(If this is a repeat post -- sorry -- weird stuff happening).
Anyway --
After going back and forth trying to decide what I want to build I decided I want a tower "style" (for cosmetic reasons) (something about 36 - 40 " tall) and a bass reflex enclosure rather than the Tline or anything elaborate.
One design that looks good is the Jordan JX92S in a BR cabinet, which according to Jordan's website has the dimensions I'm looking for.
BUT -- what else can anyone recommend?
Certainly, the Fostex drivers are something that I read about over and over and I sure would like to try them but they seem to prefer a smaller, sort of "golden ratio?" enclosure and that I don't want.
Also -- and this may sound crazy to some, but I have always enjoyed a touch of reflected sound in my speakers (listen to a lot of classical music).
A BR design with 2 drivers, one that fires toward the ceiling or rear is something I would LOVE to see.
Saw the Fostex 2 driver bipole but read some unflattering reviews of it.
Thanks kindly for any suggestions.
Anyway --
After going back and forth trying to decide what I want to build I decided I want a tower "style" (for cosmetic reasons) (something about 36 - 40 " tall) and a bass reflex enclosure rather than the Tline or anything elaborate.
One design that looks good is the Jordan JX92S in a BR cabinet, which according to Jordan's website has the dimensions I'm looking for.
BUT -- what else can anyone recommend?
Certainly, the Fostex drivers are something that I read about over and over and I sure would like to try them but they seem to prefer a smaller, sort of "golden ratio?" enclosure and that I don't want.
Also -- and this may sound crazy to some, but I have always enjoyed a touch of reflected sound in my speakers (listen to a lot of classical music).
A BR design with 2 drivers, one that fires toward the ceiling or rear is something I would LOVE to see.
Saw the Fostex 2 driver bipole but read some unflattering reviews of it.
Thanks kindly for any suggestions.
If you make a BR tall and skinny it inevitably becomes an ML-TL.
Have a look at the Castle microTower.
dave
dave
Have a look at the Castle microTower.
dave
dave
Hi jmar,
What are your efficiency requirements, or what is your amp like? Jordans and Fostex are very different, efficiency-wise.
Oh no, that's not true. Some Fostex go into elaborate horns, others go into tower-sized enclosures, etc. Actually, come to think of it, the Jordans go pretty well into small boxes (3-liter and 8-liter, as well as larger boxes).
There are many different designs that fit that description 🙂
What are your efficiency requirements, or what is your amp like? Jordans and Fostex are very different, efficiency-wise.
Oh no, that's not true. Some Fostex go into elaborate horns, others go into tower-sized enclosures, etc. Actually, come to think of it, the Jordans go pretty well into small boxes (3-liter and 8-liter, as well as larger boxes).
There are many different designs that fit that description 🙂
To throw something else into the mix:
Visaton - Lautsprecher und Zubehör, Loudspeakers and Accessories
Visaton - Lautsprecher und Zubehör, Loudspeakers and Accessories
This is EXACTLY what I'm looking for -- glad I asked the question. Tday today, so I'll have to come back and take a much closer look and print all this out.
I actually used to sell EPI speakers when I was younger, working in electronics retail and familiar with those microtowers.
I owned a pair of EPI 602's which were like a Bose901 (yuk) in appearance but sounded much better then the Bose.
Although the 602 reflected too much (and were rather "boomy), I have always liked the added dimension and sound stage of a speaker that had some reflected audio. (I know, purists would argue). BUT, that's the problem with speakers if you ask me.
When the image is so precise and phase coherent blah blah -- you are listening to SPEAKERS -- and fact is, the more precise this image, the more listener fatigue you have. (If you ask me).
It's like the great painters.
In my opinion, the impressionists are what it's all about -- no hard edges.
There is another speaker I ran across that is like this (Lowther 2.8 ambience?) -- is anyone familiar with these?
Also, what is the opinion on a rear firing vs top? Of course, if it's rear you would want the speakers away from the wall more. (I've also seen an angled top speaker).
I really want to do it right the first time and build the best sounding pair I can.
I do have a monomix subwoofer I may use as well.
I actually used to sell EPI speakers when I was younger, working in electronics retail and familiar with those microtowers.
I owned a pair of EPI 602's which were like a Bose901 (yuk) in appearance but sounded much better then the Bose.
Although the 602 reflected too much (and were rather "boomy), I have always liked the added dimension and sound stage of a speaker that had some reflected audio. (I know, purists would argue). BUT, that's the problem with speakers if you ask me.
When the image is so precise and phase coherent blah blah -- you are listening to SPEAKERS -- and fact is, the more precise this image, the more listener fatigue you have. (If you ask me).
It's like the great painters.
In my opinion, the impressionists are what it's all about -- no hard edges.
There is another speaker I ran across that is like this (Lowther 2.8 ambience?) -- is anyone familiar with these?
Also, what is the opinion on a rear firing vs top? Of course, if it's rear you would want the speakers away from the wall more. (I've also seen an angled top speaker).
I really want to do it right the first time and build the best sounding pair I can.
I do have a monomix subwoofer I may use as well.
Presentation of a bipole & something like the Microtower, with a forward & upward firing unit, is similar, but has some differences; certainly the former requires more space. Personally I like the latter configuration -it's partly my fault that the micros have that layout as an option. From what you say that you like in presentation, this semi-omni configuration should suit you quite well.
FWIW, if the Lowther 2.8 Ambience is the box I'm thinking of, I'd avoid it. For a start, it's not a Lowther design (not that Lowther's own are always especially distinguished), and isn't especially well optimised.
Edit -since you obviously like an ambient soundstage, one suggestion I do have is that you try a basic Hafler circuit. If you're not familiar with it, get yourself a couple of additional speakers (don't have to be large, or expensive), and stick them somewhere unobtrusive behind you, or to the side. Wire the positive of the right hand speaker to the right hand positive on the amp, and the positive of the left hand speaker to the left hand positive on the amp. Then wire the negative terminals of the speakers together. What then happens is the rears will reproduce the difference signal (i.e. anything that is not common to both channels). Result: instant, fairly subtle ambient surround sound, that's very effective if you like that sort of presentation. Worth trying with a spare pair of speakers for the sake of 5 minutes and a couple of lengths of bell wire.
FWIW, if the Lowther 2.8 Ambience is the box I'm thinking of, I'd avoid it. For a start, it's not a Lowther design (not that Lowther's own are always especially distinguished), and isn't especially well optimised.
Edit -since you obviously like an ambient soundstage, one suggestion I do have is that you try a basic Hafler circuit. If you're not familiar with it, get yourself a couple of additional speakers (don't have to be large, or expensive), and stick them somewhere unobtrusive behind you, or to the side. Wire the positive of the right hand speaker to the right hand positive on the amp, and the positive of the left hand speaker to the left hand positive on the amp. Then wire the negative terminals of the speakers together. What then happens is the rears will reproduce the difference signal (i.e. anything that is not common to both channels). Result: instant, fairly subtle ambient surround sound, that's very effective if you like that sort of presentation. Worth trying with a spare pair of speakers for the sake of 5 minutes and a couple of lengths of bell wire.
Last edited:
Don't be shy. It is mostly your fault 🙂
Being influenced by isobariks of the day just reinforced the idea when you 1st mentioned it.
dave
Indeed Scott, please whatever measure of credit whenever you can - I just love these things as an addition to my collection.
Do they possess all the nuance and finesse of the FonkenPrime/FE127En, or the dynamics and density of soundstage of Sachiko/FE166? Well, not entirely - but they're certainly lotsa fun packed into a compact footprint.
Provided you don't get all Krenov or Stickley with your joinery and finishing, could you start cutting material after breakfast Saturday, and be enjoying music after dinner that evening? definitely
Not if you put a partition part way down the column and convert it to a DCR (Double Chamber Reflex).
In my opinion, this is the main advantage of the DCR concept. For example, I face the usual SAF problems. But my wife dragged home from a salvage yard a pair of what appear to be art deco styled architectural columns, and said she'd be happy to put them in the lounge. They're square section, about 1.2 metres high, 40 litres volume, and solidly constructed from 19mm MDF. I'm currently working through possible combinations that will work in those constraints.
Don ,
you're inverting the concepts:Once you have decided to go with a DCR design ,setting F2 and F3,then you choose to make it tall and skinny by putting the two chambers in the same parallelepiped (piped ? ). The contrary wouldn't bring to the same conclusion.
A passive instead of the vent/mouth would bring you to the right conclusion-YESSS!
I'm not a big fan of double BR (ie double the issues of a BR), and i am a fan of ML-TLs.... neither is a BR.
dave
dave
No, I see DCR as a possible solution to the problem of a long enclosure.
Given: a long enclosure, dimensions dictated for reasons other than acoustic.
If the QW length happens to match the desired tuning point, no problem.
If not, then DCR can help.
I don't see how passive radiators will help? Can you explain?
Given: a long enclosure, dimensions dictated for reasons other than acoustic.
If the QW length happens to match the desired tuning point, no problem.
If not, then DCR can help.
I don't see how passive radiators will help? Can you explain?
Maybe...DCR don't like you , Dave !!!
I'm a fan of ML-TL too ...if I understand it correctly (Welcome to the dark side)
Passive radiators are surely a load at the end of a line and act as acoustic dampers as well as reinforcing the grave end . In tall enclosures ,you have to eliminate standing waves that birth depending on cabinet size and shape .Of course dividing the box in two parts cuts the problem.
I'm a fan of ML-TL too ...if I understand it correctly (Welcome to the dark side)
Passive radiators are surely a load at the end of a line and act as acoustic dampers as well as reinforcing the grave end . In tall enclosures ,you have to eliminate standing waves that birth depending on cabinet size and shape .Of course dividing the box in two parts cuts the problem.
Last edited:
Familiar with the Hafler "Dynaquad" circuit -- actually used it at one point with my PAT4 and Stereo 120. (dating myself).
I'm so glad I've run across this microtower design, going to get started on it soon.
The Castle? With CHR70's?
Also -- thought I read earlier, you guys were posting some "finalized" plans
soon?
I'm so glad I've run across this microtower design, going to get started on it soon.
The Castle? With CHR70's?
Also -- thought I read earlier, you guys were posting some "finalized" plans
soon?
or the EL70 paper coned cousin - having heard both drivers in several different enclosure designs, I happen to know which flavoring I prefer
AFAIK, the only revisions discussed were to extend the length of the vertically oriented holey brace that couples the drivers, and to clarify details for panel damping materials. I may have even seen an updated sketch by Dave that perhaps didn't get edited into the "published documents"
Ok -- Chris -- if it's worth the extra cash then I'll do the EL70, the money's not a problem.
I do like the appearance of those gray CHR70 as I intend to go "naked" but don't want to be a sissy.
?
I do like the appearance of those gray CHR70 as I intend to go "naked" but don't want to be a sissy.
?
Both are excellent drivers, I just happen to prefer the sound of paper cones to any metal driver I've yet heard. The fact that Mark Audio produces both the CHR70 and EL70 with the same degree of material and production quality controls was further reinforcement of this for me.
I'd be surprised if other folks didn't have different opinions on the matter.
You could always build for both, then you'd know for sure. 😀
Well, actually that's not an entirely practical suggestion, as the clearance for driver magnet portion of bracing is slightly different between the 2, so you'd need to build 2 pairs of boxes, and that's really not practical
or is it?
I'd be surprised if other folks didn't have different opinions on the matter.
You could always build for both, then you'd know for sure. 😀
Well, actually that's not an entirely practical suggestion, as the clearance for driver magnet portion of bracing is slightly different between the 2, so you'd need to build 2 pairs of boxes, and that's really not practical
or is it?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.