I would like to build a 3 way speaker with the SB23NRX as the bass unit.
Does anyone know of any kits apart from the TG 3 way classic or of any crossover designs for a 3 way using the SB23NRX as a bass unit.
Thanks
Does anyone know of any kits apart from the TG 3 way classic or of any crossover designs for a 3 way using the SB23NRX as a bass unit.
Thanks
Here's a two way from this Forum, may give you some ideas:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/231481-sb-acoustics-tw29r-sb23nrxs4.html
Geoff
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/231481-sb-acoustics-tw29r-sb23nrxs4.html
Geoff
Here's another - Kraken 3 way sealed
https://areteaudio.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/ultimate-paper.pdf
https://areteaudio.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/ultimate-paper.pdf
Hi Thanks for all your replies but none of the designs are quite what I am looking for.
The TG design is ok but a bit wide and also I dont like the stepped baffle, I know it would be fine to change it into a floorstander and also shave a bit off the width but I cannot get rid of the stepped baffle which my wife hates.
Basically looking for a design with flat baffle, decent mid and HF units, not too wide and also must have the port on the front as the speakers will be close to the back wall or bottom.
Not ideal but that is the instruction given to me.
The TG design is ok but a bit wide and also I dont like the stepped baffle, I know it would be fine to change it into a floorstander and also shave a bit off the width but I cannot get rid of the stepped baffle which my wife hates.
Basically looking for a design with flat baffle, decent mid and HF units, not too wide and also must have the port on the front as the speakers will be close to the back wall or bottom.
Not ideal but that is the instruction given to me.
Colmo,
I did make a study of a speaker with the SB23NRXS45-8 in a passive radiator system, combined with the SBA Satori MD60N-6 2.5 inch dome midrange and a SBA tweeter, to get an idea of a concept with a dome midrange.
I have no concrete plans to build it. A friend of me will built the speaker maybe this summer, but with a closed box configuration, not with the passive radiators.
Maybe you can find some tips for a new speaker for you. You can find the study here. The study is quite complete; the X-over component values are not mentioned, but you can have them for free via PM.
Paul
I did make a study of a speaker with the SB23NRXS45-8 in a passive radiator system, combined with the SBA Satori MD60N-6 2.5 inch dome midrange and a SBA tweeter, to get an idea of a concept with a dome midrange.
I have no concrete plans to build it. A friend of me will built the speaker maybe this summer, but with a closed box configuration, not with the passive radiators.
Maybe you can find some tips for a new speaker for you. You can find the study here. The study is quite complete; the X-over component values are not mentioned, but you can have them for free via PM.
Paul
Hi Paul
Thank you for the information, nearly what I require but the sensitivity of 83 db is a bit low for my amplifier.
Thank you for the information, nearly what I require but the sensitivity of 83 db is a bit low for my amplifier.
83 dB at 1m, 2.83Vrms is the sensitivity limit for that woofer, to realize a flat SPL down to low frequencies in free space.
I prefer to make flat SPL designs in free space.
If you want a higher sensitivity in free space, you have to choose another or a larger woofer with a higher sensitivity.
I prefer to make flat SPL designs in free space.
If you want a higher sensitivity in free space, you have to choose another or a larger woofer with a higher sensitivity.
The TG design gives a much higher sensitivity is it because he uses less baffle step.
The TG design is not flat in free space, the low frequency SPL becomes 6 dB lower in free space. But Troels makes the assumption that together with the room gain, the SPL becomes flat in the room half space environment.
I am not in favor of such a design. With some room setups, the low frequency content is missing.
IMO it is preferred to design and to specify a flat SPL in free space and doing an appropriate room correction below about 300 Hz, if needed. I know this is not the best solution for efficiency because the medium frequencies are filtered more. But I have the opinion that, placing a speaker in different types of rooms, a flat SPL design in free space can be the most successful for a good balanced sound.
Opinions on this topic differ. There is something to be said for both of them.
I am not in favor of such a design. With some room setups, the low frequency content is missing.
IMO it is preferred to design and to specify a flat SPL in free space and doing an appropriate room correction below about 300 Hz, if needed. I know this is not the best solution for efficiency because the medium frequencies are filtered more. But I have the opinion that, placing a speaker in different types of rooms, a flat SPL design in free space can be the most successful for a good balanced sound.
Opinions on this topic differ. There is something to be said for both of them.
Last edited:
I tend to see something in that. Using the room to augment the bass can be hit and miss. Using a sub to increase bass level can be spatially redundant (although using subs to increase bass extension is another matter).. they are easier to approach from the point of view of smoothing peaks and dips.
Cannot say I agree.
How many people use speakers in free space and if you use them close to a wall bass becomes a massive problem.
Colmo
You have to make a choice for less or more bafflestep compensation in the design, dependent on the setup in the room you have in mind with your speakers.
Speakers with less bafflestep compensation, like Troels' SB23 3-way speaker, can be placed closer to a wall, that is right.
If you gonnal build speakers yourself, you can try out both types, less or more bafflestep compensation and test it yourself.
You have to make a choice for less or more bafflestep compensation in the design, dependent on the setup in the room you have in mind with your speakers.
Speakers with less bafflestep compensation, like Troels' SB23 3-way speaker, can be placed closer to a wall, that is right.
If you gonnal build speakers yourself, you can try out both types, less or more bafflestep compensation and test it yourself.
I'm attaching my write-up on the Sonatello design for which I posted a photo earlier in this thread. Why? Because its design was optimized for close placement to the wall behind, which I must use and I suspect many people use. For this design the cabinet's back is about 5" from the wall. Another feature of this design (from 2010) is the woofer's location near the bottom of the baffle in order to use reinforcement from the floor boundary and minimize, if not eliminate baffle step correction. The bass modeling showed a 2.83v/1m sensitivity between 89 and 90 dB SPL, and actual room measurements once built measured at 88 dB.
Paul
Paul
Hi Paul
That design is very interesting and again nearly ok.
I don't want the speaker to be more than 12 inches deep, could I build it as a bass relex with front port. If so should the port go above or below the bass unit.
That design is very interesting and again nearly ok.
I don't want the speaker to be more than 12 inches deep, could I build it as a bass relex with front port. If so should the port go above or below the bass unit.
I didn't see anywhere that you stated a maximum depth of 12". If I had, I would not have bothered. Where the port would be best located can only be determined by modeling and you can only do that for a vented box if the software takes into account the actual dimensions of the cavity, not just its volume, and the locations of the driver and port within it. IOW for optimum results the woofer's enclosure needs to be designed/modeled with TL-type software even if it's not a TL.
Paul
Paul