Tilting doesn’t alter the angle of the driver relative to the k-aperture. Would the same effect be achieved by lowering the speaker relative to the listening position?
Tilting does change the angle of the driver relative to the room because much of it passes through the aperture. Also, the stuff that does go through the aperture is asymmetrically tilted up/down since aperture is asymmetric.
It is because it slants up, that the whole cab needs to be tilted *down*.
It is because it slants up, that the whole cab needs to be tilted *down*.
This tipping is something I was going to try anyway with my future 0.53x as they will be hanging on the ceiling. This is where my actual 901’s are also hanging at the moment with pretty good results and they are just tilted backwards because of their reflecting principle.
I already have the chains in place so I have room to play.
I already have the chains in place so I have room to play.
Of course I had to try it with mine too, but didn't notice much of a difference with the mini K's tilted down. But with them tilted UP, the low soundstage 'level' moved up to exactly where I always wanted it to be. I'll give it a good listen for a week or so and then put the speakers flat again to hear if there is as big a difference as I heard today.
My test track happened to be "Fever" from Elvis Presley with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra - If I Can Dream [2015]. I ended up listening to the whole album, even the tracks I'm not so fond of. Apart from the raised soundstage, it appeared that the mini Ks' razor sharp imaging and depth improved, if that's even possible.
X, thanks for all of your work on the mini-K’s. I noticed your reference to a plan for a 0.50x & 0.42x wide Karlsonator for a Pluvia 7. https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/att...or-0-53x-dual-tc9fds-karlsonator-pluvia-7-pdf
I have a pair of CHR-70.3’s that I’ve been waffling on about what to put them in for a couple of years. I’ve considered Planet10’s Slim Classic GR dCHR-Ken70, Andreas Busse’s ShoeBox-70.3, and my own active design that incorporates a Bluetooth amplifier. Would the CHR-70.3 work for the Pluvia 7 mini-K design?
I have a pair of CHR-70.3’s that I’ve been waffling on about what to put them in for a couple of years. I’ve considered Planet10’s Slim Classic GR dCHR-Ken70, Andreas Busse’s ShoeBox-70.3, and my own active design that incorporates a Bluetooth amplifier. Would the CHR-70.3 work for the Pluvia 7 mini-K design?
These drivers seems nice and appropriate. With a wood case, my XK4 which is a mix of beaverboard 10mm and OSB 8mm thick, doesn't need anything inside, no wool, no lining but I glued cleats.
The back and the wings are made of plexi 4mm if I remember correctly, the worse material you could get I guess.
I wonder if the trick is precisely to get heterogeneous materials to avoid similar vibrations into the box. OBS in itself is really heterogenous.
Attachments
I would use something thicker for the aperture. Maybe 3/8in to 7/16in thick plywood. I like the design by Jhofland which has the aperture flush and inside the main box resting on cleats which provide screw attachment points. That’s the best way to secure the aperture IMO.
I would definitely use the perimeter cleats with gasket tape for a secure seal for the aperture plate (and would probably do the same for a removable back). For the horizontal cleat that bisects the aperture opening (see drawing) I was thinking I could just incorporate it as part of the aperture plate rather than fastening it across the back. So, instead of a separate cleat, it would be part of the aperture plate itself. That means the aperture would be 2 openings instead of the continuous single curve. Make sense?
Want to know a secret?
I didn't use it on my builds...
I did use 1/2" thick foamcore from Hobby Lobby on the wings for my .53x K's though, it's substantially stiffer than the usual stuff, the foam feels crisp, and not as soft.
Lingwendil, I considered doubling the thickness on mine. It would have been trivial since I (accidentally) got foam board with a peel-away adhesive on one side. Even without that, one could cut 4 of the same pattern, and glue pairs together resulting in a much stiffer aperture.
But I decided for my first try to go 'standard'.
Kind regards,
Drew
But I decided for my first try to go 'standard'.
Kind regards,
Drew
I finalized the 0.53x with Dayton PA130-8. It is clearly an improvement over the 0.4x with Vifa. In terms of sound pressure and bass definitely. It seems to me they have a bit less treble if compared to Vifa. As they will be mounted below the ceiling they would need to be tilted a bit downwards and probably I need to add some tweeters for the upper part of the spectrum. At least my taste requires that, not sure if I am the only one...
View attachment 1
Would a single Seas MCA 12 RC be suitable for the karlsonator?
Very intriguing design and will definitely make one either a Vifa double or a single.
H1304-08 MCA12RC
Very intriguing design and will definitely make one either a Vifa double or a single.
H1304-08 MCA12RC
A member asked me to see if the Fane 15in fullrange (15-300TC) could work in a Karlsonator. It can but requires a very big one. Scaled 1.38x in height and depth x 1.25x in width. It will get 100dB sensitivity and have F3 of 57hz and F6 of 49Hz. Max output of 113dB is limited by 3.5mm Xmax at about 13Vrms (21Wrms). Response is surprisngly flat though.
Predicted freq response at 2.83v and 1m:
The very gradual slow roll-off in bass will integrate nicely with room modes to produce bass down to 30Hz easily.
Here is the predicted cone displacement for 21 Wrms:
I think you will be hard pressed to find a more sensitive full range speaker for nice loud bass that should be room filling and powerful.
Predicted freq response at 2.83v and 1m:
The very gradual slow roll-off in bass will integrate nicely with room modes to produce bass down to 30Hz easily.
Here is the predicted cone displacement for 21 Wrms:
I think you will be hard pressed to find a more sensitive full range speaker for nice loud bass that should be room filling and powerful.
