Hi Perceval,
Wow, that was quick 🙂 ! I'll take your advice about losing something with the folded version. The typical Tabaq for the W5-1611 is quite tall, nearly 4 feet. I thought about using a 16-liter enclosure, but I've found going with established designs is much better than my attempts at "design."
Thanks!
Wow, that was quick 🙂 ! I'll take your advice about losing something with the folded version. The typical Tabaq for the W5-1611 is quite tall, nearly 4 feet. I thought about using a 16-liter enclosure, but I've found going with established designs is much better than my attempts at "design."
Thanks!
No worries, just came back from camping and happened to be in front of the computer! 🙂
I have that driver. Remember, it beams quite a lot. Either you are fine with the very narrow listening spot (needs toe in), or consider adding a tweeter if you want some more dispersion of the higher frequencies.
I have that driver. Remember, it beams quite a lot. Either you are fine with the very narrow listening spot (needs toe in), or consider adding a tweeter if you want some more dispersion of the higher frequencies.
I've read that about this driver. Should I cross it pretty high? I haven't found a diagram showing when it starts beaming, but I'm thinking about 10K?
Lower. More like under 8kHz if I remember well. Really need to be toed in, and the listening spot is tiny. I added the TB 25-1744S to them, and it improved.
Tell you the truth, I tried them and was not blown away. YMMV. Everyone is different with expectations.
I took them out and now they are sitting on a shelf, waiting for some miracle, I guess!
I thought about using them in my camping van, but I went with a 2.1 instead.
Tell you the truth, I tried them and was not blown away. YMMV. Everyone is different with expectations.
I took them out and now they are sitting on a shelf, waiting for some miracle, I guess!
I thought about using them in my camping van, but I went with a 2.1 instead.
I bought them used for a decent price, so I'm keeping my expectations low. I have a main set of speakers that completely take away the desire to look for something better (Paul Carmody's Sunflower Redux). Anything I do now is for fun/learning.
Thanks for the tips!
Thanks for the tips!
Those look like a nice compromise between a good low response , and the OB sound.
I have played doing something similar, but not passively. I went active for the XOs.
Looking at the diagram... it must have been a bit expensive doing that XO.
You're right. It's nice to have a system we like as base for anything else.
After that, it's just fun to try other things, and maybe, along the way, something might pop out that takes the base system on a whole new level!
Have fun!
Well, since Mike already has the W5-1611 on hand, no sense in buying yet another pair of 5" drivers.
I too am a fan of MA drivers. Care to share some of your open baffle designs?
Thanks!
Being careful not to jack this thread; one is a tombstone shape I've shared in a "Lii Audio F15" thread here in full-range; the other, shown in the photo here, is my rendition of MJK's
"Jordan JX92S Open Baffle and Goldwood GW-1858 H Frame", using different drivers. You can see the MA Pluvia 7 HD on the 20 X 20" panel
"Jordan JX92S Open Baffle and Goldwood GW-1858 H Frame", using different drivers. You can see the MA Pluvia 7 HD on the 20 X 20" panel
Folded Faitals.
Going on a shelf?
Did you build a pair of Faitals straight line too?
I would love to hear about someone who built a pair of straight line and folded to compare between them.
Going on a shelf?
Did you build a pair of Faitals straight line too?
I would love to hear about someone who built a pair of straight line and folded to compare between them.
Yes, folded, with the port firing out the front, so a little different than Bjorn's fold. I like the bookshelf form factor, so I have never built a tower version unfortunately.
Actually I like these best sitting on the floor against the wall, where they get a little help on the low end, and with the Faital's rising response having them a little off axis is beneficial. In fact, for some music they sound great when I am sitting on my sofa and the speakers are on the floor on either end of the sofa, backed up against the same wall the sofa is against, so basically 90°+ off axis!
Actually I like these best sitting on the floor against the wall, where they get a little help on the low end, and with the Faital's rising response having them a little off axis is beneficial. In fact, for some music they sound great when I am sitting on my sofa and the speakers are on the floor on either end of the sofa, backed up against the same wall the sofa is against, so basically 90°+ off axis!
You mean 180°? If on the same wall as the sofa.
So, you are listening to the reflection, right?
That's some energy high up from the Faitals!
They would need a BSC for sure if placed in front of the sofa.
Anyway. Have fun listening!
So, you are listening to the reflection, right?
That's some energy high up from the Faitals!
They would need a BSC for sure if placed in front of the sofa.
Anyway. Have fun listening!
I would have thought that if my ear is at the side of the speaker that's 90° off from directly in front of the speaker, but whatever...
Yes, these really should have a BSC, but I'm to cheap and too lazy to make one, and I find that backing them against a wall and listening off axis makes them sound fine to me in most rooms I have used them in...
But, yes, the Faitals really do sparkle high up, more knowledgeable people than me say on this forum that they rival many tweeters as far as their top end.
Yes, these really should have a BSC, but I'm to cheap and too lazy to make one, and I find that backing them against a wall and listening off axis makes them sound fine to me in most rooms I have used them in...
But, yes, the Faitals really do sparkle high up, more knowledgeable people than me say on this forum that they rival many tweeters as far as their top end.
4" update build + questions
Hi All,
A while ago I posted a question about the 4" update by Bjorn Johansson. I have only received answer about the the original model (Thanks Perceval!), but I am stubborn and went ahead building the proposed model for 4" (More specific the 171 cm crossection pipe, the 22,8 cm crossection port and the 84g stuffing proposal for the TB W4 1320 SJ by Bjorn Johansson).
I am using the Tang Band W4 1320 SIF, which is very close in parameters to the unit mentioned above.
The chosen material here is 12mm birch ply, as this is stiffer than MDF. Also I kept to the proposed measurements, but slightly modified the design in order to get the driver closer to ear level, and at the same time dampening panel resonances and lowering center of gravity (the lower chamber will be filled with sand).
I have a question about tolerances in volume, specifically those of pipe and port. My port has a length of 9,7cm, but can I allow for a minus 5% difference in cross section or not?
Also I made a lucky mistake when sawing: This results in an extra internal volume of 0.3 Litres. Not a problem as I want to keep the back removable, and is just enough volume to allow for the internal beech battens needed for this.
But also here, to what tolerances are we working?
Kind regards, Roosje
Hi All,
A while ago I posted a question about the 4" update by Bjorn Johansson. I have only received answer about the the original model (Thanks Perceval!), but I am stubborn and went ahead building the proposed model for 4" (More specific the 171 cm crossection pipe, the 22,8 cm crossection port and the 84g stuffing proposal for the TB W4 1320 SJ by Bjorn Johansson).
I am using the Tang Band W4 1320 SIF, which is very close in parameters to the unit mentioned above.
The chosen material here is 12mm birch ply, as this is stiffer than MDF. Also I kept to the proposed measurements, but slightly modified the design in order to get the driver closer to ear level, and at the same time dampening panel resonances and lowering center of gravity (the lower chamber will be filled with sand).
I have a question about tolerances in volume, specifically those of pipe and port. My port has a length of 9,7cm, but can I allow for a minus 5% difference in cross section or not?
Also I made a lucky mistake when sawing: This results in an extra internal volume of 0.3 Litres. Not a problem as I want to keep the back removable, and is just enough volume to allow for the internal beech battens needed for this.
But also here, to what tolerances are we working?
Kind regards, Roosje
Attachments
The enclosure will not really have any problem if there’s a plus or minus centimetre here and there.
The vent is a lot more sensitive, but if the vent is supposed to be 9.2, and you are at 9.7, it won’t be too bad. The knee will have a slightly different than optimal, but the room will have an even stronger effect, so no worries there either.
The vent is a lot more sensitive, but if the vent is supposed to be 9.2, and you are at 9.7, it won’t be too bad. The knee will have a slightly different than optimal, but the room will have an even stronger effect, so no worries there either.
Tabaq update
The Tabaq design has been updated by Björn J for usage with 4 inch drivers which gave increased bass. The cross section of the updated speakerbox was 171^2.
My question is if the internal length of the box also should be changed and if the port should be changed? Does anyone have a drawing of the 4 inch box?
The Tabaq design has been updated by Björn J for usage with 4 inch drivers which gave increased bass. The cross section of the updated speakerbox was 171^2.
My question is if the internal length of the box also should be changed and if the port should be changed? Does anyone have a drawing of the 4 inch box?