Hi Bach On,
More free advice. You don't need an expert to port your big box. Having ported quite a few boxes: all you need is a pencil, a drill and a saber saw. Draw a circle around the piece of pipe you'll be using as a port, drill a hole (sufficient for the saber saw blade) on the inside of the circle, and cut the hole w/ the saber saw staying on the inside edge of the circle line. If you need to: use a half-round bastard file to smoothen thing out, and use a bit of silicone rubber cement to seal and hold the pipe. That should be your next step. Then test and-hopefully-enjoy.
I'll attach some information on the Allen HC12 (the woofer looks like a 15" Eminence). HC12 speaker dimensions: 18"D x 17.5"W x 33"H.
Hope the "Manage Attachments" button still works. 🙂
Regards,
More free advice. You don't need an expert to port your big box. Having ported quite a few boxes: all you need is a pencil, a drill and a saber saw. Draw a circle around the piece of pipe you'll be using as a port, drill a hole (sufficient for the saber saw blade) on the inside of the circle, and cut the hole w/ the saber saw staying on the inside edge of the circle line. If you need to: use a half-round bastard file to smoothen thing out, and use a bit of silicone rubber cement to seal and hold the pipe. That should be your next step. Then test and-hopefully-enjoy.
I'll attach some information on the Allen HC12 (the woofer looks like a 15" Eminence). HC12 speaker dimensions: 18"D x 17.5"W x 33"H.
Hope the "Manage Attachments" button still works. 🙂
Regards,
Attachments
Last edited:
I don't think I have any problems with anything you said.
My main problem is all the sealed box recommendations with absolutely no scientific evidence to show they have any chance at all of working, when I showed overwhelming proof that they will NOT work.
My secondary issue is people not reading what I wrote, not understanding it, or using my words in ways that were clearly not intended. There was a big blowup over port harmonics being a problem when I had already shown sims that indicate it's clearly not a problem. Now people want to suggest that the antique boxes are suitable for the job when they are used only for midbass. Multiple antique woofers in large 32 hz tuned boxes are not even close to the right tool for the job when the subwoofer is much smaller and could use the space that these things are taking up.
I'm very blunt, always was, not gonna change. If that seems confrontational I guess that's the result of people ignoring the physics, the stated goals, what was actually posted. I welcome anyone to prove anything I've said is wrong or even arguable. WITH SCIENCE. I don't care about anyone's opinions, I want to see science. Then we can have an actual conversation, not a bunch of dislocated random thoughts that may or may not have anything to do with reality.
My main problem is all the sealed box recommendations with absolutely no scientific evidence to show they have any chance at all of working, when I showed overwhelming proof that they will NOT work.
My secondary issue is people not reading what I wrote, not understanding it, or using my words in ways that were clearly not intended. There was a big blowup over port harmonics being a problem when I had already shown sims that indicate it's clearly not a problem. Now people want to suggest that the antique boxes are suitable for the job when they are used only for midbass. Multiple antique woofers in large 32 hz tuned boxes are not even close to the right tool for the job when the subwoofer is much smaller and could use the space that these things are taking up.
I'm very blunt, always was, not gonna change. If that seems confrontational I guess that's the result of people ignoring the physics, the stated goals, what was actually posted. I welcome anyone to prove anything I've said is wrong or even arguable. WITH SCIENCE. I don't care about anyone's opinions, I want to see science. Then we can have an actual conversation, not a bunch of dislocated random thoughts that may or may not have anything to do with reality.
I'm sorry, just a bit edgy, I saw a couple of posts that just happened to be directly following mine claiming bad advice was given, so really the point was just to say "please namecall if you can."
I believe the very first reply (post 2) was mine, in which I quickly went through two options, the first far from ideal, but only requiring EQ..in retrospect, a terrible idea, and the second, design a proper ported enclosure, or at the very least, tune the existing one with a vent.
The whole discussion about the existing speakers that cover higher ranges should be, imo, contained to a separate discussion. Yeah, tons of wasted space, tons of reasonable alternatives, but the OP really doesn't seem to want to entertain any discussion of more modern, more efficient, space saving, electricity bill saving, better sounding alternatives, unless I completely misunderstood his/her large post on the matter.
*shrug*
I believe the very first reply (post 2) was mine, in which I quickly went through two options, the first far from ideal, but only requiring EQ..in retrospect, a terrible idea, and the second, design a proper ported enclosure, or at the very least, tune the existing one with a vent.
The whole discussion about the existing speakers that cover higher ranges should be, imo, contained to a separate discussion. Yeah, tons of wasted space, tons of reasonable alternatives, but the OP really doesn't seem to want to entertain any discussion of more modern, more efficient, space saving, electricity bill saving, better sounding alternatives, unless I completely misunderstood his/her large post on the matter.
*shrug*
I also considered a saber saw. But I've decided to use a router and homemade trammel to do the port opening. I seldom need to cut 6 1/2" holes, so the cost of the cutting blade seems too high for my taste.
Simple Router Trammel for Woodworking
Yes. The speakers were made by Eminence. And the mid-range speakers were made by Peerless. Even though the model number is HC12 - the woofers are actually 15" diameter models. They were the main speakers used on thousands of Allen Organs until about 10 years ago. Peerless sold these same speakers to Bose for their 901 series. The mid-ranges are no longer available from Peerless.
Thanks!
Bach On
Last edited:
Hi Bach On,
Post #164: "...the cost of the cutting blade seems too high..."
That's why I suggested a saber saw, just a general purpose wood cutting blade is all that's needed. I have cut a bunch of holes w/ the home-made trammel method too.
Looking at the Allen HC12, I always liked the way the old acoustic suspension speakers sounded. For volume it was just a matter of adding speakers. 🙂
Regards,
Post #164: "...the cost of the cutting blade seems too high..."
That's why I suggested a saber saw, just a general purpose wood cutting blade is all that's needed. I have cut a bunch of holes w/ the home-made trammel method too.
Looking at the Allen HC12, I always liked the way the old acoustic suspension speakers sounded. For volume it was just a matter of adding speakers. 🙂
Regards,
Yes. They have nothing to do with the driver and box the OP asked about, which is separate and only for the 32' stop(s).
The other boxes are not "midrange drivers", they are the sound source for a different set of (simulated) pipes. Thinking in terms of "hi fi" speakers is just wrong . . . these are instrument speakers. A close familiar analogy might be back-line guitar speakers . . . lead and bass do not use the same cabs, their cabs have different lf requirements, and any "distortion" produced by them is part of the created sound, and not generally regarded as a "flaw" (guitar speakers are often selected specifically for their "coloration", which is desired).
The OP clearly knows what he wants and understands what he is doing in terms of organs (all he asked was how to get more bass output for his "32' box", and he got some good advice on that) . . . but many commenters here do not. And some, in their misunderstanding and without any reasonable justification, take a tone that is directly insulting to the OP . . . which is completely uncalled for.
I'm on justaguy's side when it comes to porting the sealed box with a 25" 6" dia tube. I'm afraid justaguy has no concept of the reason for the 8 channels of an Allen organ. The 8 mid range speakers are designed to give different reflection paths for each stop or group of stops, in a way similar to a pipe organ. They are also designed to spread the stop sources out so the ear hears different locations. Furthermore Allen limits its amps to about 100 watts, so mixing 7 channels down to two speakers is a non-starter. The more stops you add on an Allen organ, the more the music is compressed by the amp. Some Allen organs even split consecutive notes, like C and C#, of one stop, to two separate channels, as a sort of ultimate way to spread signal and avoid IM distortion. I view this as a sales technique to sell multi-channel organs at a high markup, but NOBODY in the church organ market mixes signal down to two 1000 watt speakers the way the rock people do. That includes Allen, Rodgers, and Johanssen. I suspect none of the three church organ manufacturers sell low distortion speakers as the PA market has gone to, but when one buys used equipiment, OEM speakers is what you get. Allen gets $$$$ for their multichannel speaker sets, and spread source over the front of the church is what sells $$$$$$ organ installations to church committees.
As the OP is working with an installation of used equipment, there is going to be no budget for a $2000 experiment of two monster PA speakers, a PA mixer, and a $1000 high watt reliable (pro) amp. The 8, or 7 Allen speakers stay in all likelyhood. The sealed box sub is the only subject of modification/improvement. By all means try a port- putting a square hole in it for a 6x6 wood tube is the simple part. Lifting the sub down from the organ chamber, hauling it home for modification, and putting it back without subjecting the congregation of a Sunday (performance) with a big ugly hole at the front of the church, is the hard part, IMHO.
Last edited:
Yes. If you were planning on cutting a lot of holes (speaker building as a hobby) I'd for sure say "get a carbide spiral up-cut bit". For one hole any 1/4" bit that you already have will do fine . . . just take a few more (shallow) passes and be careful about clearing the dust as you go. And it obviously doesn't have to be "perfect" . . . this is not finish cabinet work, it's cutting a hole to stick plastic pipe or a (preferred) piece of cardboard sonotube in.
From what you've written it appears that you're going to have a much more versatile instrument when you're done . . . (and be playing a lot more than just Bach on it 😉) . . .
DrDyna - who has posted many beneficial posts in this thread - has posted a good rejoinder to Just a Guy.
I can't seem to stop Just a Guy from following just about every post of mine with some kind of horrid criticism. Tell me, Just a Guy were you one of my students at the UofT engineering school? Did I fail you in the course or harm you in some way? I apologize if I did.
One minor point. DyDyna overlooked the single* example of measurements posted. It shows the REW mic curve that you get from a 20 Hz driver without an enclosure encumbering it, albeit in a small room. Ahem, ahem (post #59).
Ben
*besides DrDyna's astonishing mic record of his sub-sub-woofer
Last edited:
For those of you that haven't actually heard an electronic church organ, the Church I go to every Sunday has a Rogers system. I've not been up to the speaker loft to see what is in there in the way of speakers, but the sound is really quite impressive, even down to the pedal notes. Certainly, there's quite a bit of energy down into the 20Hz range, according to my recordings...
Without denying the truth of what you say, there is no way to really know without instrumentation if there really is some content at any particular freq or band. Many auditory illusions.
Ben
Last edited:
Absolutley true - the illusions are real. Playing pipe organ recordigs through a stack of 8 lab horns (back when Halloween used to be fun) was a truly bone-shaking experience. Even though there was absolutely nothing below 26 Hz (and little below 32) coming out of them. You'd swear they go down lower, but the truth is they don't. When those 16 Hz pipes are played, the modulation effects come through loud and clear, giving the very real impression that lower tones are being played. if the digital sysnthesis aspect of this organ is really up to par, 16Hz reproduction itself may not be needed. Especially if it turns out to be impractical. I know how big things have to be to get to 32 with authority, and 16 effectively takes 6dB more.
Ben, what I have done is to record music and services on a small digital recorder. I can then play the results at home, and analyze with Goldwave... When I said that I see energy in the 20Hz range, I mean that I can see it in the analysis..... Not claiming I can tell by ear.
You can listen so some of the music, if you like:
Organ Music Lake Oswego United Methodist Church 503-636-8423 | Lake Oswego United Methodist Church
Music Inspiration Lake Oswego United Methodist Church | Lake Oswego United Methodist Church
You can listen so some of the music, if you like:
Organ Music Lake Oswego United Methodist Church 503-636-8423 | Lake Oswego United Methodist Church
Music Inspiration Lake Oswego United Methodist Church | Lake Oswego United Methodist Church
Ben, we have never met outside of this forum.
The reason for my responding to a large number of your posts is simply that we do not agree on much and the degree to which we disagree is huge. The vast majority of your posts are about 3 topics - the inaccuracy and uselessness of simulators and simulations, the evils of resonance and the value of moving coil drivers vs other technologies. Posts on those topics are the ONLY ones I ever respond to, so if you think I respond to a lot of your posts you must post about those subjects a lot.
I have a polar opposite viewpoint on these things, in fact my preferred enclosure types rely on moving coil drivers, accurate simulations and properly controlled resonances. I've never met anyone on any forum with such polar opposite views. These views are very popular on other forums, not so much on the ones I frequent.
Additionally, you seem much closer to the subjective side of the spectrum while I'm a lot closer to the objective side.
Anytime the conversation turns to objective science you just stop posting or completely ignore it so none of these issues have ever been cleared up.
I've shown scientific evidence that your home system 1 sq meter main panels have terrible dispersion properties and lobing, your K-horn is undersized and suffers from issues related to that and I've offered to simulate your OB subwoofer to show you objectively how it performs. You have ignored all this and continue to berate tapped horns and all other resonant enclosures despite the fact that your K-horn is extremely resonant. You continue to belittle the value of simulations even though I've shown hundreds that match match measurements almost exactly. I've explained to you in detail why your system doesn't sound realistic outside of the very narrow sweet spot.
And you have no answer to any of this. You just ignore my posts and continue posting the same things over and over.
I'm sure your home system sounds fantastic, as long as you sit in the sweet spot, don't move an inch and don't turn it up past 75 db or so, as that's about when the OB subwoofer is going to run out of gas. But IMO it's a badly engineered system and not what most people are looking for.
Are you surprised that I respond to a lot of your posts? You post the same thing over and over and I counter it over and over.
More to the point and back on topic, can you provide any evidence at all that adding stuffing and a small leak to OP's sub will do anything but alter the q of the sub a bit in a way that likely won't be audible and definitely won't add any spl at 16 hz? Scientific proof please. I've repeatedly mentioned the fact that this solution won't do anything at all to improve OP's situation, provided evidence, and you just keep posting the same thing with no evidence at all.
First, with respect to disrespecting OP, I just stated he was not an audio engineer and the system was not ever going to perform as expected. I stand by that, it's not disrespect. I'm not a rocket scientist and if you pointed out my chances of building a rocket from scavenged antique parts I found and blasting off were slim to none, I would not take that as disrespect. I also stated that installing a port is as easy as tripping on your shoelaces, and while that might be a slight exaggeration my 10 year old niece has "helped" me install a port. I didn't need help and she required a bit of help holding the drill steady, but she did most of the work including hammering the port into the hole. I didn't mean to disrespect the OP with those comments, as far as I can tell they are fact (if slightly exaggerated).
Next, and probably more important, no I have no idea how the organ system works with electrical speakers. If it's an 8 channel system intended to provide dispersed sound, the OP isn't using it correctly if the speakers are stacked in a small loft room. The fact that you think an 8 channel system is purely driven by marketing forces instead of common sense tells me all I really need to know, and the fact that nobody downmixes to 2 channels doesn't mean they shouldn't. Downmixing isn't required anyway, use 8 or 16 or 64 channels for all I care, but don't take up space the subwoofer NEEDS.
I'm also not educated on the crossover points and passbands of each set of speakers. If each octave needs it's own powered speakers then these antique boxes may be completely perfect for the job AS LONG AS THEY DON'T TAKE UP SPACE THE SUBWOOFER NEEDS.
I could be completely wrong about the requirements here for the higher tuned speakers, the crossover points needed and the required passband. All I know is what the OP posted, which is that he was using the subwoofer from 16 - 177 hz, so I assumed the smaller speakers were used from 177 hz and up. If that's not the case then fine, I'm wrong.
BUT I do know enclosure acoustics, drivers and how systems are USUALLY set up. Every octave that you intend to extend lower you need a lot more driver displacement and a lot larger enclosure. There's ways around that rule but those ways are very expensive. In normal setups the speakers have unique passbands and don't overlap. If organ systems don't operate like that that's fine, but they probably should, like all the rest of the systems in the world.
In short I could very well be wrong about some of the specifics directly related to organ sound reproduction and how that is traditionally done but I'm definitely not wrong about the bass. There needs to be a lot more (or better) drivers, power and space dedicated to the subwoofer or this whole exercise is just a waste of time and money.
Last edited:
What I've managed to learn so far, is that the "subwoofer" part is used much the same way a bass guitar amplifier cabinet is used, in so far as the rank of pipe notes played through it aren't crossed over at all, instead the fundamental, plus all the other harmonics and parts that make up the sound of "those 12 pipes" play through it, while the other speakers don't make a peep, and instead are only making noise when the higher ranks are played....which may include low bass as well, as even the "mid notes" can thump out some lower order information, too.
There really shouldn't be any "crossover" in the sense we're used to dealing with it, there's a rigid point at which the notes switch speakers, do re mi fa (sub) la te do (tops).
This too, if it was up to me, I'd allocate space and power reflective of the actual size of the pipes, I.E if your lowest rank of pipes is 60% of the loft space worth of physical pipes, so should the speakers.
Now you're getting it . . . each of the speaker boxes represents a set of pipes or, in organ terms, a "stop". The box for the 32' stop will produce the sound that replicates a rank of pipes the longest of which is 32', and no more than two or three of which would ever sound at the same time. The pedal or manual key that causes those notes to sound may be coupled to other sets of pipes as well (often but not always sounding in different octaves), the sound of which would come from different speakers or, in the case of a hybrid organ such as we're talking about, from ranks of actual pipes as well.
It's not a case of subwoofer bigger than woofer bigger than midrange bigger than tweeter . . . it's a rank of 32', a couple ranks of 16', a dozen or more ranks of 8', and maybe a few 4' as well (for the "angel chorus"). The speakers represent the various ranks of pipes (and their various locations) . . . they do not all sound together, and which ones sound (and what notes) is determined by the organist at the keyboard. It may not be the "best" way to do things, but it is the traditional way, and it's the way that makes an electronic organ sound most like a "real" pipe organ in a real venue. As an add-on to an existing wind organ (ie a "hybrid") it's possibly the only way to do it that doesn't sound, at least sometimes, glaringly un-natural.
If you have any experience and memory of the sense of envelopment produced by a real pipe organ in a large church or hall compare that to the sound of the "organ" setting of an electric piano . . . (where "woofer bigger than mid bigger than tweeter" does apply).
It never is . . . on a large "real" wind organ there will be dozens of ranks of 16', 8' and 4' pipes that collectively take up far more space than the one or two ranks of 32'.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.