For clarity, as I'm guessing it's not coming across correctly:
- I was confirming to perceval that it's the large TABAQ, and no I'm not using the 10f
- It's using the TB w5-1611 with the Fountek Neo x1 tweeter crossed at 3600hz with a lr4 type crossover.
Dayton new 4 " Driver
Has anyone tried the new Dayton 4" driver? The specs look good for TABAQ.
FS 84, Qts .61, Spl 90dB, Power 40 watts/80 max. Glass fiber in poly cone.
Response 80 to 15 K.
Has anyone tried the new Dayton 4" driver? The specs look good for TABAQ.
FS 84, Qts .61, Spl 90dB, Power 40 watts/80 max. Glass fiber in poly cone.
Response 80 to 15 K.
What is the new Dayton 4" driver? I Am not aware of any and couldn't find anything related to it. I have tested the old Dayton RS 100 driver in a TABAQ cabinet and it performed well but in my opinion, not as well as the Dayton PS95.
KLBird, do you mean the new Dayton made for car audio?
Horrible FR. made to be used with bass and treble boosts using car audio amp.
Horrible FR. made to be used with bass and treble boosts using car audio amp.
Any listening feedback you care to share? 🙂
I've been playing with the exact same idea in my mind for a while now, the W5-1611 with a tweeter....
This one would seem to offer a little more in the "grunt" department, maybe?
Tang Band W5-1685 5" Underhung Midbass Driver
J.
Tang Band W5-1685 5" Underhung Midbass Driver
J.
Part number 295-960 comes up as a no match at the Parts Express website. Could you check to make sure that is correct? Thanks!
If it's the PC105-8, looking at that graph, I wouldn't use it for anything higher than 3kHz.
Also, Qts is a bit low, so you won't get the bass boost a mid Qts driver gets from the TABAQ design. F3 is much lower, so it may balance each other.
But really, it needs to be sim'd to see how it would fare, but yeah, definitively needs a tweeter with that one.
Also, Qts is a bit low, so you won't get the bass boost a mid Qts driver gets from the TABAQ design. F3 is much lower, so it may balance each other.
But really, it needs to be sim'd to see how it would fare, but yeah, definitively needs a tweeter with that one.
It is the 295-160 I made a typo. I usually don't take much credence with published response curves from PE. I'm going to buy a couple and test them in my shop.
I have tested the Dayton PS95 and RS100 in the TABAQ enclosure and feel that while the RS100 goes a little bit deeper, the PS 95 is more extended and transparent. I like affordable drivers when possible, but the Dayton PC 108-8 will probably be a noticeable step down from either of those. However, we will be interested in hearing what you think of them.
Best,
Jay
Best,
Jay
Jerms, I looked but didn't se it. Mind sharing the dimensions you used for the ND105?
156cm2 x 78cm long. Vent 20cm2 x 16. Though ideally, the vent would be shorter (12-14) and more stuffing used.
I also tried 128cm2 x 90cm long. Vent 20cm2 x 16. Same comment applies regarding the vent.
I haven't draw up plans for enclosures based around either model.
J.
Has anyone ever recalculated this for the FRS8? I have a pair that I can fit into something like this. 🙂
Hi Arne,
See post #325.
I used them in the original design and have been enjoying them for some time now.
Regards
Chris
Thanks Chris! That sounds interesting.
Two questions though...
Did you include the filter or do you run them without it?
And what damping solution did you use? And if you used the second solution, do you have a picture of the 20 grams at the last part of the tube, as I don’t seem to be able to get my head around how that would work.
Two questions though...
Did you include the filter or do you run them without it?
And what damping solution did you use? And if you used the second solution, do you have a picture of the 20 grams at the last part of the tube, as I don’t seem to be able to get my head around how that would work.
Last edited:
Hi Arne,
I didn't use the filter as I was happy with the sound.
I used hollowfibre material found in cushions etc, similar to this:
Hollowfibre Filling | Dunelm
I followed the original design, stuffing the top two thirds of the cabinet with 100g. It seems a lot when you put it in the cabinet, but I find the bass is nice and "tight" and have never felt the need to experiment with more or less stuffing. This is personal preference of course.
I'm not sure about damping the last part of the tube. In my case I'm happy with what I have!
I'm currently building a second pair with MA 70.3 drivers, so we'll see how that goes!
Good luck with your build, it's well worth it!
Regards
Chris
Thanks. I have some extra ND's I want to try something different with, maybe over the holidays. You think the vent should be shorter because of the increased volume?
Not quite.
16cm vent with moderate/heavy stuffing gives an F3 somewhere 40Hz or lower. However, there is a 2dB suckout in the model around 60-70Hz.
12cm vent gives F3 around 46Hz but with a straighter response. Shorter vent requires more stuffing to bring the bass back down.
Although.... If you are concerned about groups delay, the 16cm vent pushes the GD hump lower and lower GD quite a bit around 60Hz.
Ha, I guess you could say I'm a little undecided as to which approach is best.
If you had 4xND105 though, a TMM would only be 13x24cm for 312cm2. That's still a relatively tiny speaker.