Okay. I'm finishing some cabinets for the reference 127 monopole design with some added height I had planned to use as a separate compartment and fill with shot.
Now, I'm reading the praises of the 167 (especially the increase in SPL compared to the 127) and thinking that I could easily adjust the height of the shot compartment to get the 167's recommended 15 liters – but, of course, a couple of problems. First driver and port location, second there would only be about 4-5" in depth, almost the depth of the driver itself. Now maybe that might be helpful for bracing but what about the standing waves (I've had good luck with Deflex in the past, but this might be too much).
So the question – is the depth too narrow to even consider this? If not any suggestions on driver/port location? Should I just stick with the 127?
Thanks.
Now, I'm reading the praises of the 167 (especially the increase in SPL compared to the 127) and thinking that I could easily adjust the height of the shot compartment to get the 167's recommended 15 liters – but, of course, a couple of problems. First driver and port location, second there would only be about 4-5" in depth, almost the depth of the driver itself. Now maybe that might be helpful for bracing but what about the standing waves (I've had good luck with Deflex in the past, but this might be too much).
So the question – is the depth too narrow to even consider this? If not any suggestions on driver/port location? Should I just stick with the 127?
Thanks.
The 127 is great... i also have the 168S and it's great too.
Subjectively they seem nearly identical in efficiency.
Godzilla
Subjectively they seem nearly identical in efficiency.
Godzilla
I love the 167E. As I've said before, I think it is greatly underrated on these forums. However, trying to fit the 167E into too small a box is not going to give you the results you deserve. Finish your project with the 127E's and some time down the road, do the 167E's right.
Bob
Bob
- Status
- Not open for further replies.