Thankyou for all of the constructive input so far! The consensus seems to be that, as I feared, the design is fundamentally flawed, particularly concerning the port (its size, shape, placement, etc.).
The easiest thing I can do is simply block the port at the internal opening (with polyfill, wood, concrete, whatever) which will give me a ~2.8l sealed box which will be very similar to Vikash's as linked earlier. But can anybody comment on the WinISD graph I posted of such a cabinet? From my limited knowledge it looks dreadful?
I'm going to leave some Breakage on repeat when I go to work tomorrow. Even if these cabinets never sound very nice I can at least re-use the 'pre-broken-in' drivers in something else 🙂chris661 said:
I'm up in Fife.chris661 said:
I'm not sure what you mean by a triangle box?ODougbo said:
It isn't mounted flush yet because I wanted to test with both different drivers I have & the others don't mount the same. I will flush mount them at some point (if it's worth pursuing these boxes!).profring said:
26cm is the entire distance along the centre of the port including the fold.Bjohannesen said:
Internal dimensions are 108mm tall & 170mm wide. Depth is 148mm at the bottom, 175mm at the top. Total volume is 2.95l minus the volume of the driver/wires/connectors so I estimate 2.8l useful volume.Bjohannesen said:
I took a look at the TABAQ 'Box' but as I have a sub for everything beneath 125Hz I wanted to try for something smaller. Maybe I should've just gone with your design, at least then it would've worked!Bjohannesen said:
The easiest thing I can do is simply block the port at the internal opening (with polyfill, wood, concrete, whatever) which will give me a ~2.8l sealed box which will be very similar to Vikash's as linked earlier. But can anybody comment on the WinISD graph I posted of such a cabinet? From my limited knowledge it looks dreadful?
Tbh after a recent venture into small full rangers I concluded they just can't cut the mustard. They have to work hard for not a lot of sound out which makes them sound awful even when I had them crossed at 100Hz. By the look of full rangers especially Fostex I think they are pointless. They can't create any reasonable SPL for the dynamics in music even their in large cabinets. For the same money you could get a half decent woofer/tweeter combination actively cross them in a small simple box as a large Fostex driver and you will get far better performance with the two way. Personally I'll only go two way now.
Full range are something but not Hi-Fi that's for sure.
Full range are something but not Hi-Fi that's for sure.
There is one more aspect. I thought it is mistake but possible not.Xmax for this driver is 0.5 mm. Presumed that it is one-way xmax, any vented design will be against nature of this speaker. Even being in closed box, speaker must be high-passed by filter 100-150Hz.
(1) Yes add a bit of damping material, close of the ports.
BTW, Did you every check the tuning? Not hard to do with a generator, resistor, voltmeter. If the box is tuned where you wanted, maybe you could flip the woofer to the back, although it would right over the port, so the sound my just spill into it and sound about the same.
Might be able to use this for tuning, although the voice-over might ruin the test http://realmofexcursion.com/downloads.htm
Don't forget to chamfer the cutout on the next go-around.
Do you have an old 1970's receiver laying around? I hooked my very old Sansui 7070 (which was close to be thrown away) and hooked it up to a pair of Fostex FX-120s. It sounds great; people that hear them are impressed (they all say wow!)
Madisound Speaker Store
pm me a email address, I'll send pics of triangle boxes.
BTW, Did you every check the tuning? Not hard to do with a generator, resistor, voltmeter. If the box is tuned where you wanted, maybe you could flip the woofer to the back, although it would right over the port, so the sound my just spill into it and sound about the same.
Might be able to use this for tuning, although the voice-over might ruin the test http://realmofexcursion.com/downloads.htm
Don't forget to chamfer the cutout on the next go-around.
Do you have an old 1970's receiver laying around? I hooked my very old Sansui 7070 (which was close to be thrown away) and hooked it up to a pair of Fostex FX-120s. It sounds great; people that hear them are impressed (they all say wow!)
Madisound Speaker Store
pm me a email address, I'll send pics of triangle boxes.
Boscoe, where are you drawing the line, 3"?
Actually, I do have 3", didn't do much with them (so far). I built some cabs for Fostex 4", there is plenty of sound, and never turn the volume more than 1/4 turn.
Actually, I do have 3", didn't do much with them (so far). I built some cabs for Fostex 4", there is plenty of sound, and never turn the volume more than 1/4 turn.
Attachments
I knew fullrange wasn't going to compete with a decent multi-way box, but I was hoping for a bit more than I got. Perhaps if I had build a tried & tested fullrange cabinet my first experience with them wouldn't have been so bad! Do you happen to know of any 'small' 2-way cabinet designs that will play down to ~125Hz? I'm not asking for specifics, just a direction to start reading/searching in.
Many of the 3" TB drivers quote a 0.5mm xmax but there are plenty of examples of people using them well beyond that in 'fulllrange' designs who seem to be happy. Naturally xmech is probably approaching 5mm peak-to-peak. However I usually have my crossover set around 140Hz so that wasn't a huge concern for me.Moon Track said:
They do sound a lot better with the ports closed & a decent amount of padding inside. Still not amazing, but certainly good enough that I'm not going to use them as firewood! They are a bit too forward/fatiguing which is the same as Vikash found (not surprising as my cabinets closely resemble his now) which he addressed with a filter, so I may look into that.ODougbo said:
I'll probably wait until the weekend to properly modify the boxes - block the ports with mdf, chamfer the inside of the mount, flush mount the driver. Then I can do some more 'scientific' tests with a tone generator (I use ecasound) & whatnot.
I've done away with all of my 'vintage' amplification unfortunately, all I have to hand now are chipamps/class D; I'm using a pair of LM3886 monoblocks for my mains atm.
Have you ever taken a look at FAST (Full range And Subwoofer Technology) designs? they are doing almost exactly what you want, a small full range driver supported by a sub.
Some links: Nescio - high end FAST met DSP (in dutch but a lot of good info there, google can probably help you with the translation)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/markaudio/196167-markaudio-fullrange-woofer-6-fast.html
Some links: Nescio - high end FAST met DSP (in dutch but a lot of good info there, google can probably help you with the translation)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/markaudio/196167-markaudio-fullrange-woofer-6-fast.html
Last edited:
Feel free to think what you want but you might want to think about where your posting this. There are quite a few believers here, including myself, and calling all full range speakers not hi-Fi is a blatant hasty generalization. I guarantee that if you heard some of the systems pictured on this part of the forum you would rethink.
And yes you can get a fair amount of spl from a midsized full range driver, given a 3" will not be able tto compete with a 8". Sure a midsized fostex is not going to rattle the walls without a sub but it can be painfully loud. And it will have many benefits over a multiway system such as soundstage and phase coherence.
Don't disrespect an entire genre of speakers just because of a few experiences with some "small full rangers"
Hmmmm...
To some extent, I agree: they're not to everyone's taste. If you're after huge dynamics or simply lots of sound, one driver per side can't do it.
I'm working on a FR + woofer design with the crossover at ~2-400Hz, having concluded that, while subwoofers (80Hz 4th order LR XO) help to alleviate the above symptoms, the problems still linger.
Apart from the Founteks, what other FR designs have you heard? I'm curious.
Chris
Not sure I'd jump ship on FR yet, it seems like the was the goal, FRs do "ozz simplicity" The 125 are great little speakers, you simply cannot tell where the sound is coming from.
That said, here is a link for the HDS Madisound 2-way, a great deal; the sound is crystal clear, and natural. I have one for a center channel; we can't tell real sounds vs. what is coming from the speaker.
Hds kits by madisound
That said, here is a link for the HDS Madisound 2-way, a great deal; the sound is crystal clear, and natural. I have one for a center channel; we can't tell real sounds vs. what is coming from the speaker.
Hds kits by madisound
Attachments
that hds, I'm having trouble with seeing the x-over.
Is it a single cap on the tweet ?
or is it simple 6db crossover ? If so, i'd imagine the vocals are good.
Norman
Is it a single cap on the tweet ?
or is it simple 6db crossover ? If so, i'd imagine the vocals are good.
Norman
I bet somebody could read this better than me, but I think that coil is across the tweeter. It's a sweet deal: ring tweeter, 2 woofers and crossover, $132.
HDS Home Theater Kit - Parts Only: Madisound Speaker Store
HDS Home Theater Kit - Parts Only: Madisound Speaker Store
Attachments
Since the schematic and graphs are unavailiable from madisound, it may be no longer availiable.
If it was 6db woof and 6db tweet, I'd be tempted.
Norman
If it was 6db woof and 6db tweet, I'd be tempted.
Norman
Even though it is not much, but Im a bit usure about your dimensions.
Have you measured the port lenght in the middle of the port channel?
In the pictures it looks shorter!?
As said the port resonance is quite heavy. A smaller shorter port would be better.
Also the resonace in the enclosure is a problem with the big port.
Can you change the crossover frequency for the sub easy (activ)?
For an easy testing without modifying the enclosure I would stuff the enclosure AND port with polyfill (sonofil ...) to get a (almost) closed box (The W3-926Sd should be quite ok in a ~3l box).
So you can hear the speaker without the resonaces of/through the port.
If your box is not in a bookshelf you also need a BSC/notch.
(With one notch in "simulation" I got 1,5mH|2,2uF|5,6Ohm)
Andreas
Hi Lost Eden, I have run some simulations of your cabinet.
The tuning is about 85 Hz, but with an unwanted peak and drop at about 600 Hz. However, it should play all right.
You need stuffing in the "chamber" not in the port. Use 0.094 lb, which is a rather hard damping. The bass is good, for this driver and the small cabinet. However, you will have to live wih the peak / drop. I am not sure you would hear it playing music.
Please find more details in the document attached.
Hi from
Bjorn J
The tuning is about 85 Hz, but with an unwanted peak and drop at about 600 Hz. However, it should play all right.
You need stuffing in the "chamber" not in the port. Use 0.094 lb, which is a rather hard damping. The bass is good, for this driver and the small cabinet. However, you will have to live wih the peak / drop. I am not sure you would hear it playing music.
Please find more details in the document attached.
Hi from
Bjorn J
Last edited:
Sorry which cabinet is this? Can't be the folded tabaq you modeled for me yesterday can it?
I think that looks like a sim for the OP lost Edens box featured in this thread
Last edited:
Yes, this simulation is quite the same than in Hornresp. But as the spl of the port resonance has the same level than the Fb (blue dotted line) Im quite sure you will hear it.
The problem with stuffing this enclosure is, IMHO, that if you fill the whole "room" (to reduce enclosure resonances) you also block the path to the port which will reduce the port efficiency.
Andreas
Hi Andreas, there is no problem stuffing the entire cabinet except the port.
At the speaker there is not much movement of the air, it is changing of preasure. At the open end there is less preasure and more "blowing". As a rule of thumb you stuff the first 2/3 (like my TABAQ).
In the case of lost eden, i used "max" stuffing to decrease the unwanted output. MJK´s spreadsheets tells you how much stuffing should be used and how to distribute it.
Another beauty of simulating with MJK´s spreadsheet is that you enter any cabinet shape and the result will be a prediction of the result.
But of course, more stuffing is less bass and more even frequencey response. I always try to get a gentle roll off at the low end to avoid "boom" bass caused by room gain.
Hi from
Wonderful Copenhagen
At the speaker there is not much movement of the air, it is changing of preasure. At the open end there is less preasure and more "blowing". As a rule of thumb you stuff the first 2/3 (like my TABAQ).
In the case of lost eden, i used "max" stuffing to decrease the unwanted output. MJK´s spreadsheets tells you how much stuffing should be used and how to distribute it.
Another beauty of simulating with MJK´s spreadsheet is that you enter any cabinet shape and the result will be a prediction of the result.
But of course, more stuffing is less bass and more even frequencey response. I always try to get a gentle roll off at the low end to avoid "boom" bass caused by room gain.
Hi from
Wonderful Copenhagen
- Status
- Not open for further replies.