I was wondering if anyone has used these. I remember there was a modification for them, but I haven't heard of anyone using them in a project. The Omega Minuet uses two of these, which is what I was planning on doing. I was going to try a bipole setup instead and I was thinking about getting some for my car too.
Anyone tried them?
Thanks,
Josh
forget a link to the spec sheet
http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/264-828.pdf
Anyone tried them?
Thanks,
Josh
forget a link to the spec sheet
http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/264-828.pdf
Hmmm... That Omega design is interesting. I did a little reverse engineer on them and I can't for the life of me figure out how they get a frequency response of 52 Hz out of these. The best I could figure (working from the spec sheet) was a 17.70l box (approximately the same size as the Omega) that was -3 dB at 54.7 Hz.
That said, these drivers perform quite well in a relatively small box... If I can ever find access to another workshop (blasted appartment living) I might give them a shot. I'll post a potential (though probably fatally flawed by my newbieness) design for this driver later tonight.
Edit: Stumbled on a review of the Omega's using these drivers: http://www.dagogo.com/47LabGaincard-OmegaMinuet.html
That said, these drivers perform quite well in a relatively small box... If I can ever find access to another workshop (blasted appartment living) I might give them a shot. I'll post a potential (though probably fatally flawed by my newbieness) design for this driver later tonight.
Edit: Stumbled on a review of the Omega's using these drivers: http://www.dagogo.com/47LabGaincard-OmegaMinuet.html
blip1882,
When I modled these drivers I got similar responce graphs. As of now space is not much of an issue, so I would be more than willing to make a larger cabinet. For some reason I really want to try a bipole design as active baffle step compensation. What really got me interested in these driver besides my car was this thead http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57210 He uses a bipole design and added a tweeter on top. I think that would be great. As you can see from the frequency responce charts they don't go all the way up to 20khz and that bipole thread had the tweeter to help it up top. I thought perhaps I could add a tweeter on top too. I'm a fan of 8ohm speakers so these were perfect for a bipole design. In the article you mentioned the author (Sandy Greene) pretty much says there is a small sweet spot and that by standing up or slouching there is a big difference, I thought that with the added tweeter this might be helpful. These Omega speakers at $700 and when using 4x $22 speakers at a selling price of $700 these have to be good.
Any thoughts?
Josh
When I modled these drivers I got similar responce graphs. As of now space is not much of an issue, so I would be more than willing to make a larger cabinet. For some reason I really want to try a bipole design as active baffle step compensation. What really got me interested in these driver besides my car was this thead http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57210 He uses a bipole design and added a tweeter on top. I think that would be great. As you can see from the frequency responce charts they don't go all the way up to 20khz and that bipole thread had the tweeter to help it up top. I thought perhaps I could add a tweeter on top too. I'm a fan of 8ohm speakers so these were perfect for a bipole design. In the article you mentioned the author (Sandy Greene) pretty much says there is a small sweet spot and that by standing up or slouching there is a big difference, I thought that with the added tweeter this might be helpful. These Omega speakers at $700 and when using 4x $22 speakers at a selling price of $700 these have to be good.
Any thoughts?
Josh
here is a link to the modifications http://madspeaker.com/Projects/4-1052/1052gluemod.htm
Thanks,
Josh
Thanks,
Josh
I just through together my take on the general Minuet model... It is a little bigger but by my simulation it goes a little deeper and is a bit flatter. It's definitely a trade off I'd be willing to make. Anyway, if the good reviews on the Minuet are any indication, this might be a rather good sounding budget project... I'll build it someday I'm sure.
Anyway, the dipole design looks interesting. The W4-1052SA would certainly push it a bit lower... Could be a real success.
Anyway, the dipole design looks interesting. The W4-1052SA would certainly push it a bit lower... Could be a real success.
Attachments
Omega Minuet clone
Guys - I've just ordered 4 No - Tb W4-1052sa to build an Omega Minuet clone and was think about simply surface mounting drivers.
Do you think rebating baffle and flush mount would make any major difference. Also I'm tempted to go for Omega's (ex) size of 15" H x 7.5" W x 12" D to keep cabs as small as possible, with the thought I'd probably have a sub running as well.
Any thought on internal cab' treatment?
Cheers - Phil
Guys - I've just ordered 4 No - Tb W4-1052sa to build an Omega Minuet clone and was think about simply surface mounting drivers.
Do you think rebating baffle and flush mount would make any major difference. Also I'm tempted to go for Omega's (ex) size of 15" H x 7.5" W x 12" D to keep cabs as small as possible, with the thought I'd probably have a sub running as well.
Any thought on internal cab' treatment?
Cheers - Phil
Finally a builder!
Are you planning on modifying the drivers to help with upper frequencies? or are you adding a tweeter?
The larger cabinet the blip1882 designed should be much better, I came up with a little bit smaller box, using WinISD beta, but not much smaller.
I think the bipolar design would actually be best, so baffle step won't come into play. Although skinny cabinets look much better, their bass extension will be much less due to the losses caused by baffle step. Omega's design was 7.5" wide, which won't allow much bass. You did say that you would have a subwoofer in the room, but personally I enjoy having stereo bass. I'm not really sure about baffle step and at what frequency the bass starts to roll off on a 7.5" baffle.
Flushmounting the drivers does have its perks, if you go to
Zaph's website he explains it pretty well.
You may want to roundover the sides as well.
For internal cabinet treatment, well, there are lots of theories, Zaph also explains some on his website. If you really want to go all out on this design I would brace the drivers and cabinet well, try one of those deflex pads (I'll try and find a link after dinner), and I would stuff the enlosure pretty well since your using a smaller than optimum enclosure.
Good Luck,
Josh
Are you planning on modifying the drivers to help with upper frequencies? or are you adding a tweeter?
The larger cabinet the blip1882 designed should be much better, I came up with a little bit smaller box, using WinISD beta, but not much smaller.
I think the bipolar design would actually be best, so baffle step won't come into play. Although skinny cabinets look much better, their bass extension will be much less due to the losses caused by baffle step. Omega's design was 7.5" wide, which won't allow much bass. You did say that you would have a subwoofer in the room, but personally I enjoy having stereo bass. I'm not really sure about baffle step and at what frequency the bass starts to roll off on a 7.5" baffle.
Flushmounting the drivers does have its perks, if you go to
Zaph's website he explains it pretty well.
You may want to roundover the sides as well.
For internal cabinet treatment, well, there are lots of theories, Zaph also explains some on his website. If you really want to go all out on this design I would brace the drivers and cabinet well, try one of those deflex pads (I'll try and find a link after dinner), and I would stuff the enlosure pretty well since your using a smaller than optimum enclosure.
Good Luck,
Josh
Excellent! I'm so happy that someone is taking this project on. I think that it has one of the best potentials for a simple bass reflex, cross-overless speaker.... Especially if you want to avoid going bipole for some reason.
If only it was a bit smaller I'd probably be building them for my desk, but I think instead I'm going to go with a bit shorter FE127 based approach.
As for advice, roundovers will be important on a thin cabinet and flush mounting is also key.
From my reading of the Omega website it sounds like their cabinet is pretty well braced and damped. They also have a "floating baffle" which I've never figured out what they mean by... But suggests heavy damping around the driver.
Note that the dimensions I list are internal without any bracing etc. so you might want to expand them a bit if you are going to do any extensive bracing inside the cabnet
Another piece of advice is to use two sets of banna jacks on the back so that you can play around with them in both parrallel and series. I believe that the Omega Minuet has its inputs set up this way.
Good luck and keep us all posted.
Also, if you want my WinISD files I'm more than happy to post them... Though they are pretty easy to reproduce, if you prefer.
If only it was a bit smaller I'd probably be building them for my desk, but I think instead I'm going to go with a bit shorter FE127 based approach.
As for advice, roundovers will be important on a thin cabinet and flush mounting is also key.
From my reading of the Omega website it sounds like their cabinet is pretty well braced and damped. They also have a "floating baffle" which I've never figured out what they mean by... But suggests heavy damping around the driver.
Note that the dimensions I list are internal without any bracing etc. so you might want to expand them a bit if you are going to do any extensive bracing inside the cabnet
Another piece of advice is to use two sets of banna jacks on the back so that you can play around with them in both parrallel and series. I believe that the Omega Minuet has its inputs set up this way.
Good luck and keep us all posted.
Also, if you want my WinISD files I'm more than happy to post them... Though they are pretty easy to reproduce, if you prefer.
Sounds good
Guy's thanks of info and encouragement, will certainly keep you posted.
Don't know how much progress I'll get as the season of "bl**ding good will" is upon us all.
If you haven't spotted my odd postings here's a link to my projects so far http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/
Cheers - Phil
Guy's thanks of info and encouragement, will certainly keep you posted.
Don't know how much progress I'll get as the season of "bl**ding good will" is upon us all.
If you haven't spotted my odd postings here's a link to my projects so far http://www.greenie512.net/greenie512/
Cheers - Phil
More thoughts.....
For my “Minuet” clone I was thinking about proto typing the cabinet with (initially) removable front and back panels. Why, well to try a front port below the two drivers as I tend to run my speakers reasonably close to the back wall.
On the small Fostex FE126e BR cabinets I had, I really didn’t notice any “chuffing” sounds from the front firing port. Although with 2 x 4” I will no doubt get a lot more air movement through the port. If it is all too noisy I’ll cut a new front baffle and swap to the rear and once I get final combination I’ll permanently fix front/back.
Cheers - Phil
For my “Minuet” clone I was thinking about proto typing the cabinet with (initially) removable front and back panels. Why, well to try a front port below the two drivers as I tend to run my speakers reasonably close to the back wall.
On the small Fostex FE126e BR cabinets I had, I really didn’t notice any “chuffing” sounds from the front firing port. Although with 2 x 4” I will no doubt get a lot more air movement through the port. If it is all too noisy I’ll cut a new front baffle and swap to the rear and once I get final combination I’ll permanently fix front/back.
Cheers - Phil
If your making prototypes try the bipole configuration to see if you like it.
By the way I like the fe126 horn bass reflex enclosure, that is the first one I've seen built. I read your website and it looks like you like them.
and I believe blip1882 meant especially no need for cross over components IF you go with the bipole configuration.
Good Luck,
Josh
By the way I like the fe126 horn bass reflex enclosure, that is the first one I've seen built. I read your website and it looks like you like them.
and I believe blip1882 meant especially no need for cross over components IF you go with the bipole configuration.
Good Luck,
Josh
Skinny solution
So I’m idly sat waiting for my Tb W4-1052sa’s to arrive and I’m thinking why not build a floor standing version to avoid messing around with speaker stands.
This will allow me to go for the skinny look? Narrow front and depth – with most of the volume in the height. If I go with Blip1882’s 27.3 litre volume I could build a floor stander.
The top compartment for the speakers would be 7.5” wide x 12” deep x 29” high externally (3/4” MDF) giving me a total volume of 27.62 lts before deductions. If I went this direction (just a thought at the moment) where would the speakers sit in relation to “sat-ear-level” I would think they’d sit central above and below ear level???
Total height of speaker would be subject to above.
Cheers - Phil
So I’m idly sat waiting for my Tb W4-1052sa’s to arrive and I’m thinking why not build a floor standing version to avoid messing around with speaker stands.
This will allow me to go for the skinny look? Narrow front and depth – with most of the volume in the height. If I go with Blip1882’s 27.3 litre volume I could build a floor stander.
The top compartment for the speakers would be 7.5” wide x 12” deep x 29” high externally (3/4” MDF) giving me a total volume of 27.62 lts before deductions. If I went this direction (just a thought at the moment) where would the speakers sit in relation to “sat-ear-level” I would think they’d sit central above and below ear level???
Total height of speaker would be subject to above.
Cheers - Phil
greenie512,
I like your Idea of a floorstander, or you could do something similar to the recomended FE167e enclosure which uses the stand as a vent, a very cool design.
If you are going to go skinny then you want to bipole, I can't stress this more. If you you put both on the front baffle, not only can you introduce lobbing, but the baffle step diffraction will leave you bassless. By designing a bipole enclosure not only can you rule out any chance of baffle step occuring, but you won't have any risk of lobbing.
I build a pair of speakers for my philosophy class last year using Hi-Vi B3S. They were very skinny with a longer odd shaped side, but because of the small baffle there is no midbass. I recently turned them into bipoles and they sound MUCH better. Although the enclosure is too small for the two of them they are much fuller sounding due to no baffle step diffraction.
Good Luck,
Josh
I like your Idea of a floorstander, or you could do something similar to the recomended FE167e enclosure which uses the stand as a vent, a very cool design.
If you are going to go skinny then you want to bipole, I can't stress this more. If you you put both on the front baffle, not only can you introduce lobbing, but the baffle step diffraction will leave you bassless. By designing a bipole enclosure not only can you rule out any chance of baffle step occuring, but you won't have any risk of lobbing.
I build a pair of speakers for my philosophy class last year using Hi-Vi B3S. They were very skinny with a longer odd shaped side, but because of the small baffle there is no midbass. I recently turned them into bipoles and they sound MUCH better. Although the enclosure is too small for the two of them they are much fuller sounding due to no baffle step diffraction.
Good Luck,
Josh
Thanks Josh, okay, time to suss-up …. I have no real design knowledge for speakers and up until now have been sticking to tried and test designs. Which is why I’m throwing my ideas out for valid and helpful comments!
Is there a “simple” tool I can use to calculate the best baffle width to avoid the problems you are talking about. The reason I’m not considering bipole layout is I usually place my speakers quite close to the wall and my house is VERY light weight construction for reflective purposes. Luckily I have no neighbours close by!
Yep, have thought about building a FE167e cabinet, it looks a very nice design but think I’d uses the 167e in it first to make sure I was happy with the basic results - then I’d make variations.
Cheers - Phil
Is there a “simple” tool I can use to calculate the best baffle width to avoid the problems you are talking about. The reason I’m not considering bipole layout is I usually place my speakers quite close to the wall and my house is VERY light weight construction for reflective purposes. Luckily I have no neighbours close by!
Yep, have thought about building a FE167e cabinet, it looks a very nice design but think I’d uses the 167e in it first to make sure I was happy with the basic results - then I’d make variations.
Cheers - Phil
Greenie, a couple questions and ideas, FWIW.
To clarify, you are buying four drivers (two each side)? AFAIK putting two forward facing a la Omega Minuet is not a problem, because near-field combing effects will only occur very close to the speaker. Just make sure to mount them as close together as possible. As a test, slap them in a simple open baffle and listen to them singly and in pairs, that of course will give you the best idea of how treble sounds, and do this BEFORE building enclosures.
I think you'll want to wire them in series, which means something has to be done with McKenzie's correction circuit, but I'm not sure what. AFAIK it would just be a simple mathematical formula to determine the correct RLC values.
If you are placing your speakers right against the wall, no need to worry about baffle step loss, as the wall becomes a proxy "infinite" baffle. I like wider baffles, if it were me I'd make the cross-section a golden-ratio rectangle, with the wide side facing forward. This also puts your speaker that much closer to the wall. And if you ever want to pull them out into the room, the wider baffle lowers the baffle step frequency, which is a good thing.
If you are going to build floorstanders, by all means make them vented transmission line. The cabinet is just as easy to build as bass reflex. Designing it is a bit trickier, but by no means awful if you use Martin King's worksheet. (You need a Windoze machine, though, to run Mathcad Explorer, which he has for free download on his site.)
Bob Brines has a nifty little article showing how to design one of these towers, starting from rough rule-of-thumb dimensions and then fine-tuning with Martin's software:
http://www.geocities.com/rbrines1/Pages/Design_Procedure/Small_TL.html
Just remember that if you have two drivers, you need to double Sd. Martin has a short article about how to model multiple drivers.
P.S. The design you'll want to use from Bob's table is the Straight 40Hz row.
To clarify, you are buying four drivers (two each side)? AFAIK putting two forward facing a la Omega Minuet is not a problem, because near-field combing effects will only occur very close to the speaker. Just make sure to mount them as close together as possible. As a test, slap them in a simple open baffle and listen to them singly and in pairs, that of course will give you the best idea of how treble sounds, and do this BEFORE building enclosures.
I think you'll want to wire them in series, which means something has to be done with McKenzie's correction circuit, but I'm not sure what. AFAIK it would just be a simple mathematical formula to determine the correct RLC values.
If you are placing your speakers right against the wall, no need to worry about baffle step loss, as the wall becomes a proxy "infinite" baffle. I like wider baffles, if it were me I'd make the cross-section a golden-ratio rectangle, with the wide side facing forward. This also puts your speaker that much closer to the wall. And if you ever want to pull them out into the room, the wider baffle lowers the baffle step frequency, which is a good thing.
If you are going to build floorstanders, by all means make them vented transmission line. The cabinet is just as easy to build as bass reflex. Designing it is a bit trickier, but by no means awful if you use Martin King's worksheet. (You need a Windoze machine, though, to run Mathcad Explorer, which he has for free download on his site.)
Bob Brines has a nifty little article showing how to design one of these towers, starting from rough rule-of-thumb dimensions and then fine-tuning with Martin's software:
http://www.geocities.com/rbrines1/Pages/Design_Procedure/Small_TL.html
Just remember that if you have two drivers, you need to double Sd. Martin has a short article about how to model multiple drivers.
P.S. The design you'll want to use from Bob's table is the Straight 40Hz row.
Dumbass said:
Dumbass - thanks for info, I'll mull that lot over and post final design
once drivers arrive "Down-under" - oh - yeh, your assumptions where correct.
I was going to wire two drivers in series for each cab to give me a 8 ohm load but I don't know what you are refering to in the quote above - apologise for being a dumb a**.
Cheers - Phil
McKenzie's eq filter is an RLC (resistor/inductor/capacitor) circuit based on the load presented by a single driver. I'm pretty certain the values would need to change for two speakers in series, probably according to some simple formula but I don't know enough to say. You might want to e-mail McKenzie personally.greenie512 said:
BTW I reviewed this thread. Re: flush vs surface mounting, for a full-ranger not that important, because high-freqs are beaming anyways (due to destructive interference in sideways directions at higher freqs due to width of cone). The Zaph article was specifically about mounting tweeters, where it is an important issue. The best way (IMO) to deal with beaminess in full-rangers is to significantly toe them in, so their axes cross in front of the listening position; this is what Ted Jordan recommends. This does a couple things. First, the sweetspot listener is listening to each driver slightly off-axis, which tends to be where a full-ranger sounds best. Second, if you are to the left or right of the sweet spot, the toeing compensates for the proximity effect, because the farther speaker is more on-axis. This is how I have my FE207E set up, and it works really well. Best thing is, it's 100% reversible.
Also, want to clarify about "wide" and "narrow" remark from my previous post. If you go the vented straight TL route, it will be a tall and narrow design and the exact shape of the cross-section isn't terribly important, even square would be fine. For some examples check out:
http://www.quarter-wave.com/Gallery/Gallery.html
This just occured to me, having two drivers might make designing the TL somewhat easier, as the two drivers would tend to cancel out any harmonics associated with driver placement.
Anyways, I recommend flipping through Bob's and Martin's sites if you're interested in this route.
The temptation of ...
Christmas – bahhhhhhhhhhhh, should be in the shed making speakers.
I just knew 4 new drivers turning up just before Xmas was just too tempting. I couldn’t annoy the neighbours on Christmas day by sawing/routing a complete set of boxes. So I tried the W4-1052SA’s in the FE 126e BR box but the opening just caught the fixings so I cut a temporary baffle from a bit of 6mm MDF.
In the cobbled up box they sound pretty dam good, wouldn’t expect lower end to be too good “as is” but definitely signs that in the right box this’ll work – especially two aside!
The higher register seems better than the Fostex FE 126e but doesn’t have the “mellow/soft” sound either but it’s definitely not a hard sound. I think the metal phase plug will have something to do with that.
From very initial listening these TB driver sound little gems – will start the actual cabinets later in the week.
Cheers – Phil
PS – MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL
Christmas – bahhhhhhhhhhhh, should be in the shed making speakers.
I just knew 4 new drivers turning up just before Xmas was just too tempting. I couldn’t annoy the neighbours on Christmas day by sawing/routing a complete set of boxes. So I tried the W4-1052SA’s in the FE 126e BR box but the opening just caught the fixings so I cut a temporary baffle from a bit of 6mm MDF.
In the cobbled up box they sound pretty dam good, wouldn’t expect lower end to be too good “as is” but definitely signs that in the right box this’ll work – especially two aside!
The higher register seems better than the Fostex FE 126e but doesn’t have the “mellow/soft” sound either but it’s definitely not a hard sound. I think the metal phase plug will have something to do with that.
From very initial listening these TB driver sound little gems – will start the actual cabinets later in the week.
Cheers – Phil
PS – MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.