Omegatt, go back to page 163 and scroll down for some great simulations of what happens with different baffle treatments. You may find your answers there.
As for the hole, that will depend on which driver you select. Many Fostex drivers sit on top of the hole because of the way they are made. If you are using a different brand (TB, Pioneer, Jordan, etc.) you may be able to flush mount for best results.
Godzilla
As for the hole, that will depend on which driver you select. Many Fostex drivers sit on top of the hole because of the way they are made. If you are using a different brand (TB, Pioneer, Jordan, etc.) you may be able to flush mount for best results.
Godzilla
flush mounting the whole story
Omegatt,
Is that for (OMG as in Oh my God)? Sort of funny to see that in German.
Anyway, here at DIY audio if you back out of full range and go to
the Forum called Everything else, down the page a ways there is a thread called flush mounting drivers the whole story. That is a thread where I'm trying to pull all the info together for flush mounting square flanges and also the technique for rounds.
Be advised that some of the experts here say flush mounting small full ranges like the FE127e is a waste of time. The situation with the 168 may be different.
I've also inquired at a router forum about this. They are familair with making the patterns and templates as well. I have not gotten a specific response from them on the square flange pattern technique shown in pictures. They do have a pdf of how some of the members make patterns:
http://www.routerforums.com/
The flush mount is doable for either square or round.
Plus I've had good success with a single baffle and chamfered rear cutout.
My current build of the BIB has a double baffle with stepped cutouts-- no chamfering. I'm still setting that one up.
Godzilla said:
Omegatt,
Is that for (OMG as in Oh my God)? Sort of funny to see that in German.
Anyway, here at DIY audio if you back out of full range and go to
the Forum called Everything else, down the page a ways there is a thread called flush mounting drivers the whole story. That is a thread where I'm trying to pull all the info together for flush mounting square flanges and also the technique for rounds.
Be advised that some of the experts here say flush mounting small full ranges like the FE127e is a waste of time. The situation with the 168 may be different.
I've also inquired at a router forum about this. They are familair with making the patterns and templates as well. I have not gotten a specific response from them on the square flange pattern technique shown in pictures. They do have a pdf of how some of the members make patterns:
http://www.routerforums.com/
The flush mount is doable for either square or round.
Plus I've had good success with a single baffle and chamfered rear cutout.
My current build of the BIB has a double baffle with stepped cutouts-- no chamfering. I'm still setting that one up.
new BIB
Well I have the new BIB for FE127e up.
Initial listening tells me I've lost sound stage-- lots of separation
not corrected by toeing in. This should all have to do with the
front and baffle, not much with the changes in innards from
my other one. the only other way to go is point them straight.
This setup still has one MLTL FE127e and one BIB.
I used some egg crate foam on the bottom this time because I had it around from a hard disk drive. This might be closed cell foam, dunno. What's down there is pretty loose. Some stuffing in the peak and that's it. One other exception is I have not put a piece of felt behind the driver as in the original. I was in a hurry to set it up.
But more than that I wondered if the change would affect some boominess.
Also using new sources like HD streams. Those are very dynamic compared to over the air FM.
Well I have the new BIB for FE127e up.
Initial listening tells me I've lost sound stage-- lots of separation
not corrected by toeing in. This should all have to do with the
front and baffle, not much with the changes in innards from
my other one. the only other way to go is point them straight.
This setup still has one MLTL FE127e and one BIB.
I used some egg crate foam on the bottom this time because I had it around from a hard disk drive. This might be closed cell foam, dunno. What's down there is pretty loose. Some stuffing in the peak and that's it. One other exception is I have not put a piece of felt behind the driver as in the original. I was in a hurry to set it up.
But more than that I wondered if the change would affect some boominess.
Also using new sources like HD streams. Those are very dynamic compared to over the air FM.
Re: new BIB
Hi Lon, I would imagine it's just a mismatch in tone between the two cabs. Are drivers at the same height? Also, baffle width has not increased, right? Just thickness?
If you squeeze it, and air comes out, it's open-cell. My hard drives come with open-cell. I'm not sure this stuff is dense enough for the job.
Lon, can you play some low-volume 40Hz or 50Hz test tones and determine which cab is going lower? Here are some test tone MP3's: http://www.makezine.com/08/ibump/
Even better, the Bink test CD: http://binkster.net/extras.shtml
This would also let you determine if >300Hz is coming out of the mouth.
Hi Lon, I would imagine it's just a mismatch in tone between the two cabs. Are drivers at the same height? Also, baffle width has not increased, right? Just thickness?
If you squeeze it, and air comes out, it's open-cell. My hard drives come with open-cell. I'm not sure this stuff is dense enough for the job.
Lon, can you play some low-volume 40Hz or 50Hz test tones and determine which cab is going lower? Here are some test tone MP3's: http://www.makezine.com/08/ibump/
Even better, the Bink test CD: http://binkster.net/extras.shtml
This would also let you determine if >300Hz is coming out of the mouth.
Re: Re: new BIB
1.) yes just baffle thinckness changed.
2.) Squeeze test. Yes this egg crate stuff compresses a bit but not like a sponge. I wanted to try some bamboo stuffing (available at the fabric store) for this. Other BIB has regular fiber fill aboiut 1/2 in in bottom.
3.) The mismatch in volume. One thing I should try is just reversing the connection and see of the loudness moves. I have suspected a weak channel for a long time. The wire on these is balanced-- no thin (magnet style) wire being used.
4. ) I am downloading Bink but I've got some mp3 test tones.
Also my software with the Yamaha RPu100 receiver has some surround tests. These always give more volume to the MLTL vs Bib.
Thanks for the tips.
Old style 'discreet' stereo is not something I'm used to. It might be good for old Enoch Light recordings.
I'll reverse the channels and report back.
rjbond3rd said:
1.) yes just baffle thinckness changed.
2.) Squeeze test. Yes this egg crate stuff compresses a bit but not like a sponge. I wanted to try some bamboo stuffing (available at the fabric store) for this. Other BIB has regular fiber fill aboiut 1/2 in in bottom.
3.) The mismatch in volume. One thing I should try is just reversing the connection and see of the loudness moves. I have suspected a weak channel for a long time. The wire on these is balanced-- no thin (magnet style) wire being used.
4. ) I am downloading Bink but I've got some mp3 test tones.
Also my software with the Yamaha RPu100 receiver has some surround tests. These always give more volume to the MLTL vs Bib.
Thanks for the tips.
Old style 'discreet' stereo is not something I'm used to. It might be good for old Enoch Light recordings.
I'll reverse the channels and report back.
hard wire change
Well by ear here is what happened.
On over the air fm reception, reversing the channels manually
sent the loudness to the opposite side. In right left terms, from
the left to the right.
However on stream from HD streaming the loudness was about the same.
Still no appreciable sounstage.
The software lelft right front back test sounded about the same from the tone generate by that.
How could loudness vary just on radio/tuner portion of the unit?
In a way, that is a relief. I only have the one receiver to do everything. Plus the RPU100 has features nothing else does.
They are now being bid up on ebay and out of production.
Well by ear here is what happened.
On over the air fm reception, reversing the channels manually
sent the loudness to the opposite side. In right left terms, from
the left to the right.
However on stream from HD streaming the loudness was about the same.
Still no appreciable sounstage.
The software lelft right front back test sounded about the same from the tone generate by that.
How could loudness vary just on radio/tuner portion of the unit?
In a way, that is a relief. I only have the one receiver to do everything. Plus the RPU100 has features nothing else does.
They are now being bid up on ebay and out of production.
Hi Lon, I predict your soundstage will return when the cabs match.
Regarding za missing soundshtage, za Inspektor vishes to know:
0. Does reversing polarity on one speaker fix anything?
1. Are drivers at same height?
2. Are baffles of similar width?
3. Do they have the same amount of brightness?
4. If you play tones above 300hz, are they coming out of the BiB's mouth? If so, maybe comb filtering (direct radiation vs. BiB mouth) is robbing you of some sound.
5. If you play the Bink track 6 "log sweep," it should sound smooth. Any differences you can notice (listening to each separately)?
6. Playing track 56 (white noise) on each speaker separately, how do the two speakers differ? Whatever that difference is would be interesting to know.
Just out of curiosity, what's the lowest audible tone you can coax out the BiB vs. MLTL? 50Hz? 40Hz?
Edit: fixed the numbering, changed "pink noise" to "white noise".
Regarding za missing soundshtage, za Inspektor vishes to know:
0. Does reversing polarity on one speaker fix anything?
1. Are drivers at same height?
2. Are baffles of similar width?
3. Do they have the same amount of brightness?
4. If you play tones above 300hz, are they coming out of the BiB's mouth? If so, maybe comb filtering (direct radiation vs. BiB mouth) is robbing you of some sound.
5. If you play the Bink track 6 "log sweep," it should sound smooth. Any differences you can notice (listening to each separately)?
6. Playing track 56 (white noise) on each speaker separately, how do the two speakers differ? Whatever that difference is would be interesting to know.
Just out of curiosity, what's the lowest audible tone you can coax out the BiB vs. MLTL? 50Hz? 40Hz?
Edit: fixed the numbering, changed "pink noise" to "white noise".
Well that's a lot of stuff. Most of the answers are no:
height, baffle width. And then there's that tuner problem which
vexes me totally.
Things are coming back together by going to a zero axis-- straight forward.
Listen asymetricaly to these 2 kinds sort of used to work.
Thanks for the tips and the trouble to write these things out.
When it's cooler, I'll try some test tones again. Tomorrow.
height, baffle width. And then there's that tuner problem which
vexes me totally.
Things are coming back together by going to a zero axis-- straight forward.
Listen asymetricaly to these 2 kinds sort of used to work.
Thanks for the tips and the trouble to write these things out.
When it's cooler, I'll try some test tones again. Tomorrow.
Saburo should be neither boomy nor undefined. If they are, there's something wrong that needs sorting out. Like now-ish.
OK, this is the BIB thread, but this is something that needs adressing, so I know the guys will forgive a brief OT while I try to get them working for you. What's the build material, exactly how have you damped them, where are they in the room & what amp are you running?
OK, this is the BIB thread, but this is something that needs adressing, so I know the guys will forgive a brief OT while I try to get them working for you. What's the build material, exactly how have you damped them, where are they in the room & what amp are you running?
From above, I'm interest in this too-- the boominess issue.
Newest BIB does not have a pennant made for it as yet.
The position of the cab is closer to the wall-- maybe too close--
for my rather cramped environment.
I've tried various positioning things and it's like dancing with a dump truck to try to move it.
Newest BIB does not have a pennant made for it as yet.
The position of the cab is closer to the wall-- maybe too close--
for my rather cramped environment.
I've tried various positioning things and it's like dancing with a dump truck to try to move it.
Lon,
Perhaps your tuner has a weaker output on one channel than the other ?
My old Sherwood receiver has that problem. Seems to have happened after a particular bad storm.......
If all other inputs seem to be of same strength/output regarding left vs. right channels, I would suspect the tunner circuit.
I'm sure 2 different cabs could be affecting the soundstaging .
I have found changing the toe in/out and distance between cabs has dramatic effects on soundstage . Have you tried changing distance between cabs ?
For reference, I am using OB's, so perhaps they are a bit more sensitive to placement.
..............................Blake
Perhaps your tuner has a weaker output on one channel than the other ?
My old Sherwood receiver has that problem. Seems to have happened after a particular bad storm.......
If all other inputs seem to be of same strength/output regarding left vs. right channels, I would suspect the tunner circuit.
I'm sure 2 different cabs could be affecting the soundstaging .
I have found changing the toe in/out and distance between cabs has dramatic effects on soundstage . Have you tried changing distance between cabs ?
For reference, I am using OB's, so perhaps they are a bit more sensitive to placement.
..............................Blake
Hey Scott
I am sorry for the delay in getting
back to you,a full day on the go yesterday,
anyway I have been using DIY paradise Charlize amp,
It could be I had saburos to close to side walls.
I just got an onix tube amp a few days ago.
maybe I need to give them a try with that.
as far as dampening goes I am using wool felt pads
1/4 inch stuff on the back and bottom of chamber.
as far as material I used beautiful maple ply no voids.
build is absolutly spot on,it is hard to explain it is
like they just can't seem to get the low notes correct,
almost like they are tuned to the wrong frequency.
going from these back to my Buschhorn MK2 with fe108ez
the buschhorn sound so much more refined,if I can't
get these sounding right I might build frugels for fe126e
spoke with dave about this recently.
Scott
I am sorry for the delay in getting
back to you,a full day on the go yesterday,
anyway I have been using DIY paradise Charlize amp,
It could be I had saburos to close to side walls.
I just got an onix tube amp a few days ago.
maybe I need to give them a try with that.
as far as dampening goes I am using wool felt pads
1/4 inch stuff on the back and bottom of chamber.
as far as material I used beautiful maple ply no voids.
build is absolutly spot on,it is hard to explain it is
like they just can't seem to get the low notes correct,
almost like they are tuned to the wrong frequency.
going from these back to my Buschhorn MK2 with fe108ez
the buschhorn sound so much more refined,if I can't
get these sounding right I might build frugels for fe126e
spoke with dave about this recently.
Scott
This type of enclosure don't like being within ~3ft of side-walls unless you toe them in signficantly, and they're not overly fond of small rooms. Unlike the Bushhorn / frugel-horn etc., Saburo is a high-gain design, so if the room is quite resonant / lively it will also exacerbate this.
The damping you currently have is insufficient. Shift to ~3/4in thick wool felt, top, rear, & bottom of the low pass filter chamber, and the first 12in top & bottom of the first path to the rear of the cabinet. Adjust by damping one side-wall of the chamber should you need more, or a lining the path just above the final forward flares with the same. One thing at a time though.
The damping you currently have is insufficient. Shift to ~3/4in thick wool felt, top, rear, & bottom of the low pass filter chamber, and the first 12in top & bottom of the first path to the rear of the cabinet. Adjust by damping one side-wall of the chamber should you need more, or a lining the path just above the final forward flares with the same. One thing at a time though.
Hey Scott
I will give that a try,I spoke with a guy named Derek
a while back another guy that built these as well,
and he was using nothing but a small bag of lead shot
laying in the bottom of chamber,that did'nt sound right
to me,
where do you think I can find 3/4 wool felt.
heading off to work talk to you this evening.
I will give that a try,I spoke with a guy named Derek
a while back another guy that built these as well,
and he was using nothing but a small bag of lead shot
laying in the bottom of chamber,that did'nt sound right
to me,
where do you think I can find 3/4 wool felt.
heading off to work talk to you this evening.
Hey all -
Here are my heavily modified 126e BIBs, based on the upthread discussions about asymmetrical baffles and measured vs. claimed specs. Lovin' 'em, thanks for all the discussion.
Link to pictures and description
Here are my heavily modified 126e BIBs, based on the upthread discussions about asymmetrical baffles and measured vs. claimed specs. Lovin' 'em, thanks for all the discussion.
Link to pictures and description