Tb W4-1052sa - Page 8 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 17th April 2008, 03:55 PM   #71
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
I checked both Tang Band's and Parts Express' Web sites. The photos are the same and Tang Band has changed the model number on their spec. sheet (good for them).

The molded pattern on the cone looks the same as it always has. There is a patent on this pattern and it is not mine. It also doesn't work, which is why I presented a modification for the transducer.

While checking the two Web sites, I also saw that the two photos do not show the twin-roll surround. I also noticed that the frequency response claimed by Tang Band and claimed by Parts Express differ by a couple of kHz on the top end.

Its seems hard enough to make purchasing decisions based only on spec sheets without complicating the process with contradictory (and perhaps false claims)?

Unless someone purchases every model change and measures it, you cannot be sure of what you are buying. I just don't feel like making it my task to redo a possible modification every six to 12 months.

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2008, 05:30 PM   #72
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Oh, so you only added the ring. I see.

I haven't checked Parts Express web site, but if they use the CLIO system as I recall, then it might result in difference in response. I have never came up with the same measurement result as LMS system. So I always use my measurements. As a matter of fact, I have never came up with measurements the were exactly the same as manufacturer published data. From what I read around the web, this seems to be a common issue.

I don't know, but maybe buy a lot to last 24 months?

I thought the twin roll surround was quite weird for such a small driver, perhaps typo by PartsExpress?
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2008, 08:39 AM   #73
BudP is offline BudP  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BudP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: upper left crust, united snakes
MarkMCK,

Would you be willing to discuss your "technology to map the material vibration modes of a loudspeaker diaphragm under dynamic conditions"?

I have some information and a device that controls some of the portions of a drivers interactions that may not be apparent to an educated but casual observer. You do not appear to be casual.

Soongsc also has further investigated what I offer and has surpassed what I know to do. Would you PM me, please. I do have a couple of threads active on the subject on this Forum and a very large closed thread. I am in need of some further information and I do not know how to obtain it. Your quoted comment and others from your site lay exactly parallel to the path I have taken in my investigations. This gives me hope.

Bud
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2008, 05:19 PM   #74
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
Not to be too pessimistic, but I believe Parts Express may not be quite as careful or as hands on as they used to be. For example, they are not doing their own measurements on most of the transducers they sell.

They mostly provide either nothing or the manufacturer's information. Recent "problems" tend to suggest they also are having problems copying manufacturer claims into their own copy. I have noted several problems in addition to what we have already talked about in this thread.

Also, for the casual home speaker builder, the manufacturer not documenting performance changes like the ones that have been seen in previous production runs of Tang Band branded transducers may or may not be a problem. For what I have tried to do to dramatically improve performance, it is a problem.

As I have time I will check out Bud's threads. There is the best way to use Laser spectrometry and then there is the way everyone else seems to be using it. Few, however, have access to such equipment.

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2008, 05:39 PM   #75
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
I've been working with some students on doing some analysis work. Not easy to get them to do the right things, but it's a learning process for me as to how to work with the young generation these days.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2008, 11:33 PM   #76
BudP is offline BudP  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BudP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: upper left crust, united snakes
MarkMcK,

Thank you for the note in your reply on the TB drivers. We do have an individual, a fluid dynamics pro, with access to a laser interferometer and a desire to find out what is going on. He has a treated and untreated pair of drivers for a first cut and considerable experience in ordinary testing and enclosure design.

No one is really sure how to find what we can hear, though a number of smart and experienced people are helping with looking. Any help you can provide will be appreciated.

By the by, this EnABL pattern would not step on the toes of what you are doing. It would work in concert with it, very nicely, though.

The two current threads are here and they provide a link to the monster.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...31#post1460031
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...32#post1460032


Bud
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd April 2008, 01:58 AM   #77
ronc is offline ronc  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
I've been working with some students on doing some analysis work. Not easy to get them to do the right things, but it's a learning process for me as to how to work with the young generation these days

I know the feeling well. As i am trying to get out of the field and find someone to "hand the torch off to" there is little to chose from. The young expect easy answers, and there is not any. Structure load analysis is complicated and you have to be devoted to find answeres. There is little devotation.
This applies in any field ,be it acoustics or whatever.

ron
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd April 2008, 02:08 AM   #78
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by ronc


I know the feeling well. As i am trying to get out of the field and find someone to "hand the torch off to" there is little to chose from. The young expect easy answers, and there is not any. Structure load analysis is complicated and you have to be devoted to find answeres. There is little devotation.
This applies in any field ,be it acoustics or whatever.

ron
Yes. But I think competition is something they understand. So I tell them, if they think it's easy, then most possibly it is, and they cannot stand out from the others. Hope this point of view works. It seems to have some effect on my own kids.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2008, 01:06 AM   #79
diyAudio Member
 
Taterworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Hi, everyone.

I've bought a pair of these drivers, and am planning to use them in a pair of bass-reflex, monitor-style enclosures. Is it absolutely necessary to tame the gently rising response of these drivers? Should I design the enclosure with a slight midbass 'bump' to complement the rise? I'm interested in gathering plenty of insight before I embark on this project (though I've already bought the drivers, so I'm stuck there.)

W4-1052SD Datasheet
__________________
If it works, but you don't know why it works, then you haven't done any engineering.
Taterworks Audio (nothing for sale)
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th April 2008, 05:15 PM   #80
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
I going to respond to a couple of questions in this post.

Starting with the most applicable to the thread.

I do not know for certain, but available evidence is suggesting that the 1052SD may be very close to the 1052SA. If so, then the original modification may still be valid. I have not, however, verified this.

The technical data sheet linked to this thread is still using the identical Bode plot of the 1052SA. It also features the identical photo of the 1052SA.

Should you wish to try the old modification on the new model number, proceed at your own risk. That risk, however, is very small. The glue ring, using the specified glue, is removable.

Next, I am trying to get through the massive amount of posting on the "EnABL" thing. Bud, is this your invention?

The first problem for me is the use of terminology. A lot of statements are being drawn from a wide variety of specialties. I have some knowledge of several of these fields and find terms oddly changed in meaning for the "EnABL" context. Professionals, working in these fields usually know one another professionally. Unfortunately, we often rely on these personal associations to decipher each other's writings. I do not know any of the people posting to the "EnABL" threads and have found myself lost trying to figure out what the "heck" posters are talking about.

Trying to get past those problems, I believe that the theory I operate from and the theory or theories founding "EnABL" are very different. Despite this, our spheres of operation do seem to touch. If you are familiar with the philosophy of solid geometry, then you have a good idea of the size of the area of concurrence or congruence.

As just a kindly suggestion, try to be as clear as you can about causes and effects. I realize this does become complicated. For example, while material vibration modes (ringing) and boundary effects are different, they do impact each other. Boundary phenomena can either cause or control cone material vibration modes, for example.

As a second kindly suggestion, try examining responses in the transient or impulse domains. If a given problem is caused by a part of the speaker or transducer with a specific location (an outside cone edge for example), then it will produce a change in expected impulse response with an extremely specific time delay from excitation. In contrast, if the cone material is ringing, then you will see this effect spread over a considerable amount of time after onset.

Impulse responses allow the experimenter separate what is a transducer problem from what is an enclosure problem. With sufficient resolution, you can also separate a diaphragm from a surround, from a dust cap. You can also separate a bell mode from a shear vibration.

Mark
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TB W4-1052SA in OB? 00600 Multi-Way 6 15th September 2007 06:38 AM
w4-1052sa modifications dgoodier Full Range 1 18th February 2007 01:31 AM
W4-1052SA vented raul_77 Full Range 6 12th April 2005 03:11 PM
MarkMcK's TB 1052sa Mod #2 bwbass Multi-Way 4 9th January 2005 06:19 PM
Tb W4-1052sa smbrown Multi-Way 4 20th July 2004 04:05 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:20 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2