'LGT' Construction Diary - Page 11 - 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 26th January 2007, 03:12 PM   #101
diyAudio Member
 
Idefixes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mulhouse - Alsace
Send a message via ICQ to Idefixes
Hi ShinOBIWAN,
All pictures on Perceive v2.0 topics are down. Is there any place where we can take look at all the pictures you have posted?

Marc
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 03:49 PM   #102
Tenson is offline Tenson  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kent
I'm surprised you have gone for an 8" and a 5"... I think my choice might have been using maybe an 18cm or a 23cm C-Quenze from about 80Hz-1.5KHz instead of splitting it up. Did you not feel 2x 18cm drivers would have done the job okay for extending down to 80Hz?

Still it seems you have ordered now. Very nice design I have to say!
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 03:52 PM   #103
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by Idefixes
Hi ShinOBIWAN,
All pictures on Perceive v2.0 topics are down. Is there any place where we can take look at all the pictures you have posted?

Marc
Hi Marc

I've bit the bullet and am paying for image hosting now. This will allow to host all images and not have to keep deleting older ones to make way for the new, you should find that the majority of the images in the Perceive 2 thread are working again. The early ones in that thread I can't fix because they where hosted on a different server but the rest should be OK from about page 30 onwards.

They're pretty spread out though because the thread is quite large. Here's a couple if you can't be bothered to hunt through:

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
The more you know who you are and what you want, the less things will ever be the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 04:17 PM   #104
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by Tenson
I'm surprised you have gone for an 8" and a 5"... I think my choice might have been using maybe an 18cm or a 23cm C-Quenze from about 80Hz-1.5KHz instead of splitting it up. Did you not feel 2x 18cm drivers would have done the job okay for extending down to 80Hz?

Still it seems you have ordered now. Very nice design I have to say!
Hey Simon

A 5" cone covering that range perhaps doesn't have the right weight so you lose some of the slam and impact. Likewise using an 8" crossed to a good ribbon like the RAAL might not offer the same integration that a 5" would with its much light cone mass and higher acceleration factor. I've aimed for effectively targeting each range with a compromise between cone mass and radiating area for greater dynamics, lower distortion and greater headroom. Moving the XO point upto 200hz for the little C-Quenze mid will quite significantly reduce IMD and THD and the pair of larger 8" will be happy running down to 40-50hz. I also wouldn't like to use a side firing sub upto 80hz vs. a pair of 8" rolling off naturally and the sub covering the very bottom.

I've tried to design a full range speaker that still has the virtues of a floorstander such as weigh and solidity through the bass region and also a standmount with its midrange and imaging strengths as well as a subwoofer. I had to weigh this up against the usual problem of size as well as try to best optimise for lower distortion. Whether that will be the case when they're finished is another matter but for now its making sense.
__________________
The more you know who you are and what you want, the less things will ever be the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 04:20 PM   #105
diyAudio Member
 
Idefixes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Mulhouse - Alsace
Send a message via ICQ to Idefixes
Thanks!!!!!

Marc
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 05:03 PM   #106
ALDO is offline ALDO  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
absolutely enormous!
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 05:07 PM   #107
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally posted by ALDO
absolutely enormous!
They did go on a slimfast diet but gave up after someone offered a Mars bar.
__________________
The more you know who you are and what you want, the less things will ever be the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 05:15 PM   #108
ALDO is offline ALDO  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 06:43 PM   #109
diyAudio Member
 
ShinOBIWAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
I've been trying to get my head around TS theory and calculations so as to tailor an 8" Flex unit driver specifically for the 40-200hz range. Ideally with a modelled F3 of around 50hz in a 20ltr sealed enclosure. Those are the constraint I have to work with.

I don't want to approach Per with my order until I have something that is actually feasible otherwise I'll just end up looking like an idiot

What I've come up with so far is:

Qts: 3.29
Qes: 0.4
Qms: 1.85
Fs: 25hz
VAS: 40ltrs
Mms: 70g

With this I get the box and driver resonances below 50hz and the impedance phase is smooth from 50hz to 200hz. Its also -3dB at 50hz in a sealed 20ltr box with an over system Q of 0.6.

The other approach was to forget the keeping the box resonance out of the passband and go with something geared for a little more effeciency and lighter mms:

Qts: 3.81
Qms: 1.6
Qes: 0.5
Fs: 33hz
VAS: 40ltrs
Mms: 40g

Any thoughts?

I guess I should really just pick Per brain about this but at least wanted to have something valid to work from.
__________________
The more you know who you are and what you want, the less things will ever be the same.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2007, 08:43 PM   #110
Did it Himself
diyAudio Member
 
richie00boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Gloucestershire, England, UK
You've either got your Qes, Qms and Qts all mixed up or there's something wrong. Box Q can never be lower than Qts.

I would aim for Qts around 0.35-0.45. Qms and Qes will have to be juggled according to motor and suspension requirements/constraints. It might also be worth specifying a target BL range, I feel a highish (>8) BL gives more slam and control to the sound which is what I think you're after.

As you know your box volume you can then work back to what Vas would give you the desired box Q.

The trouble is a lot of parameters interact. For instance Vas will be influenced by Fs.
__________________
www.readresearch.co.uk my website for UK diy audio people - designs, PCBs, kits and more.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:27 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