Would it be possible to find out if anyone has a copy of any of the original recommended cabinet designs for the Wharfedale '10 RS DD golden' speakers.
(or any creditable cabinet design from or since that time). Failing that I'm hunting for the original speaker performance parameters so that I can design the correct cabinet.
I don't know what type of cabinet design they were intended for? (reflex/horn/sealed/ IB?)
I've just bought a v/good pair in large basic rear slotted vent cabinets.
They sound fine but the cabinets are huge and I may be able to get the same performance or better from the correct design.
Any info /contacts would be appreciated.
(or any creditable cabinet design from or since that time). Failing that I'm hunting for the original speaker performance parameters so that I can design the correct cabinet.
I don't know what type of cabinet design they were intended for? (reflex/horn/sealed/ IB?)
I've just bought a v/good pair in large basic rear slotted vent cabinets.
They sound fine but the cabinets are huge and I may be able to get the same performance or better from the correct design.
Any info /contacts would be appreciated.
Pat, if you are still arround, those cabinets sound like W'dale designs.
About 3 ft high, 2 feet wide, 45 degree chamfer on front edges, and a series of 1/2 slots on the rear panel. If yours have red alnico magnets, they were made in the early 60s. The alnicos gave way to ceramic in 66.
Let me know if you want futher info.
Geoff
About 3 ft high, 2 feet wide, 45 degree chamfer on front edges, and a series of 1/2 slots on the rear panel. If yours have red alnico magnets, they were made in the early 60s. The alnicos gave way to ceramic in 66.
Let me know if you want futher info.
Geoff
Thanks for your reply Geoff.
They are indeed Wharfedale designs for these speakers and the same as you describe without the chamfers to the cabinet front.
(Via info from another very informed Audio forums member.)
(Cabinets are home made I think.)
Speakers are same metallic silver grey / blueish colour all over so may well be ceramic.
The only detail of the magnets that I notice is that the overall diameter of each is just a little smaller than photos of other 10'' goldens that I have seen for sale thru Ebay. small label on each says 12 to 16 ohms (from memory and 14500 lines).
A bit more info on the speakers would be useful.
Have you ever come across G A Briggs' speaker cabinet design book?
Pat L.
They are indeed Wharfedale designs for these speakers and the same as you describe without the chamfers to the cabinet front.
(Via info from another very informed Audio forums member.)
(Cabinets are home made I think.)
Speakers are same metallic silver grey / blueish colour all over so may well be ceramic.
The only detail of the magnets that I notice is that the overall diameter of each is just a little smaller than photos of other 10'' goldens that I have seen for sale thru Ebay. small label on each says 12 to 16 ohms (from memory and 14500 lines).
A bit more info on the speakers would be useful.
Have you ever come across G A Briggs' speaker cabinet design book?
Pat L.
Hi Pat. Mr Briggs was the founder of Wharfedale. Let me know if you find his book, and I'll hope there is 2 of them.
The 10" Wharfedales with the cloth surround had a resonance of 38 Hz.
I had a pair of Super tens in 2 cubic ft BRs, designed with port at 38Hz, that worked fairly well. The bass was a little uneven, I think the calcs for the port size were out slightly.
If the magnet is slightly smaller than the surface of the alloy basket, they are alnico. The ceramic magnets are larger in diameter, but thin compared to the alnico magnets.
The cabinets they are in are probably the best suited. But if floor space is a problem, then ported BRs are the next best thing. Avoid small ports. These drivers have a long excursion, and can move a lot of air. Small ports will produce more wind than bass energy.
I do have some Wharfedale plans, there all 12" or 15" units, including the sand filled model. If you have corners where the cabinets could go, I have the dimensions for a corner ducted for the 12WRS and Super 3, which also works for the Super ten. And most likely the Golden Ten.
If you look at my profile, you can see my posts. Anything under widerange and some in Altec.
You may also find many people will tell you thay don't have good bass. You know different. Even my "tweeters" have reasonable bass.
Regards,
Geoff.
The 10" Wharfedales with the cloth surround had a resonance of 38 Hz.
I had a pair of Super tens in 2 cubic ft BRs, designed with port at 38Hz, that worked fairly well. The bass was a little uneven, I think the calcs for the port size were out slightly.
If the magnet is slightly smaller than the surface of the alloy basket, they are alnico. The ceramic magnets are larger in diameter, but thin compared to the alnico magnets.
The cabinets they are in are probably the best suited. But if floor space is a problem, then ported BRs are the next best thing. Avoid small ports. These drivers have a long excursion, and can move a lot of air. Small ports will produce more wind than bass energy.
I do have some Wharfedale plans, there all 12" or 15" units, including the sand filled model. If you have corners where the cabinets could go, I have the dimensions for a corner ducted for the 12WRS and Super 3, which also works for the Super ten. And most likely the Golden Ten.
If you look at my profile, you can see my posts. Anything under widerange and some in Altec.
You may also find many people will tell you thay don't have good bass. You know different. Even my "tweeters" have reasonable bass.
Regards,
Geoff.
I have two books by Briggs, "Loudspeakers" and "Cabinet Handbook". Both he tries to talk in general terms, rather than giving specific designs. That is, he is not overtly plugging Wharfdale.
However for a 10" roll surround with a resonance of 45 Hz or less, he suggests a 2 cu.ft cabinet tuned to 40 Hz. The sketch shows a 28" high,14"wide,12" deep box (outside measurements), with a slotted full size (14x12) 3/8 ply shelf , ( called a "filter"), mounted 17" from top. 4 Slots 1/16 by 8 1/4 long starting from front edge, spaced 1 1/2 apart. Free ends supported by 1" batten, so effectively 7 1/4" slots.
2" diam Port 3" below filter.
Box material 3/8 ply, lined with 1/2" celotex glued to the ply, (whatever that is, a form of hardboard I think),with all sides above filter lined with absorbent material.
The filter is claimed to reduce unwanted mid frequency output through the port, better load the speaker at very low frequencies, ie stop cone flap below resonance and hence provide cleaner, ( but slightly less) bass, reduce one of the impedance humps making tuning less critical, reducing standing waves within the enclosure, and provide stiffening to the cabinet walls.
He also gives a wall mounted 1 1/2 cu ft BR cabinet for wall mounting but relies on the wall to hold up the bass.
Remember these designs were based on the idea of tuning the BR cabinet to the units free air resonance, and refined by ear. One difficulty was the units resonance tended to lower with age, hence the desire for a cabinet with less critical tuning. You may be better to measure your units and design with modern software. But be prepared for big cabinets in this case.
Good luck.
However for a 10" roll surround with a resonance of 45 Hz or less, he suggests a 2 cu.ft cabinet tuned to 40 Hz. The sketch shows a 28" high,14"wide,12" deep box (outside measurements), with a slotted full size (14x12) 3/8 ply shelf , ( called a "filter"), mounted 17" from top. 4 Slots 1/16 by 8 1/4 long starting from front edge, spaced 1 1/2 apart. Free ends supported by 1" batten, so effectively 7 1/4" slots.
2" diam Port 3" below filter.
Box material 3/8 ply, lined with 1/2" celotex glued to the ply, (whatever that is, a form of hardboard I think),with all sides above filter lined with absorbent material.
The filter is claimed to reduce unwanted mid frequency output through the port, better load the speaker at very low frequencies, ie stop cone flap below resonance and hence provide cleaner, ( but slightly less) bass, reduce one of the impedance humps making tuning less critical, reducing standing waves within the enclosure, and provide stiffening to the cabinet walls.
He also gives a wall mounted 1 1/2 cu ft BR cabinet for wall mounting but relies on the wall to hold up the bass.
Remember these designs were based on the idea of tuning the BR cabinet to the units free air resonance, and refined by ear. One difficulty was the units resonance tended to lower with age, hence the desire for a cabinet with less critical tuning. You may be better to measure your units and design with modern software. But be prepared for big cabinets in this case.
Good luck.
celotex was the forerunner to tontine, or polyester fibre. It was denser, almost like cotton wool, and far superior in my book.
Martin King has designed OBs for super tens, which the owner-builder is delighted with. Martin may have all the T/S parameters.
One thing is certain, they do like big cabinets. Mine in 2cub ft felt restricted, or "sqeezeboxy" to me. I'd go for 2.5 min for original drivers.
Geoff.
Martin King has designed OBs for super tens, which the owner-builder is delighted with. Martin may have all the T/S parameters.
One thing is certain, they do like big cabinets. Mine in 2cub ft felt restricted, or "sqeezeboxy" to me. I'd go for 2.5 min for original drivers.
Geoff.
Hi Pat, if you haven't started on your cabs yet, you may be interested in this thread. Good firm and mellow bass in 1 cub ft. Bear in mind, my Wharfedales have been modified. I haven't had a chance to try the original alnicos yet.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=93686
Cheers,
Geoff.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=93686
Cheers,
Geoff.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.