Karl - this may be obvious to you, but if you're planning on CNC routing of dadoes for the internal divider and back panels, I'd suggest allowing at least .5mm / 1/64" for variations of thickness and possible slight warping of material. I find the combination of 5mm deep dado, the slight scarf cut on the bottom end of either of those two panels and small angled gluing block near the closed tip to yield a very sturdy fabrication.
Are these current and dimensionally correct? I hope so as I programmed them to machine already haha
Only minor details have been enhanced. Current document is dated 27-nov-14.
A note for those CNCing these:
dave
I shall manufacturer from the drawing I have then.
I disagree with saying that a CNC is only really useful for the sides. Even though a few angles need to be machined afterwards, having any panel cut to well within a 0.1mm tolerance with clean edges top and bottom is a bonus.
I still would like the PayPal address to make my donation to the site. [emoji4]
Once the table saw is set up then it too can do that. Or use the CNC beam saw for 1st cut. ALL of the parts but the sides need their ends cut at an angle.
In the Nav bar at the top of the page is a link called "donation"
dave
CNC will be as accurate as anything in terms of sizing all the parts, and certainly the driver cut-outs and perhaps mounting for input terminals (don't forget to offset those if dadoes used on only one side panel per enclosure.) When you're paying for overhead operation time on a commercial production CNC, it's a rather expensive saw.
But as Dave says, unless you can machine angles on your CNC, all of the the lateral parts except the vertical internal panel have a bevel on at least one end, and the two internal panels have radius on at least one end to match radius of CNC's cutting tool. Ours happens to default to 1/2" diameter or R=6.35mm
It takes a few minutes to set each table saw and router table for those operations, but once done is actually faster per piece than the CNC .
But as Dave says, unless you can machine angles on your CNC, all of the the lateral parts except the vertical internal panel have a bevel on at least one end, and the two internal panels have radius on at least one end to match radius of CNC's cutting tool. Ours happens to default to 1/2" diameter or R=6.35mm
It takes a few minutes to set each table saw and router table for those operations, but once done is actually faster per piece than the CNC .
Can the router machine vertical angles? Not all are capable on that axis - both models of the FH have 6 ends needing bevel cuts, and if you do employ dadoes for the back and internal divider, there are 4 edges that would need radius to match that of cutting tool.While the scarf cut on internal joint and gluing block at tip of closed end aren't mandatory, they aid assembly and rigidity.
Last edited:
My builder mate got me 2 sheets 8x4 for £60 all in delivered to my door, cut on a saw at correct Angels was a tenner the inner angles where easily rebated with a router and a jig, the driver cut outs and internal chamfer were also very easily done with a router. One weekend and less that £100, the veneers was £170 and the drivers I got for £160 so a cheap pair of amazing speakers.
My build....
Hi all Alpair Builders!
I have just finishe my build of the Luminaria preamp that feeds my SIT monos(the Lumin is also a single stage SIT). And now I have tried the amplifiers on my Alp12P in beech 2-3 cm (very thick and hard) Fonken. These are not influencing the sound at all - and gives a crystalclear sound and electrostatic sound that is very nice on good recordings. BUT the sound from the Alp10.2 in FHXL is more forgiving and with a deeper bottom with a tonality that is softer and not as agile. More tubelike.
And my FHXL is made of 18mm Pine! Very nice to use as a building material. And today I am very keen on rebuild my ALP12P in Pensil or Fonken in 18mm Pine. It gives a softer and more pleasant sound.
Here is the link to the Luminatread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pass-labs/248351-luminaria-10.html#post4175684
Best
Olav
Hi all Alpair Builders!
I have just finishe my build of the Luminaria preamp that feeds my SIT monos(the Lumin is also a single stage SIT). And now I have tried the amplifiers on my Alp12P in beech 2-3 cm (very thick and hard) Fonken. These are not influencing the sound at all - and gives a crystalclear sound and electrostatic sound that is very nice on good recordings. BUT the sound from the Alp10.2 in FHXL is more forgiving and with a deeper bottom with a tonality that is softer and not as agile. More tubelike.
And my FHXL is made of 18mm Pine! Very nice to use as a building material. And today I am very keen on rebuild my ALP12P in Pensil or Fonken in 18mm Pine. It gives a softer and more pleasant sound.
Here is the link to the Luminatread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pass-labs/248351-luminaria-10.html#post4175684
Best
Olav
Attachments
Doesn't the sound coming out of the port at the back after traveling some distance in the horn 'smear' (for lack of better terminology) the sound somewhat? Meaning the sound is not coming only from the front facing driver alone. Curious how much impact this has....
Thanks,
UL
Thanks,
UL
yes it does. all speaker types have drawbacks though. you ought to hear one to see if it is the type of sound that you like.
Ed Schilling of the similar Hornshoppe speakers claims that you definitely do not want the back wave mixing with the front such as in a front firing back loaded horn.
I have heard the frugalhorn and to say that they were impressive would be an understatement. and that was with the maybe less desirable fe126en drivers.
Ed Schilling of the similar Hornshoppe speakers claims that you definitely do not want the back wave mixing with the front such as in a front firing back loaded horn.
I have heard the frugalhorn and to say that they were impressive would be an understatement. and that was with the maybe less desirable fe126en drivers.
don't let your friend from SC hear that last part - or that his design and the FH family are similar at all
actually, come to think about, his reaction might be fun to watch - remotely, his arsenal just might include a Barrett M82
As I've never ridden a horse, I didn't quite get his comment some years back about "... and the horse you rode in on, friend"
maybe I made that last part up
actually, come to think about, his reaction might be fun to watch - remotely, his arsenal just might include a Barrett M82
As I've never ridden a horse, I didn't quite get his comment some years back about "... and the horse you rode in on, friend"
maybe I made that last part up
Ed's speakers use a true compression chamber behind the driver. But the bass comes out of the back on both speakers. Both need to be corner loaded.
Both were designed with the same drivers. Both are of similar size.
Just trying to help. Hope I didn't ruin anyone's day or lead anyone too far astray.
Both were designed with the same drivers. Both are of similar size.
Just trying to help. Hope I didn't ruin anyone's day or lead anyone too far astray.
At the acoustic XO between direct radiation and horn output all (well-designed) horns have the bass coming out of the mouth an odd number of half-wavelengths behind the sound coming direct.
This drives a few people bonkers, but most have no issues with it. In a well-designed horn the acoustic XO should be less than ~300 Hz. On a BLH with an air cavity, this is controlled be the size of the air cavity, the driver, and the exit to the horn. On a tapped horn like the FH, the choke point & the damping control this. This last is also one of the reasons the FH horns have proven so versatile wrt the drivers that can be used in them
dave
Pardon my addressing this issue again - there's a rather contentious history with Ed, going back to the days of Decware forum over a dozen years ago, and without revealing all the details, there are a few points I'd like to make.
In a backloaded horn, I think the room is really the "compression" chamber, but yes, his do have a "coupling/ filter chamber"
IINM, the FH3 is taller than Ed's horn, which in its earliest incarnation was fitted I believe with the FE108Sigma, then the E-Sigma version, then finally with the FE126E - fondly remembers by his pronouncement as the "it" driver
The FH3 was designed from the outset to be compliant with a wide range of drivers in the 3-4" class. I've owned a pair of Hornshoppe Horns with FE126s, prior to his adopting the Heil AMT as the "final" upgrade . Even without the AMTs, they are a great little speaker.
Of all the drivers we've heard in the FH3, the 126 is the only one for which corner boundary loading is essential.
I happen to know exactly what is inside the Hornshoppes, and the topology of the two is very different.
And don't consider my allusion to his arsenal as complete hyperbole