|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| 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 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Francisco, California
|
Hi Folks:
I found a pair of 2-way concentric in-wall speakers (labeled 'SpeakerCraft 6.5') in my neighborhood, and took them apart to get a pair of 6.5" mid/woofers and 1" fabric dome tweeters. I then measured the woofer T-S parameters using the added-mass method with SpeakerWorkshop. I intend to use these things to build my first DIY speakers, presumably sealed for ease of design. The problem I have now is that the T-S, if accurate, seem to require a very large enclosure: for sealed with Qtc=0.71, the driver needs 157 liters, or 5.5 cu.ft., compared to just 11.2 liters, or 0.4 cu.ft., for the Vifa P17WJ. Here's the measured T-S given by SW: Fs=59.6 Hz Vas=16.17 liters, or 0.571 cu.ft. Qts=0.676 Qms=4.928 Qes=0.783 This is a 6.5 inch/13.6cm driver. With a sealed box of 157 liters (!) F3 is 62.3; with a more reasonable (but still large-ish for a 6.5" driver?) 45.4 liters (1.6 cu.ft) F3 is 63 Hz and Qtc (Qb? that's what Brian Steele's "ported.xls" spreadsheet calls it) is 0.79 I realize that I don't *have* to have Qtc=0.71, but I assume it means *something* (and I further assume it's something bad...) that the things want so much more volume than the Vifa driver does for a given Qtc. Are these drivers worth messing with? I have some decent-looking 3/4 inch plywood that I scrounged at about the same time, so it would only cost me some time and glue to create some enclosures and find out for sure, but I thought I'd ask for experienced opinions. If I do plow ahead, am I correct in assuming I should stick with a sealed box design? Using "Golden Ratio" internal dimensions of 7.75"x12.6"x20.16" I have just one shared standing wave frequency, 2.68 KHz for the 5th harmonic along depth, and 8th harmonic along height. Volume is 32.2 liters, or 1.14 cu.ft., and Qtc is about 0.83. If I stretch the height to get tweeter closer to ear-height (w/o stand) I can avoid shared standing wave harmonics (w/in 50 Hz), using 7.75"x12.6"x28.35", giving 45.4 liters, or 1.6 cu.ft., and Qtc is about 0.79. Are either of these designs, used with these drivers, something with a chance of sounding OK?!? Of course, proper bracing, etc., would be required as well. OK, sock it to me! But really, thanks for any helpful thoughts at all. -Sean |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
There are a few possibilities.
First, open baffle dipole use. Second, put 'em in a closed box, accept a higher Q, then use electronics to drop the Q to something more like what you want. For example, if you use a box to get a Qtc of 1, then a simple RC filter ahead of the power amp with the same corner frequency as the driver-box resonance will give you something that looks like a third-order Butterworth. You'll lose some bass, but you'll have something that works very well with a sub (this is what I do with Dynaudio 17W75s). As a side note, don't take that golden ratio stuff too seriously. Avoid integer multiples at relevant wavelengths and stuff your box; that's all you really need to do. Fibonnacci used Quad ESLs anyway.
__________________
“Listening to records is like ****ing a picture of Brigitte Bardot.” - Sergiu Celibidache |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Hampshire
|
The specs of those woofers are exactly what one would expect for drivers intended for an in-wall infinete baffle alignment and that's probably the best way to utilize them.
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Wisconsin
|
Quote:
Realize that many small commercial designs have a Qtc of over 1, which helps small woofers give the impression of more bass than there actually is. Personally, I can comfortably go for a sealed Qtc up to about .85 before midbass boom starts to get annoying. You could always use apperiodic damping if you wanted a smaller enclosure and don't mind giving up a little bass depth and power handling.
__________________
-Zaph|Audio- |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: San Francisco, California
|
Just a quick "thank you" to the three of you for your guidance. OB looks interesting, but is not best for my living room, and in-wall isn't an option (I'm a renter), so I plan to go ahead with the 1.6 cu.ft. sealed box at Qtc=0.79. Thanks for your help, guys.
-Sean |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: L.A., CA
|
You might want to leave them as concentric drivers to get a point source a la KEF. You can always try them that way and if you dont like it take the tweeter off and cut a hole for it.
__________________
If it sounds good... it is good! |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Funky Looking 15DQ8s | wrenchone | Tubes / Valves | 14 | 29th March 2009 08:21 PM |
| funky power supply | audio_moksha | Tubes / Valves | 10 | 19th March 2008 03:51 AM |
| Funky 70's SAE preamp and amp (ebay) | Jason | Swap Meet | 0 | 8th April 2005 11:51 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.10166 seconds (78.02% PHP - 21.98% MySQL) with 10 queries |