Water based “crap” is derived from oil😉 Using crap lacquer will always be crap, no matter the chemistry!
When comparing a water based finish vs an oil based finish, doesn't seem like the water based has less sheen?
If you live inside the EU you basically can't get anything else anymore anyway.
I have used both. I find "crap" to harsh of a word, but I do really really really miss the old type of paint and finishes.
Finish was not only smoother, but also less layers were needed.
The headaches afterwards were just not as nice 😀 😀
I have used both. I find "crap" to harsh of a word, but I do really really really miss the old type of paint and finishes.
Finish was not only smoother, but also less layers were needed.
The headaches afterwards were just not as nice 😀 😀
Isn't the latest manufacturing trend, less product sold for more money?
I'm using, basically, a large air brush.
IIRC the tip is 0.6mm? I highly recommend this to you guys if looking for such a thing. Cheap and effective so far. I did spill material out the tiny hole, I'll take the blame, obviously, physics. At work, we call it; Operator error. I read that people will sometimes just put a piece of tape over, now I see why. Painting these things, is a job, as in, physical labor. Mistakes can happen.
Last edited:
Really?
This is the result after googling...
https://www.google.com/search?q=sol...ACBBiAYBkAYK&sclient=gws-wiz-serp&bshm=rimc/1
The best "wet look" finishes come from the two part paints like used in automotive. They are also the most durable.
Of all the things that I have done making speakers, the finish is by far the hardest. Without pro-grade equipment (ventilated paint booth, HVLP, etc,) it is almost impossible to get A grade finishes.
Acoustical Elegance TD18H+ claims:
The TD18H+can play cleanly up into the midrange frequencies and extends cleanly to over 1KHz for use in very large way systems. If you are looking for the cleanest, most accurate, high efficiency 18″ driver on the market, the TD18H+ is it.
https://aespeakers.com/shop/td/td18h/#
Could i use it in a two way with a large format compression driver in a large horn crossed over at 600 Hz with sucsess?
The TD18H+can play cleanly up into the midrange frequencies and extends cleanly to over 1KHz for use in very large way systems. If you are looking for the cleanest, most accurate, high efficiency 18″ driver on the market, the TD18H+ is it.
https://aespeakers.com/shop/td/td18h/#
Could i use it in a two way with a large format compression driver in a large horn crossed over at 600 Hz with sucsess?
During the discussions had here... most would not want to use a 18" above 450hz or so... different people have different philosophy... if there were an 18" that could play high, like to 600hz, The 18H+ is one of them.
I think 18" would have wide enough dispersion at 600hz, but I am not certain
I think 18" would have wide enough dispersion at 600hz, but I am not certain
What about the details/resolution in the 300-600 Hz area? Will it be significant reduced compared with f ex an 15 inch driver?
I need to make a more compact system and wonder if i can «downscale» with existing components to TD18 in a closed cabinet with JBL2451 Truextent beryllium on top. Simple two way.
Today i have TD18 in 155 vented, front loaded midbas horn (110 cm long) and JBL 2384 horn on top:
I need to make a more compact system and wonder if i can «downscale» with existing components to TD18 in a closed cabinet with JBL2451 Truextent beryllium on top. Simple two way.
Today i have TD18 in 155 vented, front loaded midbas horn (110 cm long) and JBL 2384 horn on top:
WOW >
Looks and specs. like quite an amazing driver, with Qts suitable for enclosures that aren't ridiculously large.
The price also makes it look like quite a bargain!
With efficiency like that, just imagine the 'headroom' and lack of mechanically based distortion - amazing 🙂
TD18H+ has more details than JBL 18 inch woofers. But i havent used it higher than 140 Hz.
This is the only 18 inch two way up to 600 Hz i know. I have even heard it on a fair. Cant remember any flaws but the demo was rock music and i play 90% classical music (piano consertos etc).
https://www.line-magnetic.eu/en/pro...m-812-enceintes-haut-rendement-2-voies-detail
This is the only 18 inch two way up to 600 Hz i know. I have even heard it on a fair. Cant remember any flaws but the demo was rock music and i play 90% classical music (piano consertos etc).
https://www.line-magnetic.eu/en/pro...m-812-enceintes-haut-rendement-2-voies-detail
the belief that certain types of music are more demanding or revealing of speaker system flaws simply perpetuates superstitious beliefs that stem from elitism/snobbish forms of thinking...test signals, which most, if not everyone would class as "not music" are the benchmark,no?
i have no beef with classical music and do have an appreciation for it.
but i do have a beef with those that tout it as "better" or "superior"!
if i was interested in a quick evaluation of a system's output capability and quality AC/DC's "Who made Who" or some dubstep who work for me! (to that end any music track i was familiar with would do)
i have no beef with classical music and do have an appreciation for it.
but i do have a beef with those that tout it as "better" or "superior"!
if i was interested in a quick evaluation of a system's output capability and quality AC/DC's "Who made Who" or some dubstep who work for me! (to that end any music track i was familiar with would do)
Its really important to be very familiar with how a recording sounds, and there are great recordings in all genres... being familiar with how these records sound is important. Also, as you increase volume, if the sound changes significantly, take note.
Different songs have different strong points. I think acoustical instruments are more demanding, maybe because we are so much more familiar with what they are supposed to sound like.
There is actually great truth to this comment.
So many true acoustic instruments have a plethora of complex harmonics. It is these harmonics that give
the acoustic signature of a real sound, and can be a challenge for speakers to faithfully reproduce.
Conversely, if we listen to a 'rock band's' electric guitar - bass line - snare hit - kick drum etc. >
we can't necessarily tell the difference between the frequency response of a speaker, or EQ applied in the recording studio.
I am a fan of Rock & Electric music, but I would never deny the importance of true acoustic sounds to test a speaker 🙂
( microphones obviously play a very important role )
True. Rock, Techno etc is like a stew. Bring it on 😎
Classical music and other recordings with acoustical music is like fine dining.
(I like most of the genres)
Classical music and other recordings with acoustical music is like fine dining.
(I like most of the genres)
One option for me is to keep the JBL2384/2451 beryllium and build a two way completely hidden inwall system with JBL 2216nd. The 2384 horns kan be mounted in a small frame in a niche for a slightly toe in:
As a musician, I have to agree. I said acoustical instruments might be more demanding of a loudspeaker, due to our familiarity with what they sound like live but in no way am I insinuating that one genre is superior to the other...
From a musicality stand point I will say that Jazz and Classical are not the easy picks lol... being technically difficult versus being "the best" are not the same argument.
Rock has drums, guitar, piano... male and female vocals... those are all acoustic instruments. I think I get your point. The least post processing the better?
I just completed a 15" 2-way Open Baffle system that covers 40Hz-20KHz. I obtained +6dB bass boost at 45Hz plus subsonic filtering using a passive LC circuit. Details on the circuit at "Open Baffle Bass Boost: +4 to +7dB w/ Passive Xover. No DSP." The goal was reflex-like punch in an Open Baffle format with much less weight and expense in materials. Relevant to this discussion is reducing cone excursion due to the subsonic filter built into the LC circuit.