• Disclaimer: This Vendor's Forum is a paid-for commercial area. Unlike the rest of diyAudio, the Vendor has complete control of what may or may not be posted in this forum. If you wish to discuss technical matters outside the bounds of what is permitted by the Vendor, please use the non-commercial areas of diyAudio to do so.

DIY Waveguide loudspeaker kit

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
critofur said:
Pictures please. (or link to where we can see them)

They will be almost indistinguishable from the ESP10 found at www.ai-audio.com. The differences are in the construction techniques, but the drivers and the performance will be virtually identical. The ESP10 could never be made as a kit because of the complexity of the composite cabinet. The technique is very costly.
 
Re: Re: Re: Sub ?

Bratislav said:



I do understand that, and that is not what I had in mind. As you are the person who knows best what the natural roll off of the 10" in a suggested box is, you are in perfect position to suggest ideal crossover frequency and slope in order to integrate with a sub (with minimal phase shift).

Given the suggestions to use multiple subs in various locations around the room, all tuned differently (perhaps even different size drivers?), will phase shift be an issue? (Assuming it is even audible in the first place with most speakers and music.)

Mixing and matching from things like the Parts Express Sub-80, Sub-100, and Sub-120 might work out inexpensively. There is even an article on turning the 120 into a sealed-box with a servo.

Linkwitz's sub for use with the Orion++ looks competent.

There are also the ESP bandpass subs. Personally, I have always found this type of sub to produce one-note bass, but I have not heard these models at all.
 
djarchow said:
Earl,

I looked at the AI speakers and are you talking about doing a baffle like the ESP10 with the roundover on the waveguide/tweeter opening?

As a DIY'r who doesn't like painted baffles at all I would rather have the waveguide etc mount just like a driver on my own veneered baffle. This way, all I would have to do is route the proper sized through hole and rebate for the waveguide and then mount it just like a a driver.

I am sure this would result in extra tooling for you but think this would give the most flexibility to the builder.

Kind regards,

Dennis


It sounded to me like the waveguide and underlying support (the baffle) were rather closely mated.

You could probably trim off the excess radiused part around the waveguide, plus cut off the woofer part of the baffle, and then get something close to what you want.

Perhaps this would be a good time to explore the beauty of opaque decorative finshes? The Danish have always seemed to blend black and walnut in tasteful ways, just as an example. :)
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sub ?

stuartk2007 said:


Given the suggestions to use multiple subs in various locations around the room, all tuned differently (perhaps even different size drivers?), will phase shift be an issue? (Assuming it is even audible in the first place with most speakers and music.)

Mixing and matching from things like the Parts Express Sub-80, Sub-100, and Sub-120 might work out inexpensively. There is even an article on turning the 120 into a sealed-box with a servo.

Linkwitz's sub for use with the Orion++ looks competent.

There are also the ESP bandpass subs. Personally, I have always found this type of sub to produce one-note bass, but I have not heard these models at all.

Obviously I was not clear. I have no problem with high pass part; I was just hinting at a possibility of not having to measure the box in order to estimate its Q and f3. If Q was 0.707 for example (I doubt it as box is on a smallish side) just another 2nd order L-R at F3 would make a targeted LR4 with minimal phase shift. If Q was not 0.7, one would need to make pole shifting circuit to get the targeted response before designing a mating high pass.
 
Hi Earl,

I live in an apartment. When I want to do serious DIY I have to borrow or rent workspace or pay someone to do the cutting for me. Can't run a saw or router in here. I can assemble and finish, though.

So my preference is to buy a full kit.

I'm sure my situation is not unique.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sub ?

stuartk2007 said:


$600 for each speaker, or for the pair?

Thats each. The drivers alone are almost $600 for the pair.

stuartk2007 said:


Given the suggestions to use multiple subs in various locations around the room, all tuned differently (perhaps even different size drivers?), will phase shift be an issue? (Assuming it is even audible in the first place with most speakers and music.)

I am not sure what phase shift you mean, the response at any point is the sum of the individual sources, and the phase is based on that same sum. There is no reason to believe that it would be any better or worse than a single sub. And I suppose its a tradeoff - large frequency response irregularities are certainly audible, so that has to be the first priority.

Bratislav said:


Obviously I was not clear. I have no problem with high pass part; I was just hinting at a possibility of not having to measure the box in order to estimate its Q and f3. If Q was 0.707 for example (I doubt it as box is on a smallish side) just another 2nd order L-R at F3 would make a targeted LR4 with minimal phase shift. If Q was not 0.7, one would need to make pole shifting circuit to get the targeted response before designing a mating high pass.

I see what you mean now. I would never use another HP filter like that. I want the energy below F3, which is why they are monopoles and I usually have a lot of overlap of the subs. As I have said before, you have to set the parameters in-situ. The multiple subs idea doesn't work unless all the sources are playing in the same frequency range. So in essence there is no "crossover" in the sense that you mean. The subs are blended into the mains, not crossed over to the mains.

In general the subs will LP at different point which is what acomodates the blending.
 
tktran303 said:
I think

1 = Baffle (+ integrated waveguide) and plans.

2= 1 + Drivers + XO

3= Everything except the 5 other sides of the cabinets

You and FrankWW don't agree here. You don't think that anyone would want the wood cut? I agree with Frank that I think a lot of people lack the tools to cut the cabinets but have the ability to finish them. I think that they could be acceptably finished with spray cans. And assembly just needs a hammer and some nails, perhaps a drill. But cutting the wood for the cabinet takes a table saw and thats not something that everyone has.

I see your 1 and 2 but 3 is everything.
 
Perhaps consider a menu?
a) Baffle, b) crossover, c) drivers, d) box panels; buyer chooses from list.

For example, I'd most likely go for either just a) or a) + d) as I have the DE250s, and bucket loads of crossover components.

I'd have thought the physical nature of the parts would allow such a "pick what you need" approach (drivers come separately, crossovers are a small box, baffle and panels are bulky).

I hope you are not in the end disappointed by the number of orders that emerge from this (or more positively: good luck!)

Ken
 
kstrain said:
Perhaps consider a menu?
a) Baffle, b) crossover, c) drivers, d) box panels; buyer chooses from list.

I hope you are not in the end disappointed by the number of orders that emerge from this (or more positively: good luck!)

Ken

Thats a good idea, makes sense.

One thing that is very obvious to me is that people need to hear what a really good waveguide can do and how impressive they can be. When this happens there will be no going back. I have long had this goal, but the higher priced more complete systems were just not right for the market - which is dying fast. So in the end I hope its not the audio community that is disappointed at not being able to hear what progress through research can bring. (That's REAL research in acoustics and not Bose style research; in marketing.)
 
Personally I'm only interested in the waveguide/foam, and not the 10" (at least right now)... the 15" or even better a 17-18" mouth. I have the drivers, can build the boxes, and use DSP for the crossover. If I have to cut it off of a baffle that's ok. You had these available for $250 each previously but at the moment that was too much for me. I've been looking into having a mold machined so I can pull off an indefinite number of fiberglass replicas (and then buy the foam from you) but if I can avoid this I would like to.

From what I can tell there are others out there like me, so I guess the point is that this might be a good "step" of the kit to have available.
 
I think the baffle is the hardest part, that most DIY'ers can't produce themselves. This is the key element. Having the option to choose the flat kit for the cabinet will probably result in more potential customers.

Curious, what woofer do you use in the 10" design?
 
Rybaudio said:
Personally I'm only interested in the waveguide/foam, and not the 10" (at least right now)... the 15" or even better a 17-18" mouth. ... I've been looking into having a mold machined so I can pull off an indefinite number of fiberglass replicas (and then buy the foam from you) but if I can avoid this I would like to.

I think that it will be awhile before these larger waveguide are available from me, larger just has limited appeal.

I am not sure if I would sell foam plugs for waveguides that are not my own, especially if I have waveguides available. The USPTO has not issued my "plug" patent yet, but I am confident that they will because there simply is no prior art out there on this application. If I do sell the plugs seperately they would not be cheap unless we worked on some agreement on long term licensing.

The "carret" in all of this, for me, has got to be the foam plug patent. I'm not likely to let that technology out without my being part of the game.

If I had a firm order for a number of the larger waveguides I could do them without a problem, but I'm not going to invest the time and money into making the tooling on a "hope" that they will sell.
 
gedlee said:


I think that it will be awhile before these larger waveguide are available from me, larger just has limited appeal.

I am not sure if I would sell foam plugs for waveguides that are not my own, especially if I have waveguides available. The USPTO has not issued my "plug" patent yet, but I am confident that they will because there simply is no prior art out there on this application. If I do sell the plugs seperately they would not be cheap unless we worked on some agreement on long term licensing.

The "carret" in all of this, for me, has got to be the foam plug patent. I'm not likely to let that technology out without my being part of the game.

If I had a firm order for a number of the larger waveguides I could do them without a problem, but I'm not going to invest the time and money into making the tooling on a "hope" that they will sell.

Good thinking. You would never recoup machining costs selling to DIYers, the real merit of your waveguide/plug tech (from a revenue perspective) would be licensing.
 
JoshK said:
I think the baffle is the hardest part, that most DIY'ers can produce themselves. This is the key element. Having the option to choose the flat kit for the cabinet will probably result in more potential customers.

Curious, what woofer do you use in the 10" design?

Is there a typo in your first sentence?

I use the 10ps26 - a good driver. B&C know how to make units that take a lot of power without failing. The reliability is very good. For home use this may be overkill and maybe down the road I might use a lower cost driver pair, but for now I am going to use what I know. These speakers would be perfect for sound reinforcement where large size in not desirable. They can also be arrayed because they are so small. Using the higher power driver option yields a much wider application base.
 
gedlee said:
I am not sure if I would sell foam plugs for waveguides that are not my own, especially if I have waveguides available. The USPTO has not issued my "plug" patent yet, but I am confident that they will because there simply is no prior art out there on this application. If I do sell the plugs seperately they would not be cheap unless we worked on some agreement on long term licensing.

What kind of price are we talking here?... $50/ea? $100/ea? more? I would only need 2 now and at most 7 in the forseeable future. The reason I want the ability to make an indefinite number of waveguides is so I could build them into speakers and not have to worry about cutting them out every time I make a new box... the foam plugs could be transferred. I'm not sure how liscensing comes into that. I might sell some waveguides to other DIYers but this is no serious business venture... at least I hadn't planned it that way.
 
Rybaudio said:


What kind of price are we talking here?... $50/ea? $100/ea? more? I would only need 2 now and at most 7 in the forseeable future. The reason I want the ability to make an indefinite number of waveguides is so I could build them into speakers and not have to worry about cutting them out every time I make a new box... the foam plugs could be transferred. I'm not sure how liscensing comes into that. I might sell some waveguides to other DIYers but this is no serious business venture... at least I hadn't planned it that way.

This is not how I saw the situation from your previous post. Although what you say doesn't make a lot of sense. Why not just attach the waveguides in a removable manner?

The foam plugs do tend to deteriorate with removal unless a weak adhesive is used, but then they don't want to stay in place very well. You aren't likely to get a half dozen transfers out of them the way that I attach them.

If your volumes are this low and you don't sell them I don't see a problem. But selling them without a license would be a patent violation. Your selling your waveguides with my foam plugs would not likely be acceptable to me, at least not without some financial considerations. Otherwise what's the point of getting a patent?
 
Let me elaborate since this wasn't clear before.

- I want to make or have made a mold from which I can make fiberglass OS waveguides of 1" entry and 15-18" mouth
- If I do make such a mold, I may sell some of the waveguides (no foam) to other DIYers
- If I do end up doing this, I may want to purchase a few foam plugs from you for my own usage

None of this constitutes a patent violation since the OS waveguide isn't patented (as per your own words in the Beyond the Ariel thread) and I'm not selling foam.

As for why I don't want to attach them in a removable manner,

- on the outside of the box I want to smooth them into the front baffle with some sort of bondo/wood putty so when I paint or finish the enclosure its smooth.

- on the inside I want to very rigidly attach them to the enclosure, meaning most likely fiberglass them into the box.

They aren't big deals really and if I end up buying waveguides I'll have to figure out some way to get around them. The practical info on transfering the foam plugs does answer a concern of mine... thanks. I may have to just bite the bullet and buy a pair of the 15" waveguides w/ foam if you still have them available.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.