I figured the thicker the better for the MDF. The more mass and thickness, the less resonance on each panel.
I don't think gluing the pieces to a flexible layer like fake leather would help anything. Each part needs to be fit up with it's neighbors. You can't really get that perfect before you fold up the parts. Glue is easy to clean up anyways.
I don't think gluing the pieces to a flexible layer like fake leather would help anything. Each part needs to be fit up with it's neighbors. You can't really get that perfect before you fold up the parts. Glue is easy to clean up anyways.
Well, yes, it is in Switzerland, I can post you the link.
The violin Delphine Gros is playing in the links I shared (made by a fabulous Belgian luthierE), plus 2 of my harpsichords, have the soundboards made of that same wood, really top quality spruce.
They sell "piano / harpsichord" soundboard wood by the square meter, you can even go there and choose the pieces yourself. It's absolutely knot free, straight and close grain, and really cut to the quarter so that all ring lines are perfectly perpendicular to the surface.
The width they provide is so generous in thickness (10-12 mm) for a soundboard, that the guy who built the harpsichords for me could actually use two planks from each for the harpsichord soundboard, and he told me he could almost get three out of them.
Check out their website:
www.tonewood.ch
If you go there, be prepared to some very winding roads, two-way but with the width that allows only one car, plus I would recommend going only in the warm months, my guess is that in winter you could go skiing from there to the nearest highway.
Cheers,
WF
I am glad it helped, it might be a bit overkill for speaker enclosure material, this is the same wood that is being used in tip top and valuable musical instruments. But, not to say the luthier who built it did not contribute, I am sure she did, if you listen to Delphine playing Vivaldi, you will notice her violin has a ringing in the high register that makes her stand out from the orchestra effortlessly. There are many factors in play, how good is the violinist, and the luthier, but the wood is definitively there also.
I have a small harpsichord made of that same wood, and the sound is very very generous. I played both Bach passions, the St. Matthewss and St. John's, and people told me they were able for the first time to really get something of the harpsichord sound, which I take as a compliment for the instrument, since the harpsichord is surrounded by choirs, and orchestras (in plural).
Cheers,
WF
Just to round the idea: we know that musical energy is something very elusive, I don't know which percentage of the energy we musicians give to the instrument is actually converted into sound, but my guess would be it is really single digit percentile. So any improvement is very easily noticed. I went to a blind session in which many luthiers were presenting their instruments, and a great player was trying them out. I immediately could tell the violin that stand out from the rest. I was not wrong, every one who listens to this instrument is very impressed. Plus, the violinist playing it must be also worth something ;P
Anyway, that instrument has a special ringing in the high register, that makes its sound have the potential to really stand out in any environment (if the violinist is also exceptional), particularly among other string instruments. I wish we could understand why is it so. I think the wood has definitively something to do, and it would be stupid to compromise the quality of the wood in an instrument that takes so many woman-hours (in this case) to be built.
I can only say my ears must be not too bad, since the guy presenting the violins on purpose played twice the same instrument (this one), something he was "not to do", and I said "well, I think instrument #2 and #5 sound really similar". It was the same one, of course, and the guy was very surprised I could tell.
Cheers,
WF
Anyway, that instrument has a special ringing in the high register, that makes its sound have the potential to really stand out in any environment (if the violinist is also exceptional), particularly among other string instruments. I wish we could understand why is it so. I think the wood has definitively something to do, and it would be stupid to compromise the quality of the wood in an instrument that takes so many woman-hours (in this case) to be built.
I can only say my ears must be not too bad, since the guy presenting the violins on purpose played twice the same instrument (this one), something he was "not to do", and I said "well, I think instrument #2 and #5 sound really similar". It was the same one, of course, and the guy was very surprised I could tell.
Cheers,
WF
Matt Smith, I apologize if with my total lack of knowledge in this field I allow myself to correct you, but I think that for this kind of enclosure, the resonance of the panel is actually a positive quality, and something to look for. So using resonant, thin, radiating panels is something to look for.
Unless I read them wrong, this is what both the inventors and followers seem to think unanimously.
That is why I proposed building them with tonewood.
Cheers,
WF
Look we have a pure not so bad recording of one resonator (read musical instrument) we want to play back as pure as possible, if we add another maybe non linear foreign resonator we get distortion or a new effect doesn't we
as i see it could be fine for studio use creating new sounds but not for a pure replay system, unless you can garuantee that the new resonating effect is linear and someway extracted from drivers output so that total sum of system is a smooth output.From ground let it resonate is no problem in a diy world where one can do whatever one wants, but if we want a pure reproduction think direction is another, here is a quote from known John L. Murphy at TrueAudio.com:
That said myself also find musical instruments their resonance/vibe/spectre and playability very facinating
What i get gmad have pointed out is that a 2nd order butterworth high pass system that is the principle and real world output from combining a sealed emclosure with a speaker driver has to resonate somewhere because its from ground the system principle and from its belonging math (read butterworth 2nd order high pass) we choose what spec for driver and volume of box to hit some planned predicted target.
Last edited:
I can contribute that my 5mm plywood hypercube produces purer tone and more detail than the very well developed transient-perfect commercial two-way speakers I also have and that sport a most-rigid MDF-cum-corian non-resonating enclosure.
This clearly contradicts the deader is better paradigm as far as the hypercube enclosure is concerned.
I hasten to add that there is indeed an ever so minute resonance in my hypercube that would be better if it weren't there. That's why I will build the 9mm hypercubes to see what sounds better.
This clearly contradicts the deader is better paradigm as far as the hypercube enclosure is concerned.
I hasten to add that there is indeed an ever so minute resonance in my hypercube that would be better if it weren't there. That's why I will build the 9mm hypercubes to see what sounds better.
Look we have a pure not so bad recording of one resonator (read musical instrument) we want to play back as pure as possible, if we add another maybe non linear foreign resonator we get distortion or a new effect doesn't we
That said myself also find musical instruments their resonance/vibe/spectre and playability very facinating
Sorry, once you start talking about the technical aspects of speaker enclosure design, I get lost really quickly. I am not even in Kindergarten in that regard, it is well beyond my area of expertise.
But I agree with you completely in the part of what you wrote that I understand, I don't want to have a resonator with no effect on the sound, since I do not believe it is at all possible to get even close to reproducing the soundwaves of a real performance faithfully. I have witnesses countless concerts, and the experience of a recording is not even half, not even a tenth of a live performance, to me of course.
I am not even remotely interested in a speaker design that supposedly introduces no single distortion to the signal, and that reproduces everything perfectly linearly. I have the feeling most people in this forum will think the opposite exactly to this, and it is fine with me.
I know some people like old guitar cabinets because the way the tonewood colors the sound. And sorry if I didn't mention this earlier, but the use I will give this speakers is mainly as guitar/bass/keyboard cabinets, so if they add some extra color to the sound, as long as it is in a musical way, the more the better.
It is funny, but some people's garbage is anothers' treasure. I like for instance bass guitar cabinets by companies that color the sound a lot, I never liked the "flat-hi-fi" kind. In music is all a matter of taste.
Cheers,
WF
Also, by the way, when you need to play in loud band environments, you are forced to using electric violins, more or less (otherwise it is really hard to control feedback).
I don not know if you heard them, but they really sound 'soulless' to me. And it is exactly because without them being coupled to a real-life body, you hear what the string is producing only, you get "hi-fi" string sound, which, BTW, and IMO, sounds like ####.
All the character of real life instruments is in the interaction with the resonating elements. Again, I agree fully that it is a bad thing for reproducing a sound-wave as faithfully as possible. But pardon me if I tend to see everything as musical instruments, including speakers.
Cheers,
WF
I don not know if you heard them, but they really sound 'soulless' to me. And it is exactly because without them being coupled to a real-life body, you hear what the string is producing only, you get "hi-fi" string sound, which, BTW, and IMO, sounds like ####.
All the character of real life instruments is in the interaction with the resonating elements. Again, I agree fully that it is a bad thing for reproducing a sound-wave as faithfully as possible. But pardon me if I tend to see everything as musical instruments, including speakers.
Cheers,
WF
In my humble opinion if you want any chance of hearing that violin sound captured within a recording, the enclosure itself should not be a part of it in the replay chain.
There are a lot of reasons why replay may not be satisfying enough, but having the same 'salt and pepper' added to every replay simply cannot be a good solution in my book.
There are a lot of reasons why replay may not be satisfying enough, but having the same 'salt and pepper' added to every replay simply cannot be a good solution in my book.
You are making a very clear, sound and reasonable point my friend, but let me tell you why I don't completely agree with that:
Think of musical instruments like a combination of "salt and pepper", some you like more than others. When you find the right combination, it's not a bad thing to repeat over and over the same condiments over different dishes, because the combination is really good.
So, to put it another way, even with the same amount of "salt and pepper", I never get tired of listening to different compositions and pieces played on a superb instrument, by a superb musician.
Also, if I like a reader for audio books, with her/his particular voice and formants (which are somewhat fixed) I would not get tired of listening to different books read by her/him.
You get my point? Having a color imposed is not 'per se' a bad thing, it depends if you consider ideal speakers to be neutral things, or if you allow them to add something.
Cheers,
WF
Well, as an amplifier for a musical instrument I certainly would understand it. But just not on my favorite tracks that have been spiced up already. My personal library of things I want to listen to just does not work that well with those same spices every time.
There are more ways to get us closer to the recorded magic. Using a little science really is not a bad road to travel. I don't regret following that road.
As long as you're getting something out of it that pleases you its allright though.
It just isn't my road to musicality. I do believe the job of our replay system (which inludes the room as much as the speakers to stand a chance of being succesful) is to get us closer to that magic that has been captured by the recordings our favorite artists.
There are more ways to get us closer to the recorded magic. Using a little science really is not a bad road to travel. I don't regret following that road.
As long as you're getting something out of it that pleases you its allright though.
It just isn't my road to musicality. I do believe the job of our replay system (which inludes the room as much as the speakers to stand a chance of being succesful) is to get us closer to that magic that has been captured by the recordings our favorite artists.
i guess the consensus between the two would be Stradivarius like, in that if the tone wood properties could be used in a predictable fashion like varying frequency response with volume it could be beneficial to subjective reproduction quality ...?
but i'm in the "please don't let it ring" camp when it comes to reproduction!
but i'm in the "please don't let it ring" camp when it comes to reproduction!
Wesayso, your objection is purely theoretical. Build a hypercube from thin wood and listen for yourself.
It does not add the same salt and pepper sauce, not at all. The only noticable resonance is in the bass area, and this only engages with some material. Easy to EQ this away, but I actually prefer it without EQ.
This enclosure shape is indeed special and does not abide by the same laws as normal boxes.
It does not add the same salt and pepper sauce, not at all. The only noticable resonance is in the bass area, and this only engages with some material. Easy to EQ this away, but I actually prefer it without EQ.
This enclosure shape is indeed special and does not abide by the same laws as normal boxes.
Just taking an impedance plot of the driver in the enclosure would already tell us a lot of what's really happening.
My opinion has been formed by more than theory alone. I don't believe making my own hypercubes would sway me from what I've got so far, thank you.
I believe quite some volume displacement capabillities would be needed to sway me.
My opinion has been formed by more than theory alone. I don't believe making my own hypercubes would sway me from what I've got so far, thank you.
I believe quite some volume displacement capabillities would be needed to sway me.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.