Complete redesign to be honest. Balancing the pressures is an interesting aspect we might explore for future cabinets. Harvey can benefit from being angled backward slightly in smaller spaces, but that's really a room-interaction thing, and we went for a rapid end-correction to reduce potential boom at Fc. Re the operation, you're quite correct: in the current cabinets, the lower vent is loaded lower due to the floor's reflection boundry condition, while the upper vent blends in higher.
Different takes really. One (differentially sized vents) aims to balance both outputs, the other (physically symetrical vents)deliberately avoids having both mouths coming into play at a given frequency. Which is best? I don't know, & I suspect it'll be very much driver & objective dependant. Both approaches have their positives & negatives, so it'll be an interesting study for the future.
Different takes really. One (differentially sized vents) aims to balance both outputs, the other (physically symetrical vents)deliberately avoids having both mouths coming into play at a given frequency. Which is best? I don't know, & I suspect it'll be very much driver & objective dependant. Both approaches have their positives & negatives, so it'll be an interesting study for the future.
I finished building a pair of Harveys a few weeks ago and they are great sounding speakers.
At first I had them too close together in my living room and had "shout" problems with higher pitched vocals but then I rearanged a bit and put them further apart, closer to the side walls, and toed in a bit more and now I could not be happier. I get quality bass from them, and the midrange has great tone and life to it. Imaging is good though I supsect it would be better if I had a larger living room. I put a bit of stuffing in the CC when I was trying to tame the shout, but now I think I may be able to take it out.
Tilting them up raised the soundstage and helped a lot, especially since I am often standing when I listen to music. I just put a small piece of left over plywood under the fronts.
Next I am going to build a pair of BIBs for a friend using fe126's and then will have a comparison to post.
At first I had them too close together in my living room and had "shout" problems with higher pitched vocals but then I rearanged a bit and put them further apart, closer to the side walls, and toed in a bit more and now I could not be happier. I get quality bass from them, and the midrange has great tone and life to it. Imaging is good though I supsect it would be better if I had a larger living room. I put a bit of stuffing in the CC when I was trying to tame the shout, but now I think I may be able to take it out.
Tilting them up raised the soundstage and helped a lot, especially since I am often standing when I listen to music. I just put a small piece of left over plywood under the fronts.
Next I am going to build a pair of BIBs for a friend using fe126's and then will have a comparison to post.
Hello,
I will build those box soon but this Addison Electronics is the only full range speaker I found and its did'nt exist on Google. Anyone have spec. ?
I will build those box soon but this Addison Electronics is the only full range speaker I found and its did'nt exist on Google. Anyone have spec. ?
1/2 of Bruce
I got 1/2 of Bruce together and am breaking in the 206 as I type. I like it, but I hope a little more bass starts making itself known. Maybe I'm just asking too much for a full-ranger.
Does anyone think a different cab would give much better performance in the lower registers?? I intentionally got the 206 instead of the 207 for this possibility. I was thinking if this didn't give me the response I was hoping for, perhaps a more proper horn instead of the "wave guide" might do it.
Then again, I've read quite a bit about how much better they sound after a thorough breaking in. I could be jumping the gun here. But, any input would be appreciated.
Thanks
Bruce
P.S. here's a pic, I hope
I got 1/2 of Bruce together and am breaking in the 206 as I type. I like it, but I hope a little more bass starts making itself known. Maybe I'm just asking too much for a full-ranger.
Does anyone think a different cab would give much better performance in the lower registers?? I intentionally got the 206 instead of the 207 for this possibility. I was thinking if this didn't give me the response I was hoping for, perhaps a more proper horn instead of the "wave guide" might do it.
Then again, I've read quite a bit about how much better they sound after a thorough breaking in. I could be jumping the gun here. But, any input would be appreciated.
Thanks
Bruce
P.S. here's a pic, I hope
Attachments
Well, Bruce really was designed for the 207 as it's a reflex box, and prefers a somewhat higher Q. If you add a couple of ohms series resistance to the 206, you'll find that helps, in this cabinet. Get the drivers to Xmax a few times to loosen them up too. You'll also find more bass weight coming in with the 2nd cabinet as more air is being shifted. Out of interest, what amp are you running? Looks very impressive BTW.
If you want an alternative enclosure, the Factory 208ESigma enclosure gives monster bass weight with the 206.
If you want an alternative enclosure, the Factory 208ESigma enclosure gives monster bass weight with the 206.
Wow! No kidding, 8 ohms in series helped a BUNCH!!! I'll leave them breaking in tonight with some pink noise. Right now I just have them on an Aiwa Bookshelf system with a BSR EQ. I was hoping to use a Super T-amp but after hearing them, I think I might want a little more juice.
The brother should be done sometime tomorrow. And I think it looks nice, wish I was a better woodworker then I wouldn't just thank the designers for the good look!
Yup, I've read your ideas on the 208Sigma horn, and I think that was somewhere in the back of my mind.
Much thanks,
Bruce
The brother should be done sometime tomorrow. And I think it looks nice, wish I was a better woodworker then I wouldn't just thank the designers for the good look!
Yup, I've read your ideas on the 208Sigma horn, and I think that was somewhere in the back of my mind.
Much thanks,
Bruce
No problem -glad it helped out. You can juggle with the value a bit to get it to taste -I suspect you'll want to back it off a little when the second box is complete & playing alongside.
The other reason for the weak LF you had is that your amp was very probably over-damping the drivers (something else the added series resistance helps with). Most solid state amps have a high damping factor & need that series resistance to work properly with FR units.
The other reason for the weak LF you had is that your amp was very probably over-damping the drivers (something else the added series resistance helps with). Most solid state amps have a high damping factor & need that series resistance to work properly with FR units.
I just can't belive how you guys (scottmoose and GM) are able to hear my poorly described problems and immediately identify the cause. I definately was the bookshelf amp. I borrowed a heavier duty amp from my brother and it was unbeleiveable the difference that it made!!
These things are powerful!! Even my girlfriend likes the sound. Plenty loud enough to annoy all in the house But, as I won't be able to use this amp forever, I could get my own pro-amp for it, or save up for a tube amp.
BTW, this is as off topic as I'll take this What amp might work well for Bruce using a Bruce!
Thanks,
Bruce
These things are powerful!! Even my girlfriend likes the sound. Plenty loud enough to annoy all in the house
But, as I won't be able to use this amp forever, I could get my own pro-amp for it, or save up for a tube amp. BTW, this is as off topic as I'll take this
What amp might work well for Bruce using a Bruce!Thanks,
Bruce
brucedal1 said:
Unless you listen thunderously loud one of the small digital amps might well be one of the best, off-the-shelf solutions. Otherwise a Frugal-phile(tm) build of an RH84 or an El Cheapo... of course if you have more budget a lot more options become available.
I understand this one is decent
http://www.trendsaudio.com/EN/Product/TA-10_desc.htm
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/trends/ta10.html
dave
brucedal1 said:I just can't belive how you guys (scottmoose and GM) are able to hear my poorly described problems and immediately identify the cause.
I could get my own pro-amp for it, or save up for a tube amp.
BTW, this is as off topic as I'll take this
Greets!
Yours was a common newbie problem.........
Unless it's a Crown studio/recording series or similar ($$$), steer clear of prosound amps for wide BW use as they aren't designed with high sound quality (SQ) in mind.
Since you're having to use considerable series resistance to flatten its response, you need an amp with a power rating at a nominal impedance high enough to handle it, or ~16 ohms in your case if you don't want it to possibly 'lay down' due to not enough voltage swing when there's significant LF content in the recording. This makes any of the chip amps I've seen specs of suspect IMO, so Caveat Emptor.
GM
I reckon he might be OK Greg -a fair proportion of the series resistance is probably due to the lack of amp adjustment to Qt (I'm learning... ). Most T-amps have a relatively low DF IIRC, so the T-amp's lack of voltage swinging ability might not be too much of a problem. I'm no expert though as you know, so please put me straight if I'm off the mark on this.
). Most T-amps have a relatively low DF IIRC, so the T-amp's lack of voltage swinging ability might not be too much of a problem. I'm no expert though as you know, so please put me straight if I'm off the mark on this.The 8 ohms was just the smallest resistor I had on hand. (and the only one not 1/4 watt)
I hardly know anything!! I just read what you guys "in the know" say and do it. The theory seems to stick and I try to put it into my own practice (like my failed "cheapo" bibs) then, I just say "BAH, I'll use the know quantity and tweak it if necessary" So from my end a big thanks to all those who know and share!
Bruce
I hardly know anything!! I just read what you guys "in the know" say and do it. The theory seems to stick and I try to put it into my own practice (like my failed "cheapo" bibs) then, I just say "BAH, I'll use the know quantity and tweak it if necessary" So from my end a big thanks to all those who know and share!
Bruce
Sachiko and FE208E Sigma + supertweeter
Anyone built a Sachiko so far?
I'm looking for a very high eff speaker so the 8" driver stood out. I know some of the other 8" drivers don't HAVE to have a tweeter, but I want sparkle so I'm already commited to one anyway (my main system uses ribbons so I'm afraid I'd miss their extension). I've also read the sigmas have a very good midrange so that is why I was considering the FE208EZ first. Of course I'm open to other driver suggestions too.
From what I interpreted earlier it sounds like the Sachiko is a better fit for that driver because Bruce is more of a BR design so it wants a higher qts.
Any modifications needed to use that driver in that cabinet?
Where is the best place to mount the tweeter. Can't use the top like the stock cabinets. Attach it to the side or steal a bit of the baffle? If you used the baffle would the tweeter take enough airspace to need to tweak those dimensions?
Thanks for the detailed plans! The cut plan is a great touch.
Jeremy
Anyone built a Sachiko so far?
I'm looking for a very high eff speaker so the 8" driver stood out. I know some of the other 8" drivers don't HAVE to have a tweeter, but I want sparkle so I'm already commited to one anyway (my main system uses ribbons so I'm afraid I'd miss their extension). I've also read the sigmas have a very good midrange so that is why I was considering the FE208EZ first. Of course I'm open to other driver suggestions too.
From what I interpreted earlier it sounds like the Sachiko is a better fit for that driver because Bruce is more of a BR design so it wants a higher qts.
Any modifications needed to use that driver in that cabinet?
Where is the best place to mount the tweeter. Can't use the top like the stock cabinets. Attach it to the side or steal a bit of the baffle? If you used the baffle would the tweeter take enough airspace to need to tweak those dimensions?
Thanks for the detailed plans! The cut plan is a great touch.
Jeremy
Re: Re: Sachiko and FE208E Sigma + supertweeter
Thanks!
I can see how that is much easier than dealing with the pod style. The FT17 isn't as much either. It looks to be a good match in efficency. I'm sure with a bit of playing around I can find the right crossover cap value. I know this is the Full Range forum so that is heresy, but I just want high eff.
It won't fit directly above the bigger driver, but if I put it diagonally to one side it should fix fine.
After calculating the driver baffle area vs the area the tweeter takes up I see its only a bit over 1% of the space so I guess its just noise.
Its a shame the AC ribbons are so much $ and so much bigger.
planet10 said:
Thanks!
I can see how that is much easier than dealing with the pod style. The FT17 isn't as much either. It looks to be a good match in efficency. I'm sure with a bit of playing around I can find the right crossover cap value. I know this is the Full Range forum so that is heresy, but I just want high eff.
It won't fit directly above the bigger driver, but if I put it diagonally to one side it should fix fine.
After calculating the driver baffle area vs the area the tweeter takes up I see its only a bit over 1% of the space so I guess its just noise.
Its a shame the AC ribbons are so much $ and so much bigger.
Scottmoose said:I reckon he might be OK Greg -a fair proportion of the series resistance is probably due to the lack of amp adjustment to Qt (I'm learning...
The damping factor of your average class D amp is pretty decent, but decreases with increasing frequency due to the typical LC network for keeping RF out of your speaker. Funny... most speakers have increasing impedance with increasing frequency anyway.... perhaps this actually leads to a more consistent damping factor over the load vs. a frequency constant DF.....