I put the pictures in the showcase area, but figured I might post here as well.
Just (almost) finished a pair of W8-1772 following Bob Brines' design. Need to do some finishing touches, mostly the trims. Haven't decided on the style nor color.
I added some color to the "inner" box, to fit and blend with the living room, hoping to induce a higher WAF. Seems to work!
The boxes were a bit bigger then what my wife was hoping for, but the combination of color and wood made them pass the test!
I've been breaking in the drivers for some time, and finishing to do so while they are mounted on the enclosures. I like them a lot, so far.
Haven't pushed them yet, but they seem really nice and precise. I can't wait to try them with some known recordings and compare.
I'm usually using a computer for my music, so the BSC is going to be handled by an EQ.
Just (almost) finished a pair of W8-1772 following Bob Brines' design. Need to do some finishing touches, mostly the trims. Haven't decided on the style nor color.
I added some color to the "inner" box, to fit and blend with the living room, hoping to induce a higher WAF. Seems to work!
The boxes were a bit bigger then what my wife was hoping for, but the combination of color and wood made them pass the test!
I've been breaking in the drivers for some time, and finishing to do so while they are mounted on the enclosures. I like them a lot, so far.
Haven't pushed them yet, but they seem really nice and precise. I can't wait to try them with some known recordings and compare.
I'm usually using a computer for my music, so the BSC is going to be handled by an EQ.
Attachments
Basically from reading on threads here, looking at how the 1772 was well regarded. I did a horn for a 740Q and figured I didn't want to rack my brain on these... plus didn't have the time... so I went the easy route with plans already laid up. I was hoping to have sound before Xmas, and I did!
Also, the 1772 was the one available directly from the company.
I actually didn't know so much about the 1808 until after I had already bought the 1772. Maybe one day, the 1772 will end up in a karlsonator or something else, but for now, I plan on enjoying these the way they are now!
Thanks for looking and the comment!
Also, the 1772 was the one available directly from the company.
I actually didn't know so much about the 1808 until after I had already bought the 1772. Maybe one day, the 1772 will end up in a karlsonator or something else, but for now, I plan on enjoying these the way they are now!
Thanks for looking and the comment!
Last edited:
why not? Qts is ok for port cabs. I think 1808 have too big xmax for fast fullrange speaker. I prefer 1mm.
I agree with methodarn - the real qts of 1772 is higher than spec, lays in vented box range and will often be modified higher yet by significant source Z of low negative feedback amps used in this hobby. 3mm is too much xmax - wastes flux and sensitivity plus invites "gargle" . FE206E can develop more usable impact. 1772 is well damped for a fullrange and sounds more like a competent 2-way than some fullrange drivers. I do better overall with good 12 inch coaxial as less power is required.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I rather like these drivers.
Can't remember which I've heard now, but, with a floor-standing ML-TL, they're the closest to full-range I've heard from a single voice coil.
I'd take 3mm Xmax over 0.5mm every time - its nice to have headroom. Sensitivity is high enough for a couple of watts to make quite a lot of noise.
The only problem for me is the price.
Chris
Can't remember which I've heard now, but, with a floor-standing ML-TL, they're the closest to full-range I've heard from a single voice coil.
I'd take 3mm Xmax over 0.5mm every time - its nice to have headroom. Sensitivity is high enough for a couple of watts to make quite a lot of noise.
The only problem for me is the price.
Chris
The 1808 requires a rather larger cabinet in comparison to the 1772. My MLTL for the 1772 is 70l and 40" tall. For the 1808 it would be 100l and 48" tall.
Bob
Yep!
WAF also contributed getting the smaller cabinets.
Had a go with the pair this morning and.... what was that? Sounded pretty bad. Tried a few songs and didn't like what I was hearing.
Pulled out the computer and fired up REW. Oh, indeed. If there's a sound that I don't like, it's something with a peak in the 1k range... kills the music for me.
And it exactly made an inverted smile with the center around 1k. Yikes.
Room acoustics? Probably... My failure to not implement instructions when I built the cabinets? I don't know.. could be.
Anyway, luckily, I listen to music and movies 99% from the computer. I was able to play with EQ and come up with a much more pleasing listening experience. Still work to do, but it is enjoyable now.
Now, the pair finally sound nice. I played a track that has lots of violins. I like to use that track as violins are really hard to get right. And it was right! Big smile.
So, now, I'm relieved and will throw many other songs in and enjoy listening some more!
Here are the before and after frequency sweeps.
WAF also contributed getting the smaller cabinets.
Had a go with the pair this morning and.... what was that? Sounded pretty bad. Tried a few songs and didn't like what I was hearing.
Pulled out the computer and fired up REW. Oh, indeed. If there's a sound that I don't like, it's something with a peak in the 1k range... kills the music for me.
And it exactly made an inverted smile with the center around 1k. Yikes.
Room acoustics? Probably... My failure to not implement instructions when I built the cabinets? I don't know.. could be.
Anyway, luckily, I listen to music and movies 99% from the computer. I was able to play with EQ and come up with a much more pleasing listening experience. Still work to do, but it is enjoyable now.
Now, the pair finally sound nice. I played a track that has lots of violins. I like to use that track as violins are really hard to get right. And it was right! Big smile.
So, now, I'm relieved and will throw many other songs in and enjoy listening some more!
Here are the before and after frequency sweeps.
Attachments
The first graph (forgot to mention) was without a sub, I added the sub and EQ to the second graph.
I know there are a lot of cancelations around the 80Hz, but there's not much I can do. I'm sure it comes from untreated corners (made out of concrete) but my wife "forbid" me to place anything there. I tried to introduce her to wall panels, corner triangles or foam architectural corners, but no go.
I have a 2db rise at 250Hz, a 1.6db rise at 480Hz and a high shelf 2db rise at 2.5kHz.
I know there are a lot of cancelations around the 80Hz, but there's not much I can do. I'm sure it comes from untreated corners (made out of concrete) but my wife "forbid" me to place anything there. I tried to introduce her to wall panels, corner triangles or foam architectural corners, but no go.
I have a 2db rise at 250Hz, a 1.6db rise at 480Hz and a high shelf 2db rise at 2.5kHz.
To first. your cabs isn't right calculated, cause speaker placed on center, it is not bassreflex.
Computer EQ remove all life from music.
If you need better bass response use right cabs or filter.
Regards
Nonsense! Exactly what does the driver and/or port position have to do with a BR? Placing the driver in the center cancels a potential 1/2 wave resonance that appears as the dimension depart from the golden ratio,
Nonsense! DSP can potentially preserve the phase response than passive can. But you do have to know what you are doing in either case.
And your recommendation is?
Bob
Thanks for clearing that up, Bob!
When I posted the EQ I have been using, it was a busy week, lots of things happening and it was just plain wrong!
Here are the EQ curves I am using to get to the second freq response. I am using the zero latency (well actually very very low latency) app that came with my audio interface. I have a small EQ at the input, then the bigger adjustments on the outputs. I am also able to route the mains out to a sub line, with a cut at about 125Hz.
When I posted the EQ I have been using, it was a busy week, lots of things happening and it was just plain wrong!
Here are the EQ curves I am using to get to the second freq response. I am using the zero latency (well actually very very low latency) app that came with my audio interface. I have a small EQ at the input, then the bigger adjustments on the outputs. I am also able to route the mains out to a sub line, with a cut at about 125Hz.
Attachments
Really? Helmholtz resonance is the underlying principle behind bass reflex enclosures. Helmholtz (cavity) resonance by definition assumes a uniform air particle density within the enclosure and no Eigenmodes (standing waves) of any kind. By definition, driver location is irrelevant to whether a box can be described as a bass reflex enclosure or not. Granted, most enclosures do not have such a uniform air particle density / distribution for practical reasons of shape, dimensions & construction, and some form of standing waves are likely to be generated. A competent designer will account for these. Bob is, to understate the case rather significantly, a competent designer. In golden ratio enclosures, as he noted, locating the driver at the 50% point can reduce the excitation of the 1/2 wave axial mode generated. See attached example (an Alpair 10P in a golden ratio BR box). Upper shows cabinet with a minor driver offset, lower with the driver centralised on the axial dimension, everything else identical. Note the reduced amplitude. Quod erat demonstrandum.
And your evidence to support this assertion, is? It can be problematic if poorly implemented. In the same way that any other form of EQ is problematic if poorly implemented. If properly implemented it is highly effective.
There is nothing wrong with the cabinets, nor the EQ / filter specified by Bob. They are fine for what they are. If more LF is needed, either some specific adjustment for the given acoustic space is required, or a different loudspeaker, or LF support, since these things are always relative & there's only so much an 8in wideband driver can do. Depends on requirements and expectations.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.