jeez
Jeez,
I made reply earlier but the dog must have eaten it.
Thanks for the reply chuck55.
I have a Yamaha RP U100 which I use for all my playback:
computer sound card, dvd player.
The Yamaha is 15 wpc and when using the TB's I have to dial
the volume pretty high.
The other speaks I use with is are a BIB build and an MLTL build
housing FE127e.
A/B test with this sort of mixture may be apples and oranges but
the TB should be able to at least play flat and musically crisp.
chuck55 said:
Jeez,
I made reply earlier but the dog must have eaten it.
Thanks for the reply chuck55.
I have a Yamaha RP U100 which I use for all my playback:
computer sound card, dvd player.
The Yamaha is 15 wpc and when using the TB's I have to dial
the volume pretty high.
The other speaks I use with is are a BIB build and an MLTL build
housing FE127e.
A/B test with this sort of mixture may be apples and oranges but
the TB should be able to at least play flat and musically crisp.
upside down
I continue to twiddle with the TABAQ.
I made another Tangband on a board (open baffle of about
a foot and half across) to compare with the TABAQ. Not much of
consequence in that. But to get the speakers the same listening height I flipped the TABAQ upside down and redid the port so that it
is inside.
Well to me it was a big improvement-- no noticeable boominess and it
A/B tested fairly well except that my B test is much higher efficiency
so the volume was all different.
I continue to twiddle with the TABAQ.
I made another Tangband on a board (open baffle of about
a foot and half across) to compare with the TABAQ. Not much of
consequence in that. But to get the speakers the same listening height I flipped the TABAQ upside down and redid the port so that it
is inside.
Well to me it was a big improvement-- no noticeable boominess and it
A/B tested fairly well except that my B test is much higher efficiency
so the volume was all different.
Re: Re: upside down
I am camera challenged and have often wanted to do some snaps
of things I'm doing but do not have a digital camera.
To visualize this look at Bjorn's design, then stand up
close to monitor and put the top of your head on the desk.
That's pretty much it. However, if you did not read the whole thread
I've taken the dimension of the port and cut that from 2in PVC and
put it on the bottom rather than the front. In other experiments with the TB in a TL I did not care for the result of the front port. And Martin's TL notes say that the port moves no air and radiates sound
horizontally at the terminus. this to me says that the radiated sound from the port is better places in the listening plane.
The idea comes from a build for the Jordan 92s and I've used it
in another MLTL build.
kristleifur said:
Interesting, thanks for the writeup. Could you post a picture? Can't seem to visualize this
I am camera challenged and have often wanted to do some snaps
of things I'm doing but do not have a digital camera.
To visualize this look at Bjorn's design, then stand up
close to monitor and put the top of your head on the desk.
That's pretty much it. However, if you did not read the whole thread
I've taken the dimension of the port and cut that from 2in PVC and
put it on the bottom rather than the front. In other experiments with the TB in a TL I did not care for the result of the front port. And Martin's TL notes say that the port moves no air and radiates sound
horizontally at the terminus. this to me says that the radiated sound from the port is better places in the listening plane.
The idea comes from a build for the Jordan 92s and I've used it
in another MLTL build.
Dipole with 1320
Some update on my similar design posted a few posts before.
I built a cabinet with 10cm x 17cm X 90 cm internal dimension a while back. I put one W4-1320 at 10 cm from the top and did not like the sound. It was thin and dry. Instead of doing simulation and making changes, I decided to cut another driver hole on the opposite side around 1/3 from the top to have smoother output like TABAQ.
Now I have a dipole speaker with one driver that is higher than the other one. The driver mounted 1/3 from the top faces the listener. I hope this will give a smooth output. I added a 2.5 mH inductor in series with the back driver to dampen the high frequency output. The two drivers are wired parallel and in phase.
After a bit tuning and playing around, I am listening to it (along with another straight TL with a single driver and different dimension) now. I like the dipole sound. Deep and strong bass with good balance!
I am sure if I mount the other driver also from 1/3 height and with coupling between the two drivers, I may make it even better. However, that will take some time. I am enjoying the music now.
Some update on my similar design posted a few posts before.
I built a cabinet with 10cm x 17cm X 90 cm internal dimension a while back. I put one W4-1320 at 10 cm from the top and did not like the sound. It was thin and dry. Instead of doing simulation and making changes, I decided to cut another driver hole on the opposite side around 1/3 from the top to have smoother output like TABAQ.
Now I have a dipole speaker with one driver that is higher than the other one. The driver mounted 1/3 from the top faces the listener. I hope this will give a smooth output. I added a 2.5 mH inductor in series with the back driver to dampen the high frequency output. The two drivers are wired parallel and in phase.
After a bit tuning and playing around, I am listening to it (along with another straight TL with a single driver and different dimension) now. I like the dipole sound. Deep and strong bass with good balance!
I am sure if I mount the other driver also from 1/3 height and with coupling between the two drivers, I may make it even better. However, that will take some time. I am enjoying the music now.
I'm seriously considering making this my first speaker-building project, using the W4-1320SB. I was looking at inductors on Parts Express and I'm wondering if I need to pay really close attention to the DC resistance of the coil for the BSC circuit. The one I was looking at was the cheaper 20-gauge one, which has a DC resistance of .71 ohms:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&PartNumber=255-048&DID=7
I don't see the need to go any more expensive than this.
Thank you for the help!
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&PartNumber=255-048&DID=7
I don't see the need to go any more expensive than this.
Thank you for the help!
loninappleton, it would be interesting tto hear your comparisons of the TABAQ vs. open baffle. I would think the TABAQ would have more bass since the box is producing bass from 50-100 hz although at a cost of lesser efficiency.
I have been listening to Tang-band's W4-616s in a 3.5 L cabinet. It is clearer through the midrange than the 871s and obviously more bass. It could use a supertweeter above 10kHz. This driver would be my 1st choice for a 4"er.
I found the 1320 to be bright since it has a 10dB rising FR.
I have been listening to Tang-band's W4-616s in a 3.5 L cabinet. It is clearer through the midrange than the 871s and obviously more bass. It could use a supertweeter above 10kHz. This driver would be my 1st choice for a 4"er.
I found the 1320 to be bright since it has a 10dB rising FR.
My 4 inchers are FE127e and have been very pleased with them over the years.
The inverted TABAQ plays ok at high volume levels. For me, seeing the
ol' volume meter cranked for minimal performance on a 3 in. speaker is disconcerting.
For a first build, the 871's can be ok because they require
few tools to assemble the box: 3 in hole cutter in a drill or drill
press can make the cutout and 2 in hole cutter to make the port if you made it the way I did.
The inverted TABAQ plays ok at high volume levels. For me, seeing the
ol' volume meter cranked for minimal performance on a 3 in. speaker is disconcerting.
For a first build, the 871's can be ok because they require
few tools to assemble the box: 3 in hole cutter in a drill or drill
press can make the cutout and 2 in hole cutter to make the port if you made it the way I did.
Solve said:Just can speak for my self and the W4-1320SA.
Yes it sounds very good!
I had the W3-871 in first and i was amazed!
But the bottom came with the W4.
Dont know if it works with W4-656SC.
Just try?
Solve
Okay, I did this and it sounds great! Right now I'm breaking them in with no stuffing. Has anyone who used the W4-1320's put stuffing in?
Just as an FYI, I've been playing around with the BSC values for my TABAQ (with a TB W4-1320). Based on info here and some quick math I originally had a L=1.0mH and R =8ohms. I noticed there was a dip at about 200Hz as if the BSC effect was starting too soon. I replaced the inductor with L=0.7mH and my response is much flatter now.
Papa's happy he got is mid-bass back!
I'm always paranoid about burning up full range drivers as all my amps except my PSAudio #2 put out 70 watts per channel or more. I took the liberty of installing a circuit breaker to protect them.
Papa's happy he got is mid-bass back!
I'm always paranoid about burning up full range drivers as all my amps except my PSAudio #2 put out 70 watts per channel or more. I took the liberty of installing a circuit breaker to protect them.
I have an issue with my TABAQs that maybe y'all can help me with. I built a set using 3/4" MDF and the Tangband W4-1320SA driver. They give pretty flat output down to 65Hz or so. I like them very much but after running some tests I have a dip in output from about 100 - 250 Hz. I normally have a very narrow 100Hz dip because of the floor / ceiling room mode, but it is never this wide. I have tried setting up different BSC circuits but none really get rid of this dip leading me to believe it is caused by something else.
I do have some theories.
1. I did chamfer out the back of the driver mount, but maybe I need to chamfer it more?
2. Could over or under stuffing cause this?
Has anyone else had this problem? I will post a FR picture when I get home to make my problem more clear.
I do have some theories.
1. I did chamfer out the back of the driver mount, but maybe I need to chamfer it more?
2. Could over or under stuffing cause this?
Has anyone else had this problem? I will post a FR picture when I get home to make my problem more clear.
Hi
I get exactly the same result using MJK software. This is caused by reflections, which you will see in many loudspeakers in "real life".
Have you tried to lift the cabinett from the floor, like mounting it on the wall ?
MJK software takes into consideration the physical environment, used to design BSC. MJK software also predicts the dip you have noticed. Which is interesting - the simulation and real expereince seems to follow each other
The dip is smoother if you have carpet floor and not a hard floor.
This does not help you much, but you have done nothing wrong.
Hi from Bjorn
I get exactly the same result using MJK software. This is caused by reflections, which you will see in many loudspeakers in "real life".
Have you tried to lift the cabinett from the floor, like mounting it on the wall ?
MJK software takes into consideration the physical environment, used to design BSC. MJK software also predicts the dip you have noticed. Which is interesting - the simulation and real expereince seems to follow each other
The dip is smoother if you have carpet floor and not a hard floor.
This does not help you much, but you have done nothing wrong.
Hi from Bjorn