Hi Gychang,
Yes, Dims are always internal if not specified. I've modded a spreadsheet posted in this thread and it's around here post 1261 and following. It's been useful for me for getting rid of dimensions.
Talking about the sound of Monacor BIB, as I didn't build the proper cab but a similar scaled-down version, at the moment I can't argue, but they should be reeeeeeally good, expecially considering cost/value.
The solution GM suggested is a "reversed BIB", with the mouth firing down the floor. I can'f find the post in this thread at the moment....
Maybe in USA you can find other cheap drivers suitable for a nice BIB, I think Scott, GM or Planet 10 could help you. Around here Monacors are, probably, the best cost/value available.
Ciao. Fab.
Yes, Dims are always internal if not specified. I've modded a spreadsheet posted in this thread and it's around here post 1261 and following. It's been useful for me for getting rid of dimensions.
Talking about the sound of Monacor BIB, as I didn't build the proper cab but a similar scaled-down version, at the moment I can't argue, but they should be reeeeeeally good, expecially considering cost/value.
The solution GM suggested is a "reversed BIB", with the mouth firing down the floor. I can'f find the post in this thread at the moment....
Maybe in USA you can find other cheap drivers suitable for a nice BIB, I think Scott, GM or Planet 10 could help you. Around here Monacors are, probably, the best cost/value available.
Ciao. Fab.
Re: best cost effective BIB, which? Fostex FE103
madisound - fe103 @ $31.50 each
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?cart_id=8160364.12439&pid=320
or fe126 @ $35.50
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?cart_id=8160364.12439&pid=1532
you will be very happy, I believe.
good luck
Leonard
gychang said:
madisound - fe103 @ $31.50 each
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?cart_id=8160364.12439&pid=320
or fe126 @ $35.50
http://www.madisound.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi?cart_id=8160364.12439&pid=1532
you will be very happy, I believe.
good luck
Leonard
http://www.zillaspeak.com/bib-godzillabib.asp
I have a TB Bamboo waiting for its Bib... for now they are in simple ported boxes.
Finally dragged the Bibs to the driveway this weekend and had the kiddies help with the screws... The final front baffle will be glued on top of the screws concealing them. What a heavy cabinet!
I have a TB Bamboo waiting for its Bib... for now they are in simple ported boxes.
Finally dragged the Bibs to the driveway this weekend and had the kiddies help with the screws... The final front baffle will be glued on top of the screws concealing them. What a heavy cabinet!
Well, I like the sound without whizzer but I guess that it starts to roll of around 6-7000 hz. I have no tools to measure it.....
Could definitely be used as bass/midrange, let it roll of by it self and add a tweeter from 7-8000 hz. However with addition of a tweeter it could be better to invest in a better fullranger.
It all boils down to personal preferences, me thinks.
Regarding phase plugs I have read as much as time allowed and it will be done sooner or later. I have a lot of wood working contacts in my daily work. If I can't make it work myself, it's not much of a problem. As I written before, all in all I'm satisfied cost vise. Why should I order plugs from Dave when these are "plugged" from the beginning. At the same price or cheaper! SPH60+freight+plugs+freight=buy better driver
http://www.sonido.hu/eng/home.htm
I admit I've not heard them yet but will for sure. Budapest is 3-4 hours distance by car.
Cheers/Peter
scottimoose???
I have ordered FE127E and will put them in BIB.
L = (Line length) 97in
Zdriver = Driver 19.5" down from sealed end of cabinet
Sm = 63in^2
Is my measurement/calculation correct?
Width: 7"
Depth: 9"
Height: 48.5" (not sure about this)
internal baffle: reaches down to 4.5" away from the bottom of the cabinet (little longer than 44")
Speaker placement: 19.5" from the top of the cabinet.
Let me know if I am off, all inside measurement.
On another detail, it seems to me children can drop things inside the cabinet from the top... what have others've done?
gychang
I have ordered FE127E and will put them in BIB.
L = (Line length) 97in
Zdriver = Driver 19.5" down from sealed end of cabinet
Sm = 63in^2
Is my measurement/calculation correct?
Width: 7"
Depth: 9"
Height: 48.5" (not sure about this)
internal baffle: reaches down to 4.5" away from the bottom of the cabinet (little longer than 44")
Speaker placement: 19.5" from the top of the cabinet.
Let me know if I am off, all inside measurement.
On another detail, it seems to me children can drop things inside the cabinet from the top... what have others've done?
gychang
supravox
I've moved recently and my Supravoxes (Signature Bicone in Thorsten's recommended open baffles http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=234860#post234860) don't performs so well in my new room (there is no bass at all - the ceiling is 3,6m (12ft) so maybe that's my problem?).
After reading this huge & interesting ;-) thread I've decided to try BIB. I've found recommendation for Supravox 215RTF64 on Godzilla's nice web ("Designed by GM") but TS for "Signature bicone" are very different - even if Supravox suggest the same TQWT for both of them (http://www.supravox.fr/kits/tqwt215.pdf !): Fs/Vas/Qe/Qm/Qt/Sd = 50 Hz / 85 L / 0.9 / 8 / 0.8 / 263 cm² (http://www.supravox.fr/haut_parleurs/215_SBIC.htm).
GM – could you suggest, please, dimensions for this speaker?
Has also anyone tried BIB with Eminence speakers (Beta 12LTA, Alpha 8, Alpha 10) ?
Thanks in advance,
vladimir
GM said:
I've moved recently and my Supravoxes (Signature Bicone in Thorsten's recommended open baffles http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=234860#post234860) don't performs so well in my new room (there is no bass at all - the ceiling is 3,6m (12ft) so maybe that's my problem?).
After reading this huge & interesting ;-) thread I've decided to try BIB. I've found recommendation for Supravox 215RTF64 on Godzilla's nice web ("Designed by GM") but TS for "Signature bicone" are very different - even if Supravox suggest the same TQWT for both of them (http://www.supravox.fr/kits/tqwt215.pdf !): Fs/Vas/Qe/Qm/Qt/Sd = 50 Hz / 85 L / 0.9 / 8 / 0.8 / 263 cm² (http://www.supravox.fr/haut_parleurs/215_SBIC.htm).
GM – could you suggest, please, dimensions for this speaker?
Has also anyone tried BIB with Eminence speakers (Beta 12LTA, Alpha 8, Alpha 10) ?
Thanks in advance,
vladimir
peterbrorsson said:
Ahoj Peter,
interesting site - http://www.sonido.hu/eng/home.htm
Have you any info about the sound quality (reviews, ...) and prices ?
v.
Peter: 'why should I use Dave's phase plugs when these are plugged from the beginning.' Well, it's a bit of an assumption that those other drivers are better. Their specs aren't bad, but that doesn't tell you a great deal about what they'll sound like. I hope they are good, & I'll be interested to hear your views, but I'd reserve judgement. Dave's plugs are properly optimised in length and tip geometry BTW, so it's not like that old Decware mod where they just shoved a socket from the local DIY ship into the thing.
gychang -dimensions are off. 7in wide x 9in deep will give you a 63in^2 terminus, but depth ideally wants to be as near as practicable to 1.4142W, so I would use 6.75in wide x 9.5in deep (internal) This is a fraction more than the 63in terminus, but it will give the ~ correct conical expansion rate, and better too large than too small. The cabinet ideally will need to be 49.5in tall to account for the bend at the base of the cabinet while preserving the designed line length. Terminate the internal baflle 4.75in from the front & real walls & the floor.
vladimir -I don't think Greg or I have done one for the bicone because it's parameters do not really lend themselves to a BIB particularly well -it's a large driver, as FR units go, with a high Q, and high Vas. It's possible to do one, but it will need to be massive. If you thought the B200 or Hemp cabinets were big, you haven't seen anything yet. Think 18in wide x 27in deep internally and increase from there. Not worth the effort IMO. The Supravox TQWT isn't up to much either with these units -not enough volume.
I'd probably look toward mounting them on a new baffle, with something like a 15in Eminence Beta15 bass driver to give them a hand in the lower registers. This is a very good combination -FR driver with the Beta 15, which is a most excellent driver. The bass unit is more sensitive, but as it's being mounted on a dipole, and the acoustic cancellaton kicks in with decreasing frequency, this will tend to be cancelled out, especially since you say you're loosing LF energy anyway; and you can always reduce it with a series resistor if it was a problem. Better too much sensitivity than too little.
Regards
Scott
gychang -dimensions are off. 7in wide x 9in deep will give you a 63in^2 terminus, but depth ideally wants to be as near as practicable to 1.4142W, so I would use 6.75in wide x 9.5in deep (internal) This is a fraction more than the 63in terminus, but it will give the ~ correct conical expansion rate, and better too large than too small. The cabinet ideally will need to be 49.5in tall to account for the bend at the base of the cabinet while preserving the designed line length. Terminate the internal baflle 4.75in from the front & real walls & the floor.
vladimir -I don't think Greg or I have done one for the bicone because it's parameters do not really lend themselves to a BIB particularly well -it's a large driver, as FR units go, with a high Q, and high Vas. It's possible to do one, but it will need to be massive. If you thought the B200 or Hemp cabinets were big, you haven't seen anything yet. Think 18in wide x 27in deep internally and increase from there. Not worth the effort IMO. The Supravox TQWT isn't up to much either with these units -not enough volume.
I'd probably look toward mounting them on a new baffle, with something like a 15in Eminence Beta15 bass driver to give them a hand in the lower registers. This is a very good combination -FR driver with the Beta 15, which is a most excellent driver. The bass unit is more sensitive, but as it's being mounted on a dipole, and the acoustic cancellaton kicks in with decreasing frequency, this will tend to be cancelled out, especially since you say you're loosing LF energy anyway; and you can always reduce it with a series resistor if it was a problem. Better too much sensitivity than too little.
Regards
Scott
Ahoj Vladimir!
Have not listened to them yet but I've read some positive review from someone in Bulgaria I think. Search for Sonido in this forum, that's how I found it.
Price 5 inch- 67.50 EURO
6 - 100.00 EURO
8 - 136.00 EURO
Compared with Fostex they have alu cast frames and phase plugs. that alone explains the price difference, but soundvise, we'll see about that.
Problem for me is that I've only listened to FE207 and that was many years back in a Voight pipe. Really bad combination.
So when I've listened to them you have to take it for what it's worth.
Regards/Peter
Have not listened to them yet but I've read some positive review from someone in Bulgaria I think. Search for Sonido in this forum, that's how I found it.
Price 5 inch- 67.50 EURO
6 - 100.00 EURO
8 - 136.00 EURO
Compared with Fostex they have alu cast frames and phase plugs. that alone explains the price difference, but soundvise, we'll see about that.
Problem for me is that I've only listened to FE207 and that was many years back in a Voight pipe. Really bad combination.
So when I've listened to them you have to take it for what it's worth.
Regards/Peter
Hmm, sitting at work and did not read through properly.
Regarding phase plugs: I do not doubt that Dave's plugs are good and developed by both listening and measured tests.
I simply want to have some fun with these cheap (maybe cost efficient should be used
) Monacors. If I have maybe ten different shapes hopefully I will find some improvement. That is partially why I have this as a hobby. I like to experiment!!!
Price vise I doubt that plugs will make Monacors sound twice as good, (assuming now, but logical me thinks) I'll reserve that money for better drivers, plus plugs maybe.
With a more expensive driver I would go for a documented plug for sure.
Hope I didn't dizz your efforts Dave!
Cheers
Scottmoose said:
Scott, thanks for the reply. Could you explain me how do you estimate the volume of the BIB from TS params?
I used Martin's MathCad sheet before - when it was for free - but it wasn't clear enough to me - what's the criteria you consider to evaluate if the design is OK or Not ?
Thanks for your suggestion with Betas 15" - I already have 4 Kilomaxes 18"
(in two OB subs) but I was never able to integrate them properly with Supravoxes - I have no appropriate equipment for that. I can retry integration in my new room maybe I will be luckier this time.
Vladimir -that's a good question. I tend to view it as not just volume, so much as a combination of volume and Q; i.e. you can play off Q against Vas. Assuming your amplifier is suitable, a low Q, high Vas driver will produce far better bass performance in a cabinet of restricted volume, than a driver with the same or similar Vas, but a high Q.
Re the open top, take a very careful look at Terry Cain's original CAD drawing for the BIB. See that small lip, near the top, at the back of the cabinet? And note that the internal baffle does not actually go to the very top of the cabinet, but, like that lip, is actually attached to the front baffle 3/4 of an inch below the cabinet top? That, I gather, was to support a small internal frame, over which some speaker grill-cloth was stretched. In fact, I think you can just about see it at the very top of the original photograph too -that black line? That looks to be in the wrong place for a shadow, so my guess is the grill was in place when the shot was taken. Neat solution, as you'd expect from the source.
Re the open top, take a very careful look at Terry Cain's original CAD drawing for the BIB. See that small lip, near the top, at the back of the cabinet? And note that the internal baffle does not actually go to the very top of the cabinet, but, like that lip, is actually attached to the front baffle 3/4 of an inch below the cabinet top? That, I gather, was to support a small internal frame, over which some speaker grill-cloth was stretched. In fact, I think you can just about see it at the very top of the original photograph too -that black line? That looks to be in the wrong place for a shadow, so my guess is the grill was in place when the shot was taken. Neat solution, as you'd expect from the source.
Gentlemen (and any ladies if you happen to be reading)
I've just spent some time playing with Martin's latest BLH Sections sheet, trying to determine what differences might be obtained from different flare-rates. The results are quite interesting. For most of our models, Greg & I use the ML TQWT sheet, as it's great for quick data entry. What it can't do is calculate different flares, as, if my understanding of the math is correct, simply takes the CSA of So and the CSA of Sl and calculates based upon that, not the different width / depth ratios. The TL sections sheet isn't much use here either, as it still uses CSA as a ratio of Sd area; again not much use. The BLH sections sheet does allow different WxD geometraries to be plotted however, so...
Cabinet modelled: I used the BIB Terry Cain developed in 2001 for the non 'E' model Fostex FE168Sigma as an electronic mule so to speak. I had to guess at the internal dimensions based upon the information I had available, but I'd be very surprised if I was far out.
Control simulation of the box done in ML TQWT sheet:
I've just spent some time playing with Martin's latest BLH Sections sheet, trying to determine what differences might be obtained from different flare-rates. The results are quite interesting. For most of our models, Greg & I use the ML TQWT sheet, as it's great for quick data entry. What it can't do is calculate different flares, as, if my understanding of the math is correct, simply takes the CSA of So and the CSA of Sl and calculates based upon that, not the different width / depth ratios. The TL sections sheet isn't much use here either, as it still uses CSA as a ratio of Sd area; again not much use. The BLH sections sheet does allow different WxD geometraries to be plotted however, so...
Cabinet modelled: I used the BIB Terry Cain developed in 2001 for the non 'E' model Fostex FE168Sigma as an electronic mule so to speak. I had to guess at the internal dimensions based upon the information I had available, but I'd be very surprised if I was far out.
Control simulation of the box done in ML TQWT sheet:
Attachments
Next model: I fired up the BLH Sections sheet, and after calculating the angles & baseline (thank you, Mr. Pythagoras), I entered the data, in milimeters, to four decimal places. The WxD ratio of this cabinet is 1:3. The response is attached. Note the reduction in the ripple over that predicted in the simpler ML TQWT sheet. Flare-rates obviously count for something.
Attachments
Finally, I reworked the horn, using the same length, cabinet volume and terminus area into a conical profile using the 1:1.4142 WxD ratio Greg advises. Response is attached below.
It's harder to see this time around, but the ripple in the response is once again further reduced, albeit far more slightly this time. I'd be clearer on an overlay.
Conclusion: the conical horn profile appears to be best, and offers a slight improvement in 1/2 space response over the less consistant expansions. I expect this improvement to increase in magnitude in-room.
None of this is intended to denigrate TC's cabinets I want to add. Quite the reverse -I bet it's a stunner. It was just an interesting example to use. Especially as I've always looked at the picture I have of it, and drooled.
I don't fancy doing this again for a while though -the data entry took forever! So no requests for any more tapers etc. just yet!
Hope you find this interesting
Scott
It's harder to see this time around, but the ripple in the response is once again further reduced, albeit far more slightly this time. I'd be clearer on an overlay.
Conclusion: the conical horn profile appears to be best, and offers a slight improvement in 1/2 space response over the less consistant expansions. I expect this improvement to increase in magnitude in-room.
None of this is intended to denigrate TC's cabinets I want to add. Quite the reverse -I bet it's a stunner. It was just an interesting example to use. Especially as I've always looked at the picture I have of it, and drooled.
I don't fancy doing this again for a while though -the data entry took forever! So no requests for any more tapers etc. just yet!
Hope you find this interesting
Scott
