GM said:Thanks to TJ and Colin though, now I can just point to a link.
Glad to be of service.
Jay has emailed Ted Jordan with a description of his MLTLs, which he has built in both MDF and Birch ply. The ply ones apparently blow the MDF out of the water ...
Painting ply is a different matter though.
Colin
Colin said:
Glad to be of service.
Jay has emailed Ted Jordan with a description of his MLTLs, which he has built in both MDF and Birch ply. The ply ones apparently blow the MDF out of the water ...
Painting ply is a different matter though.
Colin
Blew out of water how? Subjectively? Double blind? Measurement? ... or what?
It was a listening only and not double blind. He seemed to consider the difference large and real enough, however. Ping Jay on the fullrange driver forum for details.
Colin
Colin
Looks good. The cross braces will help support the stuffing.
At the danger of entering into elderly relatives sucking eggs territory, I'll mention that at this stage I usually wire the enclosure, giving the opportunity to thoroughly caulk the cables to a corner to prevent any buzzes. This design lends itself to fitting terminals to the base of the main enclosure.
Looking forward to the first listening report ...
Colin
At the danger of entering into elderly relatives sucking eggs territory, I'll mention that at this stage I usually wire the enclosure, giving the opportunity to thoroughly caulk the cables to a corner to prevent any buzzes. This design lends itself to fitting terminals to the base of the main enclosure.
Looking forward to the first listening report ...
Colin
I assume there will be a massive baseplate and the cavity will be filled with something inert, such as sterilized sand, kitty litter, or similar. Also, apparently not much stuffing is required so I suggest wrapping the braces.
GM
GM
I was thinking about wrapping the braces but I desided not to do it for some reason. I'm glad that you recommended it.
I haven't desided yet what to do with the bottom. I will place the binding posts there and possibly the passive network. The hard part is the sand that is required. I will probably divide the bottom to two sections and fill the other one with sand blast sand which I find excellent and cheap for this kind of applications.
I haven't desided yet what to do with the bottom. I will place the binding posts there and possibly the passive network. The hard part is the sand that is required. I will probably divide the bottom to two sections and fill the other one with sand blast sand which I find excellent and cheap for this kind of applications.
Attachments
Playing the speakers for the first time. The bass truly amazes me. Not only deep (concidering the driver) but also accurate and powerfull. Drums really sound like drums. And the most amazing thing is that they don't become boomy even if I place them near the side wall where my Dynaudio Audience 52 boom llike crazy.
I have damping material around the braces and about 28*12 cm piece of 1 cm thick felt behind the driver. I need to explore a little bit with the damping material as there is a hint of "through the nose" sound in female voices. Also the feeling of ambience is not good as I expected but I think the main reason is my CDP which needs a little bit tuning.
Anyway, a very promising sound. And I'm not just saying it. I'm quite picky about audio hardware but so far I'm quite impressed 😀
I have damping material around the braces and about 28*12 cm piece of 1 cm thick felt behind the driver. I need to explore a little bit with the damping material as there is a hint of "through the nose" sound in female voices. Also the feeling of ambience is not good as I expected but I think the main reason is my CDP which needs a little bit tuning.
Anyway, a very promising sound. And I'm not just saying it. I'm quite picky about audio hardware but so far I'm quite impressed 😀
Attachments
What do you use to drive those "low efficiency" jordans? 😉
Is a small gainclone and its 1000uF caps enough?
Is a small gainclone and its 1000uF caps enough?
I haven't finished my Gainclone yet. I have Densen Beat B300XS at the moment.
http://www.densen.dk/products/b300XS/b300XS.htm
I don't have the passive network with Jordans yet, but I plan to give it a try.
http://www.densen.dk/products/b300XS/b300XS.htm
I don't have the passive network with Jordans yet, but I plan to give it a try.
Poll:
Do you use passive network with GM MLTL?
What kind of passive network do you use?
What are the componen values?
Have you guys heard anything about how identical/different JX92S drivers are compared to each other?
Do you use passive network with GM MLTL?
What kind of passive network do you use?
What are the componen values?
Have you guys heard anything about how identical/different JX92S drivers are compared to each other?
Ok, what is it that I miss... I see you mention TL and MLTL. I know what a transmission line is but what is this mass thing? And the pictures of this design show me nothing else than a typical reflex box..?
Please help me sleep tonight. 🙂
/Peter
Please help me sleep tonight. 🙂
/Peter
A 'typical' reflex with a high aspect ratio isn't a BR, but technically a ML-TL. IOW, a BR assumes a ~uniform particle density whereas the ML-TL has one dimension long enough for 1/4WL action to contribute to the vent's action, reducing its length for a given cross sectional area (CSA) while increasing its damping somewhat.
GM
GM
How will the width of the cabinet affect to the sound of GM ML-TL?
I have the TL- cabinet which is presented on Jordan webpage. The width of this cabinet is 30cm = 11.81" and depth is 10cm = 3.94"(external dimensions) and I am satisfied with the size of this cabinet. I am also pleased with the midrange area, but I am not fully satisfied with the reproduction of low frequencies. I have understood that GM ML-TL cabinet will reproduce better bass.(quality and deepness)
How it will affect to the sound if I will do 30cm(external) wide ML-TL cabinet instead of 22.25cm wide cabinet. I will keep the area of the bottom and top as same than GM's design. (9.84" x 3", internal)
I assume that this will increase the directivity(little bit) and there will also be some changes in the bass response. (BSC)
Maybe these changes are not critical...
Cheers,
Jarno
I have the TL- cabinet which is presented on Jordan webpage. The width of this cabinet is 30cm = 11.81" and depth is 10cm = 3.94"(external dimensions) and I am satisfied with the size of this cabinet. I am also pleased with the midrange area, but I am not fully satisfied with the reproduction of low frequencies. I have understood that GM ML-TL cabinet will reproduce better bass.(quality and deepness)
How it will affect to the sound if I will do 30cm(external) wide ML-TL cabinet instead of 22.25cm wide cabinet. I will keep the area of the bottom and top as same than GM's design. (9.84" x 3", internal)
I assume that this will increase the directivity(little bit) and there will also be some changes in the bass response. (BSC)
Maybe these changes are not critical...
Cheers,
Jarno
GM,
are you saying that the internal shape of that enclosure change the resonance?
A more square box with identical internal volume and the same port dimensions would have a different port resonance?
In my little mind I can see that a tube-like enclosure could increase the airload on the driver and thereby lowering the effective Fs and pushing the Qt of driver up a bit but I can not see how it would have anything to do with TL though.
I have seen that other design on ejjjordan.co.uk that are more like a labyrint which I assume would have very different properties compared to the design in the beginning of this thread. Also I must confess that I don´t really understand that "labyrint" design. Some of the internal "braces" are dotted and some are a full line on the schematic.
/Peter
are you saying that the internal shape of that enclosure change the resonance?
A more square box with identical internal volume and the same port dimensions would have a different port resonance?
In my little mind I can see that a tube-like enclosure could increase the airload on the driver and thereby lowering the effective Fs and pushing the Qt of driver up a bit but I can not see how it would have anything to do with TL though.
I have seen that other design on ejjjordan.co.uk that are more like a labyrint which I assume would have very different properties compared to the design in the beginning of this thread. Also I must confess that I don´t really understand that "labyrint" design. Some of the internal "braces" are dotted and some are a full line on the schematic.
/Peter
Pan said:are you saying that the internal shape of that enclosure change the resonance?
A more square box with identical internal volume and the same port dimensions would have a different port resonance?
Yes
I have seen that other design on ejjjordan.co.uk that are more like a labyrint which I assume would have very different properties compared to the design in the beginning of this thread. Also I must confess that I don´t really understand that "labyrint" design. Some of the internal "braces" are dotted and some are a full line on the schematic.
The "labyrinth" type design just folds up the pipe to make it more compact (but not smaller). The Jordan design is somewhat confusing because the drawing respresents 2 or 3 different boxes.
dave
After building Gm MLTL as in the picture ,I stuffed bottom about
10 Kg sand so the speaker got twice as heavy as original; I noticed low-end separation much better , but the midband become litllebit cloudy, and very highs started to Peak??
Have anyone some advise/explanation on this??? Thanks!
10 Kg sand so the speaker got twice as heavy as original; I noticed low-end separation much better , but the midband become litllebit cloudy, and very highs started to Peak??
Have anyone some advise/explanation on this??? Thanks!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Full Range
- First Impression: GM's Jordan JX92S MLTL Speaker