166es-r in a austin a166 & construction ? - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd August 2008, 06:55 AM   #11
hifiZen is offline hifiZen  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
hifiZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mountain View, CA
I am planning to use 3/4" baltic birch ply as well. I used 0.7" as the plywood thickness for the CAD drawings, which I hope is accurate (same as the original plans called for) since I don't have a physical sample of 3/4" birch ply to measure.

Thanks for the CC volume info. I'll see if I can calculate what results in the current drawing... do note, the magnet on the back of the es-r is so big, it really blocks off a lot of the entrance, necessitating a large cone / cutout on the inside of the suprabaffle. If you look closely, you'll see that the innermost cutout actually drops down past the top of the horn throat! Hope that's OK.
__________________
- Chad.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd August 2008, 05:07 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: los alamos
Quote:
Originally posted by hifiZen

If you look closely, you'll see that the innermost cutout actually drops down past the top of the horn throat!
Only if you space the driver out from the front of the cab.
If you mount the driver flush with the cab, and build the supra baffle back around the sides and top that won't happen.

Also you won't have to stuff the compression chamber so much.
The first thing I noticed was how much clearance there was in the compression chamber; I had to stuff mine a lot to make it sound right with 166es-rs (even with the round foam in back, and damped basket, felt covered magnet, etc.).
Robert
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd August 2008, 11:30 PM   #13
hifiZen is offline hifiZen  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
hifiZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mountain View, CA
More like this you mean... with the suprabaffle flush instead of proud of the front panel? I had to move the driver centerline up to prevent the magnet crashing into the back of the CC, but with a single layer of ply, the inside cone diameter is indeed a lot less.

Hmm, I'll have to think about how to build this. It complicates construction of the front panel and also the removable top panel I am planning.
Attached Images
File Type: png picture 11.png (7.2 KB, 1212 views)
__________________
- Chad.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2008, 05:43 AM   #14
mp9 is offline mp9  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
...but it makes more sense to me with it flush to the cabinet. only prob. is that i didn't know how to calculate for space occupied by the driver/magnet when figuring out volume of the compression chamber for a revision of the org. plans (of which i found no usable version). i don't see the need for a removable front/plate baffle unless you're planing on different driver options. i'm thinking there will be plenty of room to reach into it as is. glad you're going to incorporate Ron C's c.c. numbers. hope we get a good set of workable plans soon, looking forward to building something with the promise of taking the 166es-r to another level beyond the fostex rec. blh.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2008, 06:36 AM   #15
mp9 is offline mp9  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Quote:
Originally posted by serenechaos

The first thing I noticed was how much clearance there was in the compression chamber; I had to stuff mine a lot to make it sound right with 166es-rs (even with the round foam in back, and damped basket, felt covered magnet, etc.).
Robert
how do you rate the austin/166es-r combo and did you also build the fostex rec. blh (or any of the spawn's) and which do you like best with your 166es-r's?
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2008, 12:41 PM   #16
REC1 is offline REC1  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Would be interesting and great if Ron C. were to give us his opinion of the new es-r revision.

I dont approve of opinions. Like A-holes, everybody has one.
Cant really comment as i have never heard that version. I did some trials with the Fe-166e (Enable) from Dave and i can state that on an OB the driver appears to be much smoother sounding, but again thats just an opinion.

ron

(gotta get some $ off ta Dave fer these drivers)
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2008, 03:19 PM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: los alamos
Quote:
Originally posted by mp9

how do you rate the austin/166es-r combo and did you also build the fostex rec. blh (or any of the spawn's) and which do you like best with your 166es-r's?
No I didn't build the fostex rec blh.

I only compared it with the Open Baffles I broke them in on for a few months.

I didn't like the OBs at all, but that's just MY opinion...
No control, have to cross to a woofer much higher, back wave bouncing around, combines with front wave and other reflections after delay, comb filtering,...
Not for me at all.
Robert
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th August 2008, 08:28 AM   #18
hifiZen is offline hifiZen  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
hifiZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Mountain View, CA
Quote:
Originally posted by REC1
Would be interesting and great if Ron C. were to give us his opinion of the new es-r revision.

I dont approve of opinions. Like A-holes, everybody has one.
Cant really comment as i have never heard that version. ...
Umm... FYI, mp9 was referring to the ES-R revision of the Austin A166 cabinet design, not the driver. Ron C. is the man who did the computer simulations and design of the original A166 horn. So in this case, Ron would not be giving an 'opinion', so much as an authoritative answer regarding a) whether the plans I'm reconstructing match his original design parameters, and b) whether the modifications proposed are correct for the FE166ES-R (he has already provided some information on this - the A166 will work with the ES-R, just need to get the details right).

Since most all of that context is missing from this particular thread (scattered around other threads / forums), I can understand your remark, but others may take offense at the apparent (though unintentional, I'm sure) insult to Ron.

In any case, as soon as I've got the design worked up to a point where I have integrated all the available information, and is in a presentable form (dimensions shown, etc), I certainly intend to ask Ron for his input.

I had the ES-R's on temporary open baffles for a little while too, and I agree with serenechaos - they don't work so well OB, and are really better suited to a BLH which can properly load the cone and get some useful LF extension out of them.
__________________
- Chad.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th August 2008, 12:14 PM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by hifiZen
...others may take offense at the apparent (though unintentional, I'm sure) insult to Ron...
Hi hifiZen, the gentleman REC1 who responded with the colorful comment is in fact the very same ronc, Ron Clarke, designer of the BLH's in question.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th August 2008, 03:48 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: los alamos
After much correspondence with REC1/ronc/ Ron Clarke on other threads and forums, I built the A166s as drawn, with "12.7 minimum supra baffles, and adjust the compression chamber to the changed magnet size (and room size)."
Also; (looking from the top), the rear deflector was made square, not triangular, and the speakers were corner loaded.
This sets the proper distance to the corner/rear walls, and the rear walls become the last part of the flair, extending the lower frequency response.
It is smooth to ~40Hz then rolls of smoothly.
After a lot of experimentation, I now have everything setting on a pair of 18" bag end subs, down firing, built like end tables.
(So the A166s & rear deflectors are ~24" off the ground).
Integration is good this way, and you can't tell the subs are there unless you unplug them.
You can tell they're there anywhere else in the room I've tried (everywhere) even with phase adjustments.
I've also tried using a super tweeter, had best results with a Heil AMT crossed in ~15 kHz, but still not happy with it.
Other problems with this system; namely that of long path BLHs...
But regardless, it remains the best BLH, and by itself the best single driver "fullrange" speaker I've ever heard
Robert
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Austin A166 wirewiggler Full Range 61 22nd February 2009 10:51 PM
A166 build pictures cwujek Full Range 22 9th November 2007 07:13 AM
Mounting FE166E in a A166? cwujek Full Range 5 2nd August 2007 06:13 PM
Fostex 166ES-R bone43 Swap Meet 2 19th February 2006 08:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:25 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2