Somewhat confusing for novice builders....but thank you. I think for a first attempt I'll stick with the original Tabaq enclosure dimensions, + adjust the stuffing per Bjorn + the last two updates noted.
For a 4" driver, don't use the updated port in a shape of a L, but the original straight one.
It will be a little lower tuning and ok for a lower Fs 4" driver.
It will be a little lower tuning and ok for a lower Fs 4" driver.
4" Drivers - Mark Audio CHR70.3
Perceval,
Your advice is appreciated on the 4 inch driver port.
Bjørn did as sim for the Mark Audio driver and recommended some changes including raising the height and port length of the cabinet.
I propose to keep the original cross section and "side mount" the driver due to its size.
I will also leave the port in its original position so it is pointing inwards.
Bjørn suggested a 5 inch (12.7 cm) port length, so if I lengthen it accordingly I calculate that this would leave a 1.3 cm space between the rear wall and the port end.
Would this be enough space for the port to work effectively or should I reduce the length and add some height to the shelf section?
Any suggestions or advice would be welcomed as I am eager to start building another set of Tabaq's!
A very basic and obviously not to scale diagram is attached.
Regards
Chris
Perceval,
Your advice is appreciated on the 4 inch driver port.
Bjørn did as sim for the Mark Audio driver and recommended some changes including raising the height and port length of the cabinet.
I propose to keep the original cross section and "side mount" the driver due to its size.
I will also leave the port in its original position so it is pointing inwards.
Bjørn suggested a 5 inch (12.7 cm) port length, so if I lengthen it accordingly I calculate that this would leave a 1.3 cm space between the rear wall and the port end.
Would this be enough space for the port to work effectively or should I reduce the length and add some height to the shelf section?
Any suggestions or advice would be welcomed as I am eager to start building another set of Tabaq's!
A very basic and obviously not to scale diagram is attached.
Regards
Chris
Attachments
cer2906,
did you see the TABAQ update with the new port in a L shape?
Having your port so close to the back wall, it will actually lengthen the actual port.
I suggest you use the update as design cues, and work with your port length of 12.7 into a L shaped port.
On the other hand, you could mount the MA driver directly on the front baffle, as the design intended, and glue a piece of supra baffle to help with diffraction.
did you see the TABAQ update with the new port in a L shape?
Having your port so close to the back wall, it will actually lengthen the actual port.
I suggest you use the update as design cues, and work with your port length of 12.7 into a L shaped port.
On the other hand, you could mount the MA driver directly on the front baffle, as the design intended, and glue a piece of supra baffle to help with diffraction.
CHR 70.3
Hi Perceval,
Thanks for your quick response!
I have seen the many variations in the thread, but would like to get the design for this driver as close to Bjørn's suggestions as possible. I appreciate I may be over thinking this with the Tabaq being tolerant to small changes.
I have come up with the diagram below which I think follows the correct way to measure the port length.
As my previous post, it's just a basic drawing to get the idea across.
I'm grateful for any input.
Thanks
Chris
Hi Perceval,
Thanks for your quick response!
I have seen the many variations in the thread, but would like to get the design for this driver as close to Bjørn's suggestions as possible. I appreciate I may be over thinking this with the Tabaq being tolerant to small changes.
I have come up with the diagram below which I think follows the correct way to measure the port length.
As my previous post, it's just a basic drawing to get the idea across.
I'm grateful for any input.
Thanks
Chris
Attachments
I have a question before I start cutting. My 4-inch TB drivers have an outside diameter (w/frame) of 4.57", which is 11.6cm. The front baffle in the original Tabaq is specified as 10cm wide. So, I'd like to make the enclosure a little bigger...
In terms of sizing, Bjorn states in the link above, "Width and depth of the enclosure can be designed as you wish as long as the cross section remains the same." I'm having a little trouble absorbing what that means?? If, for example, I want the front baffle piece to be 12cm wide, does that affect the rest of the dimensions etc.?
Thanks and apologies for the novice level question(s). 🙂
To answer your question, yes. If you need to make it a little wider for the driver, do so. Then just make it a little less deep. Keep the volume the same and the height the same.
An alternative is to make a supra-baffle. Use a separate piece of wood to mount the driver. Then mount that piece of wood to the TABAQ cabinet. The piece will stick out from the rest of the cabinet.
One can be seen about half-way down the page I have linked.
The Woden Design Dunideer
Mike
An alternative is to make a supra-baffle. Use a separate piece of wood to mount the driver. Then mount that piece of wood to the TABAQ cabinet. The piece will stick out from the rest of the cabinet.
One can be seen about half-way down the page I have linked.
The Woden Design Dunideer
Mike
Thanks Mike 
Makes sense. I calculate pretty close to the same volume and cross-section if I add 2cm width, reduce depth by 2.1cm, and leave height the same.
I forgot about supra-baffles, too, that's an idea...
Makes sense. I calculate pretty close to the same volume and cross-section if I add 2cm width, reduce depth by 2.1cm, and leave height the same.I forgot about supra-baffles, too, that's an idea...
Last edited:
I have a similar issue as stated in my previous post. #1870
As long as width x depth equals the recommended figure (171 cm2 in the link you attached)
I believe that's fine.
The issue is then port dimension. This is where I'm hoping for some assistance from the good people on the forum!
Good luck with your build Sarchi, you won't regret it!
Regards
Chris
As long as width x depth equals the recommended figure (171 cm2 in the link you attached)
I believe that's fine.
The issue is then port dimension. This is where I'm hoping for some assistance from the good people on the forum!
Good luck with your build Sarchi, you won't regret it!
Regards
Chris
Right, as Chris noted - the opening (looking straight down to the floor, inside the Tabaq) was 10 cm wide by 3.8 cm deep in the original spec. So cross section=38. If I'm increasing the opening to 12cm wide (same as my front baffle), then to keep the cross section of the opening the same, I need to decrease the depth to 3.167 cm. (12 x 3.167 = 38)
So my piece that was 10 x 9 will now have to be (I believe) 12 x 5.8 cm. (thankfully I think this calc was a little simpler than what Chris needs)
So my piece that was 10 x 9 will now have to be (I believe) 12 x 5.8 cm. (thankfully I think this calc was a little simpler than what Chris needs)
Last edited:
Hi Bjørn,
I hope you had a nice vacation.
I'd be grateful if you could confirm that I'm correct in my thinking regarding the port dimensions in my earlier post #1870.
Regards
Chris
I hope you had a nice vacation.
I'd be grateful if you could confirm that I'm correct in my thinking regarding the port dimensions in my earlier post #1870.
Regards
Chris
Hi Bjorn, thanks - but I'm building using the original spec, with a 4" TB (as advised). Was the original port cross section 38cm2? Or did I mess that up. I calculated it as 10cm wide x (12.8 - 9 = 3.8)cm deep.
What I'm trying to determine is what depth to make the shelf piece, since my w x d will be modified a little. I might be thinking about it incorrectly. (?)
Attachments
KLBirds TL speaker
Hello everyone.
In the post No:1348 of this thread Ken Bird shared his project of TL speaker.
Has anyone tried or simulated the KLBIrd´s project? What is your opinion?
As far as I´ve "fallen in love with" the ribbon tweeters I would like to use the ribbon´s capability to enreach the output in higher frq levels of the TL speakers.
I am considering to use the MTM configuration (the tweeter in the seperated chamber) of TL speaker similar/the same kind as KLBIrd made. Again attached in my post.
The considered tweeter is Fountek Neo CD1 NeoCD1.0
The fullrangers would be pair of following frequently mentioned TB drivers W4-1320SJ (QTS=0,35,Fs=75Hz, Xmax=3mm) W4-1320SJ - 4" Paper Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
or
W4-1052SD (Qts=0.44, Fs=70Hz,Xmax=3,4mm) W4-1052SD - 4" PP Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
or never mentioned in this thread
W4-654SE (Qts=0.43, Fs=65Hz, Xmax=4,15mm))W4-654SE - 4" Paper Cone / Full Range, Woofer - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
Do you think would it be feasable to go this way? And finally be happy when listening the music?
If the idea is OKey which of listed FRs you think is the best option?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Jan
Hello everyone.
In the post No:1348 of this thread Ken Bird shared his project of TL speaker.
Has anyone tried or simulated the KLBIrd´s project? What is your opinion?
As far as I´ve "fallen in love with" the ribbon tweeters I would like to use the ribbon´s capability to enreach the output in higher frq levels of the TL speakers.
I am considering to use the MTM configuration (the tweeter in the seperated chamber) of TL speaker similar/the same kind as KLBIrd made. Again attached in my post.
The considered tweeter is Fountek Neo CD1 NeoCD1.0
The fullrangers would be pair of following frequently mentioned TB drivers W4-1320SJ (QTS=0,35,Fs=75Hz, Xmax=3mm) W4-1320SJ - 4" Paper Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
or
W4-1052SD (Qts=0.44, Fs=70Hz,Xmax=3,4mm) W4-1052SD - 4" PP Full Range - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
or never mentioned in this thread
W4-654SE (Qts=0.43, Fs=65Hz, Xmax=4,15mm))W4-654SE - 4" Paper Cone / Full Range, Woofer - TB SPEAKER CO., LTD.
Do you think would it be feasable to go this way? And finally be happy when listening the music?
If the idea is OKey which of listed FRs you think is the best option?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Jan
Attachments
