really thin (can be deep) fullrange?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2
something like this but if the driver could be moutned on the side
attachment.php
 
#3
Be aware that if you build a really thin cabinet, with only a few exceptions, the point at which baffle step loss will occur will be quite high -far too high to negate with room-gain (especially if it's deep), so you'll need a hefty compensation circuit in there if you don't want it to sound extremely light below about 600Hz (or higher). This will decrease the sensitivity dramatically, so I hope your tube amp has plenty of power -40wpc or so.

You can compensate with line-level components, assuming you have a pre / power setup, though the preamp needs to have plenty of gain for the same reasons, or active eq, which would likely be the best bet.

The exceptions I mentioned are the Frugelhorn; nominally designed for corner placement, but quite happy with a rear wall, expecially with the optional rear deflector, and the BIB, which is usually pretty thin, and is also designed for corners, but, like the Frugel, will cheerfully work with a rear wall. Both of these are horns, and the rear-wall / corner placement, as well as their wide pass-band of horn-loading, pretty much negates baffle-step loss as they have additional gain across the area it would otherwise hit.
 
#4
#5
Yes, that's Dave's site; I do some design work with him. He's one of the moderators here (Planet10). The Frugelhorn is best described as a slightly enlarged cross between the MK1 and MK2 Buschorn, heavily reworked to improve the flare-rate and accept the larger FE108ESigma and FE126E drivers. You've already seen the MK2 plans on Dave's site -you'll see the MK1 plans at the end of the downloadeble Frugelhorn pdf. Mainly for historic interest, unless you're planning on running a 3in driver -the Frugelhorn is the better cabinet.

The Zigmahornet is a great little cabinet with the FE103E. Very little bass, but it images like crazy.

The BIB has the best bass of the lot, and they rock like nothing else in the FR world (at the expense of a little ripple), though they might be a little tall for your taste: www.zillaspeak.com/bib.asp

I'd say at present, you'll probably like the Frugelhorn best of all. There are also my double BVR horns with the 126, that I've been working on with Dave, but they're a little wider, at 8.25in, external. Got a long path version coming that's narrower though.
 
#7
Idiot! (That's me BTW I hasten to add). The brain is clearly not working 100% at the moment. Sorry Steve. Yes indeed, the Metronomes are excellent, not too large, and vanish like little else you'll come across. High WAF too. Well worth exploring. With a sub, they're one of the best resonant speakers for small rooms I've heard for a long, long time.
 
#8
Hi Scott,

If one designs a high Vas 8" driver for a Metronome cab, would it be as huge as a BIB in terms of Sm? For a Metronome, its obviosly the vented base that is large though. Pros and cons of Metronome Vs. MLTL or MLTQWT in terms of response and efficiency? Thanks!

fred
 
#9
When you say 'high Vas', just how high are we dealing with here? If Q is low, we can get away with higher than you might think for a given cabinet size. if thew Q is mid to high however, it'll redefine your notions of big enclosures. 😉

I don't honestly think there's a vast difference between a Metronome and an ML TQWT in technical terms. The quadratic taper will shift resonant peaks to slightly different points, spread them out over a wider range, and assist in preventing horizontal standing waves, but the curve is very steep so differences will be relatively small, until the curvature increases markedly. However, they look absolutely great, and perform very well. MLTL? Easiest of the lot, and much shorter of course, unless you build a folded version of the above of course. These are all resonant cabinets, so performance will be roughly similar.

Frankly, this is one of those occasions where I'd go with aesthetics. Go with whichever you like most. Me, I like the Metronomes, but then, I like big (tall) cabinets.

Regards
Scott
 
#11
When you say 'high Vas', just how high are we dealing with here? If Q is low, we can get away with higher than you might think for a given cabinet size. if thew Q is mid to high however, it'll redefine your notions of big enclosures.
Click to expand...

Hi Scott,

Thanks for the reply and comparo. Was thinking Vas and Q similar to the Hemp Acoustics 8" FR. Yeah, it would still be very large (base), maybe even larger in footprint than a Straight MLTL suited for this type of driver, but with a tall tapered top it wins in the aesthetics dept.🙂

fred
 
#15
fred76 said:


Hi Scott,

Thanks for the reply and comparo. Was thinking Vas and Q similar to the Hemp Acoustics 8" FR. Yeah, it would still be very large (base), maybe even larger in footprint than a Straight MLTL suited for this type of driver, but with a tall tapered top it wins in the aesthetics dept.🙂

fred
Click to expand...


I'd build an enlarged Metronome then. It's not going to be small, but as you're not worried about that...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom