The TH-115 specs are what everyone is after
Not the cabinet itself.
At 2500 bucks plus a cabinet
Which will probably come out closer to $3 K per cabinet. The only people so far to afford them are Church's (who can afford gold toilets), some sporting arena's (some peoples Church) and a few high end show off's. I did a search trying to find someone running a DSL rig but couldn't. (?) I would love to hear one. So what Screamer says about awareness is probably why Danley himself visits all these forums.
Plus besides Screamer and iand
How many people on here are in that business? I assume (8% are just
home brew bass nuts.
Not the cabinet itself.
At 2500 bucks plus a cabinet
Which will probably come out closer to $3 K per cabinet. The only people so far to afford them are Church's (who can afford gold toilets), some sporting arena's (some peoples Church) and a few high end show off's. I did a search trying to find someone running a DSL rig but couldn't. (?) I would love to hear one. So what Screamer says about awareness is probably why Danley himself visits all these forums.
Plus besides Screamer and iand
How many people on here are in that business? I assume (8% are just
home brew bass nuts.
Sorry about the iand
I thought I remember reading you posting about your rig or something.
And IC design?
I had only found one place listing a price for any of the DSL stuff.
Even at $2200 per cab. ROI for most is out of the question.
I was hoping someone would chime in
about someone using a DSL rig so that I might here one in person.
I thought I remember reading you posting about your rig or something.
And IC design?
I had only found one place listing a price for any of the DSL stuff.
Even at $2200 per cab. ROI for most is out of the question.
I was hoping someone would chime in
about someone using a DSL rig so that I might here one in person.
FlipC said:
I've built (and am building) speakers for our band, precisely because I can build for £2000 what it would cost at least £10000 to buy.
DSL gear is damn good but damn expensive, only installs with money to burn or big pro hire companies can afford it.
Ian
P.S. Current IC project is a 56Gs/s 8b ADC for 100G Ethernet
Just the hook up every house hold needs!
LOL
And if your in London
I could only imagine what it would cost to get DSL over there. With so much competition over there I would think Danley would have to open a factory in Poland (not on Euro so still cheap) to be able to compete.
With Funktion One, Void Stasys and others. There seems to be more competition. I would love to hear either. Or own some Porn Horns...
LOL
And if your in London
I could only imagine what it would cost to get DSL over there. With so much competition over there I would think Danley would have to open a factory in Poland (not on Euro so still cheap) to be able to compete.
With Funktion One, Void Stasys and others. There seems to be more competition. I would love to hear either. Or own some Porn Horns...
Actually my country would be ideal to invest. Low salaries (much lower than in Poland) and we have free trade agreement with the EU. Plus our government have reduced taxes for foreign investors. We also have a duty free zones with even more lower taxation.
And we have a educated labor force.
And we have a educated labor force.
FlipC said:
Well, you said cost is no object and it had to be under 500L in size. I believe this meets the bandwidth goal as well. It may not be too practical, but this is all I can come up with. The mouth can be made smaller to match the TH115 volume. I also had to add a little inductance to flatten the response. Can you imagine this in your house!
Spec sheet is here: http://www.bcspeakers.com/PDF/PRD/21SW150.pdf
JLH said:
Well, you said cost is no object and it had to be under 500L in size. I believe this meets the bandwidth goal as well. It may not be too practical, but this is all I can come up with. The mouth can be made smaller to match the TH115 volume. I also had to add a little inductance to flatten the response. Can you imagine this in your house!
Spec sheet is here: http://www.bcspeakers.com/PDF/PRD/21SW150.pdf
Try the new Precision Devices PDN.2151, in the same TH this gives about 2dB more efficiency than the B&C (higher BL and lower mmd) and is cheaper (even 20% cheaper than the ferrite PD>2150!).
The specs don't appear as good (lower Pe and Xmax) but I suspect this is PD being ultra-conservative with their specs as usual (2dB compression at full power is way lower than B&C usual figures).
Cheers
Ian
JLH said:
That's a pity, PD drivers have a very good reputation here -- the remarkable thing about the PDN.2151 is that it's not only higher performance than the PD.2150 but cheaper -- every other supplier seems to charge a premium for their neo drivers (especially 21"), not a discount.
http://www.bluearan.co.uk/index.php...oudspeaker_Drivers&subheadnew=21_Inch_Drivers
PDN.2151 £370+VAT 16kg BL=37.1 mms=281 hvc=30 hg=15
PD.2150 £410+VAT 32kg BL=34.2 mms=305 hvc=30 hg=15
21SW150 £484+VAT 18kg BL=32.6 mms=494 hvc=30 hg=12
Cheers
Ian
P.S All have 150mm voice coils, data sheet is here:
http://www.precision-devices.com/asps/uploads/super/85.pdf
Just a though (I haven't worked this out yet)...
The major TH limitation I've come across with roughly 50 models in Hornresp is running out of xmax before running out of pmax. I wonder if there might be a trick to tame the bottom peak in xmax as the woofer begins to unload at the low frequency cutoff. For example, a second longer path to the mouth to provide an out of phase wavefront to limit excursion. Alternatively, in a dual woofer configuration, what about a shunt capacitor to time delay one woofer relative to the other near the low frequency cutoff?
I know that the TH designs already produce pretty funky phase alignments, but if the goal is to get the maximum output for a given size box, one of these approaches might make sense.
The major TH limitation I've come across with roughly 50 models in Hornresp is running out of xmax before running out of pmax. I wonder if there might be a trick to tame the bottom peak in xmax as the woofer begins to unload at the low frequency cutoff. For example, a second longer path to the mouth to provide an out of phase wavefront to limit excursion. Alternatively, in a dual woofer configuration, what about a shunt capacitor to time delay one woofer relative to the other near the low frequency cutoff?
I know that the TH designs already produce pretty funky phase alignments, but if the goal is to get the maximum output for a given size box, one of these approaches might make sense.
hornresp and akabak agree, and as tom has answered before.....
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1703164#post1703164
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1703318#post1703318
Tom obviously has some 'tweaks' to akabak to make those predictions line up better with measured results -- but he obviously has faith in the underlying math, and has tweaks only.
I don't think there is anything wrong with hornresp. It may not be perfect, but for the average DIY model, which is david's intent -- it works.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1703164#post1703164
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1703318#post1703318
Tom obviously has some 'tweaks' to akabak to make those predictions line up better with measured results -- but he obviously has faith in the underlying math, and has tweaks only.
I don't think there is anything wrong with hornresp. It may not be perfect, but for the average DIY model, which is david's intent -- it works.
Originally posted by iand
Which is still about 5x what it costs to build something similar yourself -- assuming you think blood sweat and tears are free, which most people who build their own speakers seem to
I found that 20% also to be a common figure in determining the cost makeup ( +/- 5% )
For a time in the 70's I did speaker cab work and that reflected my ratio.
Of course some designs utilize proprietary materials and fabrication techniques that are unavailable to the average DIYer, but for the more conventional things 1/4 to 1/5 is a good figure.
Simulation alone will not achieve the desired result. You will have to get down and dirty with some cabinetry. Sometimes rules need to be broken. Untill one can accurately model all the bends, reflections, cancellations, and resonances of a box made of specific materials, you can't rely on the computer alone.
screamersusa said:
For bass horns I'd rather believe what Tom said, which was that bends and reflectors make no significant difference and neither does non-smooth flare expansion, so long as all the lateral dimensions are a small fraction of a wavelength -- this all fits perfectly with acoustic theory.
The first was proved by making a version of one of his existing horns (might have been the BassTech 7?) with beautifully rounded corners and bends instead of the standard build which didn't even have corner reflectors; the only difference in the passband (i.e. not at several hundred Hz) was a slight increase in LF cutoff because the horn was effectively slightly shorter (and heavier, and harder to build).
The second was proved by making a bass horn out of stepped sections instead of smoothly expanding ones, with the average area over each section matching; again no difference in the passband.
Lengthwise resonances along sections of the horn (much longer dimensions) and panel resonances, these do make a difference. But carefully rounding off bends or using reflectors are largely a waste of time and effort -- if they do make a difference it's because you've changed the length of the horn slightly.
Of course the fact that you need to build a horn and measure it -- simulations are only a reasonable prediction of performance -- is still true with speakers, mainly because the simulation tools are not accurate and detailed enough to give accurate results, or at least we don't put in sufficiently accurate models.
When I'm designing mixed-signal chips I do expect the performance to be very close to reality, assuming we did all the right simulations and built the models correctly. But then the simulation tools cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, we spend man-years doing the design, and cut-and-try isn't really acceptable when one respin costs half a million...
Ian
iand said:
Beyond bracing corners, absolutely, though of course the usual caveats apply WRT proper folding geometry for the desired BW, so research AES for the details and then figure out how to adapt it to the TH's apparently unique expansion considerations.
I believe it's due to not preserving the expansion rate through the bends since minor length changes doesn't shift the BW enough to matter and HR confirms it if it's accurate enough. Like with any other ultra high performance app though, 'God' is in the details.
GM