A good discussion here but I think Alex's remarks between here and the EnABL listening thread should be flip flopped.
He mentions that Micro Gloss is key in getting the desired "traits" in a Fostex or assumedly other driver.
Regards Cal, just in passing I noted that he said in one of the EnABL threads that he never had the nerve to do it himself but was fully engaged in the theory as a writer to those discussions. I go through the same anxiety and so I am still working on "scrubs": stuff I have had laying around doing nothing.
But here in EnABL how-to the actual application is the main focus. There will always be skeptics. Some have more commitment to doing the procedure on upscale drivers than others.
I am doing the process to see if, on these low grade Pioneers and Rolands (both unbranded), the pattern application will show a dramatic result. What traits will emerge if any?
The more people that actually stick their big toe in the water with this, the better.
Alex and Budp,
My question of the day is on the Micro Gloss: Once the pattern is applied does not an additional coating smooth over the dots that have been applied? It's like troweling over the grotty parts in wet cement (the only metaphor I could think of.)
He mentions that Micro Gloss is key in getting the desired "traits" in a Fostex or assumedly other driver.
Regards Cal, just in passing I noted that he said in one of the EnABL threads that he never had the nerve to do it himself but was fully engaged in the theory as a writer to those discussions. I go through the same anxiety and so I am still working on "scrubs": stuff I have had laying around doing nothing.
But here in EnABL how-to the actual application is the main focus. There will always be skeptics. Some have more commitment to doing the procedure on upscale drivers than others.
I am doing the process to see if, on these low grade Pioneers and Rolands (both unbranded), the pattern application will show a dramatic result. What traits will emerge if any?
The more people that actually stick their big toe in the water with this, the better.
Alex and Budp,
My question of the day is on the Micro Gloss: Once the pattern is applied does not an additional coating smooth over the dots that have been applied? It's like troweling over the grotty parts in wet cement (the only metaphor I could think of.)
None of my tube amps would be considered top notch...(even the real expensive development mules we have). Parts box + $150 to build the RH84 monobloks i have.
Swapping favours & such, i look to end up with a Gregg the Geek made DynaMutt which did have stellar performance,
dave
At the risk of sounding like I'm back-pedaling, let me add & clarify a couple of points. This also applies to the perhaps snarky remark to Lon
1) It was very late in the evening, after an exhausting couple of days, and perhaps one too many relaxation beverages, so the words could have been more carefully measured
2) It's been my personal experience that in their stock form the Fostex FE & FF drivers can be less than forgiving of the shortcomings of any of the upstream equipment, and most identifiably, variations in the final amplification stage. Careful cone treatment can mitigate that somewhat, at least to the extent that the improved musicality may swamp some of those minor flaws for which a nebulous lexicon has evolved to describe - (i.e. glare / grain / [hyper]detail, etc. )
I've listened to a fair selection of low cost commercial digital amps (Sonic Impact, Trends, Kingrex), DIY chip amps of too many flavors to remember all (most notably a very nice kit version of Peter Daniels integrated), and the DIY-Audio group-buy mini-Aleph - all of these on a wide range of Fostex and other drivers. The better ones exhibit many admirable traits, and certainly power/ value ratio on paper to which many tube amps could only aspire, is high on that list.
BUT - and I'm not usually fan of big buts 🙄, after extended listening, I've generally found their strengths separately discernible - in other words, for me they call attention to themselves, rather than dissolving into service of the music. as ever, YMMV
Since acquiring my first tube amp (Jolida 302 / EL34 P/P) 10 yrs ago, my journey has taken me in the direction of high-ish efficiency ( generally single driver / "full-range") speakers, and fairly low power (mostly SE) amps. Along the way, I've learned to accept, if not embrace, the idiosyncracys/limitations of this class of gear -call it acclimatization, or whatever. (just please don't tell me "you're deluded, or missing something, because ...x, y, z")
G'day lon,
Every driver has it's own character with regard to presentation of a musical event. The EnABL + Micro Gloss unmasks hidden muscial detail already available from the driver, and along the way, certain flaws (but not all) are mitigated as well.
Micro Gloss 'conforms' to the shape of the pattern. So additional coats will also conform. The key is learning how much Micro Gloss to use and where - and that will be different for each type of driver. Hence my suggestion to Micro Gloss a pair of cheap drivers to death.
I'm sure Bud will have plenty to say on this.
Cheers,
Alex
I have always thought of the Micro Gloss treatment as an "extender" to the EnABL patterns. Something that helped distribute the benefits of the patterns over a larger cone surface.
Since Soongsc provided his insights into pattern use, for more specific solutions, the need for this distribution agent has lessened. In a recent treatment for an Audio Nirvana product, very little micro gloss was used, but all of the pattern placements were developed using the tap test method. This allowed me to address several specific problems with this driver, a driver that already had quite good downward dynamics, a perfectly designed phase plug and four serious resonance issues.
However, for the more generic pattern placements, using the micro gloss in stages, with considerable listening in between coatings, is the proper way to go. You can have too much Micro Gloss and it would be good to get this out of your system before you tackle an expensive driver. Once you have gone too far, you won't do it again, willingly.
Bud
Since Soongsc provided his insights into pattern use, for more specific solutions, the need for this distribution agent has lessened. In a recent treatment for an Audio Nirvana product, very little micro gloss was used, but all of the pattern placements were developed using the tap test method. This allowed me to address several specific problems with this driver, a driver that already had quite good downward dynamics, a perfectly designed phase plug and four serious resonance issues.
However, for the more generic pattern placements, using the micro gloss in stages, with considerable listening in between coatings, is the proper way to go. You can have too much Micro Gloss and it would be good to get this out of your system before you tackle an expensive driver. Once you have gone too far, you won't do it again, willingly.
Bud
Search RH84 and El Cheapo... ours do have our own touchs (a big one is all Solen poly cap in the power supply.
dave
Not much doing in the Caveman audio thread but what I've always done out of necessity is take the minimum upgrade path. I've used marginal materials for construction that provide the proper result such as using a combination of particle board baffle and glued up butcher block shelving (always nice and straight) from the hardware store. At the time the recommendation was that a combination of materials would reduce internal resonances.
I've gotten the Parts Express DTA-1 as an upgrade for a hacked boom box.
The hacked boom box has holes cut in the sides where the speakers are, speaker wires snipped and BIB's and MLTL's containing various speakers attached. This has been excellent sound from the small 3watt amp in the Sharp boom box.
It worked good for radio-- classical Wisconsin Public Radio-- for a long time. But the programming on the only station I listen to became cluttered with merchandising scams. I started to listen to streaming audio from North Carolina at theclassicalstation.org. My old radio shack mini amp on the computer always was deficient in providing accurate bass. I don't even care about a lot, just accurate. I needed the path of least expense above a hacked boom box to do my listening.
That's the story.
Would like to hear from other Cavemen, but will focus on how-to's here as much as I can.
What cleaner is used on the brush after application of the Micro Gloss?
I've gotten the Parts Express DTA-1 as an upgrade for a hacked boom box.
The hacked boom box has holes cut in the sides where the speakers are, speaker wires snipped and BIB's and MLTL's containing various speakers attached. This has been excellent sound from the small 3watt amp in the Sharp boom box.
It worked good for radio-- classical Wisconsin Public Radio-- for a long time. But the programming on the only station I listen to became cluttered with merchandising scams. I started to listen to streaming audio from North Carolina at theclassicalstation.org. My old radio shack mini amp on the computer always was deficient in providing accurate bass. I don't even care about a lot, just accurate. I needed the path of least expense above a hacked boom box to do my listening.
That's the story.
Would like to hear from other Cavemen, but will focus on how-to's here as much as I can.
What cleaner is used on the brush after application of the Micro Gloss?
I did not take a close look at the Microgloss bottle. But water cleanup is preferred. I have no way of storing turps and other flammables.
I generally use liquid hand soap and force it up into the ferrule portion, by squeezing the soap into the bristles to saponify the residual acrylic, so that the dihydrogen-oxide will remove the deconstituted Micro Gloss more completely.
Bud
Bud
Today I have gotten to the point on my Roland where I'd say it's pretty close to all EnABL job can be. I put on a coat (thinned 50/50 w. water) of MicroGloss. Also did one of the Pioneer NSB with homebrew phase plug.
I may do another thin coat tomorrow, but going beyond that is, for me, unlikely.
Elsewhere I have my new tripath DTA-1 amp ready to hookup to the computer and that will be the best sound setup for these listening tests that I can manage. I may add a dvd player back here in the shop and would like to go
with the Oppo that Bob Brines recommended but more than likely will get something locally.
From the no guts no glory department I'm going to see if I can get a good pattern size and pen nib match to do the Fostex 127e. This will be one only Fostex with my other one left plain.
I have made the templates to do the plain one from scratch in the prescribed way with trifoil pattern.
I may do another thin coat tomorrow, but going beyond that is, for me, unlikely.
Elsewhere I have my new tripath DTA-1 amp ready to hookup to the computer and that will be the best sound setup for these listening tests that I can manage. I may add a dvd player back here in the shop and would like to go
with the Oppo that Bob Brines recommended but more than likely will get something locally.
From the no guts no glory department I'm going to see if I can get a good pattern size and pen nib match to do the Fostex 127e. This will be one only Fostex with my other one left plain.
I have made the templates to do the plain one from scratch in the prescribed way with trifoil pattern.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Would it be better...
Is there a way to do the enable without resorting to a pen and ink ?
I was thinking, print out a suitably scaled pattern from your computer and use it to make a stencil from some copper shim (sheet) or similar just like making a pcb at home using iron-on toner-transfer and some Ferric Chloride for example.
The resulting stencil would be thin and flexible and a single radial cut would allow it to be made into a cone shape to conform to the speaker. Or it could be a strip (wide enough) you could wrap into place. It could be cleaned after use and re-used as often as desired. It would cut down on the labour effort significantly so perhaps of more interest to the commercially-minded ?
Then you would use a spray can of enamel paint to print the pattern onto the speaker cone. There may be a better choice than enamel, but so long as it dries to produce a 'bump' - I assume enamel can be put down as a fairly thick layer or multiple layers built up.
Or is this how you are doing it and I was too lazy to read all the threads ?
Is there a way to do the enable without resorting to a pen and ink ?
I was thinking, print out a suitably scaled pattern from your computer and use it to make a stencil from some copper shim (sheet) or similar just like making a pcb at home using iron-on toner-transfer and some Ferric Chloride for example.
The resulting stencil would be thin and flexible and a single radial cut would allow it to be made into a cone shape to conform to the speaker. Or it could be a strip (wide enough) you could wrap into place. It could be cleaned after use and re-used as often as desired. It would cut down on the labour effort significantly so perhaps of more interest to the commercially-minded ?
Then you would use a spray can of enamel paint to print the pattern onto the speaker cone. There may be a better choice than enamel, but so long as it dries to produce a 'bump' - I assume enamel can be put down as a fairly thick layer or multiple layers built up.
Or is this how you are doing it and I was too lazy to read all the threads ?
-Not the worst of ideas! However, where to get what you need - copper sheets thick enough to be handled, but thin enough to be treated with the chemicals available...circuit boards have a copper layer of ~75my
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
These things have been covered to some extent in the major EnABL threads. However, to date, no process has been created other than hand work.
A copper sheet as big as an 8" driver would start to get into real money.
Maybe there is someone who is really good at scherenschnitte?
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Scherenschnitte
They are those lace-like pictures formed of folded paper with scissors.
🙂
But we digress again. [I have no idea how I remembered this from when I heard it about 15 years ago.]
A copper sheet as big as an 8" driver would start to get into real money.
Maybe there is someone who is really good at scherenschnitte?
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Scherenschnitte
They are those lace-like pictures formed of folded paper with scissors.
🙂
But we digress again. [I have no idea how I remembered this from when I heard it about 15 years ago.]
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
It doesn't have to be copper, Ferric Chloride attacks most things, usually when you don't want it to !
Anyhow, we only need one sheet, then we can post it around for everyone to use 🙂
I don't think it's as expensive as you might think.
As for lace and folded pictures, now that would be impressive !
Anyhow, we only need one sheet, then we can post it around for everyone to use 🙂
I don't think it's as expensive as you might think.
As for lace and folded pictures, now that would be impressive !
You will need to make it with backside risers, so that it remains just off of the speaker cone. Otherwise the paint will wick badly. The paint must be a very heavy liquid, really filled with chemical flattener, so that it dries upon contact, or it will run badly. A gloss enamel will not work for this, trust me. I have made three of these in 35 years, the last done by a company that specializes in photo etch stainless steel sheets, about .003 inches thick. This was the most useful one of the three and still not as quick as by hand, for two cone drivers, once you factored in clean up time involved. I was using an airbrush, so I had superb control, but it is really something for bare cone treatment, not for a finished driver.
I have a lisp program that runs in Autocad 14 or earlier, that will provide a conic plate, flattened out and with the pattern in the traditional places, based upon the cone dimensions. Another ring set or two will need to be added to disperse the nodal ringing peaks. All of this secondary work can be done in Corel Draw, 10 or earlier, after importing the Autocad drawing.
This approach was going to be experimented with by one of the cone mfg firms in the US, but the fellow involved suffered a heart attack and passed away, so nothing was accomplished.
For a template to work properly it has to conform to the cone. For curved cones, the template must be curved. As you can see, a very expensive proposition. Once you bet familiar with the hand tools, a couple of hours of tedium, spread over two or three days will see you in possession of some outstanding musical replicators. Not really such an onerous thing, after all.
Bud
I have a lisp program that runs in Autocad 14 or earlier, that will provide a conic plate, flattened out and with the pattern in the traditional places, based upon the cone dimensions. Another ring set or two will need to be added to disperse the nodal ringing peaks. All of this secondary work can be done in Corel Draw, 10 or earlier, after importing the Autocad drawing.
This approach was going to be experimented with by one of the cone mfg firms in the US, but the fellow involved suffered a heart attack and passed away, so nothing was accomplished.
For a template to work properly it has to conform to the cone. For curved cones, the template must be curved. As you can see, a very expensive proposition. Once you bet familiar with the hand tools, a couple of hours of tedium, spread over two or three days will see you in possession of some outstanding musical replicators. Not really such an onerous thing, after all.
Bud
I like the job on the Roland. It looks like a Maori tribesman now.
But the speaker itself may just be a dud. I don't recall seeing any frequency tests made on these bargains. After all they came off the production line for electric pianos. I may be spinning my wheels and should move on to the Fostex.
Budp, what is your current take on the inner ring by the dustcap of the FE127e?
Also, the full pattern for the dust cap includes a center dot. Getting that right gives me the willies too.
But the speaker itself may just be a dud. I don't recall seeing any frequency tests made on these bargains. After all they came off the production line for electric pianos. I may be spinning my wheels and should move on to the Fostex.
Budp, what is your current take on the inner ring by the dustcap of the FE127e?
Also, the full pattern for the dust cap includes a center dot. Getting that right gives me the willies too.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.