That's the ones, Oliver
They're really musical instruments, rather than speakers - extraordinary achievement.
There's a site/guy called "Romy the Cat" and he has a good discussion about this approach to building speakers.
MN55
- Edward, isn't it? You had a query about some NOS large caps when moving?
They rave about the Sonus Fabers - dunno why. Now if I was looking for a really fancy Italian speaker, the Cabasse Karissima
would feature high on my list!
So would winning the Tattslotto tomorrow!!
Interesting moulded speaker called "nOrh 4.0" (sorry, no link) - got that rear tail shape (inverse taper) to cancel rear backwave.
They're really musical instruments, rather than speakers - extraordinary achievement.
There's a site/guy called "Romy the Cat" and he has a good discussion about this approach to building speakers.
MN55
- Edward, isn't it? You had a query about some NOS large caps when moving?
They rave about the Sonus Fabers - dunno why. Now if I was looking for a really fancy Italian speaker, the Cabasse Karissima
would feature high on my list!
So would winning the Tattslotto tomorrow!!
Interesting moulded speaker called "nOrh 4.0" (sorry, no link) - got that rear tail shape (inverse taper) to cancel rear backwave.
materials
I am currently working on a concept of non-box shaped cabinets that are made from multiple laminations of kraft paper (like a heavy paper roll support tube). A properly built paper cabinet is solid and monolithic (one piece) and semi tubular shapes increase the toughness of the cabinet. It does require a machine to make and there is a lot of considerations to be made there too. Don't be afraid to "think outside the box". You know, un-box-like shapes.
I am currently working on a concept of non-box shaped cabinets that are made from multiple laminations of kraft paper (like a heavy paper roll support tube). A properly built paper cabinet is solid and monolithic (one piece) and semi tubular shapes increase the toughness of the cabinet. It does require a machine to make and there is a lot of considerations to be made there too. Don't be afraid to "think outside the box". You know, un-box-like shapes.
Cabasse are french .
How about concrete on polystyrene balls ,my mate has his Coral flat 5's in concrete spheres of this mix.
Cheers
Don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but Rauna from Sweden made their speakers out of some concrete mix, but using marble dust instead of sand, and I think maybe some kind of bonding agent mixed in as well. Those cabinets are completely dead with no resonances at all. I have an old pair back in Norwa and it seems like they were made in two parts, split vertically down the middl e from the front to the back. And I'm pretty sure there is no internal bracing there either. Can't remember the wall thickness exactly, but I have a strong feeling it is about 3/4 of an inch or so.
Yes James that was me. still not done anything with them, lack of skills lack of time :etcetc:
Marble dust plus PVA plus cement powder, isn't that Terrazzo?
Saw some old made in Melbourne speakers on e*** last week made from concrete/ advertised as only massing 75Kg
Marble dust plus PVA plus cement powder, isn't that Terrazzo?
Saw some old made in Melbourne speakers on e*** last week made from concrete/ advertised as only massing 75Kg
Well, the final texture of the material is almost chalk like. It gouges quite easily, but as I said, I've never seen any material as dead as the one in those speakers.
Cardboard anyone?
I've got a free supply of large cardboard cartons from work, it's ~7mm thick
I'm thinking of glueing together a few layers to see how it works for cabs, should be good for prototypes at least, & the price is right
I've got a free supply of large cardboard cartons from work, it's ~7mm thick
I'm thinking of glueing together a few layers to see how it works for cabs, should be good for prototypes at least, & the price is right
Pete,
Lousy material - nearly transparent about the "middle C" area and "boomy as all H---"
If you want to "beef it up", can make a multiple plywood sandwich and add some "deadening" material (mudguard/panel bitumen, etc) and also make the back/sides curved.
- come to thing about it, it actually could add up to a good and simple CLD chamber (Constrained Layer Design) with all the non resonant features.
Perhaps use a mixture of non-hardening glue (rubber compound type, etc), ridgid glue and body deadener?
Lousy material - nearly transparent about the "middle C" area and "boomy as all H---"
If you want to "beef it up", can make a multiple plywood sandwich and add some "deadening" material (mudguard/panel bitumen, etc) and also make the back/sides curved.
- come to thing about it, it actually could add up to a good and simple CLD chamber (Constrained Layer Design) with all the non resonant features.
Perhaps use a mixture of non-hardening glue (rubber compound type, etc), ridgid glue and body deadener?
yeah, thought there might be a problem getting it rigid enough (mix some blue pills into the glue? 😀 )
Well it makes the cardboard itself stiffer and lighter, so I am guessing that it is more prone to vibration, buy I have used cartons to make up experimental baffles ( open back usually )
Can you afford to waste some PVA glue in an experiment??
I have the opinion ( totally unfounded and unmeasured ) that when I build boxes out of multiple layers it is the PVA that is the damping medium, why not try gluing two or three layers together;
and see ( hear? ) what happens.
If they had been 7mm thick solid I would have said no problem at all with gluing multiple layers together, we use Sonotube don't we???
Can you afford to waste some PVA glue in an experiment??
I have the opinion ( totally unfounded and unmeasured ) that when I build boxes out of multiple layers it is the PVA that is the damping medium, why not try gluing two or three layers together;
and see ( hear? ) what happens.
If they had been 7mm thick solid I would have said no problem at all with gluing multiple layers together, we use Sonotube don't we???
Here is another dumb query on this subject.
f there is an optimum mix of materials, for instance the use of MDF: chipboard and good void free plywood: is there an optimum wat to arrange the layers??
I have used ply/MDF.
I have used Ply/chipboard.
I have used Chipboard/MDF.
I haven't yet got around to using all three together, but when I do, how do I combine the layers to get the best effect??
Is it best to use 3 thick layers? or 4 or 5 or 6 or more ? thinner layers ??
Assuming I have good quality ply that can be used as a face material to save veneering ( OK! I'm lazy! ) does the MDF come as second layer or third? or do I used thinner ply say 5mm, and used Ply Chipboard, MDF and ply again??
How much experimenting have you all done and have any measurements been done to show differences between various layering methods??
f there is an optimum mix of materials, for instance the use of MDF: chipboard and good void free plywood: is there an optimum wat to arrange the layers??
I have used ply/MDF.
I have used Ply/chipboard.
I have used Chipboard/MDF.
I haven't yet got around to using all three together, but when I do, how do I combine the layers to get the best effect??
Is it best to use 3 thick layers? or 4 or 5 or 6 or more ? thinner layers ??
Assuming I have good quality ply that can be used as a face material to save veneering ( OK! I'm lazy! ) does the MDF come as second layer or third? or do I used thinner ply say 5mm, and used Ply Chipboard, MDF and ply again??
How much experimenting have you all done and have any measurements been done to show differences between various layering methods??
For me there is no option but using real wood, it gives a real warm full sound that can't be matched by ply. As for MDF well It's a big no no, cold sounding, cheap, souless and totally devoid of style and creativity. Attached is a photo of one of my midrange units made of solid burr vavona wood. The unit is 9 years old, 25mm thick and has never warped, cracked or moved. Generally when constructing sub enclosures I use 55mm thickness in walnut, oak, figured maple and ash and have never had cracking or any other sealing issues. It can get very expensive though, I built a dual 18" sub from 55mm thick finger jointed walnut and It cost £1850 to build but I sold it for £5,500!
Another benefit of using 55mm thickness is you don't have to waste time with internal bracing, adding bracing makes NO difference whatsoever at this level. 😉
Another benefit of using 55mm thickness is you don't have to waste time with internal bracing, adding bracing makes NO difference whatsoever at this level. 😉
Attachments
Village Plank said:
Really? A warm sound from "real" wood? And a cold sound from evil old MDF?
🙄
Who would have guessed...
I should have posted the link to this post by John sometime ago... my efforts were not in vain 🙂
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...rising-geddes-loudspeaker-27.html#post1494425
dave
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...rising-geddes-loudspeaker-27.html#post1494425
dave
😕
from Kstrain:
*In simplified form: the force (F) leads to a compression (x) of a massive box acording to the effective stiffness (k) as a function of frequency (think of x = F/k) , and to an acceleration (a=(2*pi*f)^2) of a stiff box according to its mass (a=F/m). In many cases the motion due to the flexing of the box will exceed that due to recoil at box resonances.
That's what I got from that 3d.
from Kstrain:
*In simplified form: the force (F) leads to a compression (x) of a massive box acording to the effective stiffness (k) as a function of frequency (think of x = F/k) , and to an acceleration (a=(2*pi*f)^2) of a stiff box according to its mass (a=F/m). In many cases the motion due to the flexing of the box will exceed that due to recoil at box resonances.
That's what I got from that 3d.