I was thinking along the lines of a snake, having the horn as its mouth and the body curling round the speaker.
Please stop temping us, I have little will power when presented with curvey bits of wood, it is a challenge I cant resist.
I suggested to my beloved that, wouldn't the FE166's look and sound much better in a new cabinet. Her reply is unfortenatly unprintable in polite company.
Please stop temping us, I have little will power when presented with curvey bits of wood, it is a challenge I cant resist.
I suggested to my beloved that, wouldn't the FE166's look and sound much better in a new cabinet. Her reply is unfortenatly unprintable in polite company.
Scottmoose said:
I reviewed the thread and didn't see any dims.
Anyway I'm anticipating the new finished designs. Just curious about general height (which I didn't see.)
They were in CAD files linked to, post 1038, this thread. Dave's got the revisions (he must want to kill me 
) & has removed the links pending alterations.
If you're interested in what the revisions are, box depths are being reduced a touch, and I've adjusted the vent alignments to give a ~flat predicted response rather than rolled off, which should work better with these smaller drivers.
) & has removed the links pending alterations. If you're interested in what the revisions are, box depths are being reduced a touch, and I've adjusted the vent alignments to give a ~flat predicted response rather than rolled off, which should work better with these smaller drivers.
Scottmoose said:
Sorry for jumping the gun guys... the usual procedure is to pass them by Scott to get a final approval before they are posted. Scott also took the opportunity to further optimize the tuning. I have a couple details to get straight on that before i repost them.
The net will be boxes that are 1 1/8" shallower with a bit shorter ports. I suspect that Gabrielle will also go as low as Brynn when we are done.
dave
Scottmoose said:Dave's got the revisions (he must want to kill me
No. Dave wants to kick himself for jumping the gun and not following protocol 🙂
dave
Crossblade said:
The real FH should have at least half an octave advantage in the bass and with better control of excursion down low, have an edge everywhere else as the volume is wicked up.
These are more fun than anything else. In the spirit of all the Moose BVRs easy to build.
dave
Life would be boring if we always followed standard proceedure. 🙂
Those overlays you did with the various speakers on the last page were great BTW.
FWIW, in-room, the wider baffle Brynn & Gabrielle will certainly have the edge on Olivia in LF performance -which is 'better' in imaging will be a case of which presentation you prefer, WB or narrow baffle. Olivia will come into its own for those who like the very tall & slim style of enclosure & have limited floorspace. As Dave said, I suspect Gabrielle should about match Brynn's LF extension once in-room, and offer a somewhat different presentation.
Those overlays you did with the various speakers on the last page were great BTW.
FWIW, in-room, the wider baffle Brynn & Gabrielle will certainly have the edge on Olivia in LF performance -which is 'better' in imaging will be a case of which presentation you prefer, WB or narrow baffle. Olivia will come into its own for those who like the very tall & slim style of enclosure & have limited floorspace. As Dave said, I suspect Gabrielle should about match Brynn's LF extension once in-room, and offer a somewhat different presentation.
Building an Iris 1v1
Just thought I would chime in. This weekend I started working on a pair of Iris for the FE167e (I have not ordered the drivers yet). For me I think the 6 inch drivers are the best compromise.
I picked up a pair of 4' x 8' x 0.75" Birch plywood (11 layers). I have a small Skill tablesaw that I received recently as a 25 year award from my company. Nice suprise, usually its a pen or watch.
I have all but the C and F panels for the first cabenet roughed out. The saw only goes to 45 degree angles, so the 60s I am cutting my hand.
Something you might be interesed in trying is taking an 80-grit belt sander sandpaper and cut it then glue it to a board. I makes a great tool for smoothing out the cuts. Anyway, I'm having fun with it.
Thanks guys... 😉
Just thought I would chime in. This weekend I started working on a pair of Iris for the FE167e (I have not ordered the drivers yet). For me I think the 6 inch drivers are the best compromise.
I picked up a pair of 4' x 8' x 0.75" Birch plywood (11 layers). I have a small Skill tablesaw that I received recently as a 25 year award from my company. Nice suprise, usually its a pen or watch.
I have all but the C and F panels for the first cabenet roughed out. The saw only goes to 45 degree angles, so the 60s I am cutting my hand.
Something you might be interesed in trying is taking an 80-grit belt sander sandpaper and cut it then glue it to a board. I makes a great tool for smoothing out the cuts. Anyway, I'm having fun with it.
Thanks guys... 😉
I'm "Hornin' in"......
Glad I found you Horndogs. I have been enjoying the 206e in a set of 84" BIBs but these Florida ceilings are so high that after break-in I still don't hear all that I've read that you all hear. (or is that y'all?)
I have no testing gear so I'll just blunder into the next best box.
After thinking about the Bruce it was said that the Sachiko was better suited for the 206e so here we go.
My question is about panel A on the second page.
The explanation doesn't tell me the optimal result.
Are these 2 'tongues' designed to butt up to the back of the magnet or just barely short or a given distance away?
I'm assuming the holes are important. Does size matter?
Is all that folding of the box designed to give distance to the QW of the Fs of the 206e or to 'tune the box" in some other way or is that the same thing?
Would I stuff the cavity with poly and line the long back panels with felt or something?
Thank all of you guys for your patience with us newbies and lurkers.
Glad I found you Horndogs. I have been enjoying the 206e in a set of 84" BIBs but these Florida ceilings are so high that after break-in I still don't hear all that I've read that you all hear. (or is that y'all?)
I have no testing gear so I'll just blunder into the next best box.
After thinking about the Bruce it was said that the Sachiko was better suited for the 206e so here we go.
My question is about panel A on the second page.
The explanation doesn't tell me the optimal result.
Are these 2 'tongues' designed to butt up to the back of the magnet or just barely short or a given distance away?
I'm assuming the holes are important. Does size matter?
Is all that folding of the box designed to give distance to the QW of the Fs of the 206e or to 'tune the box" in some other way or is that the same thing?
Would I stuff the cavity with poly and line the long back panels with felt or something?
Thank all of you guys for your patience with us newbies and lurkers.
They press against the magnet. As many holes as possible so there's plenty of airflow.
The folding has a few purposes. Nothing to do with the driver's Fs though. Firstly, it's so I could cram the horn into the box (I started with a 41Hz catenoid flare if you're interested). And secondly, the multiple folds at the start of the horn path work in conjunction with the filter chamber to attenuate the frequencies above ~275Hz from passing through the horn. Damping will depend on what you prefer & what it sounds like in your room. As a starting point, I'd add some to the rear chamber, and some felt across the back of the cabinet, where the horn splits.
The folding has a few purposes. Nothing to do with the driver's Fs though. Firstly, it's so I could cram the horn into the box (I started with a 41Hz catenoid flare if you're interested). And secondly, the multiple folds at the start of the horn path work in conjunction with the filter chamber to attenuate the frequencies above ~275Hz from passing through the horn. Damping will depend on what you prefer & what it sounds like in your room. As a starting point, I'd add some to the rear chamber, and some felt across the back of the cabinet, where the horn splits.
Lived in every quadrant of the country, but y'all seems to be used everywhere, just with a different accent.
These horns will be a foot shorter than the bibs. If I wanted to raise the whole thing higher(to get the driver up 6 or 8 inches), would I change the bottom dim. or leave it and lose the floor loading(tile)?
These horns will be a foot shorter than the bibs. If I wanted to raise the whole thing higher(to get the driver up 6 or 8 inches), would I change the bottom dim. or leave it and lose the floor loading(tile)?
They're not ideal for that I'm afraid. Lifting them up will remove almost all the floor-loading, and significantly reduce the LF response. A complete clean-sheet design would be needed to get the driver 8in higher up.
Hi,
which of the Chang family is best suited for the Monacor SP-200X, G-Chang or Tommy-Chang?
Greetings,
TKsys
which of the Chang family is best suited for the Monacor SP-200X, G-Chang or Tommy-Chang?
Greetings,
TKsys
Thanks, then we'll just carry on as configured.
BTW, I'm finishing up on a pair of new 167s in a folded spiral:
22.5"x 7.25"x 18.5" interior dims w/ 3 slats full-lengthed downward to 3 1" holes in the front. Nothing scientific, just guessing at the dims but it'll do to get them broken in I guess.
BTW, I'm finishing up on a pair of new 167s in a folded spiral:
22.5"x 7.25"x 18.5" interior dims w/ 3 slats full-lengthed downward to 3 1" holes in the front. Nothing scientific, just guessing at the dims but it'll do to get them broken in I guess.
TKsys said:
Neither. But especially for you (well, OK, actually, I've been meaning to do one for the Monacor for a while, as us decadent Europeans don't have easy access to the B20, and this is our equivalent) there will be one for this unit. I've sent the dimensions over to Dave.
Scott