ShinOBIWAN said:
Oh dear. 😱
..of course there is always a "relationship" between "quantity" and "quality". Me thinks (..when I'm taking a fridged shower 😀 ) that I err on the other side of this equation.
Hmmm, gots to get the balance right.😉
ScottG said:
Largly also depends on method used to damp. But this gets too much into driver design rather than driver selection.
Howdy folks,
Been tweaking the design a little and have now fully settled on the styling and overall shape. This will obviously change very slightly depending on the drivers I finally choose:
I now have the following drivers on order:
HF:
RAAL 140-15D
Scanspeak R2904-7000
Mid:
Accuton C90-T6
PHL 1231 (special order with cone treatment both sides)
ATC SM75-150S
Bass:
ATC SB75-234SC
Seas W26-EX001
The Scan R2904 is thrown in there to compare an upper range dome/ring tweeter to the RAAL. The ATC drivers and also the v2 design as a whole will serve as a bassline to judge performance against the newcommers - want to make sure I'm going forwards and not backwards 😉
I'm wanting to source the 10" TAD within Europe but so far have come up with nothing. Any idea's? Importing from the States turns out to be fairly spendy after you factor in import duties and the VAT that HM Customs wonderfully impose.
And just a few idea's on construction and first ports of call for implementation:
Bass/mid cabinet section will likely be closed but I'm going to give dipole a go for sure. Not sure just how much this will compromise the xmax and therefor clean output/extension of the mid/bass drivers. I'm doubling up with an MTM so that will help but I'm guessing the measurements will move my 200hz point upto around 300-400.
If I go sealed I plan to go with a laminated construction using a mix of MDF, ply and chipboard to create a somewhat more chaotic cabinet resonance signature. Since its a laminated construction I'll also go with the usual irregular internal shapes from each laminated layer. Will also invest in some of that NASA noise absorbtion paint that Scott has mentioned several times(got that link again Scott?).
Bass cabinet will be identical to construction in the v2 - infact you've no doubt noticed that the bass cabinets are the v2 design just recycled. Obviously these will have to built from scratch for optimum performance for the choosen woofers but given the fact I've built four of these boxes already(remember the table incident?🙂) they'll come up in no time at all compartively speaking.
Alignments are up for debate, love the tight sound a good sealed enclosure and well matched driver give. I don't think I'll be considering ported at all, sure you get output but using extreme delayed resonance to boost output is a bit of a turn off. Might take a look at aperiodic but no dipoles because of SPL and distortion limitations which I consider more important than the benefits it offers. Besides with a good sealed alignment, top notch cabinet contruction and an exceptionally good woofer bass quality is pretty standout. Again compromises but weighing up one of the scale to the other and picking something inbetween seems sensible at this stage.
One final and cool note:
RAAL guy - Aleksandar. Has offered custom faceplates for the ribbons 🙂
This is great because I've come up with a design that allows extremely close placement of the mids next to the tweeter. We're talking about putting that Perceive v3 logo that I did in the above concept on the tweeter faceplate, I really hope this is doable as it would be a perfect finishing touch I feel. But Alex had problem ecthing onto the stainless steel face plate previously, he's got some plans with sandblasting though so hope that works out OK.
I'd really recommend RAAL based on the excellent service and personal touch offered that I've received during my dealings with Alex. Reminds me a little of ATC only better and cheaper! 😀
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon.
Been tweaking the design a little and have now fully settled on the styling and overall shape. This will obviously change very slightly depending on the drivers I finally choose:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I now have the following drivers on order:
HF:
RAAL 140-15D
Scanspeak R2904-7000
Mid:
Accuton C90-T6
PHL 1231 (special order with cone treatment both sides)
ATC SM75-150S
Bass:
ATC SB75-234SC
Seas W26-EX001
The Scan R2904 is thrown in there to compare an upper range dome/ring tweeter to the RAAL. The ATC drivers and also the v2 design as a whole will serve as a bassline to judge performance against the newcommers - want to make sure I'm going forwards and not backwards 😉
I'm wanting to source the 10" TAD within Europe but so far have come up with nothing. Any idea's? Importing from the States turns out to be fairly spendy after you factor in import duties and the VAT that HM Customs wonderfully impose.
And just a few idea's on construction and first ports of call for implementation:
Bass/mid cabinet section will likely be closed but I'm going to give dipole a go for sure. Not sure just how much this will compromise the xmax and therefor clean output/extension of the mid/bass drivers. I'm doubling up with an MTM so that will help but I'm guessing the measurements will move my 200hz point upto around 300-400.
If I go sealed I plan to go with a laminated construction using a mix of MDF, ply and chipboard to create a somewhat more chaotic cabinet resonance signature. Since its a laminated construction I'll also go with the usual irregular internal shapes from each laminated layer. Will also invest in some of that NASA noise absorbtion paint that Scott has mentioned several times(got that link again Scott?).
Bass cabinet will be identical to construction in the v2 - infact you've no doubt noticed that the bass cabinets are the v2 design just recycled. Obviously these will have to built from scratch for optimum performance for the choosen woofers but given the fact I've built four of these boxes already(remember the table incident?🙂) they'll come up in no time at all compartively speaking.
Alignments are up for debate, love the tight sound a good sealed enclosure and well matched driver give. I don't think I'll be considering ported at all, sure you get output but using extreme delayed resonance to boost output is a bit of a turn off. Might take a look at aperiodic but no dipoles because of SPL and distortion limitations which I consider more important than the benefits it offers. Besides with a good sealed alignment, top notch cabinet contruction and an exceptionally good woofer bass quality is pretty standout. Again compromises but weighing up one of the scale to the other and picking something inbetween seems sensible at this stage.
One final and cool note:
RAAL guy - Aleksandar. Has offered custom faceplates for the ribbons 🙂
This is great because I've come up with a design that allows extremely close placement of the mids next to the tweeter. We're talking about putting that Perceive v3 logo that I did in the above concept on the tweeter faceplate, I really hope this is doable as it would be a perfect finishing touch I feel. But Alex had problem ecthing onto the stainless steel face plate previously, he's got some plans with sandblasting though so hope that works out OK.
I'd really recommend RAAL based on the excellent service and personal touch offered that I've received during my dealings with Alex. Reminds me a little of ATC only better and cheaper! 😀
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon.
[QU
One final and cool note:
RAAL guy - Aleksandar. Has offered custom faceplates for the ribbons 🙂
This is great because I've come up with a design that allows extremely close placement of the mids next to the tweeter. We're talking about putting that Perceive v3 logo that I did in the above concept on the tweeter faceplate, I really hope this is doable as it would be a perfect finishing touch I feel. But Alex had problem ecthing onto the stainless steel face plate previously, he's got some plans with sandblasting though so hope that works out OK.
I'd really recommend RAAL based on the excellent service and personal touch offered that I've received during my dealings with Alex. Reminds me a little of ATC only better and cheaper! 😀
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon. [/B][/QUOTE]
One minor design element you could play with is the foam. I'd bet that Aleksander could sculpt a variety of shapes that would serve the same funtion as stock but give different looks.
Sheldon
One final and cool note:
RAAL guy - Aleksandar. Has offered custom faceplates for the ribbons 🙂
This is great because I've come up with a design that allows extremely close placement of the mids next to the tweeter. We're talking about putting that Perceive v3 logo that I did in the above concept on the tweeter faceplate, I really hope this is doable as it would be a perfect finishing touch I feel. But Alex had problem ecthing onto the stainless steel face plate previously, he's got some plans with sandblasting though so hope that works out OK.
I'd really recommend RAAL based on the excellent service and personal touch offered that I've received during my dealings with Alex. Reminds me a little of ATC only better and cheaper! 😀
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon. [/B][/QUOTE]
One minor design element you could play with is the foam. I'd bet that Aleksander could sculpt a variety of shapes that would serve the same funtion as stock but give different looks.
Sheldon
This little 8" Visaton seems well built and suited for closed.... and it will take some EQ easy .... four of them would be suited for something like your project
http://www.visaton.de/de/high_end/tiefton/tiw200xs_8.html
http://www.visaton.de/de/high_end/tiefton/tiw200xs_8.html
PHL 1231 (special order with cone treatment both sides)
PHL 1341 w/ phase plug ideal for midwoofer duty. For
pure midrange range duty, ie low pass ~ 300hz {no less},
PHL 1121 is hard to beat. It's ok, 1231 should perform well.
If I go sealed I plan to go with a laminated construction using a mix of MDF, ply and chipboard to create a somewhat more chaotic cabinet resonance signature.
I've done laminations, there is nothing chatoic about it or
magical. To illustrate, make a test with 12" x 12" sample
peices of wood. Make the deadest lamination you can think of,
lets laminate six 3/4" MDF panels for a final thickness of 4.5".
Hit with hammer, very dead piece of wood.
No matter what you do, mixing and matching different woods,
you can do MDF/Ply/chipboard/Ply/MDF/MDF, this combination
or any combination of the different woods won't yield better
results than your original 6 layer MDF test.
What if you do three MDF layers? That's pretty dang good.
Again, no combination of chipboard, plywood, MDF yeilding three
lamination will outperform the three MDF design.
I was looking into this for my project and wasn't satisifed with
any combination other than three 3/4" laminations, six is awesome
but bulky and not practical. LOL
For an exotic project, I would use dual MDF 3/4" wall thickness
with a ribbed bracing design. The bracing is really the key to success. If I was doing this for a customer, then nothing fancy. LOL
CLD? I think this is over-rated. For every CLD design you can
make a non CLD design work just as good. I did some CLD
tests where I placed rubber in between the laminations but
I wasn't impressed. The only thing that impresses me in cabinet
deadening is mass and proper bracing.
Give me balsa wood and fiberglass resin and I'll make a dead box
Point is, experiment with sample wood pieces until you find
your satisfaction, but don't expect miracles and there are so
many box building recipies in cyberspace that makes you do this ->
🙄 ... sand, concrete, ceramic tiles, rubber, spray dampener, kitchen sink, etc.
Will also invest in some of that NASA noise absorbtion paint that Scott has mentioned several times(got that link again Scott?).
Do they use this on the stealth airplanes for secret attack? LOL
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon.
200 pages here we come, LOL
I don't think this design will 'blow you away' type of upgrade from
v2.0, just adding two more drivers.... It will sound different though.
PHL 1341 w/ phase plug ideal for midwoofer duty. For
pure midrange range duty, ie low pass ~ 300hz {no less},
PHL 1121 is hard to beat. It's ok, 1231 should perform well.
If I go sealed I plan to go with a laminated construction using a mix of MDF, ply and chipboard to create a somewhat more chaotic cabinet resonance signature.
I've done laminations, there is nothing chatoic about it or
magical. To illustrate, make a test with 12" x 12" sample
peices of wood. Make the deadest lamination you can think of,
lets laminate six 3/4" MDF panels for a final thickness of 4.5".
Hit with hammer, very dead piece of wood.
No matter what you do, mixing and matching different woods,
you can do MDF/Ply/chipboard/Ply/MDF/MDF, this combination
or any combination of the different woods won't yield better
results than your original 6 layer MDF test.
What if you do three MDF layers? That's pretty dang good.
Again, no combination of chipboard, plywood, MDF yeilding three
lamination will outperform the three MDF design.
I was looking into this for my project and wasn't satisifed with
any combination other than three 3/4" laminations, six is awesome
but bulky and not practical. LOL
For an exotic project, I would use dual MDF 3/4" wall thickness
with a ribbed bracing design. The bracing is really the key to success. If I was doing this for a customer, then nothing fancy. LOL
CLD? I think this is over-rated. For every CLD design you can
make a non CLD design work just as good. I did some CLD
tests where I placed rubber in between the laminations but
I wasn't impressed. The only thing that impresses me in cabinet
deadening is mass and proper bracing.
Give me balsa wood and fiberglass resin and I'll make a dead box
Point is, experiment with sample wood pieces until you find
your satisfaction, but don't expect miracles and there are so
many box building recipies in cyberspace that makes you do this ->
🙄 ... sand, concrete, ceramic tiles, rubber, spray dampener, kitchen sink, etc.
Will also invest in some of that NASA noise absorbtion paint that Scott has mentioned several times(got that link again Scott?).
Do they use this on the stealth airplanes for secret attack? LOL
That's pretty much all for now until I get my grubby mits on some drivers but please feel free to comment on anything, especially if you think there's a better way that will fit within the design I've decided upon.
200 pages here we come, LOL
I don't think this design will 'blow you away' type of upgrade from
v2.0, just adding two more drivers.... It will sound different though.
It would be interesting to look at some absorbing coefficient graphs just to make sure it works good with the cabinet dimenstions and vibration modes.
thylantyr said:
The 1121/1120 is discontinued. I've ordered direct from PHL so that's straight from the horses mouth.
I asked about the 1341/1320 and all I got back was that the 1230/1231 is optimised for absolute sound quality over extension and SPL. And the conclusion was the 1231 is the best sounding 6.5" mid/bass driver they do.
I trusted their judgement and went ahead and order a single driver.
Thy, thanks for the pearls of wisdom sprinkled with you inimatable charm 🙂 In case you hadn't noticed, I know a little something about building cabinets 😉
When I talk about laminations I'm talking about doing the whole mid/treble cabinet not just a a few layers of 3/4 MDF but instead 15 vertical laminations of 18mm material for the cabinet iteself, cabinet wall thickness will vary because of the random nature of the internal cut of the laminations, this aids midrange clarity through standing waves and sound relected back through the Mms. Bracing can be very eaily integrated into the laminations few layers or so. Baffles will definitely be concrete/lead shot this time around.
Despite your fool proof hammer test, you should take a look at these also:
http://www.zelfbouwaudio.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=2
Take a look at number 6 in from that link - 18mm MDF. Pretty poor. Then take a look at the composites with bracing and damping material ie. number 25.
Building up multiple layer of the same material lowers broadband resonances whilst exagerating primary resonance. Basically your looking at narrow Q charteristic. Mix materials and the resonance signatures are greatly lessened - less noise from the cabinet and more just from the drivers.
So don't be so certain in your words. Your project is about brute force, finesse often get the job done better and this is one of those cases.
Does a similar job to open cell foam only takes up less space and provides addition damping and sound insulation. Nothing fantastical about it, just another way that fits the tight space requirements I have rather well.
Its very different in both approach, driver technologies, dispertion and overall scope.
I think your projecting the methodologies that you believe leads to high end. Its not quite as simple as multiple drivers = outstanding results because you open yourself up to a whole other batch of problem in doing so. Controlling variables is what I think makes a good design.
We'll see anyway.
ShinOBIWAN said:
The Accutons and RAAL will get you to your nominal 120dB requirement, no problem. But W26 will struggle way before that, I'm sure. Even smaller ATCs may have problem. Why not go all the way with 375 or larger ATCs ? You need to move some serious air at those SPLs.
I know this will affect the looks, but do you really want your speakers to be limited in the area where most of the "impact" really resides ?
Member
Joined 2002
I'm wondering, ShinOBIWAN
Why such a complex design ?
I thought that you were moving ?
This design looks nice but lot's of driver's lots of xover stuff and a few pairs of amp's.. Do you have the room for these mamoths ?
I' wish i had that tallent to draw and build something more complex.
Jase
Why such a complex design ?
I thought that you were moving ?
This design looks nice but lot's of driver's lots of xover stuff and a few pairs of amp's.. Do you have the room for these mamoths ?
I' wish i had that tallent to draw and build something more complex.
Jase
Bratislav said:
I'm scratching my head trying to remember where abouts I set a 120dB limit? I think you have me confused with Thy. I mentioned more headroom and lower distortion but never huge SPL's like 120dB.
Anyway, I ordered a W22 because I think its got the potential to mate well with the Accuton. I agree that its output wouldn't reach anything like 120dB in the lows.
I'm hunting around for those 10" TAD's and I think this will be where the real action is.
The TAD better be real good though because the ATC 9" is pretty competant at anything but stupid SPL's, The tweeter and mid fall apart before the bass does in the v2.
jleaman said:
Its looks that way but its pretty much a natural progression from the other one.
Not yet.
5 drivers per side isn't to much, lots of designs use plenty more, I don't think the driver count is an indication of complexity anyhow. The crossover will still be a basic 3way, I might have to extend that to a 3.5way depending on how I go about choosing XO points/slopes for the MTM section. The v2 has plenty of tricks in the XO thanks to that misbehaved mid, the driver chosen for this one look altogether better trained. I also use digital XO's which helps speed thing up greatly.
Thanks.
tinitus said:
Thanks for the suggestion. I'm going to be playing around with OB and have a design with a larger baffle so I'll see what I make of all that.
Not sure about those Visaton drivers. I'm limiting myself to 2x 10" per side.
ShinOBIWAN said:
[phasey LR "transer" sound in background with acompanying deep red horizontal "blip" moving back and forth]
While bowing: "By your command sire."
😉
http://www.hytechsales.com/prod150.html
(the shipping on this will likely be pricey because of the weight. The alternative is an increased concentration (more than double) of the microspheres)
http://hytechsales.com/insulating_paint_additives.html
EDIT: You know, this forum really needs a cylon smiley.. 😎
ShinOBIWAN said:
Those 11" alinco TAD's are pretty nice.. but they don't have the ultra low mass of the Supravox (..but they do have a much lower fs).
http://www.pioneer.co.uk/uk/product_detail.jsp?product_id=1472&taxonomy_id=43-203
The much less expensive non-alinco speakers don't have as low an fs but do have greater eff.. (..and cost half the price).
http://www.pioneer.co.uk/uk/product_detail.jsp?product_id=1471&taxonomy_id=43-203
You'll have to contact TAD UK directly (bottom):
http://www.pioneer.co.uk/eur/content/company/company/locations.html
Of course neither will go along with your speaker esthetically though...... unless you apply an aluminum "skin" to the diaphram and surrounds (..with aluminum guilding "paper").
I still think you might be missing out with 4 per side of the Bandor 150's (16 ohm):
http://www.bandor.com/products_frame.htm
The 1121/1120 is discontinued. I've ordered direct from PHL so that's straight from the horses mouth.
I asked about the 1341/1320 and all I got back was that the 1230/1231 is optimised for absolute sound quality over extension and SPL. And the conclusion was the 1231 is the best sounding 6.5" mid/bass driver they do.
I trusted their judgement and went ahead and order a single driver.
Sent you email to reply to this 🙂
When I talk about laminations I'm talking about doing the whole mid/treble cabinet not just a a few layers of 3/4 MDF but instead 15 vertical laminations of 18mm material for the cabinet iteself, cabinet wall thickness will vary because of the random nature of the internal cut of the laminations, this aids midrange clarity through standing waves and sound relected back through the Mms.
Too much trouble for little gained. A deep midrange cabinet,
proper bracing, proper fiberglass installation can solve more problems than the above lamination methodology. Lamination is
not required, the net result you are creating is an abnormal
surface area, you can just glue some wood strips to the
inside of a normal cabinet to achieve the same results, to
keep the cabinet light, use balsa wood strips. The sound doesn't
care if the wood is used to make model airplanes... LOL
Baffles will definitely be concrete/lead shot this time around.
Overkill for a single tweeter, two mids and woofers? /hehehehe
Despite your fool proof hammer test, you should take a look at these also:
http://www.zelfbouwaudio.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=2
I don't speak that language, translate. LOL
I'm going to guess by looking at the picture that this test is
to determine how an empty box sounds. I don't think anyone
serious will make an empty box for a speaker enclosure, a good
design will use proper bracing which will offer a new set of
performance results.
If you want to make an unbraced open box, then I don't
recommend it. If you can to make a proper box with bracing,
then ignore that test data. LOL
I asked about the 1341/1320 and all I got back was that the 1230/1231 is optimised for absolute sound quality over extension and SPL. And the conclusion was the 1231 is the best sounding 6.5" mid/bass driver they do.
I trusted their judgement and went ahead and order a single driver.
Sent you email to reply to this 🙂
When I talk about laminations I'm talking about doing the whole mid/treble cabinet not just a a few layers of 3/4 MDF but instead 15 vertical laminations of 18mm material for the cabinet iteself, cabinet wall thickness will vary because of the random nature of the internal cut of the laminations, this aids midrange clarity through standing waves and sound relected back through the Mms.
Too much trouble for little gained. A deep midrange cabinet,
proper bracing, proper fiberglass installation can solve more problems than the above lamination methodology. Lamination is
not required, the net result you are creating is an abnormal
surface area, you can just glue some wood strips to the
inside of a normal cabinet to achieve the same results, to
keep the cabinet light, use balsa wood strips. The sound doesn't
care if the wood is used to make model airplanes... LOL
Baffles will definitely be concrete/lead shot this time around.
Overkill for a single tweeter, two mids and woofers? /hehehehe
Despite your fool proof hammer test, you should take a look at these also:
http://www.zelfbouwaudio.nl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=2
I don't speak that language, translate. LOL
I'm going to guess by looking at the picture that this test is
to determine how an empty box sounds. I don't think anyone
serious will make an empty box for a speaker enclosure, a good
design will use proper bracing which will offer a new set of
performance results.
If you want to make an unbraced open box, then I don't
recommend it. If you can to make a proper box with bracing,
then ignore that test data. LOL
thylantyr said:
I'd imagine it probably is too much trouble for your project, not for mine.
Overkill is when you get to the point that the baffle adds absolutely nothing to the sound and then you go ahead and make things even harder.
So what I'm doing isn't overkill 😉
Its a crosssection of accelerometer tests used to map enclosure resaonces.
The materials vary from concrete, fibre glass, ply and MDF. There's also tests of composites of these materials as well as with and without bracing applied.
MDF with bracing is poor in comparison to composites with bracing.
Your cabinets and the cabinets I used for the v2 with 4" thick baffles are therefor shoddy. 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.