For a 3-way I would say that 18mm is the minimum.
Do you mean you are screwing it together? Then you would be correct in your assumption and if you want to use screws you need to use battens on the inside, glued on for the screws to pull into. However, IMO there's not really any need to use screws, especially for a box of this size.
Decent wood glue or 'no more nails' and a few nails or a clamp (duct tape can be used if careful) provide sufficient bonding power.
Selling them? Well I might have to unless I want speakers cluttering up the place 🙂
Do you mean you are screwing it together? Then you would be correct in your assumption and if you want to use screws you need to use battens on the inside, glued on for the screws to pull into. However, IMO there's not really any need to use screws, especially for a box of this size.
Decent wood glue or 'no more nails' and a few nails or a clamp (duct tape can be used if careful) provide sufficient bonding power.
Selling them? Well I might have to unless I want speakers cluttering up the place 🙂
richie00boy said:
I agree, glue is stronger than the wood (or MDF), so screws arnt needed, but I dont like nails. Im terrible with a hammer, so I always use screws.
I meant as a business, not one pair. The word "model" made me think of a whole range of speakers based on Audax drivers. 😛
Guys a bit of an update.... i thought you might like to see these?
Currently being run in, couldn't resist trying them before being completed properly, initial signs are that they will be OK.
Sound seems to be inproving as they run in, some crossover tweeks to be done as well.
More pics to follow of the actual build process.
M
Currently being run in, couldn't resist trying them before being completed properly, initial signs are that they will be OK.
Sound seems to be inproving as they run in, some crossover tweeks to be done as well.
More pics to follow of the actual build process.
M
Attachments
...and really big for one bass driver. What internal volume did you use?
Only one attachment per post, unless you host pics on another server and link to them
Only one attachment per post, unless you host pics on another server and link to them
Right. I thought you went for a sealed cab. Those little drivers are quite deceiving and make the enclosure look a lot bigger than 11 litres.
Nice work 🙂
It'll be a while before my cabinets get sorted. I've only just got my measurement equipment sorted out. Hopefully I should be posting my Thiele/Small parameters soon.
How did you do the chamfers? I imagine it's quite hard not only to get them flat/even, but also all the same.
It'll be a while before my cabinets get sorted. I've only just got my measurement equipment sorted out. Hopefully I should be posting my Thiele/Small parameters soon.
How did you do the chamfers? I imagine it's quite hard not only to get them flat/even, but also all the same.
Richie00boy,
Thanks
Chamfers were done by hand 😱 you are right you do need to be careful, but nothing a bit of 60 grit and an orbital sander can't fix 😀
I am now starting to turn my attention to the crossovers, I was going to use a basic first order crossover at 3000hz with a lpad to quieten down the tweeter (I calculate 7.3db reduction required?? tweeter minus the woofer sensitivities?)
I was thinking of keeping it cheap as this was the general direction taken at the start of the thread, so are there any REAL advantages in using more complex crossover designs for £17 quids worth of drivers???
mark
Thanks
Chamfers were done by hand 😱 you are right you do need to be careful, but nothing a bit of 60 grit and an orbital sander can't fix 😀
I am now starting to turn my attention to the crossovers, I was going to use a basic first order crossover at 3000hz with a lpad to quieten down the tweeter (I calculate 7.3db reduction required?? tweeter minus the woofer sensitivities?)
I was thinking of keeping it cheap as this was the general direction taken at the start of the thread, so are there any REAL advantages in using more complex crossover designs for £17 quids worth of drivers???
mark
I think 3k is a bit on the low side for that tweeter if it's a 1st-order crossover, I'd say more like 4.5k, but it depends how loud you let it go. The high frequency isn't a problem as the main drive unit is only 4 inch, it can go quite high anyway.
I'm not really a fan of 1st-order crossovers, but my first efforts were 1st-order and not disastrous. They are so cheap and easy to do that you can just build one anyway and try higher order later if you want. I make all my crossovers external.
I recommend an adjustable L-pad (CPC sell them) as whilst in theory the advertised sensitivies can be made to match, how it works in practice is another matter and you will be forever fiddling with resistors of odd values.
I'm not really a fan of 1st-order crossovers, but my first efforts were 1st-order and not disastrous. They are so cheap and easy to do that you can just build one anyway and try higher order later if you want. I make all my crossovers external.
I recommend an adjustable L-pad (CPC sell them) as whilst in theory the advertised sensitivies can be made to match, how it works in practice is another matter and you will be forever fiddling with resistors of odd values.
The Fs of a TWO34 is low enough to be able to run a first-order HPF at 3kHz or so.
Also, if the bass unit has a lower efficiency, then the L-pad to the tweeter will do a fairly good job of reducing the tweeter's rise in impedance at resonance as well. (otherwise the rise in impedance will mean that the simple capacitor XO won't be giving as much attenuation at Fs as you would have expected).
Also, if the bass unit has a lower efficiency, then the L-pad to the tweeter will do a fairly good job of reducing the tweeter's rise in impedance at resonance as well. (otherwise the rise in impedance will mean that the simple capacitor XO won't be giving as much attenuation at Fs as you would have expected).
Ouroboros said:
Low tweeter Fs actually causes excursion problems with 1st order
as excursion increases 6dB per octave down to Fs below c/o.
🙂 sreten.
If D1GGY was using a TW034 then I would agree with you. However, he is using a TM025F1, whose Fs is substantially higher than that of the TW034 🙂
richie00boy said:
Oh sorry, I'm getting confused between threads!
I agree that a 25mm unit is a bit marginal.
Guys,
so, it seems a little more spent on 2 more inductors and 2 more capacitors is worth it,
So if i were to use a 2nd order design what x over frequency should i use?
audax in there designs seem to stick to 2.5k or 3K for an F1, using fourth (it i think) order designs, my french is not too bon 😉 and the designs are on the french website.
so, it seems a little more spent on 2 more inductors and 2 more capacitors is worth it,
So if i were to use a 2nd order design what x over frequency should i use?
audax in there designs seem to stick to 2.5k or 3K for an F1, using fourth (it i think) order designs, my french is not too bon 😉 and the designs are on the french website.
Hi guys,
I thought I'd stick my head in this endless thread to see if anyone has done up a 2 way crossover for the AP100Z0 and the TM025F1.
I worked one up over the weekend and I'll wire it up during the week when I get a couple component values in that I need. But for now, I hooked one up mono with with a digital simulated crossover and it sounds pretty good.
The TM025F1 tweeter is a pain in the ***. It's response curve is so ugly that it takes a lot of components to get it under control. Simple 2nd order is out of the question with this driver. I did THD and CSD plots too, and any crossover point under 3Khz is a bad idea.
Anyway, if anyone wants more information, let me know and I'll post it here. This thread is so long, you guys might already have several good crossover designs buried in here somewhere. D1ggy mentioned one on the Audax website. Anyone have a link to that so I can compare with what I've come up with?
I thought I'd stick my head in this endless thread to see if anyone has done up a 2 way crossover for the AP100Z0 and the TM025F1.
I worked one up over the weekend and I'll wire it up during the week when I get a couple component values in that I need. But for now, I hooked one up mono with with a digital simulated crossover and it sounds pretty good.
The TM025F1 tweeter is a pain in the ***. It's response curve is so ugly that it takes a lot of components to get it under control. Simple 2nd order is out of the question with this driver. I did THD and CSD plots too, and any crossover point under 3Khz is a bad idea.
Anyway, if anyone wants more information, let me know and I'll post it here. This thread is so long, you guys might already have several good crossover designs buried in here somewhere. D1ggy mentioned one on the Audax website. Anyone have a link to that so I can compare with what I've come up with?
Zaph,
I would welcome a crossover design.
I have constructed both cabinets and have the drivers running in with a simple Cap to protect the tweeter, a ruuning in crossover as it were!
I seem to recall A couple of people have posted ideas and some negative responses made, without offering a better solution. Only why the idea is not a good idea.
I certainly do not have the facilities to design the crossover and look forward to your thoughts as my speaker to my ears sound pretty good. I am looking forward to hearing what they could do!
Mark
I would welcome a crossover design.
I have constructed both cabinets and have the drivers running in with a simple Cap to protect the tweeter, a ruuning in crossover as it were!
I seem to recall A couple of people have posted ideas and some negative responses made, without offering a better solution. Only why the idea is not a good idea.
I certainly do not have the facilities to design the crossover and look forward to your thoughts as my speaker to my ears sound pretty good. I am looking forward to hearing what they could do!
Mark
- Status
- Not open for further replies.