| abpea |
Several months ago I started building the Jordan JX92S TL cabinet (Kronos Essence clone) found on Jordan's website. Just when I was about done I read a thread on diyAudio about a new cabinet designed for the little Jordan driver that was suppose to sound exponentially better than the TL cabinet I was finishing. I filed the thread away and got busy doing something else.
A couple of weeks ago I was back in speaker building mode and decided to give the new design a run. I contacted GM who pointed me to Jay Fisher who had built the cabinets. I want to thank both GM and Jay for all their generous help and feedback.
GM's design is a mass loaded transmission line speaker. The cabinet is easy to build and because I was doing this as a proof-of-concept project I built the cabinet as simply and quickly as possible which means I used glued butt joints all the way around. The ply-wood was cheap 3/4" six-ply with voids because that's what I had lying around (see attached picture).
When I hooked the MLTLs up to the amp for the first time I realized I had overstuffed the cabinet. After making some stuffing adjustments these cabinets came alive.
The amount of bass GM milks out of these speakers and cabinets is simply amazing! The first day I listened to these speakers for a good seven hours. My play list included the Boston Pops, Jacqueline du Pre' playing the Elgar Concerto, lots and lots of Jimmy Smith, Bill Evans and Stan Getz, Del McCourty, Bella Fleck and other blue grass, Ben Webster, Lester Young, Miles Davis, Coultrane, Evanescence, Nora Jones, Ella Fitzgerald, Led Zepplin, REO Speedwagon, Kansas, Diana Krall, Sade, a great Windom Hill acoustical sampler and Eva Cassidy and others.
The little Jordan was especially sweet on female voices and the acoustical numbers just as you would expect from a quality full range driver. When I closed my eyes I honestly thought Diana Krall was sitting right in front of me the sound was so intimate.
But the best part, the part that astonished and delighted me the most was the bottom end that was coming out of these boxes. Absolutely amazing!! There was one Jimmy Smith song where he pushes the low E(?) peddle on the Hammand B3 and nearly knocked me out of my chair. I auditioned the speakers for some friends and after a couple of songs one of them asked me where the sub-woofer was because they thought I had a sub stuck behind the couch, the bass was that good.
These speakers are easy to build and sound fabulous! Even more the cabinet has a high WAF factor. My plans are to get some good wood and build a real pair of these speakers in the next couple of weeks which I imagine will only sound better with a carefully made cabinet.
GM thanks for an excellent speaker design. These things have a beautiful, full, rich voice that has amazed everyone who has heard them so far.
If you're looking for a fairly compact speaker with a high WAF I highly recommend GM's MLTL Jordan speakers.
Bruce |
|
|
| GM |
Glad you like them and thanks for sharing! The credit goes to Ted Jordan though for specing T/S values that makes it a 'natural' for most cab alignments, and with enough excursion to tune it to a lowish Fs without fear of overdriving it at rated power.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to your comparison of it to the Kronos Essence clone.
GM |
|
|
| smbrown |
| Can you post the design? Thanks! |
|
|
| abpea |
smbrown,
Jay told me to post his drawings (Thanks Jay!), here you go.
Cabinet front: |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
The drawings are missing some key numbers. How long and how wide is the port tube? How tall is the enclosed part of the box? How tall is that horn-like area? Is there an MLK worksheet for it?
Added later: I see now that there is a number for the height, but it is too fuzzy (on my monitor at least) to read. Also, I don't know if it is the distance to the floor, or the distance to the bottom of the enclosed area above the horn area. I see a number for "baffle" something, but it's too fuzzy also.
Soo... Could you post all the internal dimensions? I would sure appreciate it. |
|
|
| zeno |
I have build, fairly recently, a pair of Jim Griffiths ported designs. Small bookshelf speakers.
I am not too fond of them, quite a booming bass.
I might try this approach to see if these speakers perform better. Do you have any frequencycurves? And do you use any prefiltering like Jordan suggests to highten up the bassresponse? |
|
|
| BrianGT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Jones
The drawings are missing some key numbers. How long and how wide is the port tube? How tall is the enclosed part of the box? How tall is that horn-like area? Is there an MLK worksheet for it?
Added later: I see now that there is a number for the height, but it is too fuzzy (on my monitor at least) to read. Also, I don't know if it is the distance to the floor, or the distance to the bottom of the enclosed area above the horn area. I see a number for "baffle" something, but it's too fuzzy also.
Soo... Could you post all the internal dimensions? I would sure appreciate it. |
> vent = 2"dia x 5"L
more information here:
http://fullrangedriver.com/tiki-vie...find=&forumId=1
--
Brian |
|
|
| GM |
| quote: | | I have build, fairly recently, a pair of Jim Griffiths ported designs. Small bookshelf speakers. |
Interesting! I have auditioned JG's originals on several occasions and didn't get this impression, just that they were very rolled off in the LF. Indeed, measurement showed an almost billiard table flat response. Anyway, try tuning them lower or reducing the BSC.
More info, including dims, here:
http://www.fullrangedriver.com/tiki...find=&forumId=1
GM |
|
|
| abpea |
Straight from GM:
+++++++++++++++++
An ML-TL OTOH yields more cab efficiency, something the low efficiency JX92S needs in spades. I know a couple of folks who are very pleased with this one where Vb = Vas and F3 = Fs (assuming SS driven):
L = 31.04"
width/depth = 6.97"w x 4.31"d
driver down from top = 11.14"
vent = 2"dia x 5"L
stuffing = 0.54lb
Since the driver will be well below ear height when seated, extending the pipe down the appropriate amount to get the driver up leaves a nice sized cavity to mass load the cab with kitty litter/sand/whatever. I also recommend a heavy top to further mass load it, as well as a driver brace, such as this tunable one: http://melhuish.org/audio/images/press-screw.gif
GM
++++++++++++++++++
The bottom of the cabinet - below where the port exits - is adjusted up or down depending on where you want the driver to be relative to your listening position. I believe Jay Fisher builds his cabinets so the driver is at the same height or slightly higher than his ear when sitting in his listening chair. I believe GM mentioned he likes to position his drivers much higher which result in a much taller cabinet..
See the thread referenced above in the Full-Range Driver Forum for a more extensive discussion.
I'll also be happy to answer any questions I can to help out.
Bruce |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
I've got an MLK worksheet that I was fooling around with. I don't remember if I posted it and someone dumped on the idea, or what. If so, please dump on it again.
Volume is 21 liters (about 33% larger than the design under consideration). It's quite a bit shorter, at 22 inches. The port is 1" radius [sic] by 7" length. Stuffing is only .2 lb/ft^3.
The SPL graph is attached. |
|
|
| GM |
?? It may need some BSC if the room doesn't compensate enough, but otherwise it is fine, it just has less pipe action due to the shorter length. Not that this is a problem since with a Vb > Vas it will just cause some minor peaking at Fb. The only other issue is a minor increase in exceeding Xmax above Fb.
GM |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
| Okay, I'm getting the urge. Where's the best place for a Californian to order these speakers? |
|
|
| woody |
http:/www.creativesound.ca/
As far as I know they are the only distriburator in North America.
Woody |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by abpea
Straight from GM:
(snip)
L = 31.04"
width/depth = 6.97"w x 4.31"d
driver down from top = 11.14"
vent = 2"dia x 5"L
stuffing = 0.54lb
|
On to the my second DIY speakers! I'm about to order the drivers! I've been given a big-*&^ table saw and I'm not afraid to use it!
A question, tho - I've simmed these dimensions & checked that they work out, but the cabinet plans posted have the front baffle at 6.97" wide (let's call it 7"). This would give an internal dimension of 5.5" x 4.3" according to the drawings...
So - is the width of the cab 7" or 8.5" (giving 7" internal)?
Thx much
mk |
|
|
| GM |
All dims are inside (i.d.), as all posted designs should be.
Since we tend to 'see' what we expect to see, I hadn't noticed any possible dwg. discrepancies and this info getting left out of posts after my initial one on the FR forum many moons ago, so I don't know for sure what folks have built. They won't sound as 'full' if they are o.d. and the driver will be slightly misaligned, though I doubt it's audible.
GM |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
Is there a frequency response graph on the web for these drivers? I can't find one.
BTW, according to MLK's worksheet, it is possible to reduce the pipe cross section and lengthen the pipe some. Just keep the internal volume around Vas or a little over. That introduces a little ripple, but probably not a significant amount. |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Jones
Is there a frequency response graph on the web for these drivers? I can't find one.
BTW, according to MLK's worksheet, it is possible to reduce the pipe cross section and lengthen the pipe some. Just keep the internal volume around Vas or a little over. That introduces a little ripple, but probably not a significant amount. |
Never mind. I found it.
http://ejjordan.co.uk/JX92-graphs.html |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dave Jones
BTW, according to MLK's worksheet, it is possible to reduce the pipe cross section and lengthen the pipe some. Just keep the internal volume around Vas or a little over. That introduces a little ripple, but probably not a significant amount. |
Is there a reason I should lengthen the pipe? I did the sims in MJK's worksheet varying length with constant volume...
The pipe cross section is already only 2.5*Sd, with the internal volume of 933 in^3.
mk |
|
|
| nonamekid |
| I use a pair of the Jordans you mention in my project studio as countertop nearfield monitors and think they are about the best speakers I have ever heard - no kidding. I mounted them in the smallest closed cube enclosure from Ted's web site and run them with a pair of Peerless 8" subs also in closed cabs about 12" square face and 14" deep. I use 2 amps and an active crossover at 110 hz. The Jordans sit on top of the subs which are on low stands about 4" high. This way I can get the cones of the speaker pairs precisely alligned (it makes an audible difference - also I'm not a fan of ported speakers many of which seem to me not to be very flat). I used a test tone generator extensively on my room and used it to set the rolloff profile on the crossover. You can get modules to change the crossover frequency if you like but my room has a mode at 110 so that point works well. I tried the Jordans in one of his bookshelf style ported boxes at first and didn't like it real well. This setup is amazing though. IMO the best thing about the Jordans is not the low end of their "full range" capabilities, but the fact that they transition smoothly from low mid through hi mid and right on up without crossover. I hear almost all 2.5k typical crossovers as gritty and nasty - couldn't stand typical studio nearfields. The Jordan's image incredibly well and get away from the problem (most sensitive part of your hearing) hi-mid crossover area. Regarding bass - the stereo subs are fantastic - no stereo imaging issues you can get with a single sub, reasonably space friendly and responsive even at subsonic frequencies (you can feel them below 20hz even though you can't hear them - like the 32 ft organ pedal pipes in Holst's Planets #5). Also, getting the low end out of the Jordans, where they really don't excel, does them a big favor to my ear by removing slower vibrations that can screw up higher sounds. Also, if you want good imaging, flat low end makes a huge difference. I played around with this setup for about 3 years before I got it where I like it, but am very pleased with its response and quality now. Very honest, and very musical. BTW I have used spectroanalysis and EQ quite alot on my system/room and messed with traps and such - nothing did nearly as much as getting my speakers sorted out. The Peerless 8" subs are cheap and quite amazing for a sub of any size - not big powerhandlers but quite capable at reasonable levels (I monitor at moderate levels in the near field). |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
| quote: | Originally posted by cheesehead
Is there a reason I should lengthen the pipe? I did the sims in MJK's worksheet varying length with constant volume...
The pipe cross section is already only 2.5*Sd, with the internal volume of 933 in^3.
mk |
The main reason would be to make the speaker taller and skinnier if that's what you want. I guess you might be able to eek out another dB at 40Hz, but the main reason would be desired box shape. |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
Just for the fun of it, I modeled the TL that's on the Jordan web site. I don't know if I got everything exactly right. (Someone else want to try it?)
Here's the SPL graph. Sure enough, the bass response and ripple are not nearly as nice as the ML TL design. |
|
|
| GM |
| quote: | | Is there a reason I should lengthen the pipe? I did the sims in MJK's worksheet varying length with constant volume... |
I don't recommend reducing the CSA much, if any. If you want more pipe loading, ergo a lower Fb, then maintain the same CSA and try longer lengths. The optimum driver position will shift upwards some and the vent length will shorten.
FWIW, this came up in another thread and I calc'd a max practical length of 48" using the same CSA, density, vent diameter, but with driver down ~15.46"/2.75" vent length. AFAIK, no one's built it so as always YMMV, though I see no reason why it won't perform as predicted.
GM |
|
|
| lilolee |
Well these look good as a first project, and I've even got a kind of thumbs up from the wife.
Just one question, when it says 0.54ib stuffing, what does this mean?
Cheers
Lee |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by nonamekid
I mounted them in the smallest closed cube enclosure from Ted's web site and run them with a pair of Peerless 8" subs also in closed cabs about 12" square face and 14" deep. I use 2 amps and an active crossover at 110 hz. The Jordans sit on top of the subs which are on low stands about 4" high. |
That's about where I eventually want to go...
If the Jx92's work out well, I'd like to eventually move them to surround/center duties and build 2-ways (using either the Jx92 or Jx53) as mains, as per this prior thread.
mk |
|
|
| nonamekid |
Yes, good thread - thanks. I have thought of using the JX53s in a similar config to my current one, but crossed higher, say about 200 or a even bit higher. I don't know what they sound like though - it they're anything like the 92s they would be good. I'd still use the the Peerless subs, I think - Jordan's bass drivers are pricey and can't quite do what the Peerless can (and they're cheap!) The Peerless subs are good and flat up to 1000hz and with the closed cabs of the right size go way down real flat. Specs: Fs: 25 Hz * SPL: 87 dB 2.83V/1m * Vas: 3.07 cu. ft. * Qms: 2.65 * Qes: .54 * Qts: .45 * Xmax: 5.5mm * I'm sure the 53s would be good too, but the 92s sound so good I probably won't get around to it anytime soon. I may experiment with different x-over frequencies to see how my room responds. Probably many other good full range drivers would be great in this kind of setup too.
The pair of subs and active x-over was really the key to freeing the sound for me. I tried a single sub centrally located, but it's box was big and placement in my studio was difficult. (I could hear its location too, despite common wisdom saying that I wouldn't!) It's amazing how much ambience lives in the 20 - 100hz zone (and lower), especially the sound of large concert halls. Big rooms have low modes which I think contribute greatly to the sense of the space (especially in classical recordings) and can only be reproduced with good subs. It's a subtle effect. It's amazing how little information seems to come out of my subs if I run them alone. Yet their addition to the 92s is magical. |
|
|
| Colin |
The 53s go higher and sound slightly more open but a single driver probably needs to cross over higher than 200Hz (depending on slope). Ted recommends 500Hz, first order.
BTW, the Jordan bass units are no longer available, due to manufacturing difficulties for the relatively small quantities involved (and the fact that no one else seems to have woken up to how advanced they are). I believe Ted is researching commercial alternatives.
Back to the JX92 ML TL - assuming the cross sectional area is kept the same, is there any reason not to use a traingular cross-section cabinet, rather than rectangle?
Colin |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
BTW, the Jordan bass units are no longer available, due to manufacturing difficulties for the relatively small quantities involved (and the fact that no one else seems to have woken up to how advanced they are). |
:bawling: :bawling: :bawling: :bawling:
hope it's just those... www.creativesound.ca was down to their last 8 Jx92s when I ordered...
mk |
|
|
| GM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
BTW, the Jordan bass units are no longer available, due to manufacturing difficulties for the relatively small quantities involved (and the fact that no one else seems to have woken up to how advanced they are). I believe Ted is researching commercial alternatives.
Back to the JX92 ML TL - assuming the cross sectional area is kept the same, is there any reason not to use a traingular cross-section cabinet, rather than rectangle?
Colin |
Bummer! I just recently learned that he had them and had started doing a few sims...... Combined with the JX92S, a two way TL or ML-TL sims a pretty spectacular design and I'm surprised none of the ~FR entrepreneurs appears to offer either a kit or finished version.
Shape is irrelevant as long as the CSA remains ~constant and any bend radii are sufficient to pass the intended BW. A triangle will be more efficient since it has one less turbulent corner and no parallel walls, though in such a small cab I doubt the differences would be audible enough to be obvious due to being pressurized over ~ all of its intended BW. In larger cabs driven with either large or multiple drivers, it's well worth the extra woodworking IMO. Stuck in corners, they are the best performing speaker systems I've designed/built.
GM |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
BTW, the Jordan bass units are no longer available, due to manufacturing difficulties for the relatively small quantities involved (and the fact that no one else seems to have woken up to how advanced they are). I believe Ted is researching commercial alternatives. |
Damn... awefully nice drivers those... well i guess that will increase the value of the JX150s i have still in the boxes.
dave |
|
|
| pinkmouse |
I seem to remember Steve Margolis (7V) said something this time last year about Jordan giving up manufacturing completely.
However, this is probably not what you all want to hear... |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pinkmouse
Steve Margolis (7V) said something this time last year about Jordan giving up manufacturing completely. |
Wasn't that, that Bandor was getting out of the OEM market?
dave |
|
|
| Colin |
I saw Ted a couple of weeks ago and can confirm that it's only the bass units which have ceased manufacture. Some of the components were supplied by a company which requires much higher OEM orders than those particular drivers justify. If he can find an alternative manufacturer, they may go back into production.
The JX92 and JX53 are definitely continuing!
His website will be updated soon with details.
Colin |
|
|
| Colin |
| quote: | Originally posted by GM
Shape is irrelevant as long as the CSA remains ~constant and any bend radii are sufficient to pass the intended BW. A triangle will be more efficient since it has one less turbulent corner and no parallel walls
GM |
Thanks for that. Your JX92 MLTL seems a prime candidate for that shape, giving room to have a front-facing port if necessary.
BTW, what are the performance trade offs of your sim of the 48" tall version.
Colin
PS Ted mentioned that the JX92 would be a good partner for the JX53 for smaller systems. The sensitivities need adjusting, however. |
|
|
| Colin |
Drat. This seems to be another thread I've killed off by asking too many questions.
Colin the Thread Slayer. |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
Drat. This seems to be another thread I've killed off by asking too many questions.
Colin the Thread Slayer. |
Nah, the "thread" is alive and well; I'm cutting & gluing wood & waiting on my drivers to build these things. Using the rotozip and router help to decrease my HF hearing so that these full-rangers will sound better!
The only thing I changed was to make the cab front a little longer so that I can bolt in the bottom piece with the port and keep it hidden. I figure if the port is easily removable I might even be tempted to try tuning it after assembly.
Pity you waited until after I started cutting to bring up the triangular x-section idea, tho!
mk |
|
|
| abpea |
Yeah, I thought a triangular cross-section was a neat idea too. I played around with it a little and came up with a trapezoidial form that would allow you to have a front firing port... I think. Of course I would want and design change to be blessed by GM ;) before I got serious about it.
A trapezoid has four sides with two being parallel. My proposed design has the following inside dimensions:
First parallel side = 2" (this is the back)
Second parallel side = 6.875" (this is the front)
Distance between the two parallel sides = 6.770"
Draw the first side, then draw the second side centered on the first one 6.770" below the first one then draw lines to connect the end points and you have the cross-section.
GM's original MLTL CSA = 30.0407 with a total volume = 932.46332
This trapezoidial version has a CSA = 30.04187 and a total volume = 932.4996
This form would allow you to exit the port out the front, although I'm not sure exactly where the port would be placed.
Comments? |
|
|
| abpea |
The above trapezoidial cross-section uses all of GM's other inside dimensions for the original MLTL:
L = 31.04"
XO = 11.14"
Vent = 2" diag x 5" Length
Stuffing = 0.54lb |
|
|
| stefanobilliani |
Hello ,
Between two days or so the speakers will thake its form here , the JX92 are already playing in other enclosure.
How has to be fitten the stuffing material?
At the bottom ?
Right in the back of the driver?
Both?
:) |
|
|
| Colin |
Anyone cutting out wood, look away now. The other neat thing about the triangle idea is that the width of the internal surfaces works out at 7.75 inches, which avoids those tricky fractions.
The triangle would also place the JX92 at their recommended toe-in angles, when the enclosure is against a back wall.
Howeverr I'd like to hear more about the trade offs on the 48" high MLTL before starting my boxes ...
Colin |
|
|
| GM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
.
BTW, what are the performance trade offs of your sim of the 48" tall version.
Howeverr I'd like to hear more about the trade offs on the 48" high MLTL before starting my boxes ...
Drat. This seems to be another thread I've killed off by asking too many questions.
Colin |
I have a great idea, since I've already given my thoughts on its predicted performance when I spent some my precious quality time to do this design for YOU on the Fullrange Forum, how about YOU repay me by building a prototype of each and share with us your impressions and list each of their strong/weak points (if any). Who knows, if you sim them in MJK's MLTQWT worksheet and compare them to what you hear, you just might learn something.
Not to single you out per se, but this, and numerous other threads on a wide variety of forums have over time increasingly shifted from folks asking for a little guidance or insight into a particular aspect of design so they could go off and educate themselves, build a prototype, then report results as Jay/Bruce did with the original design; to folks who leave me with the strong impression that those of us who have already 'paid our dues' are expected to share it all and do everything short of building/shipping them free gratis.
Obviously, this doesn't apply to everyone, just a trend I've noticed that's souring me on continuing to be so 'free' with my time, so yeah, you've 'killed' me from responding to any more of yours or any other's Qs who I preceive as part of this trend until ya'll have done your part of the 'give n' take' process.
`| quote: | Originally posted by abpea
.
Yeah, I thought a triangular cross-section was a neat idea too. I played around with it a little and came up with a trapezoidial form that would allow you to have a front firing port... I think. Of course I would want and design change to be blessed by GM before I got serious about it.
This form would allow you to exit the port out the front, although I'm not sure exactly where the port would be placed.
Comments?
abpea |
?? I've already given my thoughts WRT using other shapes, so if they are followed, then by default they are 'blessed', at least by me.
Once properly damped, the vent's output consists of such long WLs that it doesn't matter what side it's on as long as it's near/at the bottom (in this particular design). Rear or down firing increases gain down at/around Fb if near the floor and/or wall, so may be of benefit in certain rooms and be too 'boomy' in others, requiring either more damping or a longer vent, so ideally you either measure the room's response at the intended locations and design a ~mirror image speaker response or design/build for max gain and use digital EQ to shape the in-room response as required.
GM |
|
|
| Colin |
Apologies to GM - I didn't mean to be a pest about this design. I'm on a Mac, so don't have access to the MathCad resources, otherwise I'd happily spend my own time on the simulations.
Fair point too about the prototypes. I've got a JX92 line of my own on the go at the moment and will have a go at the 48" MLTL enclosure in the next couple of weeks.
Colin |
|
|
| cheesehead |
Sooo, I'm waiting on the Jx92's and decided to build the cabinets. (I have the time now, won't have the time when they arrive.) They are per the original GM specs except that right now the ports are about 6" long so I can cut them to tune. I made the cabs a little taller than abpea's original, boosting the height of the lower chamber to get to my desired listening height. I also cut the lower "bend" of that chamber to 45 deg so it's only in the bottom 1/2. So, that external chamber is 7" wide, 12" high (internal) with a 45 deg bend in the bottom, oh, 4".
I'm finishing them and as I'm sanding the finish, I get a real resonance in that area! Did I just build some kind of back-loaded horn at the port exit? :eek:
mk |
|
|
| DIAR |
I plan on building these speakers too :smash: . The sound seems to be top notch and I really like the enclosure shape. :D
A question about damping material:
In TL enclosure damping material should be added behind the driver like this:
http://www.ingocomp.net/hifi/pdf/JX92S_TL.pdf
How should this enclosure be damped. I have a resource for 1 cm thick felt. would that be the best choise for damping the back panel behind the driver (in case it is recommended with this design)
BTW: I'm a total newbie in designing speakers so go easy on me. I'd like to build the speakers the same way as you masters do and start experimenting after I have achieved a reference point. |
|
|
| abpea |
DIAR,
Here's some good advice I got from GM on stuffing/damping this MLTL:
GM said:
"I usually just cover one wall, top, and back of a ML-TL with 1" acoustic rated fiberglass or 1/2" felt and rarely needed to adjust it. When the driver/vent is at ~the right point along its length and the vent is of reasonable dia/length, it's just not much of an issue.
Unfortunately, the Jordan has such a small Vas that the vent is on the large side for the pipe's Vb, so some experimentation may be required. The sim indicates ~0.5lb/ft^3 stuffing density if polyfil is used, so if the FG is used, then it would be ~0.35lbs/ft^3."
Hope this helps -
Bruce |
|
|
| DIAR |
Yes, this was the answer I was hoping for.
I just assembled BrianGT's Gainclone and I thought I could build these speakers as they should me a perfect match for each other. I allready have a very good setup but it is lacking emotion and 3D soundstage... :( :) |
|
|
| JVA |
To Diar & Cheesehead,
You'll love these speakers. I was utterly blown away by the sound. It took a little tweeking, i.e placing stuffing in the bottom vents and then removing small sections of stuffing until I heard the male voice honking which was prevelant, after which I added some back, just enough to remove the honking sound. Also, it's a good idea to add the passive network as indicated in Jordan's design. It added a little umph to the bottom end. I put the crossover on the outside in a small pine box and velcroed it t the back of the main speakers. It matched the front pine face. (Sort of art deco design). As for damping at the back of the driver, I used green floor dampingwhich is excellent material for deadening sound. You can find it possibly in any large flooring company. It's usually in large rolls. It's used for deadening sound under hardwood floors. As for sound of the speaker itself, I haven't found anything better. Bass is tight, very clear mid range especially for voice, and surprisingly very good highs. You will not need a super tweeter. Best to build them with either MDF or baltic birch ply and you'll be amazed what a single driver can do. I can understand why some commercial builders sell these particular speakers for up to $4000.00 (US) a pair. Good luck with building your speakers and hope to hear how they turn out. |
|
|
| zeno |
JVA, did you build the design as drawn on the Jordan Webside?
The TL, similar to the Konus Essence?
Marc |
|
|
| DIAR |
Is there any other way inside the box except the driver hole or have you build the speaker so that it can be opened?
Edit: I'm not quite sure which passive network you ment.
Edit2: Thanks Zeno :) inductor (about 2 mH or a bit more) and a resistor (4 ohms) in series with the driver. |
|
|
| JVA |
Diar
There is really no way,except through the speaker hole.You can work from there to adjust or add damping.
Zeno
Yes its built according to Jordans web site
Yes,its[similar] to Konus Essence.Konus may have altered some parts of the design,I don;t know.
NOTE
round off all corners inside the box and round off,or flare the bottom vents for cleaner air flow.
Good luck.
joe |
|
|
| navin |
| quote: | Originally posted by GM
FWIW, this came up in another thread and I calc'd a max practical length of 48" using the same CSA, density, vent diameter, but with driver down ~15.46"/2.75" vent length. ... |
Where would I find MJK's MLTL calc sheet. thanks. |
|
|
| DIAR |
| Just to make it clear for newbies: Inductor and resistor are connected parallel. This passive network is connected in series with the driver. |
|
|
| GM |
| quote: | Originally posted by navin
Where would I find MJK's MLTL calc sheet. thanks. |
?! Same place it's been on every other thread I've seen you and him post on, his website: http://www.quarter-wave.com/
GM |
|
|
| navin |
| thanks. dont remember posting there. in fact after my laptop crashed i did not even have that link. |
|
|
| cheesehead |
whoa:D :D :D :D :D
Just finished the speakers on Monday. Brought them in & set them up... after a couple of hours breaking in, they are amazing. My brother-in-law and I sat down and went through about 20 different CD's ("let's see how this sounds!").
I've got a bit of a tin ear & am a speaker noob, but I can tell you that the clarity of these things is amazing. We heard things in songs that we'd never heard before. And the percussion - No, you don't feel it (hey, it's a 4" speaker after all!) but it made me jump. I can now tell the difference between the different drums! And vocals - sweet, especially female.
I re-burned the bro-in-law's Dave Matthews CD to compensate for BSC (3dB) and he sat in front of the speakers with a grin and started pointing - "There's Dave" - "There's the drum set" - "There's the rhythm guitar".
After we'd listened for about 3 hours, the spouse came home.
First reaction - What do we need more speakers for? Don't we have enough already? :xeye:
After 5 minutes of listening to the Dixie Chicks - Hey, these are pretty good. :D :D
After 15 minutes of listening, pointing to my first diy speakers, vifa TC18 TL's - We don't need these anymore, let's give them to my brother :bawling: :D
And I don't even have the BSC in yet!
| quote: | Originally posted by JVA
To Diar & Cheesehead,
As for damping at the back of the driver, I used green floor dampingwhich is excellent material for deadening sound. You can find it possibly in any large flooring company. It's usually in large rolls. It's used for deadening sound under hardwood floors. |
Damping at the back of the driver? What is this, and how is it applied? I'm assuming that you're talking about something different than the stuffing...
For the $$ and effort, these speakers are awesome. Thanks to all for designing, posting, and sharing, especially abpea and GM, also Bob Brines & MJK for their TL work and explanations.:grouphug:
And abpea - the trapezoidal sound BETTER?:cannotbe:
mk |
|
|
| abpea |
Originally posted by cheesehead:
whoa:D :D :D :D :D
Just finished the speakers on Monday. Brought them in & set them up... after a couple of hours breaking in, they are amazing. My brother-in-law and I sat down and went through about 20 different CD's ("let's see how this sounds!").
I've got a bit of a tin ear & am a speaker noob, but I can tell you that the clarity of these things is amazing. We heard things in songs that we'd never heard before. And the percussion - No, you don't feel it (hey, it's a 4" speaker after all!) but it made me jump. I can now tell the difference between the different drums! And vocals - sweet, especially female.
I re-burned the bro-in-law's Dave Matthews CD to compensate for BSC (3dB) and he sat in front of the speakers with a grin and started pointing - "There's Dave" - "There's the drum set" - "There's the rhythm guitar".
After we'd listened for about 3 hours, the spouse came home.
First reaction - What do we need more speakers for? Don't we have enough already? :xeye:
After 5 minutes of listening to the Dixie Chicks - Hey, these are pretty good. :D :D
After 15 minutes of listening, pointing to my first diy speakers, vifa TC18 TL's - We don't need these anymore, let's give them to my brother :bawling: :D
And I don't even have the BSC in yet!
Damping at the back of the driver? What is this, and how is it applied? I'm assuming that you're talking about something different than the stuffing...
For the $$ and effort, these speakers are awesome. Thanks to all for designing, posting, and sharing, especially abpea and GM, also Bob Brines & MJK for their TL work and explanations.:grouphug:
And abpea - the trapezoidal sound BETTER?:cannotbe:
mk
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hey, hey, hey... :-) They are excellent aren't they!! :bigeyes:
What BSC are you using? I'm not using any BSC on any of my boxes. Let me know if it makes a difference.
The bass/precussion in the original design is better than you would ever think it would be considering the size of the driver, but you're right it isn't quite chest thumping... close and very good sounding.
However... you - will - get bass and precussion you can feel from the front-firing trapezoidial design. We (a whole bunch of people) just finished two days of critical listening tests between the original design and the trap design and the trapezoidial design was a hands down improvement across the board.
But hold on!! GM's back at work and has developed another variation on his original ML-TL he thinks will be the best yet !!!!! :bigeyes: :bigeyes: :bigeyes:
I'm going to try to put a pair together this weekend and give a listen. Stay tuned!!!
Cheesehead I'm glad you built a pair. If you didn't build anything else these speakers will continue to delight you for a long, long time to come. And the good news is they will continue to sound better and better the longer you listen to them.
Talk with you later -
Bruce |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by abpea
What BSC are you using? I'm not using any BSC on any of my boxes. Let me know if it makes a difference.
[/B] |
All I did was to extract the wav files from a couple of CD's then reburn with +3dB eq from abt 300 Hz on down. My bro-in-law the Dave Matthews fan says it improves things immensely, and I'd agree.
I'm going to order the inductors & resistors for a BSC circuit & give it a try sometime soon now (well, in the next month or so, when I get another paycheck).
mk |
|
|
| stefanobilliani |
FIRST IMPRESSION:
rithm , focus , depth , dynamic , bottom end
...a lot of joy :)
I like the speakers very much , thanks for a nice design .
Very, very smooth sound !!! :wave2: |
|
|
| Bricolo |
| quote: | Originally posted by abpea
But hold on!! GM's back at work and has developed another variation on his original ML-TL he thinks will be the best yet !!!!! :bigeyes: :bigeyes: :bigeyes:
I'm going to try to put a pair together this weekend and give a listen. Stay tuned!!!
|
can you tell us more about that? |
|
|
| abpea |
-> Can you tell us more about that?
You bet, however I'm still working some of the details out and as soon as I get a pair built I'll post more info.
Stay tuned -
Bruce |
|
|
| abpea |
stefanobilliani,
Nice job!! The speaker really is good isn't it. I'm glad you built a pair, I hope you enjoy them for a long time to come.
Bruce |
|
|
| jemraid |
One of the posts above suggested the design may be useful for other drivers.
Living as I do in the UK, I can get the Visaton FR10 very easily, I wonder if it would be suitable, here's a link to the page on the Visaton site.
http://www.visaton.com/english/artikel/art_247_1_3.html
If anyone can help I would be very grateful.
Jem |
|
|
| GM |
No, it is not a suitable cab for a driver with such different specs. Due to the high Qts, some will argue that it is too high for a vented. For sure it is not suitable for a ML-TL, especially with such a tiny Vas, but FWIW this golden ratio BR tuned to ~65Hz sims nice using published specs:
L = 10.96"
w = 6.78"
d = 4.19"
driver at midpoint
0.75" diameter x 0.75" long vent in the bottom
Of course it rolls off fast below ~60Hz, so EQ will be required to to keep the driver from over excursing.
GM |
|
|
| GM |
Do not know if this helps, but just did a quick sim of the W130 S4 in this cab and it looks good, though depending on room loading you may want to shorten the vent to 3.5".
GM |
|
|
| jemraid |
Dear GM thanks for the replies and for all the work you did, I'm grateful to you.
I will try the first option, I do like single drive units and I like the sound of the FR10, I use it in a SOLO TQWP at the moment and it sounds very good (to me)
Every few years I try something diferent and this year I was disappointed with a Buschhorn I tried, made one cabinet and there was so little difference between it and my TQWP I didn't bother to finish the other one.
Regards - Jem |
|
|
| GM |
You are welcome!
I assume you are referring to Bert Doppenberg's ACR FE103S TQWP. If so, with this driver it has way too much Vb (even more so than the Jordan ML-TL, and why I did not recommend it), so in a sim indicates a large dip in the response followed by a huge peak at Fb. The BSC filter would not help much with this, so I have to wonder how accurate Visaton's specs are.
Interesting, yours is the first bad review of any of the Buschorn designs, though I can not say I am surprised since they are designed for much lower Q drivers. Once Qts goes higher than 0.7, horn design gets interesting and I have yet to see any designs I consider successful.
Anyway, please let us know how the two compare.
GM |
|
|
| JVA |
Cheeshead
About damping
Im sorry its not the back of the driver,but the back part of the enclosure behind the driver,as shown in Jordans web site.
The damping material is one eight inch thick.You glue various sections on ,until half inch thick.Wood glue is good enough.It dampens and deadens sounds behind the driver.
I use the stuffing [polly pillow stuffing],in the vents themselves to finetune voices,especially male.
Remember this is a Jordan transmission design ,with no changes except fore a larger base.
Go to any lumber or flooring store and you will find this damping material.The stuff is used for deadening under hardwood floors,it could be under various brand names.
Joe |
|
|
| jordanjx92 |
Hi,
It has been really interresting to read about the succesfull TL cabinet solutions . Would be great to hear also how the latest GM MLTL version turned out! Thanks :D |
|
|
| DIAR |
I just ordered mdf board for my GM MLTL speaker. I wanted to make the front baffle as narrow as possible so I changed the dimensions a little bit (cross section and height of the cabinet stays the same). I going to use 22 mm MDF board.
http://kotiweb.kotiportti.fi/audiov...20MLTL%20V2.gif |
|
|
| GM |
FWIW, somewhere in all these posts or one of the linked threads there are comments from me that 19mm Baltic Birch, Appleply, or no void marine grade plywood be used and Jay Fisher and friend's subjective opinions on how much better it sounds compared to the MDF prototype he built.
Not being a master woodworker, I have never built a speaker using premium hardwoods, but if the wood is stable and with no voids, splits, etc., then they would be an excellent sounding material to use also.
GM |
|
|
| noisenyc |
hiya, long time no hear!
the way this thread has gone at points...i remember what my friend jc used to say to the relentless questioning of a diy design...
"why don't YOU build it and tell ME?"
hehe |
|
|
| GM |
Yo, Blackie!
Yeah, been years now. How time flies whether you're having a good time or not. :(
Did you ever build those 40-1197 line arrays, or....?
No s...! I spent maybe 10 min. total doing the various JX92 pipe designs and untold hours in repetitive correspondence. :( Thanks to TJ and Colin though, now I can just point to a link. :)
So, been doing anything interesting besides building those wild looking amps?
GM |
|
|
| noisenyc |
hehe i built those line arrays and several hundred others hahaha
i put those dang drivers in boxes, pipes, baffles, you name it!
i still use em every now and again...check the some odd rubies build on my site...:) |
|
|
| DIAR |
| quote: | Originally posted by GM
FWIW, somewhere in all these posts or one of the linked threads there are comments from me that 19mm Baltic Birch, Appleply, or no void marine grade plywood be used and Jay Fisher and friend's subjective opinions on how much better it sounds compared to the MDF prototype he built.
|
I chose mdf for maximum cabinet stiffnes. Secondly I'm going to paint the enclosure so I thought it's better to use MDF which is quite stable. It is easy to make a nice and smooth surface using mdf as it is quite homogeneous material.
I've heard that wood and even chip wood are very good in TL, pipe etc. cabinets because they absorb some frequencys a little and decreace resonances that way. I don't know if it is true but it sound sensible. In my case this is not useful feature as I plan to cover the interior with rubber damping sheets (7.5 kg/m^2). I you think this is not wise, I can cover the interior with 4 mm thick hard felt which I have laying around somewhere.
If you have any ideas how to make mdf sound like baltic birch, please let me know :) |
|
|
| GM |
>I chose mdf for maximum cabinet stiffnes.
====
Uh, typical 3/4" MDF has an average MOE of ~527k psi, 19mm 13 ply BB has ~1.8m psi, and since stiffness goes up at the cube of thickness the MDF needs to be ~28.6mm thick to match it. Plus BB ply requires much less bracing than MDF to attain a given increase. This means that the MDF is better damped, but to gain stiffness increases its mass, lowering its Fs, which requires more stiffness, etc., so basically you 'chase your tail' until you get its Fs down below the speaker's effective BW. Might as well cast it in concrete.
Increasing a stiff material damps well due to acoustic pressure falling with increasing Fs, so even if it doesn't damp it all down, at least it requires only minimal extra damping, with the stuffing/lining normally being sufficient, and in the case of a midbass or bass bin, the cab's Fs is well beyond its passband so needs no further damping.
====
>Secondly I'm going to paint the enclosure so I thought it's better to use MDF which is quite stable. It is easy to make a nice and smooth surface using mdf as it is quite homogeneous material.
====
True, but it doesn't help performance. ;)
====
>I've heard that wood and even chip wood are very good in TL, pipe etc. cabinets because they absorb some frequencys a little and decreace resonances that way.
====
Since TLs typically use medium to high Q drivers, then damp them to a fare-thee-well with stuffing, very lossy construction can work well.
====
>In my case this is not useful feature as I plan to cover the interior with rubber damping sheets (7.5 kg/m^2). I you think this is not wise, I can cover the interior with 4 mm thick hard felt which I have laying around somewhere.
>If you have any ideas how to make mdf sound like baltic birch, please let me know
====
No way to do this AFAIK since we are dealing with the SoS through completely different mediums. The MDF will underdamp the cab somewhat, so further damping will probably be required to lower its Fs, but rubber sheets will reduce cab Vb so I recommend gluing another layer of MDF to them (at least 6mm) and just use some felt as required to damp reflections back through the cone. With the extra MDF layer, only a little to one side and rear of the driver may be required.
GM |
|
|
| DIAR |
Thank you for the information. Next time I will use plywood but in this case with the paintcoat and some other unmentioned finishing issues plywood couldn't have been an option.
Ok, I will forget about the rubber sheets. I will apply 1 cm thick high quality felt behind the drivers. Adding more mdf inside the enclosure takes quite a lot room and I already have the pieces cut.
Have you people ever concidered using glass inside the cabinet to stiffen it. :cool:
Thank you for all this new and interesting knowlegde. Next time I will build much better speakers but this time this will do since these are my first pair of speakers and it would suck the fun out of DIYing if I achieved perfection at first try :D |
|
|
| GM |
You are welcome!
No, I meant to the outside since we do not want to decrease Vb any. These can be measured, cut, and glued on before final finishing. In the future if you want to paint over MDF, build the cab out of one of the plywoods, then add a thinnest layer of MDF available. This will stiffen/damp it also.
Yes, tempered glass, ceramic tiles, or similar attached with non-hardening glue to 'float' them. This is called constrained layer damping (CLD) and works extremely well, but is not needed except in bass, midbass, lower mids high acoustic power designs. My fave for smaller or low power designs are the cheap self adhesive floor tiles, and for a bit more damping, the thicker, more expensive industrial rubber floor tiles attached with non-hardening glue. This is much cheaper than Dynamat, etc., and about as effective to my ears, but I have not done extensive measuring, so as always YMMV.
Anyway, just look around, there's all sorts of inexpensive ways to stiffen/damp cabs and drivers.
GM |
|
|
| cheesehead |
| quote: | Originally posted by GM
I spent maybe 10 min. total doing the various JX92 pipe designs and untold hours in repetitive correspondence. :( Thanks to TJ and Colin though, now I can just point to a link. :)
|
As one who lurked through that correspondence and learned a little bit about TL's from it, I thank you, my wife thanks you... and my brother-in-law, who spent a couple of hours sitting in front of them jx92 pipes with a smile on his face after we built them, thanks you! :) :) :)
cheesehead
BTW, I used oak veneer-faced MDF on mine... |
|
|
| DIAR |
| After all these suprises I became suspicious about everything. I was going to add a few braces between the walls to stiffen the stucture. Does this kind of stucture interfere with air flow too much? |
|
|
| Colin |
| quote: | Originally posted by GM
Thanks to TJ and Colin though, now I can just point to a link. |
Glad to be of service.
Jay has emailed Ted Jordan with a description of his MLTLs, which he has built in both MDF and Birch ply. The ply ones apparently blow the MDF out of the water ...
Painting ply is a different matter though.
Colin |
|
|
| Dave Jones |
| quote: | Originally posted by Colin
Glad to be of service.
Jay has emailed Ted Jordan with a description of his MLTLs, which he has built in both MDF and Birch ply. The ply ones apparently blow the MDF out of the water ...
Painting ply is a different matter though.
Colin |
Blew out of water how? Subjectively? Double blind? Measurement? ... or what? |
|
|
| Colin |
It was a listening only and not double blind. He seemed to consider the difference large and real enough, however. Ping Jay on the fullrange driver forum for details.
Colin |
|
|
| DIAR |
| Any comments before closing the enclosure? |
|
|
| Colin |
Looks good. The cross braces will help support the stuffing.
At the danger of entering into elderly relatives sucking eggs territory, I'll mention that at this stage I usually wire the enclosure, giving the opportunity to thoroughly caulk the cables to a corner to prevent any buzzes. This design lends itself to fitting terminals to the base of the main enclosure.
Looking forward to the first listening report ...
Colin |
|
|
| DIAR |
| Thanks for the tip, Colin :) |
|
|
| GM |
I assume there will be a massive baseplate and the cavity will be filled with something inert, such as sterilized sand, kitty litter, or similar. Also, apparently not much stuffing is required so I suggest wrapping the braces.
GM |
|
|
| DIAR |
I was thinking about wrapping the braces but I desided not to do it for some reason. I'm glad that you recommended it.
I haven't desided yet what to do with the bottom. I will place the binding posts there and possibly the passive network. The hard part is the sand that is required. I will probably divide the bottom to two sections and fill the other one with sand blast sand which I find excellent and cheap for this kind of applications. |
|
|
| DIAR |
Playing the speakers for the first time. The bass truly amazes me. Not only deep (concidering the driver) but also accurate and powerfull. Drums really sound like drums. And the most amazing thing is that they don't become boomy even if I place them near the side wall where my Dynaudio Audience 52 boom llike crazy.
I have damping material around the braces and about 28*12 cm piece of 1 cm thick felt behind the driver. I need to explore a little bit with the damping material as there is a hint of "through the nose" sound in female voices. Also the feeling of ambience is not good as I expected but I think the main reason is my CDP which needs a little bit tuning.
Anyway, a very promising sound. And I'm not just saying it. I'm quite picky about audio hardware but so far I'm quite impressed :D |
|
|
| Bricolo |
What do you use to drive those "low efficiency" jordans? ;)
Is a small gainclone and its 1000uF caps enough? |
|
|
| DIAR |
Poll:
Do you use passive network with GM MLTL?
What kind of passive network do you use?
What are the componen values?
Have you guys heard anything about how identical/different JX92S drivers are compared to each other? |
|
|
| Pan2 |
Ok, what is it that I miss... I see you mention TL and MLTL. I know what a transmission line is but what is this mass thing? And the pictures of this design show me nothing else than a typical reflex box..?
Please help me sleep tonight. :-)
/Peter |
|
|
| GM |
A 'typical' reflex with a high aspect ratio isn't a BR, but technically a ML-TL. IOW, a BR assumes a ~uniform particle density whereas the ML-TL has one dimension long enough for 1/4WL action to contribute to the vent's action, reducing its length for a given cross sectional area (CSA) while increasing its damping somewhat.
GM |
|
|
| kamppi |
How will the width of the cabinet affect to the sound of GM ML-TL?
I have the TL- cabinet which is presented on Jordan webpage. The width of this cabinet is 30cm = 11.81" and depth is 10cm = 3.94"(external dimensions) and I am satisfied with the size of this cabinet. I am also pleased with the midrange area, but I am not fully satisfied with the reproduction of low frequencies. I have understood that GM ML-TL cabinet will reproduce better bass.(quality and deepness)
How it will affect to the sound if I will do 30cm(external) wide ML-TL cabinet instead of 22.25cm wide cabinet. I will keep the area of the bottom and top as same than GM's design. (9.84" x 3", internal)
I assume that this will increase the directivity(little bit) and there will also be some changes in the bass response. (BSC)
Maybe these changes are not critical...
Cheers,
Jarno |
|
|
| Pan2 |
GM,
are you saying that the internal shape of that enclosure change the resonance?
A more square box with identical internal volume and the same port dimensions would have a different port resonance?
In my little mind I can see that a tube-like enclosure could increase the airload on the driver and thereby lowering the effective Fs and pushing the Qt of driver up a bit but I can not see how it would have anything to do with TL though.
I have seen that other design on ejjjordan.co.uk that are more like a labyrint which I assume would have very different properties compared to the design in the beginning of this thread. Also I must confess that I donīt really understand that "labyrint" design. Some of the internal "braces" are dotted and some are a full line on the schematic.
/Peter |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Pan
are you saying that the internal shape of that enclosure change the resonance?
A more square box with identical internal volume and the same port dimensions would have a different port resonance? |
Yes
| quote: | I have seen that other design on ejjjordan.co.uk that are more like a labyrint which I assume would have very different properties compared to the design in the beginning of this thread. Also I must confess that I donīt really understand that "labyrint" design. Some of the internal "braces" are dotted and some are a full line on the schematic.
|
The "labyrinth" type design just folds up the pipe to make it more compact (but not smaller). The Jordan design is somewhat confusing because the drawing respresents 2 or 3 different boxes.
dave |
|
|
| papparazzi |
After building Gm MLTL as in the picture ,I stuffed bottom about
10 Kg sand so the speaker got twice as heavy as original; I noticed low-end separation much better , but the midband become litllebit cloudy, and very highs started to Peak??
Have anyone some advise/explanation on this??? Thanks! |
|
|
|
