Any extra internal solid consuming volume/material will kill bass output comparing without it. The more volume the better the bass output. Specially for this relative small volumes. If you want to add any bracing please install this outside the cabinet as I said before. Again, this cabinet really dont need any bracing. It is so small and narrow it will be total over kill and brings you noting. If you built wider and deeper cabinets it will give noticeable effects. So my advice, keep this narrow cabinet as clean as possible inside for getting the best and lowest bass output.To those lurkers, Hondasnl has shown a blatant disregard for solid feedback in many of hgis builds if it goes against the “truths” he has exposed in his naratibves and builds.
I would pay attention to what Scott says.
Even these tiny little boxes benefit from a holey brace, Not so much related to the box itself, but how the driver performs becomes part of the box. Bracve does not affect the bass, but improves DDR.
That is a 3” driver.
dave
A square version with the same external dimensions offers the same stability as a round one in the x and y directions.
I like the round version more than a square one ;-).
Attachments
Last edited:
Only a little bit extra weight is missing but overall more than stable enough. Depends on the specific mass of the used material.
Attachments
Last edited:
How many times do you expect me to repeat myself addressing your constant lying about the optional internal longitudinal bracing? The most recent was only in Post 42, and it was getting tedious then:
I'm wondering how many times I have to repeat that it is:
a/ Accounted for in the design volume & cross section,
b/ Was the default assumption (not having any is actually the change, not the other way around), and
c/ This was tested and measured. I've given the factual results above.
Now: where is your comparative data? You are making very strong statements as if they were fact about somebody else's design, and when you are asked to prove it, you admit you haven't in fact done any testing, structural analysis or anything else at all, and it's just your opinion, which you're repeating in the face of fact.
Once again: the assumed minimal longitudinal bracing is not necessary -Lhotse is already a relatively rigid structure with the design materials, and you will get good results without it. However, it does increase the lateral panel rigidity, which can be useful around the main bending modes, and if the driver motor structure is braced to the rear of the enclosure, there is a small reduction in (primarily) HD. It's not shown in the sketches simply because I'm lousy at drawing, and Markaudio don't like the sketches to be visually complex, since they believe it either confuses or frightens off potential buyers. However, it's mentioned in the notes. Because the volume taken up by the assumed bracing was assumed to be present when designing the load, there is no change involved in the alignment. Omitting it results in about 1/4dB - 1/3dB increase in output at Fb over what was intended. This was all tested; it's part of the wider Himalaya / Mountain series of boxes & I put a lot of work and, for me, money (which I don't get back -I don't get expenses) into those. In practice this is all well within driver production tolerance, variations in damping material, and even changes in the local climatic conditions.
Those are the facts -nothing unusual. To be honest, I'm a bit stumped why anybody would try to claim otherwise, since it's not true, and also a distraction from what's otherwise a very nice build thread.
Hi, as much if you want ;-).
Any extra internal solid consuming volume/material will kill bass output comparing without it. The more volume the better the bass output. Specially for this relative small volumes. If you want to add any bracing please install this outside the cabinet as I said before. Again, this cabinet really dont need any bracing. It is so small and narrow it will be total over kill and brings you noting. If you built wider and deeper cabinets it will give noticeable effects. So my advice, keep this narrow cabinet as clean as possible inside for getting the best and lowest bass output.
Any extra internal solid consuming volume/material will kill bass output comparing without it. The more volume the better the bass output. Specially for this relative small volumes. If you want to add any bracing please install this outside the cabinet as I said before. Again, this cabinet really dont need any bracing. It is so small and narrow it will be total over kill and brings you noting. If you built wider and deeper cabinets it will give noticeable effects. So my advice, keep this narrow cabinet as clean as possible inside for getting the best and lowest bass output.
Nope.
Any extra internal solid consuming volume/material will kill bass output comparing without it. The more volume the better and deeper the bass output. Specially for this relative small volume / cross section. If you want to add any bracing please install this outside the cabinet as I said before. Again, this cabinet really dont need any bracing. It is so small and narrow it will be total over kill and brings you noting. If you built wider and deeper cabinets it will give noticeable effects. So my advice, keep this narrow cabinet as clean as possible inside for getting the best and lowest bass output.
Any extra internal solid consuming volume/material will kill bass output comparing without it. The more volume the better and deeper the bass output. Specially for this relative small volume / cross section. If you want to add any bracing please install this outside the cabinet as I said before. Again, this cabinet really dont need any bracing. It is so small and narrow it will be total over kill and brings you noting. If you built wider and deeper cabinets it will give noticeable effects. So my advice, keep this narrow cabinet as clean as possible inside for getting the best and lowest bass output.
And the lie comes again. What do you mean 'nope'? The volume for the bracing is accounted for (included) in the alignment. It is not an 'extra' since it was assumed present when the alignment was designed. Which part of that are you finding so difficult to understand?
Those are the facts. You didn't design this speaker. Stop contradicting the reality given to you by the person who actually did. You haven't a clue what you are talking about, and you are wasting your own, and everybody else's time.I'm wondering how many times I have to repeat that it is:
a/ Accounted for in the design volume & cross section,
b/ Was the default assumption (not having any is actually the change, not the other way around), and
c/ This was tested and measured. I've given the factual results above.
Now: where is your comparative data? You are making very strong statements as if they were fact about somebody else's design, and when you are asked to prove it, you admit you haven't in fact done any testing, structural analysis or anything else at all, and it's just your opinion, which you're repeating in the face of fact.
Once again: the assumed minimal longitudinal bracing is not necessary -Lhotse is already a relatively rigid structure with the design materials, and you will get good results without it. However, it does increase the lateral panel rigidity, which can be useful around the main bending modes, and if the driver motor structure is braced to the rear of the enclosure, there is a small reduction in (primarily) HD. It's not shown in the sketches simply because I'm lousy at drawing, and Markaudio don't like the sketches to be visually complex, since they believe it either confuses or frightens off potential buyers. However, it's mentioned in the notes. Because the volume taken up by the assumed bracing was assumed to be present when designing the load, there is no change involved in the alignment. Omitting it results in about 1/4dB - 1/3dB increase in output at Fb over what was intended. This was all tested; it's part of the wider Himalaya / Mountain series of boxes & I put a lot of work and, for me, money (which I don't get back -I don't get expenses) into those. In practice this is all well within driver production tolerance, variations in damping material, and even changes in the local climatic conditions.
Those are the facts -nothing unusual. To be honest, I'm a bit stumped why anybody would try to claim otherwise, since it's not true, and also a distraction from what's otherwise a very nice build thread.
The square the circle is cut out of would be more stable, because the corners stick out, circle will fall over in any direction, a square or rectangle would be restricted at a non-orthoganol angle of fall.
dave
Hi Dave imaging the specific mass of the used material is very light then the difference will be nihil, thats what I mean.
And a square feet I don't like. I bump my toes against it and the vacuum cleaner.
Hi Dave imaging the specific mass of the used material is very light, then the difference will be nihil, thats what I mean.
And a square feet I don't like. I bump my toes against it and the vacuum cleaner.
I have. That's the problem. You're repeating an untruth. I appreciate you don't want to believe it, but 'wishing don't make it so'.
If this were a situation where something is just chucked in without regard for alignment or anything else -you'd be correct in that it would change the alignment, although especially with acoustically large enclosures, you are significantly exaggerating the effect. But that is not the case here, since there are no additions or changes involved, as mild longitudinal bracing was assumed to be present, and designed in from the outset. Are you claiming it wasn't? Since you didn't design this enclosure, that's a bit of an odd claim to make in the face of what you've been repeatedly told by the person who did, and what is in fact clearly stated in the design notes!
If this were a situation where something is just chucked in without regard for alignment or anything else -you'd be correct in that it would change the alignment, although especially with acoustically large enclosures, you are significantly exaggerating the effect. But that is not the case here, since there are no additions or changes involved, as mild longitudinal bracing was assumed to be present, and designed in from the outset. Are you claiming it wasn't? Since you didn't design this enclosure, that's a bit of an odd claim to make in the face of what you've been repeatedly told by the person who did, and what is in fact clearly stated in the design notes!
Is this primer paint layer you have used?
I like to finish the baffle of the Lhotse with: https://www.behangwereld.nl/a-23845034/plakplastic-steen/plakplastic-graniet-grijsblauw-45cm-breed-x-2m/?utm_source=GoogleShopping&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=PLAKPLASTIC/Plakplastic steen&utm_content=Plakplastic&gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI_rGLi5GuigMVpoODBx15Qy4HEAQYASABEgKob_D_BwE#description
A perfect match with my superior recommended massive granit feets.
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
🤮
The difference between a double MDF round base and a square base will make little to no difference in terms of stability for such a high speaker cabinet.
You really need more mass material.
Prefer these? The shape certainly beats a rectangular box with a "plumbing pipe” vent.
dave
No but the box is doubke MDF so not light.
The shape of the base will be more important than it mass (near negligible) given the mass it is trying to stabilize.
dave
This looks much better!Prefer these? The shape certainly beats a rectangular box with a "plumbing pipe” vent.
dave
Only the stands.......
- Status
- Not open for further replies.