also don't overlook Planet10's Fonken - the bass response never ceases to amaze the non-initiated "OK, where are you hiding the woofers?"
With only a minor change to the size of port slots, this design will also work with Fostex FE127; I spent a couple of hours last night listening to a pair. It's certainly a matter of personal preference that I always gravitate back to either this driver or the FE126 in a BLH.
With only a minor change to the size of port slots, this design will also work with Fostex FE127; I spent a couple of hours last night listening to a pair. It's certainly a matter of personal preference that I always gravitate back to either this driver or the FE126 in a BLH.
my subwoofer has XLR high pass outputs, is there a way of connecting this to my speakers (when i finish them)?
or can i make a seperate high pass filter (that i can plug in and unplug) around 80Hz so that i can integrate it into my subwoofer?
(p.s. my subwoofer is a Tannoy TS8)
or can i make a seperate high pass filter (that i can plug in and unplug) around 80Hz so that i can integrate it into my subwoofer?
(p.s. my subwoofer is a Tannoy TS8)
inrank said:
Solid core. Teflon typically prefered over PVC insulation (but PVC is way more common and cheaper). My cryoed Cat 4 is PVC.
dave
Vikash said:
13 litres seems to be a sweet spot. Works for BR, aperiodic & sealed. MiniOs are 13 l. I've yet to draw up a more typical (and simplier0 shelf port or plumbing pipe port version.
dave
Why do you separate them?planet10 said:
The capacitance has to be very low to start with as those cat5 cables have to be able to carry very high MHz frequency signals and by separating them you actually increase the inductive impedance which usually affects the highs more than the capacitance.
I was thinking of running one terminal to one polarity pair pole and the other to the other one. That' would be four conductors per speaker terminal and the other four for for the other and each pair will be feeding both terminals and all four pairs will be in parallel. This will give the lowest inductive impedance.
audioaficionado said:
Because it sounds better?
You just described Chris' previous speaker cable. I brought over my single separated pair for comparison. I was not allowed to take mine home.
2 wires. Separated. I know it is a lot of work to peel them apart, but it is worth it.
dave
Hmmm...planet10 said:
I'll have to play with this 13L sim in BBL6 both sealed & BR. Would it be a safe assumption that the aperiodic curves would fall between the first two?
Why do you think that is?planet10 said:
How far apart are they separated and what do you use to keep them separated?
audioaficionado said:
Because that's what my ears said.
I took a piece of packing tape, and taped it sticky side up on the floor. I ran one strand about a 1/2" from one edge, and then another strand about a 1/2" from the other. I made sure they were not perfectly parallel -- in this case a bit sloppy is good. I then put a piece of packing tape sticky side down over the works. Then for toughness i added one more layer of packing tape on either side.
I'd take a picture but i have to make a new set.
dave
Theoretically a twisted pair has much better shielding than separated cables. I would try both before jumping into conclusions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"my subwoofer has XLR high pass outputs, is there a way of connecting this to my speakers (when i finish them)?
or can i make a seperate high pass filter (that i can plug in and unplug) around 80Hz so that i can integrate it into my subwoofer?
(p.s. my subwoofer is a Tannoy TS8)"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone?
"my subwoofer has XLR high pass outputs, is there a way of connecting this to my speakers (when i finish them)?
or can i make a seperate high pass filter (that i can plug in and unplug) around 80Hz so that i can integrate it into my subwoofer?
(p.s. my subwoofer is a Tannoy TS8)"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone?
XLR is line-level, so you'll need an amp after them. This is possible if you have separable pre- and power-amp stages.
Edit: I don't think passive high-pass is such a good idea with FR125S. If you have an AV-receiver, it should have optional active high pass for all speakers.
Edit: I don't think passive high-pass is such a good idea with FR125S. If you have an AV-receiver, it should have optional active high pass for all speakers.
well at the moment i have a NAD L53 reciever, but in the future i want to build my own pre/power amp for my finished speaker.
Bas Horneman said:
A passive 1st order highpass at ~80Hz on speaker level will need pretty big caps and these going to be pretty expansive and BIG, unless you ecxept cheap elcos in your signal path. Also IMO it is going to need an Impedance Equalization Circuit (a zobel network in paralell to the speaker to flatten the impedance peak around fb) for the xo to work properly. This IEC again will need some big inductors and caps.
best, LC
And considering the low efficiency of the driver, even more power will be wasted. If you add a BSC, the situation will be even worse.
The sub amplifier has already done that at line level.
But I thought there might be some reason other than cost/complexity and efficiency which are seldom reasons for diy'ers to do things otherwise 😉
Best,
bas
Bas Horneman said:
Hi
Well, depends on the diy'er, but effciency will get a very high rating from most fullrangers.
There might be a diy way to adress this on line level, for folks like me who don't really like the idea of using commercial active subs (as they mostly have bad amps or are very expansive).
On t-linesspeakers is a article on a diy passive line level xo - PLLXO - you will need a second poweramp for the bass section then, but it's a more diy'fish way than some commercial active sub...
best, LC
- Status
- Not open for further replies.