Cabinet for Tang Band W3-871S

coolkhoa · 13th January 2004, 01:42 AM

I may want to use the widely-recommended TB W3-871S wide-range drivers in a future multimedia speaker project. The problem is that its T/S parameters are somewhat odd. If I use a sealed box with the normal Q of 0.707, the "optimum" volume is a large 16.7 L (0.59 cubic ft.) I'm leaning towards the acoustic suspension box as opposed to the bass reflex, but if either can be made small enough (<3 L or 0.10 cubic feet) and be optimum, I can accept it. I realize that there are DIY projects on the web using the W3-871, but which one is "optimum"?
If it can be made to fit in a 8.5"x5"x6" (hwd) box and be near optimum, that'd be great!
BTW would it be wise to power the 30-watt-max TBs with 40-watt-per-channel (RMS) amplifiers just for sheer headroom?

Thanks for any advice.

Timn8ter · 13th January 2004, 02:21 AM

The single driver Elf 1.0 from CSS uses a vented box that's 6.5"x7.5"x6.25" external. Also, check this design.
John R's TBand

coolkhoa · 24th January 2004, 08:41 PM

I want to focus on a sealed box just for the sake of simplicity. With a system Q of 0.707, the internal enclosure volume for the W3-81S is about 3.8 L (0.135 cubic feet), which is a little too big for me. I understand that the 871 doesn't have a very good Xmax, and too small a box can lead to it reaching the excursion limit.

Has anyone used the 871's in higher-Q (i.e. smaller) boxes? Is 0.8 acceptable?

BTW the enclosure sizes I gave earlier were based on incorrect specs given by Creative Sound Solutions (CSS) of Canada, not from TB. Someone should tell them...

seangoesbonk · 24th January 2004, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by coolkhoa
BTW the enclosure sizes I gave earlier were based on incorrect specs given by Creative Sound Solutions (CSS) of Canada, not from TB. Someone should tell them...

Actually, the T/S Parameters given on the CSS website are actual measured specs. The specs on the Tangband website are less accurate.

coolkhoa · 24th January 2004, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seangoesbonk

Actually, the T/S Parameters given on the CSS website are actual measured specs. The specs on the Tangband website are less accurate.

Do you happen to know how many units CSS tested to obtain this info?

SQ Kid · 24th January 2004, 10:24 PM

hey, i just finished building a set of speakers based off of that link. i built the taller ones and they are farely close to your .707 (i think its around .72). i just started auditioning them about 20 min ago and very impressed so far. i understand there will be little to no bass from these, but mated with a small sub, they sound very nice (might run off of my creative/cambridge soundworks 4.1 pc system for the time being. gotta find out the stock speaker's ohms). here's a pic.

SQ Kid · 24th January 2004, 10:26 PM

a better one...

planet10 · 25th January 2004, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by seangoesbonk
The specs on the Tangband website are less accurate.

Yes, use the CSS specs... any specs on the TB site are, unfortuneatly, suspect.

dave

GM · 25th January 2004, 02:57 AM

>I may want to use the widely-recommended TB W3-871S wide-range drivers in a future multimedia speaker project. The problem is that its T/S parameters are somewhat odd. If I use a sealed box with the normal Q of 0.707, the "optimum" volume is a large 16.7 L (0.59 cubic ft.)

====

Using measured specs and somewhat less simplified formulas I get 0.95ft^3.

====

>I'm leaning towards the acoustic suspension box as opposed to the bass reflex, but if either can be made small enough (<3 L or 0.10 cubic feet) and be optimum, I can accept it. I realize that there are DIY projects on the web using the W3-871, but which one is "optimum"?

====

'Optimum' depends on what the app. is, and in your case, the smallest I recommend is a 0.8Qtc with a 2nd order XO at 500hz or 4th at 250Hz to realize all of what little dynamic headroom the driver's capable of. 0.14ft^3 plus driver, then reduce actual Vb to 0.8x and stuff it with 1.0lb/ft^3.

Unfortunately, this doesn't meet your size criteria, so build it the size you want and accept whatever performance you get.

====

>BTW would it be wise to power the 30-watt-max TBs with 40-watt-per-channel (RMS) amplifiers just for sheer headroom?

====

It's always better to have too much power (within reason) than not have it and clip the amp and either have it sound compressed and/or damage the driver.

GM

Killjoy99 · 25th January 2004, 03:44 AM

When looking at John's TB site how would his designs change if I wanted to add 2 speakers per box, or more? Would the Filter values change? I would like to build a center channel with the W3-871's. Thanks

13th January 2004, 01:42 AM	#1
coolkhoa diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Houston	Cabinet for Tang Band W3-871S I may want to use the widely-recommended TB W3-871S wide-range drivers in a future multimedia speaker project. The problem is that its T/S parameters are somewhat odd. If I use a sealed box with the normal Q of 0.707, the "optimum" volume is a large 16.7 L (0.59 cubic ft.) I'm leaning towards the acoustic suspension box as opposed to the bass reflex, but if either can be made small enough (<3 L or 0.10 cubic feet) and be optimum, I can accept it. I realize that there are DIY projects on the web using the W3-871, but which one is "optimum"? If it can be made to fit in a 8.5"x5"x6" (hwd) box and be near optimum, that'd be great! BTW would it be wise to power the 30-watt-max TBs with 40-watt-per-channel (RMS) amplifiers just for sheer headroom? Thanks for any advice.

24th January 2004, 08:41 PM	#3
coolkhoa diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Houston	I want to focus on a sealed box just for the sake of simplicity. With a system Q of 0.707, the internal enclosure volume for the W3-81S is about 3.8 L (0.135 cubic feet), which is a little too big for me. I understand that the 871 doesn't have a very good Xmax, and too small a box can lead to it reaching the excursion limit. Has anyone used the 871's in higher-Q (i.e. smaller) boxes? Is 0.8 acceptable? BTW the enclosure sizes I gave earlier were based on incorrect specs given by Creative Sound Solutions (CSS) of Canada, not from TB. Someone should tell them... __________________ KTK. Kool To the Kore.

25th January 2004, 02:57 AM	#9
GM diyAudio Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Chamblee, Ga.	>I may want to use the widely-recommended TB W3-871S wide-range drivers in a future multimedia speaker project. The problem is that its T/S parameters are somewhat odd. If I use a sealed box with the normal Q of 0.707, the "optimum" volume is a large 16.7 L (0.59 cubic ft.) ==== Using measured specs and somewhat less simplified formulas I get 0.95ft^3. ==== >I'm leaning towards the acoustic suspension box as opposed to the bass reflex, but if either can be made small enough (<3 L or 0.10 cubic feet) and be optimum, I can accept it. I realize that there are DIY projects on the web using the W3-871, but which one is "optimum"? ==== 'Optimum' depends on what the app. is, and in your case, the smallest I recommend is a 0.8Qtc with a 2nd order XO at 500hz or 4th at 250Hz to realize all of what little dynamic headroom the driver's capable of. 0.14ft^3 plus driver, then reduce actual Vb to 0.8x and stuff it with 1.0lb/ft^3. Unfortunately, this doesn't meet your size criteria, so build it the size you want and accept whatever performance you get. ==== >BTW would it be wise to power the 30-watt-max TBs with 40-watt-per-channel (RMS) amplifiers just for sheer headroom? ==== It's always better to have too much power (within reason) than not have it and clip the amp and either have it sound compressed and/or damage the driver. GM __________________ Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.

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
WTB a Tang Band 871S	joeybutts	Swap Meet	14	19th November 2009 04:56 PM
Fs: Tang Band W3-871s drivers	norman bates	Swap Meet	17	13th November 2008 09:44 AM
I want your tang band w3-871s !!!!!!!	norman bates	Full Range	0	15th September 2008 06:43 AM
FS: Tang Band 871s	jmikes	Swap Meet	1	21st March 2007 03:34 AM
Tang Band W3-871S with KEF B139	anannra	Multi-Way	2	14th January 2004 10:11 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

13th January 2004, 02:21 AM	#2
Timn8ter diyAudio Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Seattle, WA	The single driver Elf 1.0 from CSS uses a vented box that's 6.5"x7.5"x6.25" external. Also, check this design. John R's TBand

25th January 2004, 03:44 AM	#10
Killjoy99 diyAudio Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Seattle, WA	When looking at John's TB site how would his designs change if I wanted to add 2 speakers per box, or more? Would the Filter values change? I would like to build a center channel with the W3-871's. Thanks

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