You should perhaps open the sides the sides of the cavity, it will looks a little less monolithic ?
My walnut was aromatised, i've bought it in a luthiery shop and there was parrafin on the both sides of the plates to block capillarity and regulate water penetration.
My walnut was aromatised, i've bought it in a luthiery shop and there was parrafin on the both sides of the plates to block capillarity and regulate water penetration.
That would break the W-frame operation. It is basically a dual woofer open baffle set up for opposed vibration cancellation.
Walnut baffle on the 2nd speaker hot glued up & routed over the past day.
Orion were nice looking speakers and these look like they'll be great too.
Does anybody know the reason for the change from W-frame to V-frame from Orion to LX 521? One should assume that the force cancellation would be a big advantage? I think I've read something about build complexity, but don't quite understand that.
Is there a difference in the cavity resonance and how high they can cross?
Also wondering why there is this big difference in slot opening for V/W-frame vs ripol/slob. What is the technical explanation for that? Pros and cons for the two different approaches?
Does anybody know the reason for the change from W-frame to V-frame from Orion to LX 521? One should assume that the force cancellation would be a big advantage? I think I've read something about build complexity, but don't quite understand that.
Is there a difference in the cavity resonance and how high they can cross?
Also wondering why there is this big difference in slot opening for V/W-frame vs ripol/slob. What is the technical explanation for that? Pros and cons for the two different approaches?
Thanks, I hope so! My Orions were redesigned slightly to look taller & slimmer, for the sake of my honey's tastes. (pic in first post of this thread.)
SL himself wrote this about the move from H to W frame in the Orions, then V in the 521. The key reasons, imo, are numbered (by me) :
In essence, I think SL found it hard to build the W-frame and was thinking about salability of a kit. Those were important issues for him.
It's true that the cavity resonance in the W-frame is significant. It's around 10+ dB in a fairly sharp peak at 190Hz in this dual 12" system. In my 521 clones with 10" SBAs, it's 300Hz or higher, iirc. Both V- and H-frame cavity resonances are minor or nonexistent. Still, with either a passive notch filter or DSP, the peak is not really prohibitive.
Also, I disagree about how much vibration is in the W-frame -- in all 3 of my W-frames, which were all 4-ways, the vibration from the bass section was always LESS than the vibration from the 8" low-mid on the upper baffle. I dislike the mechanical inelegance of the "bridge" solution SL came up with for the 521, and the W-frames makes vibration from the bass box a non-factor.
But to ensure minimal vibration in the mid/tweeter domes, I'm using magnet mounting for the 9.5" low-mid woofer. Its frame will not touch the front baffle at all, so its vibrations have to go through the aluminum/steel bracket + 1.5" BB plywood top plate beneath it before it can reach the baffle. Previous experiments (and the Orions) have shown this has a positive effect on overall clarity, esp at higher SPL.
Don't know enough about ripole bass operational theory vs W-frame. There has to be more pressure/loading on the cone with the latter.
The mid woofer at 10 inch may be too big. A 6.5 or 8 inch can go past 3khz while getting to 125hz open baffle. Then the sub takes over for the bottom end.
Having heard, measured, and tweaked the trial system with all the components, I think it's better than the 8" drivers I've used in the 3 previous OB 3-and 4-ways. The high bass & low mids are fuller, more detailed & dynamic. And less distorted at higher SPL. It doesn't need to go higher than 800hs, where dispersion hasn't really started to narrow, so... That Textreme driver is excellent to > 1.5 khz, imo.