Tang Band W5-704D + Dayton PT2C - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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 25th February 2008, 12:22 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NH
Send a message via AIM to 69stingray Send a message via MSN to 69stingray Send a message via Yahoo to 69stingray
Default Tang Band W5-704D + Dayton PT2C

Referene Thread: Design Review: Tang Bang W5-704s Woofer

I finally ordered by W5-704D's from Parts Express. I caught them on sale as the Deal of the Day.

I have measured them with Speaker Workshop. I think it went well, except for I could not get VAS on the second driver, just came up blank or a really low number that rounded to zero.

Attached are the results. My Fs came out a little higher then Zaph's and Tang Band's.

I plan on doing the design with FRC tools, except for the woofer measurements (complete) and the inbox impedance/phase (which will be done with Speaker Workshop). I will start the design "from scratch", again.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg t_s_para.jpg (41.9 KB, 670 views)
__________________
Audio DIY Page
FOLLOWMY529.COM - Subscribe and follow the performance of my daughter's 529 College Saving Account.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 12:24 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NH
Send a message via AIM to 69stingray Send a message via MSN to 69stingray Send a message via Yahoo to 69stingray
Plan is a ported enclosure, 20-Liters, Fb = 45 Hz w/ (2) 1.5" ports that I hope to fit on the front baffle. Assuming 3 dB of BSC since these will be a bureau.

In my reference thread, someone mentioned that even though the response looks flat, it will be boomy. Any comments on this design? Still a concern?

Max. excursion is hit with only 5-watts. I am assuming about 3 db of boundary gain, so approx. 90-dB of output @ 1 meter.
Attached Images
File Type: gif ported_resp.gif (20.7 KB, 639 views)
__________________
Audio DIY Page
FOLLOWMY529.COM - Subscribe and follow the performance of my daughter's 529 College Saving Account.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 04:13 AM   #3
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
I'd tune the port lower. 38 to 40 Hz Fb in a 20 liter box gives a good result according to my Unibox sim. In most rooms, this low tuning will provide a deeper, flatter bass response.
Attached Images
File Type: gif tb_704d_vb_39hz.gif (19.7 KB, 625 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 04:23 AM   #4
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
I quickly modeled a low pass filter for a single TB W5-704---the old 704S version has the same response as the new 704D. I used an in-box modeled response that was used for my 2.5-way design:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...14#post1422714

Your baffle will be different from this, but the effect due to different baffles should be minimal. Mine is a sealed design. So, ignore the response below 200 Hz.

The target is LR4 4 kHz.
Attached Images
File Type: gif tb_704d_4khz_xover.gif (15.9 KB, 636 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 12:12 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NH
Send a message via AIM to 69stingray Send a message via MSN to 69stingray Send a message via Yahoo to 69stingray
Thanks Jay- the LR4 @ 4k Hz looks promising. I am surprised you got full BSC without a LR filter. My original attempts failed at this....encouraging.

I want to cross over to the Daytons high to avoid some of the distortion issues below 4 kHz.

I agree, a sealed version crossed to sub would be a nice design. Mine are slated for a bedroom...no subs allowed.

P.S.- The lower tuning also moves the sub-Fb over excursion below 40-Hz, which i like.
__________________
Audio DIY Page
FOLLOWMY529.COM - Subscribe and follow the performance of my daughter's 529 College Saving Account.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 05:45 PM   #6
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Hi,

20L box with driver of Vas = 8L, Fs = 62Hz, and Qts = 0.6 ?

It will work but this is no way to extract the best performance out
of a box that size, a bigger driver is required. Whenever the box size
exceeds 200% of the driver Vas you are usually wasting your time.

Sealed is the obvious way to go, 7L to 10L well stuffed.
Comparatively no bass, but it will not overload easily.

If you must reflex, probably 13L tuned to 40Hz is about right.
Tight bass you will not get, 20L will probably sound even looser.

Allegedly higher Qts drivers can be made to work in stuffed TL's,
but MJK's worksheets I've not got into and got to grips with.

/sreten.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 08:03 PM   #7
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Yes, no doubt power handling will be an issue. When we consider BSC, a single speaker's max SPL will be 88-89 dB at 1 m. This limitation won't improve much even when a 13-14 liter (.5 cu ft) box is used for a single driver. In fact, the idea of using a single TB W5-704 for full range, whether vented or sealed, will result in having this problem, though sealed is better, of course.

So, the bottom line is 1) use it in sealed with HP filter and a subwoofer or 2) admit this limitation and use it only for moderate level listeninig. Or use multiple drivers. IIRC, he already admitted the limitation. So, it's up to him.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 08:23 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Sreten just FYI: most of us have being measuring about 11-13L Vas and .45 Qts

It's very important with this driver to consider it's final use, whether HT, music, maybe music with pipe organs etc. If you can cross to a sub then no worries. With a 80 Hz crossover you can run 32 watts at Xmax, with a 60 Hz you can run 16 watts at xmax. You could also run without a sub if your receiver has a very low XO setting, say <40 Hz. That way you could get mostly the same bass response >50 Hz where the music is, but still protect from over excursion down low.

If you are using these for music with no sub I don't think you will need to tune too low and reduce power handling. Personally I'm going to use 15L tuned to 50 Hz. Higher power handling and excursion is lower above 45 Hz. Below 45 Hz it's worse, but most music doesn't have much info that low. I think the 20L tuned to 45 Hz would also be a decent alignment. I'm using pre made 15L boxes so I didn't choose that one.
__________________
~Brandon
DriverVault Soma Sonus Old Driver Tests
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 08:46 PM   #9
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Quote:
Originally posted by augerpro
If you are using these for music with no sub I don't think you will need to tune too low and reduce power handling.
As you can see in the above sims, there's no significant difference in power handling between 39 and 45 Hz tuning. So, the tuning freq choice should depend on personal preference, not much on power handling (very low in both cases).
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th February 2008, 10:59 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
At the same volume a 5 Hz difference won't make much difference, you're right. I was comparing two alignments that were a bit more different though. Here is a comparison between 15L @ 50Hz (black) and 20L @ 40Hz (red), both at 8 watts input:


Click the image to open in full size.


As you can see the smaller/higher tune is actually moving 1-2mm less from 50Hz to 65Hz, not insignificant considering xmax is rated at 3mm. And that's the meat of music based bass. Actually the larger/lower tune is slightly past xmax. Here is with xmax equal, which required dropping input to the larger/lower tune box to 6 watts:

Click the image to open in full size.


Below 45Hz is where the smaller/higher tune box falls behind. If that's not problem due to how the speaker is used, I think the smaller/higher tuned box has the advantage.Now I'm making two big assumptions here: that the smaller/higher tune box won't sound boomy (and vice versa for the larger box) and that there isn't much music content below 45 hz. So that's the big dilemma 69stingray has to answer for himself. The lower tune may very well sound better in his room, and using it for HT or orchestras without a sub would probably require a lower tune also. This is a tough one since you need all the power handling you can get, considering sensitivity after BSC.
__________________
~Brandon
DriverVault Soma Sonus Old Driver Tests
  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
Tang Band W3-593SF vs. Tang Band W3-926SD Zaputh Full Range 17 5th June 2009 11:37 PM
Tang Band W5-704D 5-1/4" Woofer-- has anybody used this? loninappleton Multi-Way 32 30th July 2008 05:35 PM
Tang Band W5-704D revelator Full Range 0 1st February 2008 06:26 AM
Dayton RSS265HF-4 vs Tang Band WT-1427B jetty2 Subwoofers 1 6th August 2007 01:55 PM
8 x 12 Tang Band troystg Subwoofers 3 2nd February 2007 03:37 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:56 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