Hi perceval, I am reading "backwards".
Your Post 939.
The TABAQ design can be used for a various number of drivers and sizes, but the design has to be redone is some cases. Like the WIBAQ.
I have a small TABAQ with 2" TB driver, with a very nice sound for the size.
The drivers you suggest would not be my first choice in a quarter wave like TABAQ as the Qts is low, which makes it hard to obtain bass below driver Fs.
Hi
BJørn
Your Post 939.
The TABAQ design can be used for a various number of drivers and sizes, but the design has to be redone is some cases. Like the WIBAQ.
I have a small TABAQ with 2" TB driver, with a very nice sound for the size.
The drivers you suggest would not be my first choice in a quarter wave like TABAQ as the Qts is low, which makes it hard to obtain bass below driver Fs.
Hi
BJørn
Well, I am not giving up!
I have a few extra drivers left from my arrays build. They have a nice clear high end, but lack some punch towards the low end. Perhaps the TABAQ is their answer.
The sticker on it says 80Hz to 20kHz but Fs is 123Hz.
So, what about this one? Just use as is in the folded 3" TABAQ?
I have a few extra drivers left from my arrays build. They have a nice clear high end, but lack some punch towards the low end. Perhaps the TABAQ is their answer.
The sticker on it says 80Hz to 20kHz but Fs is 123Hz.
So, what about this one? Just use as is in the folded 3" TABAQ?
Attachments
A couple of quick questions!
1. I play back via Jriver media center. Is there any reason not to use a hi-shelf filter from within the parametric equalizer? A 4 inch TABAQ with the driver in the long side has an f3 point of 757hz, according to my arithmetic.
2. Is there a calculaton for the components for a BSC for the TABAQ large? I'm thinking of using the standard TABAQ for the lounge and a TABAQ large for the more serious listening room (I can source the drivers for 35 euros each plus delivery), so it's a cheap project.
1. I play back via Jriver media center. Is there any reason not to use a hi-shelf filter from within the parametric equalizer? A 4 inch TABAQ with the driver in the long side has an f3 point of 757hz, according to my arithmetic.
2. Is there a calculaton for the components for a BSC for the TABAQ large? I'm thinking of using the standard TABAQ for the lounge and a TABAQ large for the more serious listening room (I can source the drivers for 35 euros each plus delivery), so it's a cheap project.
Hi Bjørn,
I am interested in building the TABAQ for the Mark Audio BB4.AL, a slight variation on the CHR-70. The specs I found are:
Nennimpedanz/Gleichstromwiderstand: 4 / 3,6 Ohm
Resonanzfrequenz: 70 Hz
Gütefaktoren(Qms/Qes/Qts): 2,82 / 0,84 / 0,65
Äquivalenzvolumen(Vas): 3,61 Liter
Effektive Membranfläche(Sd): 50 cm²
Antriebsfaktor(BL): 3,10 Tm
Schwingspuleninduktivität(Le): 0,027 mH
X-max: +/- 4,5 mm
Following the dimensions from your sims I get a cabinet with (internal dimensions):
Height: 93,5
Width: 12,8
Depth: 10
Z driver: 22,9
Port: 12,7
Are these correct? The port does not fit in the enclosure and if I increase the depth the driver won't fit on the baffle. Can the cross section be increased?
Thanks for all your work!
Larry
I am interested in building the TABAQ for the Mark Audio BB4.AL, a slight variation on the CHR-70. The specs I found are:
Nennimpedanz/Gleichstromwiderstand: 4 / 3,6 Ohm
Resonanzfrequenz: 70 Hz
Gütefaktoren(Qms/Qes/Qts): 2,82 / 0,84 / 0,65
Äquivalenzvolumen(Vas): 3,61 Liter
Effektive Membranfläche(Sd): 50 cm²
Antriebsfaktor(BL): 3,10 Tm
Schwingspuleninduktivität(Le): 0,027 mH
X-max: +/- 4,5 mm
Following the dimensions from your sims I get a cabinet with (internal dimensions):
Height: 93,5
Width: 12,8
Depth: 10
Z driver: 22,9
Port: 12,7
Are these correct? The port does not fit in the enclosure and if I increase the depth the driver won't fit on the baffle. Can the cross section be increased?
Thanks for all your work!
Larry
Hi Larry
You have a point about the size of the driver. Increasing the volume will lower the tuning a little, meaning the port had to be adjusted. This would require some time with MJKs models.
Remember to include the thickness of the cabinet wall in the length of the port.
The easy solution would be to place the port in the bottom, making a 90 degree bend and let the cabinet cover this external port. My Kvart&Bølge is designed this way.
When I made the prototype of Kvart&Bølge I used an insulation tube with the right internal dimension. Cut two pieces with 45 degrees cut and glued them together.
Regards
Bjørn
You have a point about the size of the driver. Increasing the volume will lower the tuning a little, meaning the port had to be adjusted. This would require some time with MJKs models.
Remember to include the thickness of the cabinet wall in the length of the port.
The easy solution would be to place the port in the bottom, making a 90 degree bend and let the cabinet cover this external port. My Kvart&Bølge is designed this way.
When I made the prototype of Kvart&Bølge I used an insulation tube with the right internal dimension. Cut two pieces with 45 degrees cut and glued them together.
Regards
Bjørn
A quick update: The TB 4 inchers are now up and running, driven by my Icon Audio valve amp. My first observation is that the bottom end is much tighter than my previous stand mounters. The top end is much better without the BSC circuit, but I had to go for a full complement of Mullard valves in the preamp section to get a bit more warmth into the midrange and upper bass. The speakers are about 6 inches away from the wall.
I'd still like more weight in the upper bass and lower midrange and find I still use a powered sub to flesh it out (I find a sub benefits the midrange as much as it does the bass, even though I have it dialled it at around 55hz).
I'm thinking the TB 5 inch with perhaps some supertweeter support (I have a pair of Coles 4001 knocking around) coming in at around 17khz might have more of the weight I'm looking for.
I'd still like more weight in the upper bass and lower midrange and find I still use a powered sub to flesh it out (I find a sub benefits the midrange as much as it does the bass, even though I have it dialled it at around 55hz).
I'm thinking the TB 5 inch with perhaps some supertweeter support (I have a pair of Coles 4001 knocking around) coming in at around 17khz might have more of the weight I'm looking for.
Hi
Did you try to reduce stuffing to get a warmer upper bass.
My TABAQ with 4" TB is running without BSC. I like the very tight bass but could use more spl around 80 Hz where it is a little weaker than the 3" TB (!).
Sims shows reduced stuffing (60g instead of 100g) should take care of that. I have not tested this yet.
Hi
Bjørn
Did you try to reduce stuffing to get a warmer upper bass.
My TABAQ with 4" TB is running without BSC. I like the very tight bass but could use more spl around 80 Hz where it is a little weaker than the 3" TB (!).
Sims shows reduced stuffing (60g instead of 100g) should take care of that. I have not tested this yet.
Hi
Bjørn
I've now reduced stuffing to about 70g with some useful filling out of the mid bass without too much of a negative impact on the tightness. The driver was not recessed as I do not have a router. However, I have added a 4mm thick rectangle of MDF with hole cut out and glued it to the front baffle. As a result, it's making a pretty decent fist of playing Kari Bremnes and Machiavel. I think it still needs a little more in the upper bass / lower midrange though.
BTW, if you are fan of excellent female vocals end top recording quality, Kari Bremnes is well worth a listen.
BTW, if you are fan of excellent female vocals end top recording quality, Kari Bremnes is well worth a listen.
Hi
All
Looking to build the original tabaq
Using the w4 1320
However I see the 1320 sa which bjorn used initially is nowhere to be found
All I can see on parts express is the 1320 Sjf and 1320 sif full rangers for 37 $ odd
Please help
Are these alternatives without changing the original design and filters??
Or should I look at a mark audio
Please advice
Help is thoroughly appreciated
P.s I'm a noob on my first full ranger build
All
Looking to build the original tabaq
Using the w4 1320
However I see the 1320 sa which bjorn used initially is nowhere to be found
All I can see on parts express is the 1320 Sjf and 1320 sif full rangers for 37 $ odd
Please help
Are these alternatives without changing the original design and filters??
Or should I look at a mark audio
Please advice
Help is thoroughly appreciated
P.s I'm a noob on my first full ranger build
I've used the W4-1320SIF with no baffle step circuit with good results and this was my first ever speaker build of any kind. As per Bjorn's advice, I reduced the stuffing to about 70g. I've also placed the driver on the longer dimension and so the vent is to the side. The speaker needs a plinth as it is otherwise somewhat unstable.
The Markaudio drivers will require different cabinet dimensions - try looking at the various Pensil designs. However, the drivers are much more expensive and they also need a lot of gentle running in.
The W5-1611SAF is also tempting - search for TABAQ large. However, the 1.2m high cabinets may have a lower WAF!!!
The Markaudio drivers will require different cabinet dimensions - try looking at the various Pensil designs. However, the drivers are much more expensive and they also need a lot of gentle running in.
The W5-1611SAF is also tempting - search for TABAQ large. However, the 1.2m high cabinets may have a lower WAF!!!
I decided that putting the 94mm opening where the internal cabinet width is 10cm was a bit tight, so I put it where the internal width is 12.8cm. As a result the vent has to be on the side to be the correct size.
FWIW I also did a quick simulation where I increased the cross section to 171cm2 (i.e. 3 x the driver piston area) and fiddled with the overall volume, but the resulting response chart seemed to be either no better or a bit worse regardless of the tuning frequency.
FWIW I also did a quick simulation where I increased the cross section to 171cm2 (i.e. 3 x the driver piston area) and fiddled with the overall volume, but the resulting response chart seemed to be either no better or a bit worse regardless of the tuning frequency.