bigwill said:
Any part of the peaks (side effects of the peaks) that are exacerbated by what i am now calling the "hall-of-mirrors" effect are reduced by EnABL.
As many know, we have been working extensively on the FE127 and FE126, which show a couple marked peaks. For about a year we have been shipping a modded driver where the audible effects of these peaks was reduced.
Bud kindly EnABLed a stock FE127e. Overall it was better than our driver. It was very hard to determine, but our old driver still had a few places where they had an edge. We embarked on an R&D program to determine how much of our existing treatment could be put under the EnABLE treatment to get the best results. Both variations with all or part of our 1st gen treatment were less coloured (not by much mind you) than the driver that was just EnABLEd by otherwise similar.
My conclusion based on that sole experience (ie tread softly) is that if there is anything you can do to fix the inherent issues with a driver before EnABLing you will be ahead of a driver that is just EnABLed, but that the EnABL by itself is capable of overwhelming the fix by itself.
dave
bigwill,
In addition to Ed's summation comments, which as usual are spot on, I should point out that the frequency response graphs that you are allowed to see from the usual suspects are averaged....., even the raw data you pull from a microphone is averaged.
The peaks of energy that would represent ringing are only going to be a small part of that average, until you hit the systemic standing wave, where very dramatic events occur.
You may have missed my noise about our hearing and what it really is. We hear, and see and taste and smell and touch with an extremely refined threat assessment system. This threat assessment system has a semi autonomous correlator sitting on it, with a specific task. Look for known, genetically encoded threats and look for anomalies.
In the case of hearing, the drill is, the threat assessment correlator alerts you, the conscious part that was busy doping off, that something is "not right". You are forced to pay attention until you make a judgment as to potential threat. If you acknowledge the sound as safe, the correlator literally tunes it out, so that other sounds being masked by this particular one can be assessed.
This is just for the small noises, that might be snake scales slipping over a door jamb, or a scorpion scratching across rocks. The big unknown sounds have you in motion long before the conscious you has been notified. Same with genetically known threats.
So, your 5 or 6 million year old hearing is really good at listening for small irritating noises and pointing them out to you.
Based upon this analysis, I strive for audio that puts this correlator to sleep and leaves me with a sense of bliss. This does not mean that music is boring, or soft, or dull. Just that all of the sounds fall within the "natural" boundaries set by that incredibly ruthlessly selected threat assessment system.
It's asleep. I'm safe, and the music plays on.
Dave,
Hall of mirrors indeed. I commend you for looking beyond your own pea patch and incorporating something new into your own thoughts, to the betterment of both. Thank you.
Bud
In addition to Ed's summation comments, which as usual are spot on, I should point out that the frequency response graphs that you are allowed to see from the usual suspects are averaged....., even the raw data you pull from a microphone is averaged.
The peaks of energy that would represent ringing are only going to be a small part of that average, until you hit the systemic standing wave, where very dramatic events occur.
You may have missed my noise about our hearing and what it really is. We hear, and see and taste and smell and touch with an extremely refined threat assessment system. This threat assessment system has a semi autonomous correlator sitting on it, with a specific task. Look for known, genetically encoded threats and look for anomalies.
In the case of hearing, the drill is, the threat assessment correlator alerts you, the conscious part that was busy doping off, that something is "not right". You are forced to pay attention until you make a judgment as to potential threat. If you acknowledge the sound as safe, the correlator literally tunes it out, so that other sounds being masked by this particular one can be assessed.
This is just for the small noises, that might be snake scales slipping over a door jamb, or a scorpion scratching across rocks. The big unknown sounds have you in motion long before the conscious you has been notified. Same with genetically known threats.
So, your 5 or 6 million year old hearing is really good at listening for small irritating noises and pointing them out to you.
Based upon this analysis, I strive for audio that puts this correlator to sleep and leaves me with a sense of bliss. This does not mean that music is boring, or soft, or dull. Just that all of the sounds fall within the "natural" boundaries set by that incredibly ruthlessly selected threat assessment system.
It's asleep. I'm safe, and the music plays on.
Dave,
Hall of mirrors indeed. I commend you for looking beyond your own pea patch and incorporating something new into your own thoughts, to the betterment of both. Thank you.
Bud
'hall of mirrors'
planet_10,
Bravo for the 'hall of mirrors' analogy. It is 'spot on'.
BudP
Kudos to you - The reflections, diffractions, and driver specific resonance seem to be ameliorated by this EnABL process/treatment. Now, if driver manufacturers can think out of the box and accept the concept, we may eventually be able to easily obtain drivers that fall under the 'radar' of our finely tuned 'threat assessment correlator'. The outcome would be audio bliss - is not that what we all seek? My EnaBLed drivers seem to bear out this simple fact...
tea
planet_10,
Bravo for the 'hall of mirrors' analogy. It is 'spot on'.
BudP
Kudos to you - The reflections, diffractions, and driver specific resonance seem to be ameliorated by this EnABL process/treatment. Now, if driver manufacturers can think out of the box and accept the concept, we may eventually be able to easily obtain drivers that fall under the 'radar' of our finely tuned 'threat assessment correlator'. The outcome would be audio bliss - is not that what we all seek? My EnaBLed drivers seem to bear out this simple fact...
tea
More Than Meets the Eye
Literally, in the case of the conventional measurements. In the simplest case, linear (FFT freq response, CSD decay) and nonlinear (harmonic & IM distortion) measurements are usually shown separately, but are directly perceived as a single, unified experience. Distortion from electronics that are completely flat can easily mimic tweeter resonances; they sound similar, but from the perspective of conventional measurements, are occurring in complete separate domains.
This is merely a 1-D representation, as picked up by a microphone diaphragm no more than 1/2" across, then funneled down an electronic pipe to the FFT system. In reality, a speaker diaphragm radiates into 3D space, and if you measure carefully enough, you discover that all of the industry-standard measurements mentioned above change when you move the microphone - sometimes just an inch or so, which is a tiny angular distance at 1 or 2 meters.
There is no good way to display or "map" the existing sets of standard measurements (FR+CSD+IM+HD) into 3 dimensions. Nobody's figured how to create this kind of multidimensional display, or perform the complete set of measurements. Perceptually, we experience all of this at once, fitting the first-arrival wavefront (from both ears, thus spatially discriminated) into one time-slot, then the succession of arrivals from all over the room into another time-slot (with much more spatial discrimination), then unifying all of it into what sounds like a single perception, but with many different subjective qualities that don't map into English all that well.
What words are there for the feelings you experience listening to a symphony, feeling the rain on your face, making footprints in the first snows of winter, or sharing a sunset with somebody you love? Words are grossly inadequate - and as a professional writer, I know that from firsthand experience. We just fake it as best we can, using clever rhetorical tricks to induce similar emotions in the reader.
Numeric measurements map even less well to the complexities of subjective experience, and even more is lost in translation. Even calling this "translation" is an inappropriate choice of words, since all human languages share the common interior subjective experiences of humankind (life, death, love, hate, beauty, ugliness), while mathematics is a precision tool for quantifying aspects of "objective" reality.
All we know at the current primitive state of the art is that certain types of standard measurements point to trouble - CSD resonances where we don't want them, areas of nonlinear distortion that indicate regions of unwanted cone motion. But no driver using any known technology comes remotely close to measured perfection - the whole concept is even further away than the famed but nonexistent "distortionless amplifier".
With the amplifier, at least we have the option of a direct-bypass test, comparing the input and output. With a loudspeaker, there's no way to directly audition the electrical signal, since standard methods to make this signal audible are going to involve an electromechanical transducer - and existing methods of RF or microwave induction directly into the brain bypass the entire auditory system, and are unlikely to mimic everyday acoustic perception.
Since all of the methods of electrical-to-perception involve (many) conversion steps of unknown accuracy, I'm not too sure a word like "accuracy" is even applicable - where do you start, except with a large set of assumptions about what constitutes "good" loudspeaker design? In that case, "accuracy" merely means conformance to a set of existing engineering standards (Toole et al), and says very little about how it may sound to you personally.
Literally, in the case of the conventional measurements. In the simplest case, linear (FFT freq response, CSD decay) and nonlinear (harmonic & IM distortion) measurements are usually shown separately, but are directly perceived as a single, unified experience. Distortion from electronics that are completely flat can easily mimic tweeter resonances; they sound similar, but from the perspective of conventional measurements, are occurring in complete separate domains.
This is merely a 1-D representation, as picked up by a microphone diaphragm no more than 1/2" across, then funneled down an electronic pipe to the FFT system. In reality, a speaker diaphragm radiates into 3D space, and if you measure carefully enough, you discover that all of the industry-standard measurements mentioned above change when you move the microphone - sometimes just an inch or so, which is a tiny angular distance at 1 or 2 meters.
There is no good way to display or "map" the existing sets of standard measurements (FR+CSD+IM+HD) into 3 dimensions. Nobody's figured how to create this kind of multidimensional display, or perform the complete set of measurements. Perceptually, we experience all of this at once, fitting the first-arrival wavefront (from both ears, thus spatially discriminated) into one time-slot, then the succession of arrivals from all over the room into another time-slot (with much more spatial discrimination), then unifying all of it into what sounds like a single perception, but with many different subjective qualities that don't map into English all that well.
What words are there for the feelings you experience listening to a symphony, feeling the rain on your face, making footprints in the first snows of winter, or sharing a sunset with somebody you love? Words are grossly inadequate - and as a professional writer, I know that from firsthand experience. We just fake it as best we can, using clever rhetorical tricks to induce similar emotions in the reader.
Numeric measurements map even less well to the complexities of subjective experience, and even more is lost in translation. Even calling this "translation" is an inappropriate choice of words, since all human languages share the common interior subjective experiences of humankind (life, death, love, hate, beauty, ugliness), while mathematics is a precision tool for quantifying aspects of "objective" reality.
All we know at the current primitive state of the art is that certain types of standard measurements point to trouble - CSD resonances where we don't want them, areas of nonlinear distortion that indicate regions of unwanted cone motion. But no driver using any known technology comes remotely close to measured perfection - the whole concept is even further away than the famed but nonexistent "distortionless amplifier".
With the amplifier, at least we have the option of a direct-bypass test, comparing the input and output. With a loudspeaker, there's no way to directly audition the electrical signal, since standard methods to make this signal audible are going to involve an electromechanical transducer - and existing methods of RF or microwave induction directly into the brain bypass the entire auditory system, and are unlikely to mimic everyday acoustic perception.
Since all of the methods of electrical-to-perception involve (many) conversion steps of unknown accuracy, I'm not too sure a word like "accuracy" is even applicable - where do you start, except with a large set of assumptions about what constitutes "good" loudspeaker design? In that case, "accuracy" merely means conformance to a set of existing engineering standards (Toole et al), and says very little about how it may sound to you personally.
Re: More Than Meets the Eye
Lynn: This is off topic but I think you would enjoy the book "The Memory of Whiteness" by Kim Stanley Robinson, He explores mathematics, music and human perception in the story.
Lynn Olson said:
Lynn: This is off topic but I think you would enjoy the book "The Memory of Whiteness" by Kim Stanley Robinson, He explores mathematics, music and human perception in the story.
LOWTHER A45
This driver is a treat to listen to, before EnABL gets put on. Very smooth and orderly in it's presentation, with a slightly rising frequency response.
EnABL treatment roughly doubles the small signal detail expression and uncovers a truly glorious midrange. Without question, the clearest, sweetest, most solid and natural mid range I have ever encountered. High frequency extension is very good, but my preamp is dying and it's death song is a 7 to 8 kHz odd order distortion, that tracks the output signal and this was interfering with the A45 high frequencies. So, I really do not know how sweet they are, just that they are extraordinarily detailed and expressive.
The Process:
You will notice, on the attached PDF, that the conic section has radial lines printed. These lines are to be used as a pen guide, allowing you to place the pen tip properly while applying the lower main cone pattern. This is needed because the lower cone pattern is under the whizzer cone, so you will be using the conic section lower edge as your pattern guide.
I have posted pictures of the fully trussed up driver here.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/LowtherA45
Lowther America asked that the pattern be kept invisible and it very nearly is. You will have to look very closely to see the blocks. This is what the recommended Clear Flat Poly S acrylic paint, under the Micro Scale gloss coat, looks like... or, doesn't look like.
The pattern application is straight forward, except for the lower cone rings. I used an A-4 pen for the main cone and appropriately sized Rapidiograph pen points for the whizzer and phase plug patterns. I suspect you can get away with using an A-5 calligraphy pen tip here also.
The Gloss coat is a bit different. I used a 50% water solution and painted down into the V between both whizzer cone and main cone high frequency fingers, using a fine point sable brush. I allowed no Gloss coat on either set of fingers. You have to look very carefully to see the fingers under the whizzer, on the main cone.
After that careful application, the whizzer received a single coat of 50 % solution, applied with radial strokes from the lower to upper pattern rings, as I had painted up into the lower rings when painting the between finger areas.
The main cone received a radial application of 50 % gloss/water solution. Then another using circumferential brush strokes and more than modest drain tamping of the loaded brush. Finally a circular brush stroke applied, third coating.
The second and third coats covered wide areas with each brush dip, as each dipping allowed about 1/4 of the area to be covered. Again this was from lower main cone ring to the outer surround. So, three coatings of 50% material in all, but effectively probably less than a full 100% gloss coat, and much smoother than a single coat would have been.
I also applied an outer frame area ring pattern, out past the glue surface for the surround. The pattern is included in the PDF but not shown in the pics. This is a truncated pattern, with the lower ring on the vertical wall of the trim ring molded into the frame, and the outer ring on the horizontal, mostly, top of the trim ring. A single coat of gloss was applied over this outer surface and over the surround. Both were well tamp drained brush loads.
The net effect of doing this is to make the driver omni directional when sitting in open air. The usual null area extends about an inch from the outer edge and disappears audibly beyond that. Only a small change in high frequency propagation, from front to back sides, so, an open baffle usage should be just sensational for this driver.
The phase plug received two sets of pattern rings, as shown by the PDF patterns, and the usual six block sets in two rings, around a 3mm dot of clear flat, with a nipple of PVA on top of that. The gloss coating was one full strength coat from upper rings to center dot and another coating from lower rings to center dot. These are both full strength coats and I was sorely tempted to apply a third full coating,. All in honor of slowing this super fast and hard surface down, to the same speed of expression found from the whizzer. Without these two coats you will get IM distortion, in the mid range, especially on alto female voices, between whizzer and phase plug.
I will warn you that the whizzer is going to look a bit rumpled from the Gloss coat application. That comes from the water dilution of the Gloss coat material. I think I would recommend that you leave the Gloss coating on the Whizzer for last and listen to the otherwise finished driver for a while, before putting the final and only Gloss coat on the whizzer.
Truly, if you can use this small driver in your system do so. It is hard to find words that don't sound idiotic in trying to describe the sound that comes from the A45, when treated. I suppose, a clear, clean, unflavored drink of cold rushing water, on a hot and dusty morning, might come close.
Bud
This driver is a treat to listen to, before EnABL gets put on. Very smooth and orderly in it's presentation, with a slightly rising frequency response.
EnABL treatment roughly doubles the small signal detail expression and uncovers a truly glorious midrange. Without question, the clearest, sweetest, most solid and natural mid range I have ever encountered. High frequency extension is very good, but my preamp is dying and it's death song is a 7 to 8 kHz odd order distortion, that tracks the output signal and this was interfering with the A45 high frequencies. So, I really do not know how sweet they are, just that they are extraordinarily detailed and expressive.
The Process:
You will notice, on the attached PDF, that the conic section has radial lines printed. These lines are to be used as a pen guide, allowing you to place the pen tip properly while applying the lower main cone pattern. This is needed because the lower cone pattern is under the whizzer cone, so you will be using the conic section lower edge as your pattern guide.
I have posted pictures of the fully trussed up driver here.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/LowtherA45
Lowther America asked that the pattern be kept invisible and it very nearly is. You will have to look very closely to see the blocks. This is what the recommended Clear Flat Poly S acrylic paint, under the Micro Scale gloss coat, looks like... or, doesn't look like.
The pattern application is straight forward, except for the lower cone rings. I used an A-4 pen for the main cone and appropriately sized Rapidiograph pen points for the whizzer and phase plug patterns. I suspect you can get away with using an A-5 calligraphy pen tip here also.
The Gloss coat is a bit different. I used a 50% water solution and painted down into the V between both whizzer cone and main cone high frequency fingers, using a fine point sable brush. I allowed no Gloss coat on either set of fingers. You have to look very carefully to see the fingers under the whizzer, on the main cone.
After that careful application, the whizzer received a single coat of 50 % solution, applied with radial strokes from the lower to upper pattern rings, as I had painted up into the lower rings when painting the between finger areas.
The main cone received a radial application of 50 % gloss/water solution. Then another using circumferential brush strokes and more than modest drain tamping of the loaded brush. Finally a circular brush stroke applied, third coating.
The second and third coats covered wide areas with each brush dip, as each dipping allowed about 1/4 of the area to be covered. Again this was from lower main cone ring to the outer surround. So, three coatings of 50% material in all, but effectively probably less than a full 100% gloss coat, and much smoother than a single coat would have been.
I also applied an outer frame area ring pattern, out past the glue surface for the surround. The pattern is included in the PDF but not shown in the pics. This is a truncated pattern, with the lower ring on the vertical wall of the trim ring molded into the frame, and the outer ring on the horizontal, mostly, top of the trim ring. A single coat of gloss was applied over this outer surface and over the surround. Both were well tamp drained brush loads.
The net effect of doing this is to make the driver omni directional when sitting in open air. The usual null area extends about an inch from the outer edge and disappears audibly beyond that. Only a small change in high frequency propagation, from front to back sides, so, an open baffle usage should be just sensational for this driver.
The phase plug received two sets of pattern rings, as shown by the PDF patterns, and the usual six block sets in two rings, around a 3mm dot of clear flat, with a nipple of PVA on top of that. The gloss coating was one full strength coat from upper rings to center dot and another coating from lower rings to center dot. These are both full strength coats and I was sorely tempted to apply a third full coating,. All in honor of slowing this super fast and hard surface down, to the same speed of expression found from the whizzer. Without these two coats you will get IM distortion, in the mid range, especially on alto female voices, between whizzer and phase plug.
I will warn you that the whizzer is going to look a bit rumpled from the Gloss coat application. That comes from the water dilution of the Gloss coat material. I think I would recommend that you leave the Gloss coating on the Whizzer for last and listen to the otherwise finished driver for a while, before putting the final and only Gloss coat on the whizzer.
Truly, if you can use this small driver in your system do so. It is hard to find words that don't sound idiotic in trying to describe the sound that comes from the A45, when treated. I suppose, a clear, clean, unflavored drink of cold rushing water, on a hot and dusty morning, might come close.
Bud
In other areas,
Anything written by Kim Stanley Robinson is worth the time needed to read slowly, to contemplate the words and the thoughts, behind those words.
RMAF ATTENDEES
Remember to be in the Lowther America room Friday night to hear an A/B comparison of treated and untreated PM6A drivers, put on by Jon Ver Halen himself. This is in suite 1128.
Thom Makris is just down the hall in suite 1130 and he will have the just finished A45 drivers in hand and may well have them in the Le Cleach flare Azura horns for you to listen to. Certainly will be another take on EnABL, on lively drivers, being horny and strutting their stuff.
All of you who are fortunate enough to get to the show should enjoy all of the show you can, but please attend these two rooms.
Bud
Anything written by Kim Stanley Robinson is worth the time needed to read slowly, to contemplate the words and the thoughts, behind those words.
RMAF ATTENDEES
Remember to be in the Lowther America room Friday night to hear an A/B comparison of treated and untreated PM6A drivers, put on by Jon Ver Halen himself. This is in suite 1128.
Thom Makris is just down the hall in suite 1130 and he will have the just finished A45 drivers in hand and may well have them in the Le Cleach flare Azura horns for you to listen to. Certainly will be another take on EnABL, on lively drivers, being horny and strutting their stuff.
All of you who are fortunate enough to get to the show should enjoy all of the show you can, but please attend these two rooms.
Bud
And speaking of EnABL'd drivers at RMAF, please stop by room 1021 where Audiomagus will have a set of EnABL'd Hemp FR8c.
They will be playing in a set of cabinets designed by Planet 10 - Dave. The Demetri. Made of bamboo, no less!
They will be playing in a set of cabinets designed by Planet 10 - Dave. The Demetri. Made of bamboo, no less!
panomaniac said:
I am very interested to see how the bamboo Demetri turns out... and from my correspondence with Mike, these will be the 5th Element version of Demetri -- they should really stand out.
An example of bamboo ply in action:
dave
Panomaniac,
I am very jealous, Perry has yet to send me a pair to treat and post patterns for. I suspect he is out of them and one in each of this lovely a cabinet pair, is just going to make the situation worse....
Can someone please post pictures and perhaps provide us with a show report or ten? At least on the EnABL'd drivers?
Bud
I am very jealous, Perry has yet to send me a pair to treat and post patterns for. I suspect he is out of them and one in each of this lovely a cabinet pair, is just going to make the situation worse....
Can someone please post pictures and perhaps provide us with a show report or ten? At least on the EnABL'd drivers?
Bud
Yay my first enabled drivers
Finally got around to trying the Enable process out on some old philips 7 x 5" fullrange drivers (around 1970s)
Used some deep yellow acrylic model paint (Acrylicos Vallejo) and managed to find the Microscale Micro Gloss that Bud uses for the conformal coating.
My inital impressions, after only modding one driver with the pattern (was just done freehand, as I found it a bit trick to do a oval pattern). I was quite surprised how much cleaner the sound was, all the instruments were far easier to differentiate, I heard some quieter sounds I couldn't hear before, treble and midrange was definitely louder, bass was tighter but seemed not as low, but that might be because it was no where near as bloomy.
So I did the other driver and apply the 50/50 thinned single conformal coat to one of the drivers. The conformal coat seems to bring more balance into the frequency response, treble and midrange levels seem to be lower a little, it made it all a little smooth but a little more microdetail seems to be able to be heard.
I do have a question though, how do I know how many coats of the conformal coating I need? what should I be listening for?
I will also try the Mamboni triangles on the backside of the speaker once I get some felt. What thickness felt should I use? doesn't the felt add a lot of weight to the cone? is it better to use it only with larger drivers? At the very least I might try the triangles on the inside of the basket legs.
The additonal clarity is astonishing, it makes me wonder how much clearer a driver can get that is already very clear, but I will practise on some cheaper drivers before I try my fostexs.
Finally got around to trying the Enable process out on some old philips 7 x 5" fullrange drivers (around 1970s)
Used some deep yellow acrylic model paint (Acrylicos Vallejo) and managed to find the Microscale Micro Gloss that Bud uses for the conformal coating.
My inital impressions, after only modding one driver with the pattern (was just done freehand, as I found it a bit trick to do a oval pattern). I was quite surprised how much cleaner the sound was, all the instruments were far easier to differentiate, I heard some quieter sounds I couldn't hear before, treble and midrange was definitely louder, bass was tighter but seemed not as low, but that might be because it was no where near as bloomy.
So I did the other driver and apply the 50/50 thinned single conformal coat to one of the drivers. The conformal coat seems to bring more balance into the frequency response, treble and midrange levels seem to be lower a little, it made it all a little smooth but a little more microdetail seems to be able to be heard.
I do have a question though, how do I know how many coats of the conformal coating I need? what should I be listening for?
I will also try the Mamboni triangles on the backside of the speaker once I get some felt. What thickness felt should I use? doesn't the felt add a lot of weight to the cone? is it better to use it only with larger drivers? At the very least I might try the triangles on the inside of the basket legs.
The additonal clarity is astonishing, it makes me wonder how much clearer a driver can get that is already very clear, but I will practise on some cheaper drivers before I try my fostexs.
zBuff,
Congratulations, you have joined a still very select clique.
The EnABL pattern provides the same format of improvement to all drivers, does not matter their provenance. Certainly the better the driver, in terms of typical piston theory based tests, the better the end product.
Percentage of overall gain in listenability does not change however. Even the Lowthers are altered to the point that Jon Ver Halen of Lowther America makes the same complaint as Planet 10. That it is very difficult to listen to untreated drivers, once you have been infected with the EnABL variety.
Lucky me, I have been listening to EnABL'd drivers for 34 years. Lucky you, you get to listen to them from now on.
Wonder how long it will take to get the rest of the world to get this lucky?
As for Mamboni felt, I was advised to go to a Female style craft store and look for the thinnest cotton felt available. Then to lightly coat it with PVA and coat the surface of the cone with PVA and stick it on.
Stopped me cold every time I have thought about it. PVA is essentially Elmer's white wood glue and you can thin it down to a very thin coating. Planet 10 knows about this, I have never done any work with the thinned variety of PVA. (Poly Vinyl Acrylic) Lot's of experience with it full strength on cone woofers, though.
As for how many coats of Gloss? The fewer the better. Typical application runs from three full strength coats on thick felted cones to three 50% coat's, using less by half for every layer, for the thin calendered paper as used in Fostex and Lowther drivers.
Your older cones, with a thin felted cone, will probably top out with three 50% coats. Really though, if you like what you hear now, leave it alone.
I know what you mean by saying how astonishing it is to hear music from treated drivers for the first time. Like you finally got to go inside of the concert hall and sit in a good seat, for the first time ever. Even with cheap drivers, that just squawked and grated on nerve ends before, and you never knew how bad they were.
Bud
Congratulations, you have joined a still very select clique.
The EnABL pattern provides the same format of improvement to all drivers, does not matter their provenance. Certainly the better the driver, in terms of typical piston theory based tests, the better the end product.
Percentage of overall gain in listenability does not change however. Even the Lowthers are altered to the point that Jon Ver Halen of Lowther America makes the same complaint as Planet 10. That it is very difficult to listen to untreated drivers, once you have been infected with the EnABL variety.
Lucky me, I have been listening to EnABL'd drivers for 34 years. Lucky you, you get to listen to them from now on.
Wonder how long it will take to get the rest of the world to get this lucky?
As for Mamboni felt, I was advised to go to a Female style craft store and look for the thinnest cotton felt available. Then to lightly coat it with PVA and coat the surface of the cone with PVA and stick it on.
Stopped me cold every time I have thought about it. PVA is essentially Elmer's white wood glue and you can thin it down to a very thin coating. Planet 10 knows about this, I have never done any work with the thinned variety of PVA. (Poly Vinyl Acrylic) Lot's of experience with it full strength on cone woofers, though.
As for how many coats of Gloss? The fewer the better. Typical application runs from three full strength coats on thick felted cones to three 50% coat's, using less by half for every layer, for the thin calendered paper as used in Fostex and Lowther drivers.
Your older cones, with a thin felted cone, will probably top out with three 50% coats. Really though, if you like what you hear now, leave it alone.
I know what you mean by saying how astonishing it is to hear music from treated drivers for the first time. Like you finally got to go inside of the concert hall and sit in a good seat, for the first time ever. Even with cheap drivers, that just squawked and grated on nerve ends before, and you never knew how bad they were.
Bud
I went ahead and just put another 2 conformal coats on, it's sounding a bit "tight" at the moment, but I assume that will pass.
More listening impressions, I'm really enjoying what this process does for fullrange drivers, as one of their major draw backs is to start sounding very congested and muddy with more complex music. The Enable process seems to help alot with offsetting that drawback in FRs.
I'm definitely going to have to try this on some better speakers.
I was just wondering about the Mamboni process, as I understand it works as a edge termination breakup much like Enable process, but is it of benefit as a techique of applying damping as well?
More listening impressions, I'm really enjoying what this process does for fullrange drivers, as one of their major draw backs is to start sounding very congested and muddy with more complex music. The Enable process seems to help alot with offsetting that drawback in FRs.
I'm definitely going to have to try this on some better speakers.
I was just wondering about the Mamboni process, as I understand it works as a edge termination breakup much like Enable process, but is it of benefit as a techique of applying damping as well?
zBuff,
That tightness will take a while to work out. You can aid it by using your fingers to flex the cone. Just a little bend between sections around the cone and point push flexing up and down the cone height, all around the cone. Just the result of slightly too much Gloss.
It is hard to get it just right, but likely two coats were all that was needed. Now that you know the limit, you need to treat another cheaper set of cones, of more or less equal size, and let the Gloss dry between coats for 24 hours, listen for a day and then decide. That will provide you with all of the instruction possible, without any objective tests to help in determining what limits to set.
I do not expect to see that kind of test in my life, but perhaps someday.
I would go right ahead and Mamboni those ovals. Do contact Planet 10 for some coaching on thin coats of PVA and probably C2Cthomas, on this thread, for application secrets for the triangles. Dr Mamboni might also chime in if you PM him. I am not sure he follows this thread, as his main interest is in modifying later, Ohm, Walsh style drivers.
The lack of corruption in orchestral music is my greatest joy from EnABL drivers. Now, you need to look into the "Ground Side Electrons" thread and learn how to make a pigtail that gives your drivers the equivalent of a ground plane. Will make those Fostex drivers even more natural sounding than they are going to be with just EnABL.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102180
Come to think of it, Planet 10 can help you with treatments for the Fostex drivers too.
Bud
That tightness will take a while to work out. You can aid it by using your fingers to flex the cone. Just a little bend between sections around the cone and point push flexing up and down the cone height, all around the cone. Just the result of slightly too much Gloss.
It is hard to get it just right, but likely two coats were all that was needed. Now that you know the limit, you need to treat another cheaper set of cones, of more or less equal size, and let the Gloss dry between coats for 24 hours, listen for a day and then decide. That will provide you with all of the instruction possible, without any objective tests to help in determining what limits to set.
I do not expect to see that kind of test in my life, but perhaps someday.
I would go right ahead and Mamboni those ovals. Do contact Planet 10 for some coaching on thin coats of PVA and probably C2Cthomas, on this thread, for application secrets for the triangles. Dr Mamboni might also chime in if you PM him. I am not sure he follows this thread, as his main interest is in modifying later, Ohm, Walsh style drivers.
The lack of corruption in orchestral music is my greatest joy from EnABL drivers. Now, you need to look into the "Ground Side Electrons" thread and learn how to make a pigtail that gives your drivers the equivalent of a ground plane. Will make those Fostex drivers even more natural sounding than they are going to be with just EnABL.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102180
Come to think of it, Planet 10 can help you with treatments for the Fostex drivers too.
Bud
Hi zBuff
I went to the crafts section of our local WalMart and picked up about a square meter of felt scrap for around $2 US. After cutting out some triangles I applied a thin coat of PVA on one side and slapped it onto the speaker cone and let it dry over night and it was good to go. (I also applied some moderate pressure to the triangle while the glue set up.)
Mamboni developed the process and used several of the triangles on his Walsh 5 Remakes (see link) but there isn't anything carved in stone about how many to use - what size - etc. when it comes to applying them to different speaker cones. Lynn Olsen had some suggestions about different sizes and placement as well.
If you are concerned about the weight of things then I would suggest that you start out with just 3 or 4 and play around a bit - but play around on the "test" cones. Simple process and when done to match the particular speaker cone does provide a smoothing effect to "edgy" cones. BudP's EnABL puts things into play with greater dynamics and clarity.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1188280#post1188280
Hope this helps a bit!
I went to the crafts section of our local WalMart and picked up about a square meter of felt scrap for around $2 US. After cutting out some triangles I applied a thin coat of PVA on one side and slapped it onto the speaker cone and let it dry over night and it was good to go. (I also applied some moderate pressure to the triangle while the glue set up.)
Mamboni developed the process and used several of the triangles on his Walsh 5 Remakes (see link) but there isn't anything carved in stone about how many to use - what size - etc. when it comes to applying them to different speaker cones. Lynn Olsen had some suggestions about different sizes and placement as well.
If you are concerned about the weight of things then I would suggest that you start out with just 3 or 4 and play around a bit - but play around on the "test" cones. Simple process and when done to match the particular speaker cone does provide a smoothing effect to "edgy" cones. BudP's EnABL puts things into play with greater dynamics and clarity.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1188280#post1188280
Hope this helps a bit!
Thanks for all the replies guys.
I'll have to pop into a fabric store or craft store the next few days.
The changes are coming so fast it's hard to remember exactly how the drivers have changed. I might have to move to a different driver which I have a few more of lying around, so I can treat each one a bit different as to judge the benefits of varying applications easier.
I did try the speakers I had treated with a cheap subwoofer that they previously matched fairly well with, now there is no synergy at all, might have to treat the sub now too 😀
I'll have to pop into a fabric store or craft store the next few days.
The changes are coming so fast it's hard to remember exactly how the drivers have changed. I might have to move to a different driver which I have a few more of lying around, so I can treat each one a bit different as to judge the benefits of varying applications easier.
I did try the speakers I had treated with a cheap subwoofer that they previously matched fairly well with, now there is no synergy at all, might have to treat the sub now too 😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.