Take a Post-It Note and stick it on the relevant organ key with the message "Automatic Ejection Button".
Slightly more seriously, all speakers in almost all spaces have lots of hills and valleys. First issue is to establish if it is the speaker, room, mic location, or some or all interacting. Just move the mic 2 feet in almost any direction.
Ben
I'm going to give that first suggestion all the serious consideration it deserves.
Looks like a dilemma. If I drive the drivers too hard, I get spurious noises. The question then is can I drive them hard enough to get the volume needed?
Bach On
Hard for any of your loyal friends out here to judge how loud you are pushing them. Almost all components are pretty clean up to a point where they "break up". So ordinarily, the question becomes, "Can the speakers be used productively if mostly kept below the break-point?"
Unless there is a defect in your drivers or speakers (such as the surround bumping into the covering, etc), my guess is you are reading problems elsewhere. So persevere.
"Elsewhere" includes the drive system (have you measured the signal going into the speakers or into the amp?????). And it includes faults of the measurement system (a million possibilities).
You know I always look for the feasible tests for you. What I'd do is haul in a speaker you have reason to think is pretty good and see what kind of distortion or hills-and-valleys you get when fed by the same amp as the new bass speakers. Needn't be too loud. This will confirm both the input system as well as the measurement system.
Ben
Regarding the dip on the SI 18 box.
If you connected the proper wires to the enclosure, REW could do an impedance sweep.
That would get us a great deal closer to understanding what that dip is, and if it is repairable.
There are a number of possibilities. But it all shows up in the impedance plot.
It may be an incorrect tuning on your port.
The simplest way to determine that is to block the port and do the same kind of sweep you have been doing.
If you connected the proper wires to the enclosure, REW could do an impedance sweep.
That would get us a great deal closer to understanding what that dip is, and if it is repairable.
There are a number of possibilities. But it all shows up in the impedance plot.
It may be an incorrect tuning on your port.
The simplest way to determine that is to block the port and do the same kind of sweep you have been doing.
On the plus side your distortion products are pretty good in your last set of tests.
The first set had me really scratching my head.
There are independent tests out there that show pretty high distortion figures for that 18 inch driver.
But not as high as what you first test showed.
As Ben noted.
When you do your tests.
Strap on a volt meter onto your amp as it is driving 64 hertz and record the voltage.
We can do a fair bit of sleuthing when we know your drive conditions.
Simulators are not as useless when they are in the hands of a bunch of seasoned builders. Most of us are in that company.
The first set had me really scratching my head.
There are independent tests out there that show pretty high distortion figures for that 18 inch driver.
But not as high as what you first test showed.
As Ben noted.
When you do your tests.
Strap on a volt meter onto your amp as it is driving 64 hertz and record the voltage.
We can do a fair bit of sleuthing when we know your drive conditions.
Simulators are not as useless when they are in the hands of a bunch of seasoned builders. Most of us are in that company.
We got most of the speakers in the speaker chamber today. The cabinet with the twin Dayton speakers fit perfectly in the area just to the left of the door. We turned it on its side with the speakers facing the Sanctuary and the port facing the door. Two Allen HC12s and the HR100 sit on top of it. I put the lower portion of the triangular speaker in the corner. Again, a perfect fit. I need to do some work on the upper section, then it will be placed on top. I had room for only four of the Allen HC12s until the Bourdon pipes are removed. Then the other two will go in there.
I've got all the cables labeled and threaded to their correct positions. But I haven't connected them all yet. That will happen soon.
The organ tech is supposed to come get the console and remove those pipes on July 27th. Then we'll have until Aug. 11th to connect, test and tweak. I also may mount the Allen Presence Presenters on the walls and ceiling of the pipe chamber. This would spread out the sounds among the pipes. It would also change the speaker channels from 8 ohms to 4 ohms. The Artisan Sound Engine should come on the 12th or 13th. Then it's voicing and balancing time. First use in church SHOULD be Aug. 16th.
These dates could change, but that's what I've been told to expect.
Bach On
** I need to mow grass this afternoon, then I may perform brain surgery on the Rolls unit tonight.
I've got all the cables labeled and threaded to their correct positions. But I haven't connected them all yet. That will happen soon.
The organ tech is supposed to come get the console and remove those pipes on July 27th. Then we'll have until Aug. 11th to connect, test and tweak. I also may mount the Allen Presence Presenters on the walls and ceiling of the pipe chamber. This would spread out the sounds among the pipes. It would also change the speaker channels from 8 ohms to 4 ohms. The Artisan Sound Engine should come on the 12th or 13th. Then it's voicing and balancing time. First use in church SHOULD be Aug. 16th.
These dates could change, but that's what I've been told to expect.
Bach On
** I need to mow grass this afternoon, then I may perform brain surgery on the Rolls unit tonight.
Last edited:
16 Hz for organ
Forgive me, please, if this has been addressed. I'm on page 50 of more than 70 in this thread.
Most organ sources say only two *pipe* instruments have 64' stops: Atlantic City Convention Center and Sydney Town Hall in Australia. However, 32' is fairly common. Who knows what has been done with custom electronics? One company (Rodgers) even used a 30" Electrovoice subwoofer in a box larger than some refrigerators.
Bach was better known in his day as an organist and consultant than as a composer. Even on fairly modest instruments, he recommended adding a 32' rank.
A celeste is a chorus effect achieved with stops of similar tone, but one is tuned sharp to beat gently. An unda maris is similar, but one is usually tuned flat. String stops are the most commonly used sounds, but flutes are also effective. Italians used a principal, calling it a voce humana. A distant fourth is using a reed stop, but it can be very effective.
Forgive me, please, if this has been addressed. I'm on page 50 of more than 70 in this thread.
Most organ sources say only two *pipe* instruments have 64' stops: Atlantic City Convention Center and Sydney Town Hall in Australia. However, 32' is fairly common. Who knows what has been done with custom electronics? One company (Rodgers) even used a 30" Electrovoice subwoofer in a box larger than some refrigerators.
Bach was better known in his day as an organist and consultant than as a composer. Even on fairly modest instruments, he recommended adding a 32' rank.
A celeste is a chorus effect achieved with stops of similar tone, but one is tuned sharp to beat gently. An unda maris is similar, but one is usually tuned flat. String stops are the most commonly used sounds, but flutes are also effective. Italians used a principal, calling it a voce humana. A distant fourth is using a reed stop, but it can be very effective.
Just a reminder not to conflate instruments and reproducers.
As far as I can think about it, the familiar system of dividing the sound compass into separate speaker systems should still apply. Anybody think otherwise?
But some of what I've read earlier makes this installation sound like a badly mushed-up semi-bionic-electronic organ. Vast complexity that could be simplified by just adding a mixer in the middle, stream the frequencies, and away we go. Set it and forget it. Reproduction of a signal created upstream, not a musical instrument.
With the present complexity, I can't picture an harmonious result... except with endless futzing about and "tuning" systems to play together and/or great stress on the organist to work the stops right.
Ben
streaming/biamping greatly reduces the power requirement
As far as I can think about it, the familiar system of dividing the sound compass into separate speaker systems should still apply. Anybody think otherwise?
But some of what I've read earlier makes this installation sound like a badly mushed-up semi-bionic-electronic organ. Vast complexity that could be simplified by just adding a mixer in the middle, stream the frequencies, and away we go. Set it and forget it. Reproduction of a signal created upstream, not a musical instrument.
With the present complexity, I can't picture an harmonious result... except with endless futzing about and "tuning" systems to play together and/or great stress on the organist to work the stops right.
Ben
streaming/biamping greatly reduces the power requirement
Last edited:
This is a risk, Ben. Yes. There is lots of complexity - but the software has built-in settings that can be adjusted for the digital samples. The pipes will be the standard to match. Then we need to adjust the electronics to match.
I do see the following as possible positive things.
1. Antique, or not - the speakers for the manuals are all the same. The organs that have used these speakers for many years often used multiple numbers of these successfully. They have a track record of blending with each other. Each has an identical crossover network.
2. These are speakers specifically design for organ sounds. And none of them are going to be pushed to their limits - where flaws often become more apparent.
3. All these speakers will be powered by the same model of amplifiers. This should add a tiny bit of consistency to the mixing process.
4. Division of the channels is being setup by organ ranks, not frequencies. And the volume of each rank can be adjusted. And each note in that rank can be adjusted.
5. I have deliberately designed this system so the volume of the electronics - like the pipes - will be at a constant output and SPL. I have heard speakers where the harmonics and notes at certain frequencies changed depending on the volume level of the speaker. Thus, perhaps the balance and blend may be easier to accomplish than if we were raising and lowering the volume of the sounds electronically.
Will this work? I cannot and do not know. Will we need to change some things? I consider that a likely possibility. Will this be set it and forget it? I'd be amazed if it was.
I've played Allen and Rodgers organs that had pipes added. Some sounded great. Some less so. One of the honored and oft repeated mantras I frequently 'hear' from people at the organ forum is that the installation and skills of the technicians and the organist can make or break the success of any organ installation - pipe, electronic or hybrid.
I've admitted that I have some slight anxieties that people won't like the resulting sound. And since this was my idea, I'd get blamed for it. But I'm still hopeful that we will be able to make it work well together. If we can't, I'll know I did all I could to make it a success.
Bach On
OK.... very important to get it right.
To make a long story short, why don't you play some organ music through those vintage speakers and see what they sound like? Easy to do, eh.
Ben
Last edited:
I did. Right after I replaced the surrounds on the woofers and the mid-range speakers. I let them sit for three days to make sure everything was set.
Then I daisy chained the input from a CD player into three of the Crown XLS1000s. I spread the speakers out over a 20 foot wide area about three feet in front of a wall. I put the speakers on chair seats to have them about 20 inches above the floor. I played organ works by several composers. I thought the sound was excellent. It was good enough that I invited our choir members to come listen to the speakers in our fellowship hall. They all commented how you good it sounded without it being overpowering. I also invited a couple of experienced organist friends. They commented on the clarity and how each note could be detected with no sense of mushy sound due to too many sounds coming through just a pair of speakers. They were very positive on the sound.
Remember, however that this setup was sending identical sounds to each of the stereo pairs of speakers. That won't be the circumstances when we setup our system. Each stereo pair will get different sounds to play (or reproduce if that suits you better).
Realizing this, I tested each pair individually. Each sounded good. To my ears the sound was almost identical, though I did not do a blind test.
But that is still not quite the same since the 15 inch speakers on the HC12s were playing the pedal tones as well as the manual division sounds they will be expected to play in the final system.
I did all this before coming to this forum for advice on the bass frequencies. This was months ago. Since coming here, my focus has primarily been on the two bass boxes.
I do feel pretty confident the HC12s will be up to their assigned duties. My primary focus throughout much of the now very long thread has been on the bass boxes. I still don't know if these boxes will provide adequate SPL at 16-26 Hertz to project out to the back pews in the Sanctuary. I am pretty confident they will be able to reproduce the 16 and 8 foot sounds. If they can't do 16 Hertz loud enough, I'll have two choices.
1. I can do just without them.
2. I can wait until we've replenished our organ fund. Then I can buy organ speakers that will do it. The model that many on the organ forum have suggested is the Allen B40. It is no longer being manufactured. I could get a pair for under $600. Two of these will do it. (I could not find any of these on the used market when I built my first bass box. But I've since found a source for them.)
I've done some testing that indicates these boxes can do 16 Hertz. The real questions arise from getting those sounds through the pipe chamber, out the shades and traveling out to the pews. And I cannot test or measure that until we get those big pipes out of the way (projected to happen July 27th).
Probably more than you want to know, but I have tested all the speakers with recorded with organ music.
BO
Last edited:
Again, Bach On does his homework before any poster suggests it! Moving forward to what is likely to be a satisfying result; even if none of the plaster shakes off the ceiling, it should be better than before.
But it would be false of me not to mention what flashed through my thoughts as I pictured the assembled choir admiring the sound: those demo's done by Edison with his cylinders that everybody swore could not be distinguished from Caruso.
Hard, so far, to find information on the B40. If it is like the B20, it is a bass reflex box with a tube port.
For the interest of those who have followed this thread, here is what Allen Organ, biggest organ company in the church organ biz, would have provided:SR-1 Seismic Radiator.
Allen Organ MIDI Products - Speakers
It is a big box with one 15-inch driver with a weighted cone (way to go!... how come we never thought of getting out the package of duct-caulk and pasting on half a pound?*) and 4 passive radiators**. Tuned to provide whomp down to 14.8 Hz, as they claim.
My belief is that these and other Allen speakers are made by "value engineers" whose purpose is to ensure the product sort of meets the design spec while having an incremental/marginal cost to build no more than 20% of the selling price.
Ben
*not too late to do it.... sort of kidding
** way to go but for obvious reasons, not something we ever talk about in this forum
But it would be false of me not to mention what flashed through my thoughts as I pictured the assembled choir admiring the sound: those demo's done by Edison with his cylinders that everybody swore could not be distinguished from Caruso.
Hard, so far, to find information on the B40. If it is like the B20, it is a bass reflex box with a tube port.
For the interest of those who have followed this thread, here is what Allen Organ, biggest organ company in the church organ biz, would have provided:SR-1 Seismic Radiator.
Allen Organ MIDI Products - Speakers
It is a big box with one 15-inch driver with a weighted cone (way to go!... how come we never thought of getting out the package of duct-caulk and pasting on half a pound?*) and 4 passive radiators**. Tuned to provide whomp down to 14.8 Hz, as they claim.
My belief is that these and other Allen speakers are made by "value engineers" whose purpose is to ensure the product sort of meets the design spec while having an incremental/marginal cost to build no more than 20% of the selling price.
Ben
*not too late to do it.... sort of kidding
** way to go but for obvious reasons, not something we ever talk about in this forum
Last edited:
The B40 has an 15 inch woofer and a tuned port. It has a larger cabinet than the modern B20. It also puts out much more low bass than the smaller counterpart.
Yes. That Allen SR-1 is the current top-of-the-line bass box by Allen. It uses one active 15 inch driver and four passive radiators. It has dimensions similar to the 12 cu.ft. box I put the two Dayton drivers. I priced this box months ago. It costs $1,750 plus shipping. Here's a pic of the advertised frequency response.
You may or may not remember I toyed with the idea of trying to replicate the design of the SR-1 by using passive radiators. But the radiators are rather costly - compared with a ported design.
The organ techs advise me that the older B40s actually put out more lower sounds, possibly because of the port.
Allen also makes a model called the SR-5. It has one 15 inch driver and two passive radiators. $1,150 plus shipping. It looks like a 5 or 6 cu. ft. box.
Allen Organ MIDI Products - Speakers
The frequency chart shows a roll-off starting at 50 Hz. It gets much steeper below 30 Hz.
Both of these models are the current Allen models, along with the B20, which is just can't do 32 foot pedals. I have tried to do my homework. I can't claim I've looked or even thought of everything, but I've done quite a bit of the simple and more obvious fact finding.
There's a guy in Florida who buys used organs and sells them on eBay. I've been in touch with him. I can buy two B40s from him if he doesn't sell them before we have enough money. But they show up from time-to-time.
Here's pic of an Allen B-40.
I'd have probably gone for one of those SR-1s if we'd had the budget for it, although the price is pretty steep. I opted for Plan B with the homemade boxes. Time will tell whether this Plan B will be adequate.
Bach On
Yes. That Allen SR-1 is the current top-of-the-line bass box by Allen. It uses one active 15 inch driver and four passive radiators. It has dimensions similar to the 12 cu.ft. box I put the two Dayton drivers. I priced this box months ago. It costs $1,750 plus shipping. Here's a pic of the advertised frequency response.
You may or may not remember I toyed with the idea of trying to replicate the design of the SR-1 by using passive radiators. But the radiators are rather costly - compared with a ported design.
The organ techs advise me that the older B40s actually put out more lower sounds, possibly because of the port.
Allen also makes a model called the SR-5. It has one 15 inch driver and two passive radiators. $1,150 plus shipping. It looks like a 5 or 6 cu. ft. box.
Allen Organ MIDI Products - Speakers
The frequency chart shows a roll-off starting at 50 Hz. It gets much steeper below 30 Hz.
Both of these models are the current Allen models, along with the B20, which is just can't do 32 foot pedals. I have tried to do my homework. I can't claim I've looked or even thought of everything, but I've done quite a bit of the simple and more obvious fact finding.
There's a guy in Florida who buys used organs and sells them on eBay. I've been in touch with him. I can buy two B40s from him if he doesn't sell them before we have enough money. But they show up from time-to-time.
Here's pic of an Allen B-40.
I'd have probably gone for one of those SR-1s if we'd had the budget for it, although the price is pretty steep. I opted for Plan B with the homemade boxes. Time will tell whether this Plan B will be adequate.
Bach On
Last edited:
Whatever jokes I've made about sim-believers, with the help of some very capable people here (not me), you've designed and built something that greatly out-classes gear from the value-engineers at Allen - at 20% of their price.
Do you think they have some special drivers? Some trick methods? On the contrary, they are using the smallest magnets, lightest wood, and cheapest everything they can get away with and still deliver sound that impresses organ-buying committees. No doubt their gear is adequate, I'm not skeptical about that. But I say, run the other way if you want more than just adequate at high prices.
The weighted cone approach of the Seismic gizmo (leading to a purpose-built shaker) is a clever concept and a missed-bet here. Being sim-driven is actually the main reason for this lapse in creative thinking; it obviously could have been readily simulated if people weren't belly-button deep into driver parameters and could take a step back and re-think the problem (myself included). I'd offer similar thoughts about using passive radiators.
Ben
Last edited:
Adding weight to a subwoofer's cone is usually not that great of an idea, particularly if it's a long-coil driver, which is usually exactly the driver you need to produce 16 Hz with any authority, The suspension may not be designed for the extra weight, and could cause the coil to go out of alignment, leading to premature failure. Better to just choose a driver that's capable of doing what you need it to do in the first place.
Right. But the part about "choose a driver" is where the question of which road to take comes into play. Adding duct-seal (is that still made?) to a cone has the risks Brian cogently outlines. But trying to get Hz's below free-air resonance also has problems.
I'll stand by my observation that creativity and toleration of a diversity of thought was not a feature of the proposals in this thread. We headed in one direction and that's that.
The triangular speaker is a notable accomplishment and should be good. For sure, Bach On has been amazing at every point (and in testing to follow, eh).
Ben
It is probably a little early to say what we're going to have will equal the Allen products at a fraction of the cost. A limited budget is what drove me to go the do it yourself route.
Though I've yet to do the sims myself, I do believe they can be a useful tool to help people obtain better results. But there is also another avenue of expertise. My Dad would have called it getting an education at Hardknocks University. I call it experience. Some have obtained good results with various methods in the past. As one guy wrote, a well built oversized box with the right driver had seldom let him down when he needed low bass. He suggested the first homemade bass box I built.
The box actually came out a bit larger than was suggested by one of the organ techs over at the organ forum. It was actually supposed to be about 10 cu. ft. in volume. I built it slightly wider and deeper so it came in at 12 cu. ft. Originally, it was sealed with a single driver.
Some may remember that one of the first recommendations from the sims crowd was to add a port. I looked at their charts and became convinced the port would obtain better results for those lowest frequencies. So added a big port (some of the sims people told me how long the port needed to be to tune the box for 16 hz.)
And I added another identical driver even though some felt it might be a mistake. I hoped that an identical driver might make up for the low Xmax of the Dayton drivers and move a bit more air without causing excessive cone excursion. This was an experiment - at least in my mind. And my plan was to remove that extra driver and seal up the hole if it all went wrong. Luckily, it didn't.
I owe any success with the new SI HT18 triangular box to Oliver and some of the people who pointed me to that driver. He designed the box for a sharp corner area that was unsuitable for a rectangular box. I had toyed with the idea of putting a Sonotube in that space. But Oliver's design looked just right to me. So I took a risk and built it. I'm having to adjust the upper box section to assure the side walls don't vibrate and that the joint is a good fit. I'm working on that now. Should be done by the weekend.
All this is to say I got a lot of good advice. There have been disagreements - some got annoyed with my slow pace, or thought I'd made mistakes. And I know I have.
This fumble and bumble method would be a terrible way for a commercial company like Allen Organs to operate. And it may turn out that what we'll end up won't be adequate or suitable for the job.
But I go back to what my chef friend said, "You know you've got good ingredients in there. So it'll probably turn out OK.And it might even turn out great." As some say, "I'm cautiously optimistic".
I guess we'll find out within the next month.
Thanks again to everyone here for the generous advice and patience. Maybe somebody trying to do something similar may find the good, the bad and the ugly from this thread helpful.
Bach On
Though I've yet to do the sims myself, I do believe they can be a useful tool to help people obtain better results. But there is also another avenue of expertise. My Dad would have called it getting an education at Hardknocks University. I call it experience. Some have obtained good results with various methods in the past. As one guy wrote, a well built oversized box with the right driver had seldom let him down when he needed low bass. He suggested the first homemade bass box I built.
The box actually came out a bit larger than was suggested by one of the organ techs over at the organ forum. It was actually supposed to be about 10 cu. ft. in volume. I built it slightly wider and deeper so it came in at 12 cu. ft. Originally, it was sealed with a single driver.
Some may remember that one of the first recommendations from the sims crowd was to add a port. I looked at their charts and became convinced the port would obtain better results for those lowest frequencies. So added a big port (some of the sims people told me how long the port needed to be to tune the box for 16 hz.)
And I added another identical driver even though some felt it might be a mistake. I hoped that an identical driver might make up for the low Xmax of the Dayton drivers and move a bit more air without causing excessive cone excursion. This was an experiment - at least in my mind. And my plan was to remove that extra driver and seal up the hole if it all went wrong. Luckily, it didn't.
I owe any success with the new SI HT18 triangular box to Oliver and some of the people who pointed me to that driver. He designed the box for a sharp corner area that was unsuitable for a rectangular box. I had toyed with the idea of putting a Sonotube in that space. But Oliver's design looked just right to me. So I took a risk and built it. I'm having to adjust the upper box section to assure the side walls don't vibrate and that the joint is a good fit. I'm working on that now. Should be done by the weekend.
All this is to say I got a lot of good advice. There have been disagreements - some got annoyed with my slow pace, or thought I'd made mistakes. And I know I have.
This fumble and bumble method would be a terrible way for a commercial company like Allen Organs to operate. And it may turn out that what we'll end up won't be adequate or suitable for the job.
But I go back to what my chef friend said, "You know you've got good ingredients in there. So it'll probably turn out OK.And it might even turn out great." As some say, "I'm cautiously optimistic".
I guess we'll find out within the next month.
Thanks again to everyone here for the generous advice and patience. Maybe somebody trying to do something similar may find the good, the bad and the ugly from this thread helpful.
Bach On
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.