Thanks Bjohannesen, tabaq Large alpair 10.3
Best Regards
Best Regards
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I'm new to building speakers but TABAQ seems simple enough for me to try as my first project.
Before going and buying the parts for a TABAQ with CHR 7.3 I have a few questions about the dimensions that the simulation was based on:
"The cross section should be the same as the original design" i.e. 128cm2. As the CHR 7.3 element is 124mm wide at the widest the easy solution might be to just change the internal dimensions of 10x12.8 cm to 12.8 x 10 cm. That would leave only 2 mm on each side of the front panel, is that too little? Or is that even what you suggested?
Also, you mention that by increasing the port length to 5 inches would lower the tuning to 45 Hz. Do you mean the port at the bottom, currently formed by the front panel and the 9 x 10cm piece and the bottom piece (cross section 16cm2, length 10.2cm). If the cabinet is wider so that the driver can fit in then the cross section of the tube would also change to (20.48 cm2 with the change described above). Making the tube 5 inches long (12.7cm) would mean that it wouldn't fit inside the cabinet. Is that correct?
thanks!
Before going and buying the parts for a TABAQ with CHR 7.3 I have a few questions about the dimensions that the simulation was based on:
"The cross section should be the same as the original design" i.e. 128cm2. As the CHR 7.3 element is 124mm wide at the widest the easy solution might be to just change the internal dimensions of 10x12.8 cm to 12.8 x 10 cm. That would leave only 2 mm on each side of the front panel, is that too little? Or is that even what you suggested?
Also, you mention that by increasing the port length to 5 inches would lower the tuning to 45 Hz. Do you mean the port at the bottom, currently formed by the front panel and the 9 x 10cm piece and the bottom piece (cross section 16cm2, length 10.2cm). If the cabinet is wider so that the driver can fit in then the cross section of the tube would also change to (20.48 cm2 with the change described above). Making the tube 5 inches long (12.7cm) would mean that it wouldn't fit inside the cabinet. Is that correct?
thanks!
Nice work wvonkessler!
How do they sound with the Visatons? I've got a couple of those kicking around that could do with a new home..
How do they sound with the Visatons? I've got a couple of those kicking around that could do with a new home..
Russ:
They sound awesome - just need to put enough stuffing in - they can get overpowered if you're not careful - soundstage is extraordinary, I'm really impressed. Glad I went to the effort. Go for it.
Wilson
They sound awesome - just need to put enough stuffing in - they can get overpowered if you're not careful - soundstage is extraordinary, I'm really impressed. Glad I went to the effort. Go for it.
Wilson
You guys are having so much fun.
I haven't completed mine yet. Having only a jigsaw to cut straight pieces slows me down, and I've had a few that turned out wrong by a few millimetres which is annoying. I am close to final assembly though. I'll be putting the port at the rear, and they are stadium-shaped or "race track" shaped rather than rectangle.
I haven't completed mine yet. Having only a jigsaw to cut straight pieces slows me down, and I've had a few that turned out wrong by a few millimetres which is annoying. I am close to final assembly though. I'll be putting the port at the rear, and they are stadium-shaped or "race track" shaped rather than rectangle.
Thanks Wilson, that's a pretty good recommendation!
I'll give it a go - might go for the folded version though.
Cheers
Russ
I'll give it a go - might go for the folded version though.
Cheers
Russ
Hi Russ
In the foldet version, you can mount the driver in the middle if you like.
My intention was to mount the speaker on the wall with the opening firing downwards. Looks rather nice.
Hi
Bjørn
In the foldet version, you can mount the driver in the middle if you like.
My intention was to mount the speaker on the wall with the opening firing downwards. Looks rather nice.
Hi
Bjørn
Thanks Bjorn, it's going on the wall so that's what I'll do then 🙂
Looking forward to getting it up and running!
Looking forward to getting it up and running!
I did some final testing before sealing the speakers for good, and I like what I hear. Bass extension is incredible for a 5 inch pair. It can sound a bit muddled up with complex bass passages, but not to the extent where I'd complain about it, and it certainly is fun sounding.
Actually today I did. That time I didn't use the 200 grams as the instructions said, it was 150 grams. It was quite boomy and had a bit if a spike in the low vocal range, and had a 'home theatre' like sound to it, which my father likes. I added a few more strips of polyfill to one of them to get it up to 200 and compared the two. The denser one did get closer to what I prefer. I think I'm going to go in between those two to get a sound that's to everyone's liking.
I understand that overstuffing, though reducing the boominess does lower the bass am I correct?
I understand that overstuffing, though reducing the boominess does lower the bass am I correct?
Great thread here and thanks to Bjorn for all his efforts on this design. I have a quick question (having read the entire thread!!).
Should there be a rebate for the driver so that it's completely flush with the front panel? I'm thinking of using the Tang Band W4-1320SIF. I will probably build in 12mm baltic birch (perhaps 18mm for the front baffle if the driver aperture is rebated) with the panels cut to size and the driver cutout done professionally.
Should there be a rebate for the driver so that it's completely flush with the front panel? I'm thinking of using the Tang Band W4-1320SIF. I will probably build in 12mm baltic birch (perhaps 18mm for the front baffle if the driver aperture is rebated) with the panels cut to size and the driver cutout done professionally.