I think the biggest problem is in how we define what is a sub, a woofer, and a midbass. A midbass has light cone vs typical subs being quite heavy, with woofers somewhere in between. But yet there is a second qualifier, range. A midbass can be a sub, or a woofer, but a sub or a woofer can never be a midbass due to their limited bandwidth aka high end extension.
Yes, good, let's everyone debate MTTMWWMMTTTTMM notation, because that's such an effective way to describe a speaker in the first place. 🙄
If anyone asks what is what it is important to keep it straight to avoid confusion. It's more than symantics, it's being honest. A fact I know you realize, perhaps others do not.
A little baking soda to your vinegar 🙂
A little baking soda to your vinegar 🙂
And if I make a speaker with an MTM layout but the bottom driver is actually doing 0.5 duties? See?? 😉
So the speakers are MTM(MM) then? Right?
But is that right, shouldn't it be WTW(WW)?
I think that depends on the drivers.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
But doesn't the "W" or "M" depend on the presence or absents of a Midrange driver? We use "W" for WMT (Woofer, Mid-Range, Tweeter), but we use "M" for Mid-Bass when there is no midrange. Given that this is a 2-way or 2.5-way, the proper designation, at least for me, is "MTM(MM)". The parenthesis implying the half-way aspect; an MTM augmented with an additional (MM).
Can you tell us what the drivers are? I don't believe I saw that anywhere.
And you are calling them "Anarchy" or was that more metaphorical.
Will you use a special connector between the cabinets?
Will each cabinet contain its own relevant crossover?
Just curious.
Steve/bluewizard
But is that right, shouldn't it be WTW(WW)?
I think that depends on the drivers.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
But doesn't the "W" or "M" depend on the presence or absents of a Midrange driver? We use "W" for WMT (Woofer, Mid-Range, Tweeter), but we use "M" for Mid-Bass when there is no midrange. Given that this is a 2-way or 2.5-way, the proper designation, at least for me, is "MTM(MM)". The parenthesis implying the half-way aspect; an MTM augmented with an additional (MM).
Can you tell us what the drivers are? I don't believe I saw that anywhere.
And you are calling them "Anarchy" or was that more metaphorical.
Will you use a special connector between the cabinets?
Will each cabinet contain its own relevant crossover?
Just curious.
Steve/bluewizard
Last edited:
If TOTAL_ANARCHY is too crude sounding, a TMWWW with a SBacoustics M could be a good alternative. TMWWWW could allow a better impedance match, but might be bass heavy and appear too tall.
T = SB29RDNC-C000-4
M = SB17NRX C 35-4
W = Anarchy
T = SB29RDNC-C000-4
M = SB17NRX C 35-4
W = Anarchy
Total Anarchy - 😀
Sorry BW for the lack of detail, the Exodus Anarchy page went down, although the measurements are off anyway. I did grab some screen shots the day they were ordered. I read where Zaph did some measurements.
One reason I'm floundering with the test box, need to move the Fs down 10hz from where I am now.
Fabricating to the 48" width of the sheet, one double chamber box, 48" tall, depth is TBD and what I'm working on. If they end up being 15" deep, that would make things easier. Port now is 9" wide x 3/4" high x 11" deep.
Back up plan - been toying around with a idea about adding wedges to a port, which will add "flare" to them (cut circles and run them thought the saw). Of course that would lower the tuning and can fine tune.
[I think the speakers will be re-made someday]
Sorry BW for the lack of detail, the Exodus Anarchy page went down, although the measurements are off anyway. I did grab some screen shots the day they were ordered. I read where Zaph did some measurements.
One reason I'm floundering with the test box, need to move the Fs down 10hz from where I am now.
Fabricating to the 48" width of the sheet, one double chamber box, 48" tall, depth is TBD and what I'm working on. If they end up being 15" deep, that would make things easier. Port now is 9" wide x 3/4" high x 11" deep.
Back up plan - been toying around with a idea about adding wedges to a port, which will add "flare" to them (cut circles and run them thought the saw). Of course that would lower the tuning and can fine tune.
[I think the speakers will be re-made someday]
Attachments
Some success here, and this took a few tries 
Made the ports into 2 L's - 16" long x 3/4" wide.
New tuning:
6.5v @ 27hz
1v @ 35hz-36hz
7v @ 62hz.
With the new larger L's the box is now 40 liters.
The 55ish peak was much better and the bass does extend down very low.
Made the ports into 2 L's - 16" long x 3/4" wide.
New tuning:
6.5v @ 27hz
1v @ 35hz-36hz
7v @ 62hz.
With the new larger L's the box is now 40 liters.
The 55ish peak was much better and the bass does extend down very low.
Greenbster...past the point of no return...all xo parts, speakers, already here.
okay...a slight delay, but back on track now.
Glad I had the test box, would have been sunk without that.
Here's the layout,(which is only 1/2 the box) I expect the tuning to be 35hz in a 40liter box.
okay...a slight delay, but back on track now.
Glad I had the test box, would have been sunk without that.
Here's the layout,(which is only 1/2 the box) I expect the tuning to be 35hz in a 40liter box.
Attachments
Last edited:
Slot ports are great handles.
Pic for the build thread - been using side to "hold" pieces in place while glue sets up, e.g. the side here will lift off.
To much to glue all at one time and don't use nails so just piecing them together.
I have a pair of subs about the same size, won't that be a odd look (single fold T-TQWTs).
Pic for the build thread - been using side to "hold" pieces in place while glue sets up, e.g. the side here will lift off.
To much to glue all at one time and don't use nails so just piecing them together.
I have a pair of subs about the same size, won't that be a odd look (single fold T-TQWTs).
Attachments
OT: I am curious about what wintermute said. How many pairs have you built in the last 4 years? Just curious, 'cause I thought I was a nut.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.