I have 6 of these on the way. I think the end result is going to be 1 each in small sealed enclosures for a HT system, but I was wondering if there was a sortof "expirament" that I could perform with them first. I have good building and listening skills, but have never expiramented with transmision lines or anything like that.
I was thinking a trapezoidal type top enclosure with 3 of the drivers per side, all running full range, that goes into a TL below, all in a 40" tall enclosure.
I dont mind spending a couple of bucks on some wood in order to have some fun.
I can measure frequency response as well.
-Paul Hilgeman
I was thinking a trapezoidal type top enclosure with 3 of the drivers per side, all running full range, that goes into a TL below, all in a 40" tall enclosure.
I dont mind spending a couple of bucks on some wood in order to have some fun.
I can measure frequency response as well.
-Paul Hilgeman
Hey, you said "fun". Just make 1 channel and take some in-room measurements to see if you have built a better mousetrap.
Try this-
Put three TB's in an 11 litre enclosure with the rear wall directing the back wave down a 40" TL, terminate at front... floor level. Leave room at the top of the baffle for a tweet or small horn.(5"x5" rabbeted for inserts would be nice)
Help me find the right tweet and cap. and figure the center box design. I've found in some rooms the additional HF driver isn't needed, but with 4 TBs it's a satisfactory comb effect compensator.
You should also try the 1.5 config over the single driver...what you seem to lose in imaging is more than made up by depth and presence.
Order more drivers. Once you build a speaker, for its cost, it'll surely find a home. And BTW, little square drive finish screws work great.
Put three TB's in an 11 litre enclosure with the rear wall directing the back wave down a 40" TL, terminate at front... floor level. Leave room at the top of the baffle for a tweet or small horn.(5"x5" rabbeted for inserts would be nice)
Help me find the right tweet and cap. and figure the center box design. I've found in some rooms the additional HF driver isn't needed, but with 4 TBs it's a satisfactory comb effect compensator.
You should also try the 1.5 config over the single driver...what you seem to lose in imaging is more than made up by depth and presence.
Order more drivers. Once you build a speaker, for its cost, it'll surely find a home. And BTW, little square drive finish screws work great.
Two of these drivers in an enclosure is a big improvement over the single driver model. You'll want to use a BDS compensation network on one driver though.
Deja vu all over again
All Contributors: Thanks for the comments. I am considering a similar pursuit and your input here is appreciated and of value to more than one member!
Paul,
I honestly had an idea last week that involved buying a handful (12-ish) of some pseudo-small pseudo-fullrange drivers to experiment with. I have read way too much and done way too little to understand the nuances of speakerbuilding. I thought a good 'lab' would be to try a constant driver in various implementations. Maybe a sealed, vented and TL configuration with three small Tangband's and a minimal crossover. Then maybe a complex crossover 'optimized' (my version, not a true optimization as I am not a designer) for each situation. I'm just wondering and wanting to experiment a bit. I didn't post my thoughts, as I knew it would be winter that drove me inside, giving me time to play with my winter hobbies.
Regardless, I hope this thread stays alive and I can try to get some ideas. I have in no way researched my desired driver characteristics, but if you think the driver you are planning on tinkering with would be a valid candidate for my experiment, I would love to collaborate and possibly add some data points to the cumulative experiments. Regretfully, I can't add any pedigree which would give credence to my participation in the project, but if you find something of interest, I would like to add another reference point using the same geometry/crossover (my parts, not yours).
I'd say my total budget would be roughly $300 for the whole experience (100-150-ish in whatever drivers) and the rest for components, as MDF is not worth considering. Time frame would be Nov-Feb-ish. My source components aren't entirely up to audiophile snuff and of course listening environment/tastes vary greatly, so it is subjective.
Might be fun. Either way, I hope some good ideas are posed with regard to your project and this thread becomes a little melting pot of 'standard innovation.'
I enjoy reading your posts here and at PE. Keep it up. You are a good influence on new participants in this hobby. Are you going to a DIY event this year?
Sandy.
All Contributors: Thanks for the comments. I am considering a similar pursuit and your input here is appreciated and of value to more than one member!
Paul,
I honestly had an idea last week that involved buying a handful (12-ish) of some pseudo-small pseudo-fullrange drivers to experiment with. I have read way too much and done way too little to understand the nuances of speakerbuilding. I thought a good 'lab' would be to try a constant driver in various implementations. Maybe a sealed, vented and TL configuration with three small Tangband's and a minimal crossover. Then maybe a complex crossover 'optimized' (my version, not a true optimization as I am not a designer) for each situation. I'm just wondering and wanting to experiment a bit. I didn't post my thoughts, as I knew it would be winter that drove me inside, giving me time to play with my winter hobbies.
Regardless, I hope this thread stays alive and I can try to get some ideas. I have in no way researched my desired driver characteristics, but if you think the driver you are planning on tinkering with would be a valid candidate for my experiment, I would love to collaborate and possibly add some data points to the cumulative experiments. Regretfully, I can't add any pedigree which would give credence to my participation in the project, but if you find something of interest, I would like to add another reference point using the same geometry/crossover (my parts, not yours).
I'd say my total budget would be roughly $300 for the whole experience (100-150-ish in whatever drivers) and the rest for components, as MDF is not worth considering. Time frame would be Nov-Feb-ish. My source components aren't entirely up to audiophile snuff and of course listening environment/tastes vary greatly, so it is subjective.
Might be fun. Either way, I hope some good ideas are posed with regard to your project and this thread becomes a little melting pot of 'standard innovation.'
I enjoy reading your posts here and at PE. Keep it up. You are a good influence on new participants in this hobby. Are you going to a DIY event this year?
Sandy.
Thanks Sandy,
I will keep people posted. The first two thing I am going to do are a Bipolar TL design. If anyone would like to help, I would apreciate it.
I will simultaniously build two sealed single driver speakers to test their suitibility for some satelites for HT.
I will keep people posted. The first two thing I am going to do are a Bipolar TL design. If anyone would like to help, I would apreciate it.
I will simultaniously build two sealed single driver speakers to test their suitibility for some satelites for HT.
Re: Sandy on Tang Band W3-871S Projects
Sandy,
On TB W3-871S projects you might take at look at the ELF1.5 or Super ELF and my line array deisgn. These are shown and are available through:
www.creativesound.ca
On the DIY speaker events, you might think about the Atlanta event on October 25th as it will be the closest one to you in Charlotte, NC.
Info at:
http://www.audiodiycentral.com/diy2003_atlanta.shtml
You can also download my near field line array white paper at the www.audiodiycentral.com site.
See you there.
Jim
Sandy,
On TB W3-871S projects you might take at look at the ELF1.5 or Super ELF and my line array deisgn. These are shown and are available through:
www.creativesound.ca
On the DIY speaker events, you might think about the Atlanta event on October 25th as it will be the closest one to you in Charlotte, NC.
Info at:
http://www.audiodiycentral.com/diy2003_atlanta.shtml
You can also download my near field line array white paper at the www.audiodiycentral.com site.
See you there.
Jim
Thanks
Jim Griffin: Yes, I am aware of the excellent designs you mentioned. I'm treating my experiment as a college lab more than an attempt at a great speaker, but the barometer for the experiment will be a true designer's implementation. I will seriously consider your recommendations and hope I get to enjoy whatever you bring to Atlanta if I can attend.
Paul: Good for you and the Milwaukee area DIY'ers. I hope your event is enjoyable for all that attend.
Sandy.
Jim Griffin: Yes, I am aware of the excellent designs you mentioned. I'm treating my experiment as a college lab more than an attempt at a great speaker, but the barometer for the experiment will be a true designer's implementation. I will seriously consider your recommendations and hope I get to enjoy whatever you bring to Atlanta if I can attend.
Paul: Good for you and the Milwaukee area DIY'ers. I hope your event is enjoyable for all that attend.
Sandy.
two pair impedance
I'm attempting to put 4 together in a mini-array type configuration. I think I've got the BDS compensation ok but I'm concerned about the impedance. I've tried different wiring configurations and the one that sounds the best is with the drivers in parallel. However, the DC resistance is <3 ohms. I tried each pair in series then the two pair in parallel. Sounded awful. Any suggestions?
I'm attempting to put 4 together in a mini-array type configuration. I think I've got the BDS compensation ok but I'm concerned about the impedance. I've tried different wiring configurations and the one that sounds the best is with the drivers in parallel. However, the DC resistance is <3 ohms. I tried each pair in series then the two pair in parallel. Sounded awful. Any suggestions?
um.... There is no reason why the series/parallel will sound worse, you need to check the polarity, that is the only thing I can think of. After you have wired them take a 1.5 v battery across the terminals and make sure that they all move out/in together as you touch and untough the battery.
The only thing lost by going from all parallel to series/parallel will be 3dB of sensativity.
The only thing lost by going from all parallel to series/parallel will be 3dB of sensativity.
Back on topic.
Now, I understand that Comb filtering is an issue, but at the same time, so is beaming, or a narrowing 'cone' of HF emitting from the driver. Has anyone done any comparisons of the off-axis response of the w3-871s? If you can find the angle at which the HF roll-off is down enough that you could 'angle' each driver away from the other, maybe take 2 of them wired in parallel . Then you would have a much smoother off-axis response in the HF range, and more radiating area in the midrange. This would almost look like the bose direct reflecting speaker with one driver pointing at the listener, and another pointed away, this would fill in the baffle step loss and increase the HF off-axis response.
Now, I am more of a traditionalist, and these ideas seems way off the wall to me, but it could be some fun to expirament with for a while.
-Paul Hilgeman
Now, I understand that Comb filtering is an issue, but at the same time, so is beaming, or a narrowing 'cone' of HF emitting from the driver. Has anyone done any comparisons of the off-axis response of the w3-871s? If you can find the angle at which the HF roll-off is down enough that you could 'angle' each driver away from the other, maybe take 2 of them wired in parallel . Then you would have a much smoother off-axis response in the HF range, and more radiating area in the midrange. This would almost look like the bose direct reflecting speaker with one driver pointing at the listener, and another pointed away, this would fill in the baffle step loss and increase the HF off-axis response.
Now, I am more of a traditionalist, and these ideas seems way off the wall to me, but it could be some fun to expirament with for a while.
-Paul Hilgeman
True, true, but that should be made up by the increased cone area. While contemplating this I wondered about the polarity and if the drivers were cancelling each other out. Thanks for the tip. I'll try that when I get home.
bipolar alphaTL for W3-871S
40" is way too long for these...
* 5.25" internal square prism** 21" internal height (+ legs) open at the bottom drivers mounted at the top on opposite faces stuffed evenly with 48 g of dacron wool. ** 27.5 in^2 x-section.
dave
40" is way too long for these...
* 5.25" internal square prism** 21" internal height (+ legs) open at the bottom drivers mounted at the top on opposite faces stuffed evenly with 48 g of dacron wool. ** 27.5 in^2 x-section.
dave
Have you built a pair of those Dave? I have, they sounded good, but not as good as a pair of monopole bass reflex cabinets for these. Maybe I've been doing something wrong, but I doubt it.
JoeBob said:
Not yet... i have a single pr of 871s and a pr of 879s -- i was going to try a pr of lines in a box and see how they do...
dave
I just picked up 5 of these drivers to play with for a small 5.1 setup for my computer. I did not see the design that CSS had for them, and I even ordered my drivers from there. Dope..... I was going to build single cabinets for single drivers, but the dual idea seems interesting. I will go ahead with the single plan for now, but I can always order more or build some new stuff. I will have to keep up with this thread, and I will be attending the Atlanta DIY again this year.
Hear is a design that a guy on PE posted.
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/audio-speaker11.html
Hear is a design that a guy on PE posted.
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/audio-speaker11.html
- Status
- Not open for further replies.