Changed the 3 filters capacitor value that made quite a difference in the top end in simulations with the 10F (compared to the TC9).
Need to place the last filter back inside the enclosure and then on to replacing the drivers...
Sorry, no pictures as it's all covered in wool fibers it doesn't look that good anyway. Basically, the outer driver groups get filtered steep
which makes the top end (the 5 unfiltered drivers) perform a little better.
Practically it meant raising the capacitance of the last step on those 3 filters. @ of them from 40nf to 60nf, one from 10nf to 40nf.
That's all the change the filters needed to accommodate the 10F drivers. So no large overhaul, just some minor changes.
(still a lot of work though)
Need to place the last filter back inside the enclosure and then on to replacing the drivers...
Sorry, no pictures as it's all covered in wool fibers it doesn't look that good anyway. Basically, the outer driver groups get filtered steep
which makes the top end (the 5 unfiltered drivers) perform a little better.
Practically it meant raising the capacitance of the last step on those 3 filters. @ of them from 40nf to 60nf, one from 10nf to 40nf.
That's all the change the filters needed to accommodate the 10F drivers. So no large overhaul, just some minor changes.
(still a lot of work though)
An example compared to (measurements of both of) the old filter(s):
The green one being (one of the measurements of) the new result... only the top end deviates...
(in reality you're looking at at least5 8 different measurements of 2 the original filters and one modified filter plus a simulated result using x-sim
these measurements are my quality control, a way to check the simulated filters with reality and against each other if one builds 2 sets)
The orange line is the 'load' resistor of 8.2 ohm (to be able to measure the filter with a load). In reality there's
two of those straight lines as well, one of the old measurement set and one of the newer set made today. (my reference)
The green one being (one of the measurements of) the new result... only the top end deviates...
(in reality you're looking at at least
these measurements are my quality control, a way to check the simulated filters with reality and against each other if one builds 2 sets)
The orange line is the 'load' resistor of 8.2 ohm (to be able to measure the filter with a load). In reality there's
two of those straight lines as well, one of the old measurement set and one of the newer set made today. (my reference)
Last edited:
Absolutely 🤣
Got to have several modes... wide beam, narrow beam, SDA mode... it would keep me busy for the rest of my life 👍
Got to have several modes... wide beam, narrow beam, SDA mode... it would keep me busy for the rest of my life 👍
Not as nimble as I used to be... I'm disassembling the baffle with drivers and in desperate need of in-between breaks.
Another break... time to post a picture...
10 more to go... then on to cleaning the baffle...
(if anyone is wondering, the ways you ride: Tenways E-bike)
10 more to go... then on to cleaning the baffle...
(if anyone is wondering, the ways you ride: Tenways E-bike)
As a massive Zep fan that’s interesting as I’ve never heard of that particular tribute band.
Here‘s a pic of my dog, he’s called Bonzo, and you’ll notice he’s Black . . . 😉
Attachments
First one here (but no nurse)!just need to organize a quick trip to the netherlands! 😉
Thanks for the moral support... I guess I'm not the only one curious to find out what 50x Scan Speak 10F sounds like 😀
If they ever have a gig near you, go see them 👍
They are worth it... (I've seen my share of tribute bands and most don't cut it 😉)
No gigs scheduled in the UK for this year 🙁. Maybe they will be like Elvis and never come to the UK 😗
Almost 9 years late, but a big thanks to wesayso for starting the thread and feeding it with so much interesting stuff. Feeling inspired, as a experiement I recently bought a handful of tg9, and put them on a very cheap baffle. I wasn't sure what to expect. Despite the really sloppy implementation my ears tell me there is something about the sound that is pretty ok: direct and live. For me it's worth further exploring, and there was something satisfying about trying.
Can I ask a question: there were comments earlier in the thread about 'mono' being a good test of a speaker. If I understood correctly, is it possible to quickly summarize why?
The reason I ask the question is for the moment I only have one sloppy experiment, but to my surprise it sounded pretty ok (even though I've previously always listened to two speakers).
Can I ask a question: there were comments earlier in the thread about 'mono' being a good test of a speaker. If I understood correctly, is it possible to quickly summarize why?
The reason I ask the question is for the moment I only have one sloppy experiment, but to my surprise it sounded pretty ok (even though I've previously always listened to two speakers).
That's a pretty loaded question, or at least, the answer could be...
Over on ASR there's a whole thread on it: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/speaker-testing-why-mono-is-better.21681/
Basically it boils down to this: in mono it is easier to hear flaws in the frequency response. According to research by Harmon/Toole, listening in mono is enough to determine the sound quality and their tests confirmed that the winner of a mono test also came out highest when tested in Stereo.
But... I have listened to my speakers for quite a while... So I do test in Stereo a lot of the times. As I trust in my procedure to setup the speaker with measurements and
then move on to the listening part, more often than not in Stereo. Yes, I've done my share of listening/testing in Mono. But if I'm adjusting speakers to my preference,
I'm using Stereo. In earlier stages, after building a speaker I did listen in mono first, because that gives an honest view of the speaker without things like cross talk etc.
An honest tonal balance and easier to judge (a speaker) than listening to a complete stereo image etc.
When listening in stereo, I don't listen to many mono recordings (I may at times to judge certain aspects)... When listening in mono, I mix down the stereo recording.
This may not be the answer you hoped for but I'm sure some other members may share their bit as well...
Over on ASR there's a whole thread on it: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/speaker-testing-why-mono-is-better.21681/
Basically it boils down to this: in mono it is easier to hear flaws in the frequency response. According to research by Harmon/Toole, listening in mono is enough to determine the sound quality and their tests confirmed that the winner of a mono test also came out highest when tested in Stereo.
But... I have listened to my speakers for quite a while... So I do test in Stereo a lot of the times. As I trust in my procedure to setup the speaker with measurements and
then move on to the listening part, more often than not in Stereo. Yes, I've done my share of listening/testing in Mono. But if I'm adjusting speakers to my preference,
I'm using Stereo. In earlier stages, after building a speaker I did listen in mono first, because that gives an honest view of the speaker without things like cross talk etc.
An honest tonal balance and easier to judge (a speaker) than listening to a complete stereo image etc.
When listening in stereo, I don't listen to many mono recordings (I may at times to judge certain aspects)... When listening in mono, I mix down the stereo recording.
This may not be the answer you hoped for but I'm sure some other members may share their bit as well...
Lots of breathing room for the new drivers! It will take a while though, to mount them all but it has begun!
All of them are labeled to get the most even performance out of those groups of drivers...