Hi guys!
Allow me to jump in. Would you call this TL, because of the box on the bottom.
Dimension of the box is 22"x17"x13" and tube is 10"x58" everything filled very
dens.
Woofer is 10" Peerless, Fs 22Hz. Reading about TL enclosures I come to
conclusion that there is no sure thing in design, so I took a chance and used the most
length I could. Sound is OK but I think little boomy for my taste. It could be my
room or maybe electrostatic panels aren't efficient enough to mach woofers or the
box itself makes that sound. What do you think?
Allow me to jump in. Would you call this TL, because of the box on the bottom.
Dimension of the box is 22"x17"x13" and tube is 10"x58" everything filled very
dens.
Woofer is 10" Peerless, Fs 22Hz. Reading about TL enclosures I come to
conclusion that there is no sure thing in design, so I took a chance and used the most
length I could. Sound is OK but I think little boomy for my taste. It could be my
room or maybe electrostatic panels aren't efficient enough to mach woofers or the
box itself makes that sound. What do you think?
Attachments
Awsome work, did you do the electrostatic's yourself?
and about the filling for the TL, how did you make the thing stay uniformely in the tube?
and about the filling for the TL, how did you make the thing stay uniformely in the tube?
Hi Ilianh!
Electrostatic panels are rebuilt "Audiostatics" , but I have recently build clones that
works well. Actually I squeezed couple more dB out of clones. Filling is synthetic
stuff and doesn't need support.
Electrostatic panels are rebuilt "Audiostatics" , but I have recently build clones that
works well. Actually I squeezed couple more dB out of clones. Filling is synthetic
stuff and doesn't need support.
Now the rest.
Well, it seems that I got the midbass region done. It's a f5=35Hz, not too bad🙂 for a 1meter high box.
I'm thinking it as a two way with a peerless 811815, or maybe with the same beyma as my previous project (T2010). My question is the tweeter position: would the standing waves be altered with the intruder? I will make a small sub-enclosure for the tweet, and maybe it gets some ridiculous space from the inside. is this important, or like we say here: I'm ******* eau-de-cologne?
Mr. King, what if I choose to fit not a reflex tube but a rectangular shape? Can I translate the area of the opening of the tube into a square shape one?
What should I take into account about the position of the tweetee driver?
What about the building of the box, is a 0.5Sd to 5Sd, 32" high. As far as I know, no bracing can be used? Would this box resonate a lot if plain built?
Well, it seems that I got the midbass region done. It's a f5=35Hz, not too bad🙂 for a 1meter high box.
I'm thinking it as a two way with a peerless 811815, or maybe with the same beyma as my previous project (T2010). My question is the tweeter position: would the standing waves be altered with the intruder? I will make a small sub-enclosure for the tweet, and maybe it gets some ridiculous space from the inside. is this important, or like we say here: I'm ******* eau-de-cologne?
Mr. King, what if I choose to fit not a reflex tube but a rectangular shape? Can I translate the area of the opening of the tube into a square shape one?
What should I take into account about the position of the tweetee driver?
What about the building of the box, is a 0.5Sd to 5Sd, 32" high. As far as I know, no bracing can be used? Would this box resonate a lot if plain built?
Hi Raka,
Yes you can use a rectangualr port with an equivalent cross-sectional area. This should not change the results.
For my expanding or tapered designs I have not used internal bracing. The entire enclosure is not pressurized like in a bass reflex or closed box. There are pressure maximums and minimums at different axial positions along the line. I think if the enclosure is built sturdy enough that bracing is not really required. I have not experienced box resonating problems in my personal speakers.
Yes you can use a rectangualr port with an equivalent cross-sectional area. This should not change the results.
For my expanding or tapered designs I have not used internal bracing. The entire enclosure is not pressurized like in a bass reflex or closed box. There are pressure maximums and minimums at different axial positions along the line. I think if the enclosure is built sturdy enough that bracing is not really required. I have not experienced box resonating problems in my personal speakers.
Thanks MJK,
AAhhh, so the inside is not pressurized, then no big problem with the resonances is expected, that's good.
I'm trying to shorten the line, in order to make it as small as possible, let's say reaching 42Hz is enough. I don't have much experience building (is my 2nd), so I haven't heard many designs yet. How you'd describe the sound of your ML TQWT? What are the advantages of this design? In the paper, I see that the lows are easily reached, but what about the mids? How's affected the backwave?
When we say sturdy, with MDF 16mm is OK? I don't know if the shape would be a standard one, or the sided one like in your fullranger one. With the assymetric one, the tweeter can be fitted just in the small top angle with almost no baffle, but maybe the Cuople Acceptance Factor is greatly affected...
AAhhh, so the inside is not pressurized, then no big problem with the resonances is expected, that's good.
I'm trying to shorten the line, in order to make it as small as possible, let's say reaching 42Hz is enough. I don't have much experience building (is my 2nd), so I haven't heard many designs yet. How you'd describe the sound of your ML TQWT? What are the advantages of this design? In the paper, I see that the lows are easily reached, but what about the mids? How's affected the backwave?
When we say sturdy, with MDF 16mm is OK? I don't know if the shape would be a standard one, or the sided one like in your fullranger one. With the assymetric one, the tweeter can be fitted just in the small top angle with almost no baffle, but maybe the Cuople Acceptance Factor is greatly affected...
Hi Raka,
I would not say that the inside is not pressurized. The standing waves produce local pressure peaks and other regions without pressure. So the line is not completely pressurized like a bass reflex or closed box. Look at the graphic at the very top of the page of my website to see the pressure patterns. So applying local bracing will not always reinforce the high pressure region. The basic construction of a folded TL will add reinforcement to the enclosure. I tend to use plywood for all of my enclosures and have stayed away from MDF. Just my preference for wood.
As for the ML TQWT, the fundamental high pressure region is only in the top of the enclosure where the smallest cross-section exists. This is the stiffest part of the cabinet. I have had nothing but very positive feedback from the people who have built the ML TQWT. Some have tried to modify the design with a correction different circuit or stuffing material but in the end they came back to almost the original design. The only real change people have made is to reduce the amount of baffle step correction applyed. Keep in mind that if you are considering a full range driver that they are very directional and require close to on axis listening.
Hope that helps,
I would not say that the inside is not pressurized. The standing waves produce local pressure peaks and other regions without pressure. So the line is not completely pressurized like a bass reflex or closed box. Look at the graphic at the very top of the page of my website to see the pressure patterns. So applying local bracing will not always reinforce the high pressure region. The basic construction of a folded TL will add reinforcement to the enclosure. I tend to use plywood for all of my enclosures and have stayed away from MDF. Just my preference for wood.
As for the ML TQWT, the fundamental high pressure region is only in the top of the enclosure where the smallest cross-section exists. This is the stiffest part of the cabinet. I have had nothing but very positive feedback from the people who have built the ML TQWT. Some have tried to modify the design with a correction different circuit or stuffing material but in the end they came back to almost the original design. The only real change people have made is to reduce the amount of baffle step correction applyed. Keep in mind that if you are considering a full range driver that they are very directional and require close to on axis listening.
Hope that helps,
back o the worksheets...
I have tried reading your information article but they are just too advanced for me. Could you give a brief rundown on exactly how to use the worksheets?? I figured out so far the blue line is some sort of reference, but what does it reference? And then all your driver specs end in a d instead of an s, ex fd instead of fs.. I asume that it is the same thing as the fs, vas, qes, qms and so on that come with the driver? somewher else smeone suggested a woofer with a .Qts from .5 .. 1 and I have been trying to model a driver with a Qts of .38 with some odd results, namely I cant get the redline to go over the blue line below 100 hz in the closed end worksheet. Is this just a poor choice for a TL design?
I alo shave 2 8" JL-audio 8ib4 drivers that are made for free air use. would a driver such as this which needs a massive sealed box be a better choice for a TL design? This driver did not come with the Lvc or Bl specs.. can I fudge this somehow?
Thanks for any and all pointers !!
I have tried reading your information article but they are just too advanced for me. Could you give a brief rundown on exactly how to use the worksheets?? I figured out so far the blue line is some sort of reference, but what does it reference? And then all your driver specs end in a d instead of an s, ex fd instead of fs.. I asume that it is the same thing as the fs, vas, qes, qms and so on that come with the driver? somewher else smeone suggested a woofer with a .Qts from .5 .. 1 and I have been trying to model a driver with a Qts of .38 with some odd results, namely I cant get the redline to go over the blue line below 100 hz in the closed end worksheet. Is this just a poor choice for a TL design?
I alo shave 2 8" JL-audio 8ib4 drivers that are made for free air use. would a driver such as this which needs a massive sealed box be a better choice for a TL design? This driver did not come with the Lvc or Bl specs.. can I fudge this somehow?
Thanks for any and all pointers !!
Re: back o the worksheets...
<TR>
<TD WIDTH="148">
<CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="4"><B>King</b><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE><br>f<SUB>d</SUB><br>R<SUB>e</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ed</SUB><br>Q<SUB>md</SUB><br>Q<SUB>td</SUB><br>V<SUB>d</SUB><br>BL<br>L<SUB>vc</SUB><br>X<SUB>max</SUB><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE>
</CENTER>
</TD>
<TD>
<CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="4"><B>Rest of world</B><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE><br>f<SUB>s</SUB><br>R<SUB>e</SUB><br>Q<SUB>es</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ms</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ts</SUB><br>V<SUB>as</SUB><br>BL<br>L<SUB>vc</SUB><br>X<SUB>max</SUB><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE>
</CENTER>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
You should put some stuffing in those boxes to help get the ripple down.
dave
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="300">Jared said:
<TR>
<TD WIDTH="148">
<CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="4"><B>King</b><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE><br>f<SUB>d</SUB><br>R<SUB>e</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ed</SUB><br>Q<SUB>md</SUB><br>Q<SUB>td</SUB><br>V<SUB>d</SUB><br>BL<br>L<SUB>vc</SUB><br>X<SUB>max</SUB><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE>
</CENTER>
</TD>
<TD>
<CENTER>
<FONT SIZE="4"><B>Rest of world</B><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE><br>f<SUB>s</SUB><br>R<SUB>e</SUB><br>Q<SUB>es</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ms</SUB><br>Q<SUB>ts</SUB><br>V<SUB>as</SUB><br>BL<br>L<SUB>vc</SUB><br>X<SUB>max</SUB><br>
<HR SIZE="1" NOSHADE>
</CENTER>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
You should put some stuffing in those boxes to help get the ripple down.
dave
Hi Jared,
Looks like you are making progress and starting to understand how to use the MathCad worksheets.
Dave has provided the key to translating from my terminology to the traditional terminology used in speaker building. I use a "d" subscript and the rest of the world uses a "s" subscript. My crazy terminology dates back to my first set of notes on speaker design from 20+ yeasr ago. Unfortunatley I have stuck with my own subscipts and never invisioned people using my work on speaker design. My appologies for the confusion.
The TL Open End, TL Offset Driver, TL Sections, and maybe ML TQWT worksheets are the ones you want to work with. The TL Closed End is for a TL that has a closed reflecting terminus and I originally set it up to model the B&W Nautilus speakers. As far as guidelines on how to use these worksheets, my recommendation is to play with them changing one parameter at a time until you get a desirable response. There are many different design possibilities and no absolutely best design.
The curve definitions can be found in the plot titles. I usually plot two variables as stated in the title. The first variable is the solid red curve and the second is the blue dashed curve. In the plots you have provided, the solid redcurve is the total TL system respone and the dashed blue curve is the same driver mounted in an infinite baffle. The infinite baffle response is provided as a reference to show what the enclosure is doing for the design.
Hope that helps,
Looks like you are making progress and starting to understand how to use the MathCad worksheets.
Dave has provided the key to translating from my terminology to the traditional terminology used in speaker building. I use a "d" subscript and the rest of the world uses a "s" subscript. My crazy terminology dates back to my first set of notes on speaker design from 20+ yeasr ago. Unfortunatley I have stuck with my own subscipts and never invisioned people using my work on speaker design. My appologies for the confusion.
The TL Open End, TL Offset Driver, TL Sections, and maybe ML TQWT worksheets are the ones you want to work with. The TL Closed End is for a TL that has a closed reflecting terminus and I originally set it up to model the B&W Nautilus speakers. As far as guidelines on how to use these worksheets, my recommendation is to play with them changing one parameter at a time until you get a desirable response. There are many different design possibilities and no absolutely best design.
The curve definitions can be found in the plot titles. I usually plot two variables as stated in the title. The first variable is the solid red curve and the second is the blue dashed curve. In the plots you have provided, the solid redcurve is the total TL system respone and the dashed blue curve is the same driver mounted in an infinite baffle. The infinite baffle response is provided as a reference to show what the enclosure is doing for the design.
Hope that helps,
thanks very much for the reply. It is re-assuring to know I have all the corect driver specs entered. I feel like I am threadjacking, even if it is on topic, so Im going to limit myself to one more question.. If I do not add stuffing, and leave the design with the ripple, and low pass it at ~80 hz will th eripple cause any problems? wont it be at such a low magnitude that it does not afect anything??
Hi Jared,
I think that I have been asked that before. If I understand correctly, by leaving the line unstuffed you can get a big boost in the low frequency and then add a crossover (probably fairly steep) to roll off the response before the ripple becomes a problem. To be honest, I have never looked at doing that but I do not see any reason that it could not be made to work. If it does not work so well, you could always add some stuffing to tame any ripple problems in the crossover region.
Hope that helps,
I think that I have been asked that before. If I understand correctly, by leaving the line unstuffed you can get a big boost in the low frequency and then add a crossover (probably fairly steep) to roll off the response before the ripple becomes a problem. To be honest, I have never looked at doing that but I do not see any reason that it could not be made to work. If it does not work so well, you could always add some stuffing to tame any ripple problems in the crossover region.
Hope that helps,
- Status
- Not open for further replies.