Dear all,
without striving for perfect high-end sound I decided to build a 3-way stereo to the kitchen / living room, to the sides of the tv so we can use it for music and movies as well (in 2.0 but it's okay).
l'm going to put all drivers into separate boxes.
My question regards the Faital 6FE100 midbass/midrange driver.
I modeled in WinISD both boxed and vented versions, pretty much the same results with negligible deviations.
1. Which variant would you use ? Vented or boxed ? According to Qts the recommendation rather closed, according to EBP it's rather vented. I assume I'd be fine with closed for a more precise sound, or am I wrong ? Which way would you go ? Or maybe try closed first and if it doesn't work out that well, drill the box ? 🙂
2. 1st XO freq. intended to be 70 or 80Hz, electronic active 3-way, 4th order LR. (Aiming for side mounted woofer(s)).
3. With a 48 liters box.. both vented (tuned to fs) and closed box variants are okay. An ideal volume and size too, for this driver.
4. I bought the wooden sheets for the boxes. Would you stay at a classic design with parallel walls, or does it make ANY sense to make the 2 bigger walls non-parallel to eachother ? A small amount of angle I can cut from the wood, but I'm not sure if it brings that much benefit to avoid standing waves. A somewhat bigger angle I don't want to do, then I rather stay with a classic design. Simpler anyway.
Any opinions ? Thank you !
without striving for perfect high-end sound I decided to build a 3-way stereo to the kitchen / living room, to the sides of the tv so we can use it for music and movies as well (in 2.0 but it's okay).
l'm going to put all drivers into separate boxes.
My question regards the Faital 6FE100 midbass/midrange driver.
I modeled in WinISD both boxed and vented versions, pretty much the same results with negligible deviations.
1. Which variant would you use ? Vented or boxed ? According to Qts the recommendation rather closed, according to EBP it's rather vented. I assume I'd be fine with closed for a more precise sound, or am I wrong ? Which way would you go ? Or maybe try closed first and if it doesn't work out that well, drill the box ? 🙂
2. 1st XO freq. intended to be 70 or 80Hz, electronic active 3-way, 4th order LR. (Aiming for side mounted woofer(s)).
3. With a 48 liters box.. both vented (tuned to fs) and closed box variants are okay. An ideal volume and size too, for this driver.
4. I bought the wooden sheets for the boxes. Would you stay at a classic design with parallel walls, or does it make ANY sense to make the 2 bigger walls non-parallel to eachother ? A small amount of angle I can cut from the wood, but I'm not sure if it brings that much benefit to avoid standing waves. A somewhat bigger angle I don't want to do, then I rather stay with a classic design. Simpler anyway.
Any opinions ? Thank you !
Am I the only one who finds it annoying when someone asks an opinion on a driver, but doesn't provide links to the data sheet?
Re:'1st XO freq. intended to be 70 or 80Hz' - so you're using a subwoofer? - if so, go closed for the midrange boxes.
' all drivers ' - you haven't told us what they are......
Re:'1st XO freq. intended to be 70 or 80Hz' - so you're using a subwoofer? - if so, go closed for the midrange boxes.
' all drivers ' - you haven't told us what they are......
Since you are trying to meet a lower cross that has a different arrangement with your side woofers, it would be good to cross low. If this makes it necessary to go vented then it could be beneficial. Normally closed would be helpful with its simpler impedance variation and shallower rolloff.
It annoys me too, but I'm always opening a search window and begin to type. For now, here it is., full data for several programs can be obtained here.
All drivers - needed to know at all ? My question was focusing on the general theory of bass directivity, how 'high' you would cross a woofer if side mounted while avoiding loss of lower midrange. (In this context, a 4th order filter comes handy due to steeper slopes).
- Tbh have no idea for the bass section yet, just thinking about a 12"/30cm woofer (or two) on the side panel(s). According to bass waves' directivity at around ~100-120Hz I'll try to position first crossover freq. to 70-80Hz. According to WinISD I'm still good at 50 with the 4th order crossover, just below the Faital's natural rolloff curve, but don't want to bring that much bass onto the midrange drivers either. So.. 70, or even 80Hz.. yepp.
Alternative option would be using 8"/20cm drivers facing forward and I can choose a somewhat more relaxed 100-Hz crossover frequency.(I have space for that, but no more). Maybe 2x 4Ohms or 4x8Ohms. Not sure if this setup would have that 'oomph' and 'big bass' sound like 1 large side mounted bass driver.
- tweeters are Monacor DTM-104/8 but that part is okay, I'm really struggling between 1 bigger side mounted bass vs. 2-4 front facing smaller bass drivers (with reasonably low fs).
So far thinking about Daytons, good price/perf. but 8" drivers have fs of 30Hz while 12" at about 23Hz.
Option1
Option2
(Impedance doesn't matter now).
I was thinking just the same but wanted to hear other opinions too. This confirms my basic feeling of going closed and 'worst case scenario' is drilling a hole and a well sized&tuned tube into the cabinet.
I have a miniDSP UMIK-1, maybe I'll measure the closed box first carefully and then see what's the lowest XO freq. it can achieve safely. I tried to avoid the driver's fs, if not completely, at least partly, that's why I'm thinking of 80Hz but not sure if it's still usable for side mounted configuration. On some factory subs I see a pot going up 'til 100-120Hz sometimes, but that doesn't mean anything.
Out of the 2 options (see prev. post), I'd vote for lower fs -> bigger woofer -> side mounting -> lower needed XO for midrange.
If taking care of a more clean, more controlled midrange, higher XO helps, but then bass driver has to face forward and be multiplied to bear some power, so I would have to opt for 8" bass drivers and 30Hz fs, which can't go that deep of course like a big woofer with lower fs.
Like always, there's a tradeoff with both options.. which path would you choose ? Just out of curiosity.
Last edited:
If I were you, I'd do polar measurements. At least measure sideways at different angles and learn at what frequency the box and driver locations gets in the way. Whatever it is, you can find a solution.
If you haven't built yet you could design this for your own choice of crossover frequency.
If you haven't built yet you could design this for your own choice of crossover frequency.
Normally you would only vent the woofer for the low end, so I'd use your faital in a closed box.
Re 2x8" vs 1x 12" - usually you get better bang for buck with 8" drivers, & they look more cool..🙂
& because you'd wire them in parallel sensitivity isn't such a concern
either option might be a stretch for 48L though, usually that's 1x8" territory (2x6"?)
(SB20PFC might be worth a look)
Re 2x8" vs 1x 12" - usually you get better bang for buck with 8" drivers, & they look more cool..🙂
& because you'd wire them in parallel sensitivity isn't such a concern
either option might be a stretch for 48L though, usually that's 1x8" territory (2x6"?)
(SB20PFC might be worth a look)
Last edited:
Thanks but 48l is for the Faitals alone. There will be separate cabinets for each way, for bass I can design a bigger box and put it beneath the 48l midrange box.
You're right with sensitivity, 2 woofers in parallel give a 6dB gain, however I'd drive bass with a Class D each side, no worries. How about fs=30 Hz ? If I can tune the cabinet to reach 24Hz at -3dB, that's already good, I really don't like a very loud 20Hz region. Wouldn't you mind sacrificing some deeper fs ?
You're right with sensitivity, 2 woofers in parallel give a 6dB gain, however I'd drive bass with a Class D each side, no worries. How about fs=30 Hz ? If I can tune the cabinet to reach 24Hz at -3dB, that's already good, I really don't like a very loud 20Hz region. Wouldn't you mind sacrificing some deeper fs ?
48L is way too big for a mid enclosure, with a Vas of 14L, you'll probably need a mid enclosure of ~ 5L.
Time to do some box simulating, then find a bass driver/s which match the mids
Time to do some box simulating, then find a bass driver/s which match the mids
Hmm I simulated the Faitals too, but I really don't mind going smaller with that volume. I think I need a second round around that.
It doesn't break the bank and pretty performant I think. I'll just give it a try instead of using some fancy and way more expensive brand or model. They just arrived about 2 weeks ago, build quality seems to be top notch. And according to some stress tests online, it's a real PA midbass-midrange, it can handle quite some abuse if needed. Not that I want to kill them 🙂 but good to know it's a reliable kind of animal.. seems to be a real workhorse. We'll see how it performs in the living room, I expect good results.
48liters was chosen by me because of flexibility. Goes quite 'deep' for a midbass with this volume if box is closed, and if I convert & tune it to a vented box, the same volume is just perfect as well. But I'm trying to decrease size now, modeling in WinISD, aiming for LR4@80Hz.