Someone will have to explain to me CLIO's right Y axis- is that percentage distortion that it is showing?
my sample of SB26CDC-
Another view of the same measurement:
My SB26ADC measure virtually identically. Choose black or white hard dome, IMHO.
If you don't want a ceramic/aluminium, all the 26mm dome SB tweeters below have a healthy +/- 0.6mm x-max, with the same motor/magnet system.
Soft dome with or without waveguide.
Bonus: both have aluminum faceplates (the aforementioned are plastic)
SB26 STAC
Soft dome, aluminium faceplate, rear chambered
SB26 STWGC
Soft dome, aluminium faceplate, waveguide, rear chamber
Much easier to understand their product offerings using the catalogue book:
https://sbacoustics.com/3d-flip-book/sb-acoustics-tweeters-flipbook/
my sample of SB26CDC-
Another view of the same measurement:
My SB26ADC measure virtually identically. Choose black or white hard dome, IMHO.
If you don't want a ceramic/aluminium, all the 26mm dome SB tweeters below have a healthy +/- 0.6mm x-max, with the same motor/magnet system.
Soft dome with or without waveguide.
Bonus: both have aluminum faceplates (the aforementioned are plastic)
SB26 STAC
Soft dome, aluminium faceplate, rear chambered
SB26 STWGC
Soft dome, aluminium faceplate, waveguide, rear chamber
Much easier to understand their product offerings using the catalogue book:
https://sbacoustics.com/3d-flip-book/sb-acoustics-tweeters-flipbook/
Last edited:
It is about the waveguide. And matching directivity to the mid/reducing secondary sources from sharp enclosure edges.
Getting a waveguide on the SB sets you back another tweeter, cost-wise. Been there done that (have an SB ADC on an Augerpro guide lying around, waiting for some project implementation time…).
Getting a waveguide on the SB sets you back another tweeter, cost-wise. Been there done that (have an SB ADC on an Augerpro guide lying around, waiting for some project implementation time…).
The thing is, the concept of this speaker is no waveguide. The original monkey coffins did not have that and the wide dispertion is a part of the sound of that concept. For waveguided speakers go to the thread of Andy.
To bring you back to the original concept of this divertion of the tread of andy :
A classic monkeybox 3 way with a big (10-12") woofer, a small mid and tweeter on a flat front panel
driver cost under 300 per speaker
easy to build with average skills
Passive crossover (active possible)
40-20k flat (harman curve) as target, but no monitor precsion is needed.
drivable with average integrated amp (50w or more).
A classic monkeybox 3 way with a big (10-12") woofer, a small mid and tweeter on a flat front panel
driver cost under 300 per speaker
easy to build with average skills
Passive crossover (active possible)
40-20k flat (harman curve) as target, but no monitor precsion is needed.
drivable with average integrated amp (50w or more).
this is a commercial example of what the goal was:
Warfdale Linton Classic
JBL L100
Harbeth M40.3
Warfdale Linton Classic
JBL L100
Harbeth M40.3
Are we attempting to replicate the looks and performance?
Or just the looks?
And improve on the originals?
Even JBL put waveguides on the 2018 “L100 Classic”
… proper crossovers, proper damping, proper bracing.
The original L100 Century, as pictured previously, ran their thin paper cone woofers and midranges without crossovers, had a paper cone tweeter, without any cabinet bracing or deadening/damping that we understand to improve speakers today.
Reference:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/audio/jbl/l100.htm
Or just the looks?
And improve on the originals?
Even JBL put waveguides on the 2018 “L100 Classic”
… proper crossovers, proper damping, proper bracing.
The original L100 Century, as pictured previously, ran their thin paper cone woofers and midranges without crossovers, had a paper cone tweeter, without any cabinet bracing or deadening/damping that we understand to improve speakers today.
Reference:
https://www.kenrockwell.com/audio/jbl/l100.htm
Last edited:
We keep the look and layout, but with modern drivers and computer design. But we keep also the way it works in a room (so wide dispertion/wide baffle).
And The L100 is not unfiltered, the tweeter and mid have a cap to filter the low out. and there were Lpads also. But it's a very minimal filter, that is true. With modern hardcone drivers you can't do that. With the paper drivers like those used there it can, because they resonances are very minimal. I would do a real modern crossover, that is designed on measurements.
But it's not about that, it's the wide baflle box with all drivers on a flat surface that counts, not how we do the crossover itself. That kind of layout creates a sound that may not be what today is considered hifi by the nerds (like here), but is what many like. I got tons of requests for designs like that by people who know i know something about loudspeaker design, but outside the SB Gema i don't know kits that exist. The Tarkus is also popular for that reason, but is to big for many, or they don't like that it's two speakers, they want one cabinet.
And The L100 is not unfiltered, the tweeter and mid have a cap to filter the low out. and there were Lpads also. But it's a very minimal filter, that is true. With modern hardcone drivers you can't do that. With the paper drivers like those used there it can, because they resonances are very minimal. I would do a real modern crossover, that is designed on measurements.
But it's not about that, it's the wide baflle box with all drivers on a flat surface that counts, not how we do the crossover itself. That kind of layout creates a sound that may not be what today is considered hifi by the nerds (like here), but is what many like. I got tons of requests for designs like that by people who know i know something about loudspeaker design, but outside the SB Gema i don't know kits that exist. The Tarkus is also popular for that reason, but is to big for many, or they don't like that it's two speakers, they want one cabinet.
Wide baffle; less need for baffle step loss compensation on the woofer.
But a wider baffle-> narrower dispersion as frequency increases
Asymmetric driver layout- smoother on axis response; but asymmetric dispersion.
Reference:
Same drivers in different cabinets
This kind of affordable monkey box concept has been around for a long time Eg. kit from 2009 with single SB34NRX-6 in 100L
http://www.zaphaudio.com/SB12.3/
But a wider baffle-> narrower dispersion as frequency increases
Asymmetric driver layout- smoother on axis response; but asymmetric dispersion.
Reference:
Same drivers in different cabinets
This kind of affordable monkey box concept has been around for a long time Eg. kit from 2009 with single SB34NRX-6 in 100L
http://www.zaphaudio.com/SB12.3/
That Zaph speaker is not a classic monkeybox, it's an MTMW floorstander. So not what we are after.
The thing too is we have to go for best bang for the buck. It’s hard (not impossible) to get directivity right with a 5” mid and a bare 1” tweeter. The average paper cone mid drops off axis from 1k, typically 3dB at 2k and 60 degrees, IEC baffle. The average 1” tweeter starts doing that at 4-5k. Leaving too much energy in a very important octave. But one could of course drop on axis response at 3k, like we used to do in bygone years…
What's wrong with the Marshall Leach Laboratory Standard Loudspeaker, three way with Eminence 10" woofer, closed back peerless mr, and vifa tweeter?
you mean that the tweeter plate is not flat, that is technically a waveguide, but it's part of the tweeter asssembly and very minimal and for me no problem. It's a seperate waveguide, that has to be printed that is to complicating.
btw, most SB (and many other driver) also don't have a flat front plate, so it's technically also a waveguide. This is the SB26ADC, it also got a curved front plate that you call a waveguide:
It could not get more classic than with a cone tweeter ...
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
The Linton Heritage 85 anniversary in France is between 1350 to 1500 euros / pair ! Erin Corner has a measurement of it and found the off axis well controlled, hard to beat !
What we can do better ?
- bigger woofer than the 200 mm = less distorsion; possibly sealed VS vented for a better less boomy low end of a smallish commercial loudspeaker that cheats here with soso BR tunning.
- better midrange & treble unit : feasible with the drivers talked already
- Not better surface finish but stiffier cabinet (quieter) by better bracing & choosing the bass unit that permits to push the first modes upon the low pass cut off by playing on the cabinet dimension (vented here migth be whished according the T&S of the driver to reduce the cabinet volume).
12/10" + 5" + 1/1.1" seems a proper trade-off. : 5" permits to go low enough to choose an average 10"/12" that doesn't climb clean high enough. Its high-end goes high enough for a 2k5 electrical cut off (towards 2 K hz acoustical)
It is certainly feasible at a close price to the Linton and perfs, if not better perfs, if severall experienced designers from here help to the design.
Few things to solve first : size of the cabinet(so choice of the woofer) : 70L load for the woof load makes an even bigger cabinet than the OSMC at the end if you add the midrange. 55L load for the woof gives a more friendly looking (spouse peace).
I played yesterday with the SB34RNX75-6 to see if 70L could be lowed. 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. Seems okay to me, but it is just a sim. Is such a driver no too much noisy in such a little load ?
The 12"SLS becomes less good at cabinet size game !
So it is possible one needs to push a little the price of the bass unit or go vented to have the help of a port and lower cabinet size with the rigth driver.
@shadowplay62 illustrated that well in his sims here by mixing sealed and vented sims according the driver spec.
What we can do better ?
- bigger woofer than the 200 mm = less distorsion; possibly sealed VS vented for a better less boomy low end of a smallish commercial loudspeaker that cheats here with soso BR tunning.
- better midrange & treble unit : feasible with the drivers talked already
- Not better surface finish but stiffier cabinet (quieter) by better bracing & choosing the bass unit that permits to push the first modes upon the low pass cut off by playing on the cabinet dimension (vented here migth be whished according the T&S of the driver to reduce the cabinet volume).
12/10" + 5" + 1/1.1" seems a proper trade-off. : 5" permits to go low enough to choose an average 10"/12" that doesn't climb clean high enough. Its high-end goes high enough for a 2k5 electrical cut off (towards 2 K hz acoustical)
It is certainly feasible at a close price to the Linton and perfs, if not better perfs, if severall experienced designers from here help to the design.
Few things to solve first : size of the cabinet(so choice of the woofer) : 70L load for the woof load makes an even bigger cabinet than the OSMC at the end if you add the midrange. 55L load for the woof gives a more friendly looking (spouse peace).
I played yesterday with the SB34RNX75-6 to see if 70L could be lowed. 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. Seems okay to me, but it is just a sim. Is such a driver no too much noisy in such a little load ?
The 12"SLS becomes less good at cabinet size game !
So it is possible one needs to push a little the price of the bass unit or go vented to have the help of a port and lower cabinet size with the rigth driver.
@shadowplay62 illustrated that well in his sims here by mixing sealed and vented sims according the driver spec.
Last edited:
I've posted an example on the other thread - https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-box-coffin-group-project.423501/post-7935481
How does the size of those speakers compare with my box size estimate in this sketch? My sketch was an estimate, and might need to be larger depending on the little details. I posted it just as a visual reference to just how large these speakers might be. Dimensions are inches.