knows how to make speakers!) , Scanpeak, Preeless and even Cerwin-Vega(though I've never "understood" their slogan, "Loud and Dirty"... but that's just me...).
And A closed or vented cabinet is a good beginning, and don't use too elaborate filters, a 12dB/Oct and a Zobel is often enough. To start with, I would use a 6dB/Oct, damping and Zobel, and only Zobel on the base/mid-range speaker if you're building a two-way speaker...
Zobel/Passive/Low/Bandpass/High - link
Visit ESP, you can get much good ideas and info there!
Have fun, "try and error" is my way, and the best way, build, build and build, each mistake will learn you something new!
Last edited:
The cabinet should add nothing at all to the sound. It's like years ago when radiograms were said to have a nice tone, any resonance will add something that shouldn't be there. Just listen to a pair of electrostatics with no cabinet to prove my point.
The HIFI site
The HIFI site
Well, with all due respect; as with transducers with electro/magnetic dynamic motors, not all electrostatics sound the same (or would be the best exemplar of your point)
and there are some of us quite happy with the musical mirage produced by commercial or DIY enclosure designs that would not past objective measures of inert neutrality - does that make us wrong?
- keep the change 
I accept your point that there will always be distortion with any tranducer. As long as you're happy with your sound, then I'll be the last to offer criticism. For myself, I'm always searching for something better.
The HIFI site
The HIFI site
Well, with all due respect; as with transducers with electro/magnetic dynamic motors, not all electrostatics sound the same (or would be the best exemplar of your point)
and there are some of us quite happy with the musical mirage produced by commercial or DIY enclosure designs that would not past objective measures of inert neutrality - does that make us wrong?
Exactly, the electrostatic speaker can't produce any bass to speak of, check out Rod's Electrostatic project, I've build it just for fun(I found on old article from a Swedish magazine called "Radio & Television", from 1late 60's, and they had an article 'bout headphones w/ electrostatic "elements", 30k of voltage between my ears.... they must have confused it with chock thearapy..
).Well hears the link to a great project for those who want to hear "voltage"....
He has removed that project... sad but true.. I might have missed it so if some one's curious, the url is; ESP Projects Pages - DIY Audio and Electronics
Well I found the project... yipee-kai.....
Project 105 - Build an ESL , it's a three part projcet, and notice that he use a "common" speaker for the base fq.
I recommend anyone who's never really cared or heard of electrostatic speaker to build this project, it's lots of fun, and it opens ideas for all sorts of crazy solutions...
Project 105 - Build an ESL , it's a three part projcet, and notice that he use a "common" speaker for the base fq.
I recommend anyone who's never really cared or heard of electrostatic speaker to build this project, it's lots of fun, and it opens ideas for all sorts of crazy solutions...
That is completely untrue. Just like any OB the bass extension is largely determined by the size of the baffle, and the level capability by the volume displacement.
An ESL that can produce bass is usually impractically large. But they exist.
BTW: to stoke the fires, i never use MDF for boxes, finding it unsuitable. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/cons...ussion-what-materials-build-speakers-out.html
dave
Heard some 'statics a while ago, pretty amazing, even though they were 2-way (mid-high and mid-bass). 2' wide by 3' high, bass went low enough, loud enough. Still, while impressive to listen to, it wasn't for me.
Now then, a while ago, I played around with cancelling the rear-wave of a small full-ranger. There's a thread somewhere. Why can't such an idea be applied to electrostatics? Surely, with a light cone and a powerful motor (think PA drivers), the rearward driver would keep up...
Of course, the rearward cabinet would have to be well braced, and another amplifier would be needed, but halving the size of the electrostatic panels required would be handy...
Now then, a while ago, I played around with cancelling the rear-wave of a small full-ranger. There's a thread somewhere. Why can't such an idea be applied to electrostatics? Surely, with a light cone and a powerful motor (think PA drivers), the rearward driver would keep up...
Of course, the rearward cabinet would have to be well braced, and another amplifier would be needed, but halving the size of the electrostatic panels required would be handy...
Well good for you, "judge the book by its cover, and read what you want between selected lines...."
Why you mentioned MDF can I only take for kindergarten sandbox war.... Build a cabinet with MDF is excellent, and then use plywood or whatever to "hide" the MDF is a cheap way to build good looking, well sounding speakers. I don't know if you have unlimited supply of money, but I don't, and I rather spend some extra bucks on the elements.....
But cheers to you mate...
And building a well sounding system with limited assets is a bigger challenge, if you have the money and can buy what the heck you want, well why even do it your self?
planet10: And why are you picking on me?
That's not what he's talking about. Plywood sounds better to him. Who cares about the finish? Money has nothing to do with it.
Hmm...
No one's picking on you. Thicken your skin a little.
Not picking on you, i'm picking on MDF -- i'm on a crusade against the myth that MDF is a good material for speaker building. Using MDF compromises the potential downward dynamic range of the speaker.
We can get all the free MDF we'd ever need for our speaker builds. We still figure that money spent on BB ply is better value. Given how much labour and energy goes into a box the cost of base materials borders on insignificant. Certainly less than the cost of veneer & finish.
And if you are on a real budget partical board (or even OSB) can be used to make a better sounding box than MDF. Harder to make look pretty thou.
I actually had an email from another swede, who being a kid, has an extremely tight budget. He decided to go with BB because it was cheaper than MDF + veneer. He did that before he was advised that he'd also end up with a better sounding speaker.
dave
We can get all the free MDF we'd ever need for our speaker builds. We still figure that money spent on BB ply is better value. Given how much labour and energy goes into a box the cost of base materials borders on insignificant. Certainly less than the cost of veneer & finish.
And if you are on a real budget partical board (or even OSB) can be used to make a better sounding box than MDF. Harder to make look pretty thou.
I actually had an email from another swede, who being a kid, has an extremely tight budget. He decided to go with BB because it was cheaper than MDF + veneer. He did that before he was advised that he'd also end up with a better sounding speaker.
dave
>>> and build them too produce base like a ordinary loudspeaker is tricky...
I always try to hear electrostatics whenever i can bc there are so many 'electrostatic fanatics' out there. I heard the Quad many years ago (probably when i could here much better) and just did not like the way the sound seemed to emanate from behind them. I have heard Martin Logans several times and never enjoy them either. ML also uses woofers to do bass duties rather than a full length electrostatic.
Not sure there are any a-holes on this forum but there are people with different opinions. For reasons unknown we enjoy the sounds of different speakers... horns, sealed, ported, open baffle, compression drivers, electrostatic, full range, multi driver, omni directional, directional, etc.... so many to choose from! The 'math guys' may believe one thing while the 'emotional guys' believe another. Around here, many of the 'math guys' love Lowther... which have pretty bad numbers sometimes... they also enjoy much cheaper stuff. Same for the 'emotional guys.' Regardless, somewhere in the middle is a very large gray area where there's plenty of room for personal opinion, experimentation and enthusiasm.
I've never once been offended when someone claims a cheep woofer with a piezo on top sounds bad. When i turn on my pair they always sound good... to me.
I reserve the right to enjoy electrostatics in the future! Right now, i'll pass.
I always try to hear electrostatics whenever i can bc there are so many 'electrostatic fanatics' out there. I heard the Quad many years ago (probably when i could here much better) and just did not like the way the sound seemed to emanate from behind them. I have heard Martin Logans several times and never enjoy them either. ML also uses woofers to do bass duties rather than a full length electrostatic.
Not sure there are any a-holes on this forum but there are people with different opinions. For reasons unknown we enjoy the sounds of different speakers... horns, sealed, ported, open baffle, compression drivers, electrostatic, full range, multi driver, omni directional, directional, etc.... so many to choose from! The 'math guys' may believe one thing while the 'emotional guys' believe another. Around here, many of the 'math guys' love Lowther... which have pretty bad numbers sometimes... they also enjoy much cheaper stuff. Same for the 'emotional guys.' Regardless, somewhere in the middle is a very large gray area where there's plenty of room for personal opinion, experimentation and enthusiasm.
I've never once been offended when someone claims a cheep woofer with a piezo on top sounds bad. When i turn on my pair they always sound good... to me.
I reserve the right to enjoy electrostatics in the future! Right now, i'll pass.
I have read a significant portion of Rod Elliot's site, including that. His site is an invaluable reference, even thou we disagree on some things.
It is easier to buy some drivers and put them into a box than build an ESL, but it is a lot easier to build an ESL than to build a dynamic speaker. Except for the transformers, probably cheaper too.
An ESL just needs to be big (or on a big baffle) to produce bass. But that compromises other things, and often requires an arc welder to drive. That comes from having lots of experience with Quad 57, Dayton Wrights (a stacked pair of DW can certainly produce bass), Acoustats ... before i had a paradigm changing experience with some cheap FRs and a 5W SE amp, i had lived with Acoustats.
Most ESLs are bass challenged (because of size, room requirements, and cubic dollars usually needed to get bass), but that does not exclude them from being able to produce bass.
dave
My opinion why is that because speakers have sooo much more potential (i figure on a scale of 1-10, even the best speakers are still only 1-2), it is possible to build 2 perfectly valid loudspeakers that are totally different. As the consumer of the music that comes out of them, only the individual listening can choose the compromises best suited to their needs.
dave
I did not find reggae sounding too ridiculous on my classic British pipesmoker's rig of Quad IIs and ESL-57s. I think that what bass is for many people, not the connoisseurs who post here, is that boof boof sound allied to the LF grumble you get from poorly designed ports and ill braced cabinets. ELS-57s also need to be millimetrically precisely placed to sing.
I am wary of MDF, not just because of pro BB ply polemic, but from a health and safety aspect. I gave up smoking, which I enjoyed, because it was bad for me so avoiding breathing MDF dust is an easy decision.
Veering back on topic, all I want is a box that doesn't sound like a box, I guess. An OB won't cut it for the same reasons I gave up the 'statics.
We should as builders also not be afraid of allowing a home made speaker to look home made, rather than try to imitate factory finishes and techniques. Which would you prefer, some good home cookin' or a microwave ready meal?
Cheers Steve
I am wary of MDF, not just because of pro BB ply polemic, but from a health and safety aspect. I gave up smoking, which I enjoyed, because it was bad for me so avoiding breathing MDF dust is an easy decision.
Veering back on topic, all I want is a box that doesn't sound like a box, I guess. An OB won't cut it for the same reasons I gave up the 'statics.
We should as builders also not be afraid of allowing a home made speaker to look home made, rather than try to imitate factory finishes and techniques. Which would you prefer, some good home cookin' or a microwave ready meal?
Cheers Steve
BB just happens to be the least expensive flat material that is easy to source, to work with and to finish. System design needs to include target material.
With more budget, you can do better -- as the designs i build have been designed to work with BB and flat panel material, anything we use that is more exotic tends to have charateristics that improve on those that are paramount to BB's performance. A favourite is stranded bamboo ply.
On the far-out there side i have fantisies about "growing" cabinets in zero-G using nanobots working in a soup of carbon & organic (plastic) compounds. But one would need to reconsider the actual cabinet design from the POV of the material's strengths.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.