|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
|
|
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 |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#11 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Prairie Wasteland, Canada
|
That is a diffusor not absorber. Still should make a difference.
BTW, here's a little variation on a Shroeder diffusor I slapped together out of boredom. It was supposed to be 3'x2'...but, ironically, I got bored of building it, therefore I stopped at 1'x2'.
__________________
Fighting the program since 1976. |
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
|
Quote:
link to foam stuff |
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Prairie Wasteland, Canada
|
I hope I didn't 'read' like an ***... so hard to convey tone through a keyboard.
Those types of foam panels usually are made of open cell foam giving some absorbive quality, but they are designed to diffuse first. you can make your own much more effective absorbers for a lot less $. plus they look nice. Lots of info on the web. Like your speaker by the way, angled baffle is cool.
__________________
Fighting the program since 1976. |
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
|
Quote:
No offense taken. Baffle design was sorted out in Tolvan's Edge program. I futzed around with it trying to get the bumps out, and this was about as good as I could do. I was trying to get down to 200 Hz or so. XO is around 300 Hz with a dbx driverack. The baffle is seperate from the box for the woofer to keep the baffle from vibrating so much. Here's a screen grab from Tolvan's program... - Robert |
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Northen Europe
|
Nice speakers Batdorf9 , how do they sound, can you compare them to anything else you built.
John |
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
|
Quote:
Out of the box, I must admit, I thought the Fostex sounded really nasty and harsh. There's a chance they needed to be broken in a bit -- I'm not sure. The dbx driverack is a marvelous device because it has a few parametric filters and a 1/3 octave EQ. So you can get just about any speaker to have a reasonably flat response (this makes comparing various speakers even harder). I have the trueaudio 1/24th octave rta program for measurements. Once EQ'd a bit the midrange quite good in my opinion. I don't have a lot of useful listening references to compare them too. The last time I was in a hi-fi hi-$ audio salon was probably 10 years ago. So my speakers sound great to me (and all of my non-audio-geek buddies that have been over here), but I can't make any terribly useful comparisons to help much. I've never been thrilled with the highs coming out of the Fostex though. I'm beginning to put together the impression that full range drivers have good midrange, but crummy low bass and crummy highs. But I suspect that keeping a crossover out of the 300 - 10000 Hz range is a worthwhile cause. I've considered adding a super tweeter. I'll probably give that a whirl at some point. The Fostex FT17H is looking like a likely candidate. Up until recently I had been driving the Fostex with an Adcom 2535 amp. Everyone seems pretty excited about tubes combined with the Fostex. So I picked up a couple used ASL Wave 8's. I got levels matched and such, so I could easily switch back and forth for A/B listening. With the Sovtek tubes, I easily prefered the sound of the the Adcom. My girlfriend even agreed. Next I switched to some Tehlam tubes. Things were noticably better than the Sovtek. So I listened to those for a while, but they weren't thrilling. Eventually I did a bit more A/B back and forth with the Adcom, and found it to be better. So the Wave 8's are going. There's a bit of a question when EQing and setting levels, do you measure the nearfield response, or the response at the listening position. I suspect a combination would be best. EQ'd flat for the response at the listening position results in a pretty harsh midrange. In the end I settled on getting the nearfield response flat from 300 Hz up, and then getting the listening position reponse flat from 300 Hz down. The low frequency stuff is affected by the room too much for the nearfield response to be useful. After the Fostex, my system gets complicated enough, that describing it in the "full-range" section, could lead to protests from the purists. I tried the kilomax 18's in an open baffle first (Qts=0.56 and 10mm Xmax). I had figured with my baffle shape they would get down to 65 Hz or so reasonably well. But they didn't. I had a huge bump at 200 Hz and was pretty much done around 100 Hz. I suspect they may have been too close to the back wall. ??? I tried some baffle mods, H-thing and side "wings". Things got a bit better but now enough. Additionally, the woofers shook the baffles (just 3/4" mdf) enough you could feel pretty strong vibration at the top of the baffles. So that led me to build the sealed boxes for the kilomax. I haven't completely given up on OB, but it's going to have to be in my next house, not this one. So for now the 18's sit in some 8+ ft^3 sealed boxes. The thing that's not show in the pics is that I crossover to some subwoofers at 45 Hz or so. There's two Dayton Titanic 15's in 3 ft^3 sealed boxes right behind the listening position. I use the delay in the driverack to delay the sub output, so things are pretty much aligned with the fronts. By having the sub very close the listening position, I get a bit more direct sound and a bit less room sound (I'm guessing). I'm about to switch to a Rane RPM 26Z digital crossover (replacing the driverack). The Rane has an AES/EBU digital input, gobs of parametric EQ filters, and unlike all the other digital crossovers, actually has a clever way to control volume after all the D/A outputs. Bascially take the functionality of a behringer dcx2496, deq2496, and some homebrewed 6-channel volume control and combine it into one box. And the Rane has arguably better sounding DSP guts, (see Superior Audio Requires Fixed-Point DSP) On top of that the Rane people are infinitely cooler than the Behringer scoundrels. - Robert Better picture of the front of the room (and my dog Turbo) is attached here. |
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
For midrange duty something like a Decware ZEN or Bottlehead paramour (or new SEX amp) are better representatives of the tube low-end (and they can be improved on with some tweaking) dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA |
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
|
Quote:
Thanks for the input Dave. I was starting to think about trying a gainclone. I may look into either of these though. Too bad there's no easy way to just try one out for a week before buying it. - Robert |
|
|
|
|
#19 | ||
|
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
Quote:
dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA |
||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Basszilla - better with active bi-amp? | spa317 | Multi-Way | 0 | 29th March 2006 11:12 AM |
| BassZilla Leopard | paba | Multi-Way | 0 | 10th August 2005 08:27 PM |
| Basszilla Lite | jim | Multi-Way | 8 | 19th November 2003 07:25 PM |
| basszilla | horn150 | Multi-Way | 2 | 5th January 2003 02:37 PM |
| BassZilla information | krikor111 | Multi-Way | 0 | 8th May 2001 06:07 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |