TABAQ TL for Tangband

Time to share my experience with TABAQs :)
After some burn in period, both for speakers and amp (tiny Topping TP23) all i can say is that i'm simply in love in these speakers. Not in my wildest audio dreams did i expect such big sound from such tiny boxes. After measly 60+ hours of burn in, bass extension in room goes way below 55Hz, which i thought to be quite optimal from those boxes. I don't have any measuring equipment, but using YT frequency videos, i did get quite strong (-few dB, but still quite audible) 42 Hz from them, then the bass cuts off. From 4 inch speaker in floorstanders that are smaller than some bookshelf boxes? Sounds impossible, but it is working.
The clarity of sound and sound stage are superb also. I like listening to pipe organs and electronic music, mostly old school techno (unusual combo, right?), and they deliver quite a punch down in the bass, with good dynamic. If they can deliver pipe organs, then what can't they? With those measly few Watts from amp, they make my couch tremble.
All said, i find this design outstanding and i think i wont be changing them soon, although i did get caught in DIY fever and planning some other boxes in other rooms in my house. But, these will be with me for a loooong time. :)
 
I belive i did, in one of previous posts (the one with pictures), but doesnt hurt to mention them again. I used Tang Band W4 1320 SIF. Also, i made boxes from 12mm MDF (el cheapo solution, but doesn't hurt so much in boxes this small) with aproximately 65g of synthetic wool in upper 2/3, no BSC, no terminals, cables go directly from amp to drivers (sounds semi-purist). Easy to make, i made them in few days (paint job included) with my kiddos. :)
 
This time for sure... Really.

Summer in Canada was a warm one so it made me stay out of the shop and focus on the outside "to do" list :(

Now fall is here and I can FINALLY build the TABAQ with the Faital 4FE32:)

But to get clarification (maybe again) I use the original design of the straight port and use the 20.3cm measurement for the driver placement? I ask this as the PDF for the redesign seems to suggest that a driver with a FS of 100Hz or higher (which the 4FE32 is 100Hz) you should use the updated port design. But I have seen posts suggesting to use the original port design with a 4" driver, so I am a bit confused. As well it looks like one should stick with the same volume and measurements. I don't want to start cutting until I have a grasp. Also I am going to start with 60 grams of stuffing for this driver, test and see if it sounds ok.

Since this driver is a bit on the ugly side I am going to mount behind the baffle and use a exotic wood baffle for finished version, so I want to make no mistakes with measurements.
 
Hi guys !

I have a TABAQ with a 3" TB driver but can I use a bigger driver to increase the SPL ?
Any good VFM driver in the 4" or 5" range ?

Ok, I have the following options for a "bigger" sounding TABAQ !

1. Dayton RS100 8ohm.
Dayton Audio - RS100-8 - 4" Reference Full-Range Driver 8 Ohm
Total Q (Qts) : 0.48

2. Dayton Audio - CX120-8 - 4" Coaxial Driver with 3/4" Silk Dome Tweeter 8 Ohm
Dayton Audio - CX120-8 - 4" Coaxial Driver with 3/4" Silk Dome Tweeter 8 Ohm
Total Q Qts : 0.48
Well, its a co-axial driver with a separate tweeter, I know. But would it work ?

EDIT:

3. Tang Band W4 1052SD
Tang Band W4-1052SD 4" 4 Ohm Full Range Driver | Diyaudioparts

Which among them is better ?
Any opinions ?
 
Last edited:
I think you would need a crossover for the coaxials but I might be wrong. I made one with the rs100 and it sounds great and produces surprisingly deep and tuneful bass.
My TB W3 based TABAQ is pretty good in bass. The problem with it is SPL. Its too quiet for my Dad (it was supposed to be a great gift for him but he want it loud !)

So, I have bought a 2.1 Aiyima 3116D2 amp (with a nice case) from Ali Express and would be adding a cheap subwoofer later this month. I hope this would enable them to play a little louder. Then, I would be upgrading the 3" TBs with this Dayton Co-axial drivers for good treble response along with decent midrange. The sub-bass would be taken care off by the sub.
Thats my thinking !
 
Perceval thanks for your post and giving me a clearer understanding.

About a month ago I had the opportunity to have my friend listen to my TABAQ setup. Ralph is a retired CBC tV, radio and music producer. He has produced a lot of albums for some well known artists as well as a JUNO winner. He knows sound, and how to record to a high level. He listened, and didn’t say much at first but after about a three minute listen he turned to me and said wow, really nice. As most say he couldn’t believe the sound stage, and quality of tone coming from this small setup. To me this says a lot about the design of the speakers, but as well my dac and amp is surely helping also.

Happy building everyone.
 
I ordered another model with that kind of suede surround, and it was the worst driver I have ever bought.

distortion was off the scale throughout the whole frequency range.

I have the W4-1052sd in a TABAQ I built, but it needs EQ to sound good, and it drops like a rock past 12kHz. Good bass though.

I think there's someone who did one with the RS100 ... probably a search of that driver from this thread will show something up.

The CX120 is probably the most interesting here. I'd try that one.
 
I ordered another model with that kind of suede surround, and it was the worst driver I have ever bought.

distortion was off the scale throughout the whole frequency range.

I have the W4-1052sd in a TABAQ I built, but it needs EQ to sound good, and it drops like a rock past 12kHz. Good bass though.

I think there's someone who did one with the RS100 ... probably a search of that driver from this thread will show something up.

The CX120 is probably the most interesting here. I'd try that one.

1.Ok, thanks for the comment. I wouldn't be making that purchase.

2 & 3. Yeah, that's why I'm thinking of going for the CX120. It's got a tweeter.
But, is there something inherently wrong with coaxial drivers ?
 
Graphic... sweet! :)

eljo.... nothing wrong with coaxial... except there are a lot of cheap ones and they don't sound great, but some of them are pretty good, and having the tweeter in the middle of the cone is good for point source designs.

My 4' builds would need some help in the HF frequencies reach and dispersion. A tweeter would really help them.
 
eljo.... nothing wrong with coaxial... except there are a lot of cheap ones and they don't sound great, but some of them are pretty good, and having the tweeter in the middle of the cone is good for point source designs.

My 4' builds would need some help in the HF frequencies reach and dispersion. A tweeter would really help them.
1. OK, I'll go for the CX 120.

2. Can I just pop in these guys on my existing TABAQ or make a brand new enclosure as it needs a cross over ?

3. Also, I saw your post earlier in the thread regarding the cross over design for CX120. Have you made it ?
Can you share any of your findings ?

By the way, there was a small family gathering at my wife's place yesterday and I used the TABAQ to play the background music.
They loved it !
Can't imagine how big the CX120 along with a brand new sub would sound !
It will be EPIC, I'm sure !

Now, after getting the CX120 purchased, I'll move on to building an inexpensive subwoofer. The 2.1 amp I bought for this setup isn't shipped yet @AliExpress.So, I have a lot of time to get it done.
 
I don't have the CX120, but I have been trying some tweeters with my TABAQs "test enclosures" . They are enclosures I use to test if sims do translate well . And at the moment, trying to add some air to 4" drivers.

The CX120 will need a XO, 2nd order if you go high enough, or 3rd to 4th order if you want to cross a little closer to their advertised bandwidth .

You could use the zma and frd files from Dayton as a starting point with XSim to come up with something, until you actually get the drivers in the TABAQs and measure them personally to input that into XSim.

Just had a quick look at the CX120, it doesn't look bad, but it is not as clean as I was expecting. It looks a little like the original TB used for the TABAQ design, the W3-315c.

If you can get it, the W4-1720 looks great, but would need a tweeter on top, the 1720 is a woofer.

I'm not saying the CX120 will be bad, it should be ok in the original design. It will depend if your room picks up frequencies around 50Hx and boosts them. If not, then it should be fine. If your room boosts frequencies between 65Hz and 120Hz, then it should be great.
 

Attachments

  • Photo Sep 10, 1 09 39 PM.jpg
    Photo Sep 10, 1 09 39 PM.jpg
    684 KB · Views: 599
I don't have the CX120, but I have been trying some tweeters with my TABAQs "test enclosures" . They are enclosures I use to test if sims do translate well . And at the moment, trying to add some air to 4" drivers.

The CX120 will need a XO, 2nd order if you go high enough, or 3rd to 4th order if you want to cross a little closer to their advertised bandwidth .

You could use the zma and frd files from Dayton as a starting point with XSim to come up with something, until you actually get the drivers in the TABAQs and measure them personally to input that into XSim.

Just had a quick look at the CX120, it doesn't look bad, but it is not as clean as I was expecting. It looks a little like the original TB used for the TABAQ design, the W3-315c.

If you can get it, the W4-1720 looks great, but would need a tweeter on top, the 1720 is a woofer.

I'm not saying the CX120 will be bad, it should be ok in the original design. It will depend if your room picks up frequencies around 50Hx and boosts them. If not, then it should be fine. If your room boosts frequencies between 65Hz and 120Hz, then it should be great.
I would be adding a sub. So, it should be alright ?

And no, I cannot get the W4-1720 easily.