Sorry, I'm an european so i need to calculated that to mm...
With: 16" = 406.4mm
height: 31" = 787.4mm
depth: 12" = 292.8mm
that is 72L internal space for an 18mm wood enclosure (not counting for bracing, port, drivers and so).
I had in mind 400x750x300mm, so 69L (about 3L less). So for me it's certainly good if it fits the drivers. It's a good goal i think for box size, mine or yours (they are close). The SB34NRX75-6 can fit that (can be 50L sealed, but not smaller). The Peerless you mention fits also the same cabinet with almost the same response in a first sim. The thick line is the SB, the peersless is almost not visible because it's the same
both will need a fairly heavy stuffed cabinet altough, to tame a bump at fsc, and the peerless Q is 0.95 then. We need to keep it that small because we need space for the mid and tweeter and crossover also. In reality it will be a bit smaller, but not larger than 60L i think within our size limits. It could be a good base for a universal cabinet that fits several woofers (so you can choose what is availeble).
Last edited:
I figured 55L for the actual woofer air space. ( My sim showed a Q of .8 for the 830845 Peerless. ) Then I ball parked 15L for everything else, including mostly a mid chamber. I would actually prefer more than 15L for the mid, but some people like to keep it smaller. Allowing for common wood thickness, these could be the outside dimensions. I don't think anything discussed so far would be smaller. I was curious how this size compares to the commercial speakers pictured.
Last edited:
The M40 is bigger 750 x 432 x 388 mm says the spec sheet. Th JBL L100 is 600x360x350mm and the original Linton was a lot smaller (270 x 480 x 240 mm), but don't go that low:, F3 is 60Hz as it use a smaller woofer.
Your sim is very close to Vituix : "At 0.8 Qtc + 12 db low pass around 180 hz electrical, full stuffing, moderate leaks, we can land on 40/32Hz F3/F6 in 55L."
The circa 70 L of the JBL and dimension looks very well sized (less heigth for the cabinet= less risk the firt resonant mode of the woofer to be inside its low pass bandwidth. The Harbeth is more mamuth coffin à la ATC monitor, The linton indeed has "only" a 200 mm woofer (8")
The circa 70 L of the JBL and dimension looks very well sized (less heigth for the cabinet= less risk the firt resonant mode of the woofer to be inside its low pass bandwidth. The Harbeth is more mamuth coffin à la ATC monitor, The linton indeed has "only" a 200 mm woofer (8")
Last edited:
I think that goals need to be clear here.
This thread has been originally done in parallel of an other one to have a BUDGET speaker. With SB34 you are already at 440eu. That means more or less 600 for drivers + crossover + wood finish = not less than 800 -> same ballpark than on the other thread
In that case it is better to close this thread and continue on the original one ...
If it differs for something else (easy construction smaller or bigger size, or anything else) this needs to be clear.
Otherwise we are going in the same direction ...
This thread has been originally done in parallel of an other one to have a BUDGET speaker. With SB34 you are already at 440eu. That means more or less 600 for drivers + crossover + wood finish = not less than 800 -> same ballpark than on the other thread
In that case it is better to close this thread and continue on the original one ...
If it differs for something else (easy construction smaller or bigger size, or anything else) this needs to be clear.
Otherwise we are going in the same direction ...
A thought about the midrange sub-enclosure:
Use a PVC/ABS pipe of 5" diameter (or similar) that connects between front & back panels, making it act like a brace. Make it aperiodic with a 3-4" hole at the back & stuffing that starts loose near the driver & gets progressively denser near the exit hole.
I've heard very nice effects from such midrange schemes. Reduction of through-cone internal reflections, reduced back pressure on the driver cone. Livelier yet with a sense of greater ease.
EDIT: ok, this obviously will not pass the requirement for simplicity suggested by @pefpef 😐
Use a PVC/ABS pipe of 5" diameter (or similar) that connects between front & back panels, making it act like a brace. Make it aperiodic with a 3-4" hole at the back & stuffing that starts loose near the driver & gets progressively denser near the exit hole.
I've heard very nice effects from such midrange schemes. Reduction of through-cone internal reflections, reduced back pressure on the driver cone. Livelier yet with a sense of greater ease.
EDIT: ok, this obviously will not pass the requirement for simplicity suggested by @pefpef 😐
Last edited:
I don't know how much is 2 x SB34RNX75-6 in USA.
In France it is 170 x 2 / SLS is 100 x 2 / XXLS >=200 euros x 2 . For sure it seems there are more North America zone people here.
The SLS is said to sound good and 0.87 Qtc is certainly good enough.
There are very few drivers that are cheap, low Fs enough with T&S to hit the cabinet volume and widely distributed...
Perhaps a Goodmans cheap 12" ? Not sure the 40 Hz is feasible, they are cheap but their Fs is high ! Perhaps it worths to check at Part Express.
In France it is 170 x 2 / SLS is 100 x 2 / XXLS >=200 euros x 2 . For sure it seems there are more North America zone people here.
The SLS is said to sound good and 0.87 Qtc is certainly good enough.
There are very few drivers that are cheap, low Fs enough with T&S to hit the cabinet volume and widely distributed...
Perhaps a Goodmans cheap 12" ? Not sure the 40 Hz is feasible, they are cheap but their Fs is high ! Perhaps it worths to check at Part Express.
The problem with the SLS is that it needs a much biger cabinet to go that low. In a 50L it has an F3 of 50 and an F6 of 40, that is higher than we wanted i thought. In a 60L it's a bit lower, but not that much.
Seems a bit low to me, the Kef 104/2 has a50 Hz-isch F3 and they lacked lows to me. But dunno if because of F3 or the Qtc....
Are there cheaper drivers than the SB34RNX75-6 going as low or lower but vented this time ?
Are there cheaper drivers than the SB34RNX75-6 going as low or lower but vented this time ?
Is a series cap an option?
Disadvantage is the steeper rolloff and consequently slightly higher group delay.
I think we will end up at a much lower cost, and complexity than the other thread. No need to end the thread.
That is why i suggested orignally other drivers like the 10FE330. They are cheaper and fit that format. But people thought they were not good enough. The SLS-P830668 also would fit that. Both are 10" and go loud enough for hifi (+105dB/1m) i think. Both are for sale worldwide for prices much cheaper than the SB34
But the other tread was more about 1000£, what is roughly 1200€ as limit for drivers, so 600 is halve of that.
But the other tread was more about 1000£, what is roughly 1200€ as limit for drivers, so 600 is halve of that.
I think low woofer distortion at reasonable SPL is a good goal. Well Duh! The mid, and tweeter might have a high distortion when pushed . Having a 12" woofer that is coasting along, may allow some use of EQ to boost the low end. I mentioned before that my room boosts 50hz significantly. If a room boosts 45hz by 6dB, you can end up with too much low end. For some people too much, is just right. If in that room, you use EQ to cut around 45hz, now the power required is less, and the effective f3 is lower (sometimes) I think. Also, there's less heating of the voice coil. But maybe boosting 30hz is an option, if not done so foolishly by the end user.
It's hard not to have brand bias. There are some I would not consider for my use. They may be great. It may vary with different models. I like a lot of Daytons I've used, but there have been some models that I did not care for. Same with some other brands.
Last edited:
Where do you have this price ?? I forget to check la companie acoustique de belgique but it is still 180eu
TLHP 😉
ANyway it is more expensive in USD, up to our cousins to see if the price can enter in an low budget. Here a 25 USD midwoof :
Also wideworld avialable : cheap and good mid with efficienty to figth the baffle step, almost no break-ups, filter friendly : I talked about that in the other thread : https://techtalk.parts-express.com/.../64750-tymphany-fsl-0512r01-08-5-25-midwoofer
ANyway it is more expensive in USD, up to our cousins to see if the price can enter in an low budget. Here a 25 USD midwoof :
Also wideworld avialable : cheap and good mid with efficienty to figth the baffle step, almost no break-ups, filter friendly : I talked about that in the other thread : https://techtalk.parts-express.com/.../64750-tymphany-fsl-0512r01-08-5-25-midwoofer