"But why should I? The product was not what I ordered, the product delivered is utter garbage and I paid a premium price for it. I am not interested in "fixing" it."
Hello Brett
That didn't come out right. I didn't mean to imply you should have to fix them. I would have thought that they would have been finished to a level where you could just drop them into your baffle and then do the final finishing.
Rob🙂
Hello Brett
That didn't come out right. I didn't mean to imply you should have to fix them. I would have thought that they would have been finished to a level where you could just drop them into your baffle and then do the final finishing.
Rob🙂
For the record
Here are the facts:
1) I told Brett that I had fiberglass waveguides now, but that he would have to wait quite awhile to get five cast ones as I had a lot of full kit orders ahead of him. His response was ambiguous.
2) When the five waveguides were done I wrote Brett again requesting clarification on the order and none was forthcoming, although he did pay the final amount and so I assumed that he was satisfied with what I was going to send.
3) The waveguides that were sent were perfectly usable although they would need some finishing work. I don't cut off the flange because not know how they would be mounted and as such it is best for the end user to do that. I usually do sand the cast throat and don't understand why Brett got one that wasn't (although this is a simple procedure that takes about 5 minutes) But make no mistake about it when one orders just the waveguides they don't get a completely finished piece because they have to finish in-situ. They DO get something that is completely suitable to the task. My first several Nathans used fiberglass waveguides with MDF mounts just like the ones that Brett got. There is simply nothing wrong with those parts, they just were not what Brett was expecting.
4) The price included a foam plug, which I sell for $50 each and a mounting plate, which is hand machined, the center hole not being simply a hole but in fact an extension of the waveguide. When I first bought these they cost me $125 each because of the machining time. In Plexi-glass they are a lot less expensive, but work just as well. So the waveguide themselves are no where near $200, more like $75 after the discount that I offered Brett.
5) When Brett told me of his disappointment, I said that I was sorry for the misunderstanding and that I offered to lower the price by $50 each. That would make his waveguide $100 less (each!) than the current price for cast waveguides.
6) Brett was not very cooperative making all kinds of unreasonable demands. I asked why he did not want to just clean up those waveguides and he responded that he didn't see how to mount them (which is really a no-brainer). I responded that the cast ones had 1.25" flanges and THOSE would be actually be harder to mount - i.e. he was really better off with what he had. At that point Brett became threatening (as you can see here) and I simply stopped responding to him.
If Brett sends what he has back to me and they arrive in good condition I will refund to him all of the money that he has paid me. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with Bretts demands for full compensation of extraneous expenses (not paid to me) because it was "totally my fault".
Brett is attempting to basically blackmail me into giving him what he wants. I'm sorry that he feels that he needs to do that since I have been reasonable to everyone who has been reasonable with me.
Here are the facts:
1) I told Brett that I had fiberglass waveguides now, but that he would have to wait quite awhile to get five cast ones as I had a lot of full kit orders ahead of him. His response was ambiguous.
2) When the five waveguides were done I wrote Brett again requesting clarification on the order and none was forthcoming, although he did pay the final amount and so I assumed that he was satisfied with what I was going to send.
3) The waveguides that were sent were perfectly usable although they would need some finishing work. I don't cut off the flange because not know how they would be mounted and as such it is best for the end user to do that. I usually do sand the cast throat and don't understand why Brett got one that wasn't (although this is a simple procedure that takes about 5 minutes) But make no mistake about it when one orders just the waveguides they don't get a completely finished piece because they have to finish in-situ. They DO get something that is completely suitable to the task. My first several Nathans used fiberglass waveguides with MDF mounts just like the ones that Brett got. There is simply nothing wrong with those parts, they just were not what Brett was expecting.
4) The price included a foam plug, which I sell for $50 each and a mounting plate, which is hand machined, the center hole not being simply a hole but in fact an extension of the waveguide. When I first bought these they cost me $125 each because of the machining time. In Plexi-glass they are a lot less expensive, but work just as well. So the waveguide themselves are no where near $200, more like $75 after the discount that I offered Brett.
5) When Brett told me of his disappointment, I said that I was sorry for the misunderstanding and that I offered to lower the price by $50 each. That would make his waveguide $100 less (each!) than the current price for cast waveguides.
6) Brett was not very cooperative making all kinds of unreasonable demands. I asked why he did not want to just clean up those waveguides and he responded that he didn't see how to mount them (which is really a no-brainer). I responded that the cast ones had 1.25" flanges and THOSE would be actually be harder to mount - i.e. he was really better off with what he had. At that point Brett became threatening (as you can see here) and I simply stopped responding to him.
If Brett sends what he has back to me and they arrive in good condition I will refund to him all of the money that he has paid me. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with Bretts demands for full compensation of extraneous expenses (not paid to me) because it was "totally my fault".
Brett is attempting to basically blackmail me into giving him what he wants. I'm sorry that he feels that he needs to do that since I have been reasonable to everyone who has been reasonable with me.
amiklos said:
Adam
Thanks, when you are reasonable with me I am reasonable in return, but I don't respond to threats.
You are exactly correct to note that some work is required for these kits, I never indicated otherwise.
Is that a sub that you are building?
Yes. It's one of three or four that I'll have accompanying the Nathan 10s. This one is a 6.3 ft3 sealed cube for a 18" Maelstrom-x to handle low sub bass range. The others in the system will use 12 inch woofers, likely the JBL w12gti and probably be crossed somewhere above 35 hz with at least one extending up toward 150.
Responding to post #663 , so it doesn't get missed in the other thread.
From:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1587094#post1587094
Brett said:
From:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1587094#post1587094
Brett is getting his money back and the situation is resolved. I appologize for any misunderstandings.
amiklos said:
So the inner baffle is just a brace? I thought that maybe this was a Passive radiator bandpass - a design that I have long wanted to try. Passive radiators are just too expensive when compared to ports.
Yes, just a brace. The passive radiator bandpass sounds quite interesting. I thought I'd give the maelstrom a go in the cheap sealed box and then decide later if I felt a different alignment was worth the extra investment. Preliminary reports from other users have indicated good performance in the 5-6.5 cubic foot sealed enclosures.
I see nothing fundamentally wrong with a closed box sub-woofer. Its just not as efficient as it could be. But if driver and box are big enough and there is enough amp behind it then this is a very practical way to go. Its number that matters not type or "alignment".
On a similar topic. How critical is the subwoofer above the centerline of the room? My room is 10 feet tall and outside of using a IB manifold in the attic above the room, I can't figure out a simple implementation.
Yea, What I did was a design with very long ports, which put them about 4 ft. off of the floor. Above centerline is not critical, nothings critical if there are enough of them.
Funny: The rave reviews at my HT were with only TWO subs. I found that the third one was somehow turned off and not playing. Turning in on was a marginal improvement. That one was above the centerline, so I guess that answers your question.
You have to remember that I use Summas as mains and they have full LF capability so they act like sub sources too, so I actually have five LF sources and missing one is not going to be a big issue. I noticed this problem when I hooked up the Nathans to the same subs as the Summas used. They don't have a lot of LF capability and a bass problem was noticable. Adding the third sub did make a diference.
Funny: The rave reviews at my HT were with only TWO subs. I found that the third one was somehow turned off and not playing. Turning in on was a marginal improvement. That one was above the centerline, so I guess that answers your question.
You have to remember that I use Summas as mains and they have full LF capability so they act like sub sources too, so I actually have five LF sources and missing one is not going to be a big issue. I noticed this problem when I hooked up the Nathans to the same subs as the Summas used. They don't have a lot of LF capability and a bass problem was noticable. Adding the third sub did make a diference.
The Abbies are definitely going to close in on that gap. They should go down to about 60 Hz, or 1/2 an octave more than the Nathan's. I'm very pleased to read that my impressions of your system was with only a pair of subs. Like you said earlier, the Abbie will be the sweet spot in your entire line. I figure the R&D work on the Abbie's will take until the end of the year, but its worth it 
Anand.
Anand.
nycavsr2000 said:
We'll see, but Earl has set an impressively high bar with the latest refinements of the Nathans. If he doesn't manage significant improvement over the ESP 12s, there's likely won't be a lot of performance difference between Nathan and Abbey. There will be some, to be sure, but "sweet spot" is all about price/performance ratio, and that will have to wait for actual Abbey measurements and kits. I think a lot of people could already be very happy with completed Nathans.
The back side of the wave guides do look quite nice. Hope to see some pictures how you mount the drivers.amiklos said:FWIW, my nathan 10 kit is quite nice. There is definitely quite a bit of finish work involved in terms of sanding and whatnot (I was expecting this based on conversations with Earl), but my waveguides look quite good. They are the newer version rather than the fiberglass so it's definitely not an apples to apples comparison.
Don't mean to discredit Brett's concerns in any way as they are certainly valid, just want to give another anecdotal example off toward the other side of the spectrum. My communications with Earl regarding various questions have been quite good which seems to be the opposite of the case here. I sincerely hope this gets straightened out for you, Brett.
Sorry I don't have any closeups at the moment, but you can see my baffles in the background of this picture.
gedlee said:
Any chance you have pictures. Is this a bandpass design, and would be it similar to any of the Ai's, which I noticed had somewhat long protruding ports.
I keep thinking about an idea that would involve a very shallow platform for the couch with a bandpass mouth exit (port exit) running up the middle back area. Even if I was to use a home theater sectional couch and build the sub into the center compartment with a port exit out the top back of that section, it would be potentially 4ft off the ground and somewhat hidden.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Update on Abbey12
I cast an Abbey12 baffle today - it didn't work. I did not leave enough area around the mold and it leaked. I will have to redesign the baffle making it larger and retry the procedure. A short but predictable delay.
I cast an Abbey12 baffle today - it didn't work. I did not leave enough area around the mold and it leaked. I will have to redesign the baffle making it larger and retry the procedure. A short but predictable delay.
You tried to cast the entire baffle, not just the waveguide? I'm just asking for clarification.
Best,
Chris
Best,
Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.