Tb W4-1052sa

[greenie512]

Keep us posted, I just got 4 of these drivers as well and am unsure exactly what to do with them.

Jeb, I don't want to post a load of detail here, I'll just report on final construction/sound. But if you are interested you can follow "work-in-progress" at http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/html/wip.html where I'll post pics over the next week of build process.

Cheers - Phil

 

[greenie512]

build progress

Finally have one box build, wired and just running in. If you are interested in the fabrication see .. http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/html/construction_w4.html

Currently one side is my Seas Thor TL's with the little W4's running on the other side not a very good balance but couldn't wait to hear a least one box. First impression was their efficiency - sound louder that the Thor on the other side at low/mediam volume. I've put biwire sockets in rear and am currently running speakers as bi-amped 4 ohm's but with a few jumper leads will play around with serial 8 ohm and parellel.

Sound are very good, but as an unbalanced pair can not really say yet what sound stage/depth etc are like.

Will try and get box No 2 finished during the week.

Cheers - Phil

 

[greenie512]

Pair complete

Couldn't live with running one box, so finished second yesterday. The advantage of +40C in the shed is your glue cures dam quick!

I've put my comments on sound at the bottom of the construction page -
http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/html/construction_w4.html

Cheer Phil

 

[edjosh23]

Very nice.

I'm glad you like them. How are they compared to your Fostex?

Josh

 

[greenie512]

Very nice.

I'm glad you like them. How are they compared to your Fostex?

Josh

Josh – tell me say firstly this is “totally subjective” each pair of speakers were driven by different systems (but good un’s), one box is BR the other is BLH etc etc.

Okay, I’d say difference is very marginal, that close I think it’d come down to personal preference.

• TB’s reveal slightly more in the upper range and give better “shimmer/ting/crash” to cymbals/tops hats etc.
• On initial hearing this make TB’s sound more “forward” than FE 126e’s but TB’s sound is even overall and they don’t sound tiring!
• I’ve always like Fostex (human) “voicing” so FE’s win here but only marginal – the TB’s are very good.
• The BLH gives the impression of more bass but if I put the FE in their BR box I’m guessing there wouldn’t be much difference.

I think “joe public” would plum for the TB’s because the FE appear more mellow but with a good pair of ears you realize there’s not much in it.

Cheers – Phil

 

[type]

Josh – tell me say firstly this is “totally subjective” each pair of speakers were driven by different systems (but good un’s), one box is BR the other is BLH etc etc.

Okay, I’d say difference is very marginal, that close I think it’d come down to personal preference.

• TB’s reveal slightly more in the upper range and give better “shimmer/ting/crash” to cymbals/tops hats etc.
• On initial hearing this make TB’s sound more “forward” than FE 126e’s but TB’s sound is even overall and they don’t sound tiring!
• I’ve always like Fostex (human) “voicing” so FE’s win here but only marginal – the TB’s are very good.
• The BLH gives the impression of more bass but if I put the FE in their BR box I’m guessing there wouldn’t be much difference.

I think “joe public” would plum for the TB’s because the FE appear more mellow but with a good pair of ears you realize there’s not much in it.

Cheers – Phil

greenie512,

So it looks like you feel like the 1052 is almost as good as the 126e. That's an interesting driver. You would never think that it was that good based on the manufacturer supplied frequency resoponse.

 

[edjosh23]

I don't think the responce is half bad. It's not flat, but responce curves for drivers such as the FE166R aren't so smooth, but I think there is a bit more than just responce graphs.

Josh

FE166ES-R graph below

 

[greenie512]

Type, I did say my comments were totally subjective – which reads “use your own ears”. This was a total free-form experiment that worked better than I thought it might.

For the cheap price of these drivers they work well and above their price range. There are probably even better speakers at this price, I just happened to try them.

I like them but they can not exactly replace my Seas Thor TL’s and after veneering and finishing they were sold on eBay.

Final boxes … http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/html/finished_w4s.html

Cheers - Phil

 

[edjosh23]

I saw that Scottmouse designed this in another thread and wanted to reprint it here as well. Thanks

Well, here's one idea: a max flat (large) stand-mount:

20in tall
7in wide
8in deep
2in port, 4in long, 5in up from internal base on either the front or rear baffle.
Driver centre 5in down from top. (all internal dimensions)
Stuff 0.5lbs ft^3 of dacron or similar from the top to just above the port.

I don't normally bother with max-flat any more, but a standmount is often quite a good candidate for it -it'll add a little weight to proceedings. If you want to roll things off a little more, increase the port length by 1in.

 

[indoubt]

I know I'm kicking an old topic.

The reason for it being that I would like to know whether the dual drivers interfered with each other and whether this was audible. Ussually the theory says one driver for a frequency or a lot of drivers in a line array but than bassically from down the knee to over the head (if done right)

Is my understanding correct that you made a two driver crossoverless line array and that it worked like a charm as well?

 

[greenie512]

Indoubt – I have no measuring gear, so can not prove “technically” these were first rate. This was a basic lets throw it together and see if it’s half-alright. With my slightly aging ears it was. Put it this way - someone was willing to sit down – listen to them and give me money for the speakers – he was happy.

Gotta sneak these in, they now reside at my brothers place ...

 

[indoubt]

Yeah, that's a line array alright

I've seen a review of the Menuet where they mention that the sweetspot is relatively small, both horizontally as well as vertically.

Is that your perception as well? Is it much smaller than the sweetspot of the Thor?

 

[greenie512]

Indoubt, sorry but this was 8 months ago and to be honest I can not remember the range of the sweet spot and must admit it’s something I forget about as I’m always the one in the centre listening position.

But I’m almost sure the Thors would throw a large central listening position due to more drivers/physically larger drivers and box etc

 

[69stingray]

greenie512-

I have not read all of your website yet, so please excuse me if these questions are answered. Now that you have listened for a while, how do you like the TB 1052's??

I noticed in the mfg. impedance plat, there are some ripples from 400 Hz to 1,000 Hz, are these cone breakup modes? Are they audioable (to an average Joe)?

 

[greenie512]

Don’t know whether I should speak to a Stingray after what happened to Steve Irwin.

However … no grudges held – if you “backread” this tread you’ll see all my comments/judgments are based on what I heard as I have no measurement gear. I ready could not hear any undue anomalies due to these peaks/troughs you mention. That’s not to say that a younger (less that 50 - yikes) pair of ears might spot something.

So yes, I recon’ Joe Public would be very happy with these drivers. As I said in an earlier response – I’m afraid I can not give you further information as I sold the speakers on eBay quite some time ago. And, the buyer hasn’t come back knocking on my door saying I sold him a “duff” pair of speakers. Before you ask - I was very happy with them but just don't have room for ever set of speaker I make - so some have to go.

Cheers - Phil

 

[69stingray]

Thanks for the reply...and thanks for not holding a grudge. I did backread the post and your website (which is excellent by the way).

Glad you liked them...

 

[MarkMcK]

Unusual for me, but I while I was here today I looked through several threads. I have a couple of things to add to this thread.

As far as I know, Tang Band has not changed the W4-1052SA (if it still goes by that model number). If it is still the same, then the cone glue mod and passive eq filter modification still hold and will improve the accuracy of the reproduction.

Cone vibration modes (or cone breakup) rarely show up in the imped plot. Imped plots show what is happening to the voice coil. During a vibration mode the cone and the voice coil do not couple well. If they did, either you would see the mode plainly in Imped curves or the cone would not be breaking up.

Two closely spaced W4-1052SA transducers (as closely spaced as physically possible) running full range will comb filter. If the spacing between the vertical listening position (ear) and each driver is the same there is no comb filtering. Even very small deviations from this equal distant position will produce very deep but narrow bandwidth dips in the response. These dips are audible. I find them easily audible if I move my head and change the vertical position of my ears in relation to the loudspeaker.

The effect, while audible, is not terrible. They are very narrow bandwidth dips in output. Dips are never as bothersome as peaks.

The effects of comb filtering in line arrays is very easy to measure. While I have measurements of the the combing effect I am not on a one man crusade either for or against line arrays. Does anyone else have measurements that they are willing to share?

If so, start a thread or contact me directly. I would like to talk about this, but I do not want to be the lone voice.

Mark

 

[edjosh23]

I finally got myself 2 pairs of these drivers and am going to try to build a pair enclosures. I am going to build a pair of bipolar bass reflex enclosures. I've been fooling around unibox and trying to understand how port end correction works with slot ports. I found an interesting article on JL Audio's website about slot ports and end correction. I was trying to think up dimensions to build a pair of bookshelfs without making the enclosures too deep and not too tall. I personally do not like the look of a tall bookshelf with a single driver per side because it looks plain. Since these will be made with solid wood or plywood i'm not going to paint, and cannot paint designs on the front so that they don't look so plain. So I was thinking about making it have 2 slot ports (one at the top and one at the bottom). I figure this would make it look less plain.

This brings me to the question of whether or not there are pros of having multiple ports vs a single port. ???

When I thought of using multiple ports I thought of designing an Onken style enclosure, but after trying to do some sims I found that the driver is definately not suitable in an Onken style enlcosure.

Any suggestion? Are there pros to having multiple ports?

Thanks,

Josh

 

[edjosh23]

Well after bringing up the issue with Dave I learned that I have much to learn.... By increasing total port area, port resonances decrease in frequency. As the resonance decrease in frequency the magnitude increases. So it looks like I need to stick with a smaller port, probably a single port.

Thanks,

Josh

 

[edjosh23]

That last graph was a smaller port area and has a resonance at 698hz. This graph below has a resonance at 217hz.

Big Differenece.