Mbrennwa, one remark,
Tortuosity leads to longer propagation path of air molecules, NOT sound wave, so speed of sound cannot be changed into the box, only the speed of moving air and its movement length:
if you were to consider that sound is propagating inside a damped(stuffed) box, then you must admit a very huge versatility of paths throughout the box up to then vent:
In such case, how cpuld any wave keep its integrity and not be completely destroyed down to noise?? BTW, this is how we break the ocean's wavezs before they hit the shore too heavily..
Another thing: If Damping efficiency changes with frequency AND speed of sound changes with the action of damping, how would the system manage to not generate large distortion levels ??
Hope this helps.
Tortuosity leads to longer propagation path of air molecules, NOT sound wave, so speed of sound cannot be changed into the box, only the speed of moving air and its movement length:
if you were to consider that sound is propagating inside a damped(stuffed) box, then you must admit a very huge versatility of paths throughout the box up to then vent:
In such case, how cpuld any wave keep its integrity and not be completely destroyed down to noise?? BTW, this is how we break the ocean's wavezs before they hit the shore too heavily..
Another thing: If Damping efficiency changes with frequency AND speed of sound changes with the action of damping, how would the system manage to not generate large distortion levels ??
Hope this helps.
I quite like it. I think I have alluded to the same idea. I am reminded about the Einsteinian (that word just passed the spell checker
) idea that it wasn't the speed of light that changed, it was time. But if "tortuosity" achieved by fill makes the box look larger to the vent, then Fb saddle will go down to a lower frequency. The Elsinore box is about 75 Litres Vb and now looks like 100-110 Hertz instead. This does a number of things of course, like increased damping according to classic thinking and so on. But it also seems to have an effect on the bass that is more like that of a TL, and I like it.
Joe
Helps? Maybe it is all semantics? But a longer propagation path means that something is slowing down, something is delayed, not just attenuated?
It works!!!
The rest is just theory.
“No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical.” Niels Bohr
Great....I haven't even built my boxes and now I need to worry about my screws? LOL. I put things on hold last December when I had trouble finding a local CNC or cabinet builder available to cut/build my boxes. I have recently began planning to finish the project. Everything is here, obviously xovers assembled, box material ready...just want them to be as nice to look at as they sound so I'm still trying to find a source to build or at least to cut the panels.
I've caught up on this thread and good to see nothing about the speaker design has changed..and neither has the discussion. Talk about a peeing competition (and I say that with all due respect to the designer). This 350 page thread would be about 50 without all the arguments about why the design works....if it works it works.
Hey - just putting together my crossovers for a Mark 5 build and trying to figure out a good inductor arrangement... Any comments or suggestions on the attached picture?
Also - my understanding is that Elsinores are not meant to be bi-amped, and therefore on the crossover box I should be able to place 1 set of binding posts with 3 wires to each crossover section from the same originating source?
Thanks a lot everyone,
Vic
Also - my understanding is that Elsinores are not meant to be bi-amped, and therefore on the crossover box I should be able to place 1 set of binding posts with 3 wires to each crossover section from the same originating source?
Thanks a lot everyone,
Vic
Attachments
I too searched high and low for someone to cnc my panels.. I wound up building a table saw sled (2 hrs) and dialing in my 25 year old portable table saw!
a router jig later and had at it.
My stock only came in 12" wide x 48 long, so I had to biscuit join to make the sides longer. They came out amazing.
I lurked on this forum (this thread) for probably 2 years before I decided to "get off the pot" Except for the passionate posts, I have yet to see any negative comments about the actual performance. I have to say, I think my posts were probably the least favorable I have read lol
I truly loved my last set of speakers. I guess between break in and getting accustomed to the dynamic of these, I was a little (very little) less than estatic.
About a month ago, I dusted off the old set of speakers, and tried them again...
All I can say is that session lasted for less than 10 min. I honestly am not sure of what I ever saw in them.
That said, months later, I am 200% satisfied with the elsinore's.
When people come over, and I have just a little something playing in the back ground, you can see them transfix onto the sound... For those who can hear, they almost always say, WOW... that sounds amazing..
So, All I can say, is make sure the boxes are finished, painted, stained what ever before you listen to them.... I now know why folks just give them a quick try and 8 months later still have them unfinished lolol....
Yes, it's those arguments and desire for deeper understanding that make it interesting.
Been there done that. I pulled my old HT Fusion 12 speaks out to see if they were as fun as I remember. They were, so much so that I began to question my current home theater stage which are Maximus 12's for my HT from DIYSG. By all accounts they should crush the Fusions.
They come with midbass modules with a 12" woofer. For the life of me I could not get them under control I had nulls, and peaks, wondering staging, and resonance. I tried upside down, facing the wall, facing sideways, closer, further away. I spent 2 weeks building and installing room treatments and never could get them to sound the way I expected given all the crazy praise they had received. I just accepted them as just ok.
This week, as a last resort I decided to reverse polarity on the woofers as I've had success with that in the past. I did the right side and it was almost like magic. The things just began to sing. So smooth and dynamic. Dead center staging. I was shocked. Time to double check everything.
When I pulled the left driver I found that during my install I had mistakenly reversed the left woofer. TWO YEARS of high expectations and a constant nagging that something must be off. Got everything right and they are wow for HT and pretty dang fun for music. Lesson learned.
I can appreciate that. But wading through 350 pages for us mortals just to find something pertinent to the speakers themselves is a bit daunting. It must be about 90% technical mumbo jumbo and 10% speakers.
That said, I'm glad a couple of you guys chimed in on one of my threads last year and led me to the Elsinores vs. the Solstice. I really wanted an end gamer for me and I'm looking forward to getting them finished before spring hits.
Joe, would you please post a plot of group delay for your bass, without room involvement?
By removing/damping some of the bass of the vented box, you may be bringing it back closer to closed-ish... Modern TL understanding finds that useful alignments tend to resemble closed systems.
The response is based on three measurements, some near and some far field, both to vent at the rear and drivers at the front. So group delay can only be simulated in SoundEasy and it just doesn't work. I choose to trust my hard earned instincts. But SoundEasy is then used to model the Xover and current EQ based on real measurements that are very reliable. The problem with measuring LF and using near field measurements to get quasi-anechoic results is the problem of microphone proximity effect. John Atkinson has said much on this subject. But the Elsinore alignment gets closed to being a Bessel in terms of type of alignment, so the group delay would be similar to that. I hope.
The way I understand it, the ideal TL absorbs the entire backwave. The practical TL does not. If there are 'modern' TLs that does absorb the backwave entirely, then I am a bit behind the times. I am quite OK to admit that.
Cheers, Joe
Ok Joe, could you post anything from which one could derive a plot of group delay, with the extra damping added. Even better if you could plot it against the non-heavily damped version.
We mustn't overthink this. If it looks like a closed box response then it should sound like the equivalent closed box.
The ideal aperiodic TL has no output at the terminus. Modern modelers have given us acess to exporing a much broader range of TLs, and how they are tailored is a design decision.
dave
Not everything is going to be "perfect". (..and the result you've got certainly looks very good.)..and note that I never spec'ed terminal strips, but did spec. each type of wire for each lead. (..plus my recommendation of Tony Gee; note that he doesn't use terminal strips, or perhaps very rarely does.)
Still, might not make a bit of difference.
..bummer about (not) finding local cabinet makers. Remember that Steve Manning is doing this sort of work, but unfortunately isn't local for you.
A New Adventure
Last edited:
Joe, why do you come back with "proximity effect thing"? There was a long discussion about the proximity effect in this thread a while ago, so you should know that your "proximity effect" argument is not right.
That said, you seem to have a number of special ideas hard-wired to your thinking, and you keep preaching them over and over: current distortion, damping that increases box volume, proximity effect in low-frequency measurements, standing waves in loudspeaker enclosures (or their magic non-existence), etc. People around here have been trying hard to explain these things to you by using simple, straight-forward physics and engineering principles that have been well established in audio design for many decades. However, for reasons I don't understand, you prefer to preach your skewed "alternative facts" over and over.
I really hope I am wrong, but to me your preaching comes across as if you are trying to impress those who don't know much about loudspeaker design by claiming unrelated or some never-heard-of theories and effects. In my opinion, this is very unfair to the Elsinore builders who want to learn about how loudspeakers work.
Whatever your reasons and intentions may be, this is "your" thread. You are responsible for teaching your ideas to people who are trying to learn. To me, your preaching of wrong explanations feels very awkward. I have tried to contribute to the scientific and engineering content in this thread, but I do not want to be a part of this any longer. I am out of here.
Good bye!