No the only thing we can do here, is deduction by elimination, since logical deduction will result in a stalemate situation.
There are to many variables at play of similar order of magnitude.
At this point it is still guessing. Even more so for readers, because they can't be sure you (double) checked on certain aspects.
The devil is most certainly in the details in this case. So a very accurate description of the testing method is necessary.
(yes I have read the page thoroughly)
It is most certainly also not how accelerometer squiggle "sounds like". Which is a very odd sentence to me.
That's not the point of how an accelerometer works and what it does.
It's about cross correlating potential issues on an objective way.
So the whole point is not to find how things sound like, the point is to figure out were certain problems in the frequency response come from.
Since Erin already has a nice laser system, it would be very little work to point that on baffles instead of speakers.
Oh really? And you say I make odd statements.
I have the data, and you don't. You are free to do your own set of experiments and then we can discuss how they compare. All the rest is just noise.
Oh yeah, I forgot that for audio hobbyist it's all about "the best sound".
No this is called getting insight how certain things behave.
It's noise indeed. Why don't you just share your data, or is that all of a sudden a deep "secret"?
Rather weird approach for someone trying to stay scientific and objective?
What's otherwise the whole purpose of showing things anyway to begin with?
In my 15 years of professional experience in acoustics as well as loudspeakers, I have just never seen that front baffle vibrations are all of a sudden so significant. I have also never seen any of this in any scientific literature.
I am not saying they are not there, but just not so extremely obvious in the measurements like has been shown.
So I am happy to read through your data if you can show us more, otherwise it's nothing more than just guessing and a good way to spread misinformation around. Something I don't really approve.
fyi, keep in mind that not everyone is in the position to perform such practical tests for whatever reason.
Doesn't mean they don't know what they are saying or doing, so hopefully we can stay respectful that way.
It's HERE and HERE and always has been, if you would look up from your navel!
IT'S NOT THE JUST THE BAFFLE, IT'S THE WHOLE DAMN BOX! How many times must I say this before it penetrates your skull?
We've had a couple debates, and I've rarely met someone who is so determined to not hear what the other side is saying, and just continue to push his own pet views like you. I'm not engaging with this nonsense any longer.
It really is a great woofer. Does a lot well and nothing bad. Madisound still list them, so maybe there? Something I've been thinking about, is using a soft dome in one of your waveguides to pair with it and compare to the sb26adc, especially now that I've lived with them for months. But which soft dome would be best? I've yet to try any ring radiator personally.
I've made some videos to explain my choices in my box construction thread: https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...s-shootout-thread.356130/page-18#post-7109774
Brandon. Is designing 5.5" waveguide for Bliesma T34B very time consuming for you? I've bought T34B nd MW16TX and I think 6" WG is a bit too big for MW16TX. Moreover Kimmosto is saying that a smaller waveguide than the midwoofer gives better overall response in XO region🙂
You want to match directivity at the crossover, so what's your crossover and slope, and how do the directivities look for the woofer and waveguide in that area?
I don't have measurements yet. I didn't printed waveguide up till now because I wanted ask you for smaller version and then build prototype enclosure and make spatial mesurements of woofer and tweeter. I'm interrested on conservative LR12 slope and XO frequency in range 1500-2000Hz. I will see if T34B will manage 1500Hz with LR12 slope. With 2000Hz it shouldn't be a problem.
A low slope and low crossover like that will likely require directivity at a lower frequency than a 5" waveguide will provide.
Be very careful of taking single snippets of things Kimmosto has said without considering them in the wider context of advice he has given.
This might be what you are referring to
"One tiny thing. Too large wave guide causes dip to power at XO frequency. For example thumb rule that diameter of wave guide should be equal to woofer cone is probably bad idea no matter how brilliant wavefront it produces. Whole construction including components should be in balance as well as environment."
From page 136 of the link below, there is a lot of interesting discussion in the link from page 134 forwards to 140 and beyond. There is an example of a two way speaker with a waveguide and how the crossover can be manipulated for different effects and avoid the s curve to the power response. At page 140 there is a example where the same speaker has the CTC extended virtually and then all the curves become much smoother without so much robbing Peter to pay Paul.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/vituixcad.307910/post-6512115
Brandon it would be great if you could put the data into Vituix. I realise you are a Sound Easy man but it is much easier to get a handle on what is going on when you can see all the directivity traces in one place. I think it would help to show that there is both good horizontal pattern matching but also that because of the vertical spacing the power and DI don't have to suffer to get it.
SE now has CEA2034 built-in too, so it should be able to display all the same curves. I know people are used to the Vituix plots, but I'm used to using SE 😛 But if Vituix is faster and does the same things maybe I'll switch.
Cool, no need for an SE to VC religious conversion 🙂
Do you have a 2034 plot of the simulated crossover you showed before?
Nope, haven't went through the new measurement process yet. It's a bit different and I wanted to get some 0-60 degree plots done before I sent it to Erin for verification. So that was the priority. I'll be one vacation next week and I'll probably look at the new method then.
Thanks fluid for the link to kimmosto advices, I was looking for it, there are a lot of interesting comments. I only know vituix, it would be great if we could compared the 5 inch and 6 inch version of the WG to find the optimum XO for each and compare the pros and cons but as I understand Brandon only has in box measurments of the 6 inch WG ?
FYI, Pida design named shamal (well documented in its website) use mw16tx + t25b with WG crossed @2kHz and looks pretty perfect to me.
FYI, Pida design named shamal (well documented in its website) use mw16tx + t25b with WG crossed @2kHz and looks pretty perfect to me.
I have a 6" with slightly higher aspect ratio than the one use here on my website (1:.618 vs 1:.68 used here). The ones on my website are on a biggish baffle closer to the IEC baffle.
Hi @augerpro, thanks for your workings.
In the end, after several attempts with ABEC for the T34B i give up.
Are there updates on the 8" T34B Waveguide?
Many thanks in advance
In the end, after several attempts with ABEC for the T34B i give up.
Are there updates on the 8" T34B Waveguide?
Many thanks in advance