Hi all,
I've been looking for another cheap but impressive project after playing with some Alpairs. I found this project from Klang & Tong that looks really interesting using a cheap driver here in Europe.
CT 193 – die (fast) vergessene Legende – Lautsprecher selber bauen
From what I can make out this is an updated design accounting for the drivers updated TSP. The problem I have is that I can't read German and don't know what the BSC components are or what the circuit is achieving, all I know is that it is either a band or notch filter. Does anyone know? I can achieve this with MiniDSP. Passive components ratings would be great as I've never made a passive crossover.
Also, is this a bass reflex design? It looks like a hybrid of an MLTL and BR.
Let me know if you can shed any light!
I've been looking for another cheap but impressive project after playing with some Alpairs. I found this project from Klang & Tong that looks really interesting using a cheap driver here in Europe.
CT 193 – die (fast) vergessene Legende – Lautsprecher selber bauen
From what I can make out this is an updated design accounting for the drivers updated TSP. The problem I have is that I can't read German and don't know what the BSC components are or what the circuit is achieving, all I know is that it is either a band or notch filter. Does anyone know? I can achieve this with MiniDSP. Passive components ratings would be great as I've never made a passive crossover.
Also, is this a bass reflex design? It looks like a hybrid of an MLTL and BR.
Let me know if you can shed any light!
Last edited:
Thanks yes I tried that. The company doing the CT193 'Reload' does not specify component values for obvious reasons. My wonder is the difference between the driver when it was first designed and its new TS parameters with the modern incarnation.
Also, I cannot find any info on the original K&T article how the BSC is altering the FR. It is obviously a notch filter, well, I mean, I assume it is. I can replicate this with MiniDSP but I am not sure of the values!
Also, I cannot find any info on the original K&T article how the BSC is altering the FR. It is obviously a notch filter, well, I mean, I assume it is. I can replicate this with MiniDSP but I am not sure of the values!
hello.
this is a box for the new version of the sph-60x.
this port makes less noise in this config.,
a common port (as often used) would be very small
- or too big to fit into the box .........
the 3 parts filter flattens the +5dB bump at 1500 Hz.......should be no great problem with a dsp .........
this is a box for the new version of the sph-60x.
this port makes less noise in this config.,
a common port (as often used) would be very small
- or too big to fit into the box .........
the 3 parts filter flattens the +5dB bump at 1500 Hz.......should be no great problem with a dsp .........
Hi
next issue Klang&Ton publishes the CT194 - same driver, same enclosure.
Just the port is divided into two halfs to get a symmetrical design.
Cheap Trick 194
You may probably find sone more information in the copy included in the link above.
Edit: maybe this will help (use translater) Welcher Sperrkreis für CT193 ?, Lautsprecher - HIFI-FORUM
next issue Klang&Ton publishes the CT194 - same driver, same enclosure.
Just the port is divided into two halfs to get a symmetrical design.
Cheap Trick 194
You may probably find sone more information in the copy included in the link above.
Edit: maybe this will help (use translater) Welcher Sperrkreis für CT193 ?, Lautsprecher - HIFI-FORUM
Last edited:
Is there any chance you could shed light on wat an expanding port does, please? I've googled for ages and only found references to flared ports so far. Does it help turbulence? How does one calculate one or quantify its function?
Hello
this type of enclosure is called "horn-reflex" or (for some german products) "Horn-Kehle" ). Something in between Bassreflex and typical horn-enclosure.
Used in the early 80's e.g. by Isophon: Bauvorschlag Hornkehle H520 Kit Isophon, E. Fritz & Co. GmbH
oder modern example: Haigner rho: Hornlautsprecher von HAIGNER | Rho
or as DIY-Speaker: The Spawn Family of Double Horns
this type of enclosure is called "horn-reflex" or (for some german products) "Horn-Kehle" ). Something in between Bassreflex and typical horn-enclosure.
Used in the early 80's e.g. by Isophon: Bauvorschlag Hornkehle H520 Kit Isophon, E. Fritz & Co. GmbH
oder modern example: Haigner rho: Hornlautsprecher von HAIGNER | Rho
or as DIY-Speaker: The Spawn Family of Double Horns
Hi
somewhat similar to bass reflex - it's a resonator.
Just in a conical or wedged shape ....
somewhat similar to bass reflex - it's a resonator.
Just in a conical or wedged shape ....
Monacor SPH-60X / CT193 Cheap Trick 193
Depends on who you ask......
Regardless, a typical pipe/duct vent is an open pipe [1/2 WL] resonator and historically a typical 'horn' vent was an 1/8 WL parabolic horn, though for illustrative purposes we can use the near identical closed cone [conical 1/2 WL] pipe that would inaudibly measure a tiny bit different: Resonances of open air columns
Since Hornresp uses 344 m/sec SoS, input this and however long you want in either of the pipe charts, then click anywhere on the page and it will calculate each pipe's harmonics, which will be same frequency wise for these two and go to each one to see their structure.
You will have to use Hornresp or similar to sim the two types to see how their harmonic structures impact a speaker's response.
In short, the pipe provides the smoothest overall response and the horn has more peak output spread unevenly over a wider BW similar to a very large, long pipe vent, i.e. in the frequency response overlay, notice the deep notch and additional 'ripple' in the horn vent's response [blue trace] that wouldn't be there with a pipe vent Vs sealed [red trace]: CT 193 – die (fast) vergessene Legende – Lautsprecher selber bauen
Not represented is that the horn vent will have a bit greater acoustic efficiency [power handling] down low, so the CT194's dual vent design would be my preference, though for modest/near-field playback levels it may not be worth the extra size, build complexity.
GM
Depends on who you ask......
Regardless, a typical pipe/duct vent is an open pipe [1/2 WL] resonator and historically a typical 'horn' vent was an 1/8 WL parabolic horn, though for illustrative purposes we can use the near identical closed cone [conical 1/2 WL] pipe that would inaudibly measure a tiny bit different: Resonances of open air columns
Since Hornresp uses 344 m/sec SoS, input this and however long you want in either of the pipe charts, then click anywhere on the page and it will calculate each pipe's harmonics, which will be same frequency wise for these two and go to each one to see their structure.
You will have to use Hornresp or similar to sim the two types to see how their harmonic structures impact a speaker's response.
In short, the pipe provides the smoothest overall response and the horn has more peak output spread unevenly over a wider BW similar to a very large, long pipe vent, i.e. in the frequency response overlay, notice the deep notch and additional 'ripple' in the horn vent's response [blue trace] that wouldn't be there with a pipe vent Vs sealed [red trace]: CT 193 – die (fast) vergessene Legende – Lautsprecher selber bauen
Not represented is that the horn vent will have a bit greater acoustic efficiency [power handling] down low, so the CT194's dual vent design would be my preference, though for modest/near-field playback levels it may not be worth the extra size, build complexity.
GM
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.