What's the attraction?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What it takes to tame this puppy. Yea, it sounds a lot smoother too.
This is a 1M, 3.5ms gate, so ignore all LF.

nicely done.

After experiencing the Fostex FE127 I give data sheets for potential new driver choices a careful look over at the freq. response. It didn't take more than 10 seconds to realize that the new Fostex drivers are just as bad as the old one's but very encouraging to see how you've fixed it.
 
Just materials. Choose what works for the application. There is no magic in MDF, PB, ply, exotic woods or unobtanium.

I agree.
Having said that I have been busy designing new materials using carbon nanotubes which have some very interesting properties.
Since no one else knows how to make it I suppose you could classify that as unobtanium. Haha
Seriously considering making speaker cones
 
Last edited:
I read a review of a full ranger in Stereophile.

The mfr had taken the lowther driver ideals and made their own driver.

What was interesting was the cabinet, made by a piano maker of some history Schimmel, had particleboard components in it.

Apparently there are some panels in a folded horn that while structural dont contribute to the sound.

Other panels are tonewoods or ply but i found the use of "particleboard" interesting.
I once made identical TLS cabinets in the late '70s, one pair Medite MDF, the other pair 700kg/m chipboard (US particleboard?). The chip pair sounded cleaner, but that was then, so MDF and chip may be different now.
 
Here is a thought, use the FF85s I've been hanging onto and put them in another mdf/cork "W" box.

Could use Fostex plans/dimensions (but with angles and side ports) - Example 2 at bottom of page.

http://www.madisound.com/pdf/fostexcabs/85kencrev.pdf


FWIW, note that the drawings Doug linked to are for the previous FF85K ( "miniSigma" 😉), and that the T/S parameters for the WK series are revised enough that the "factory recommended" BR enclosure is 1 liter smaller at 3.5, and tuned to 92Hz with a 40 x 100mm (round) port.

As to the question of "no magic" or lack of (implied) discernible sonic improvement of materials such as quality plywoods vs MDF, let me again add my croaky voice to the chorus of dissenters to that position. Over the past 10yrs I've on several occasions built identical designed enclosures from MDF, Baltic Birch / Appleply and laminated block core bamboo plywood. To my ears there's no question that of the material types listed, MDF comes dead last in terms of sonics. Considering that almost any complement of decent drivers for a "full-range" or multi-way system can cost several times the cost differential between MDF and BB, and even discounting my labor to $1/hr I'll opt for the quality materials every time.
 
Here is a thought, use the FF85s I've been hanging onto and put them in another mdf/cork "W" box.

Could use Fostex plans/dimensions (but with angles and side ports) - Example 2 at bottom of page.

Another case of a factory Fostex box that should be avoided. And i simmed the recommended FF85wk box (and posted in a different thread), it is not quite as cruel as the factory BR for the FE126En, but it is still a joke.

dave
 
FWIW, note that the drawings Doug linked to are for the previous FF85K ( "miniSigma" 😉), and that the T/S parameters for the WK series are revised enough that the "factory recommended" BR enclosure is 1 liter smaller at 3.5, and tuned to 92Hz with a 40 x 100mm (round) port.

As to the question of "no magic" or lack of (implied) discernible sonic improvement of materials such as quality plywoods vs MDF, let me again add my croaky voice to the chorus of dissenters to that position. Over the past 10yrs I've on several occasions built identical designed enclosures from MDF, Baltic Birch / Appleply and laminated block core bamboo plywood. To my ears there's no question that of the material types listed, MDF comes dead last in terms of sonics. Considering that almost any complement of decent drivers for a "full-range" or multi-way system can cost several times the cost differential between MDF and BB, and even discounting my labor to $1/hr I'll opt for the quality materials every time.


Ah! I never said there are not differences. By far there are. Just nothing is magic. Its materials science and engineering. I use different materials for different applications. I find 3/4 MDF quite useful for small speakers and mid-ranges. I use cheap fir plywood and ceramic plates for subs, I am playing with foam for tweeters. Different requirements, different materials. No magic. I have never seen bamboo plywood. No idea about it's properties. What I know about bamboo plywood. I would love to get some. Of course, construction and design matter too. I have been quite amazed at the changes as I have progressed from "eased" edges through to 3/5 roundover. I may need a shaper to swing a bigger bit, but I would love to try inch and a half.
 
Darn...I don't know what driver I have now, other than 85. I'll look for the specs that came with. They could be 5 years old :scratch:

Now Now, mdf is not dead last, maybe cheap chip particle board....that said these compact "W" boxes sound very nice. Also it's a new game when you use 1" thick material.

(The cork liner cost more than the mdf)

Need to mention the ploy here....the 125 needs a lot of damping IMO, however the large amounts of fill were snuffing out the bass.

The "W" box with the cork really soaks up the sound (amazing) I did add cove pieces and extra back strip (a lot of cork). I used very springy poly fill, 3oz it does not block the air flow.

btw, the "W" box sounds pretty good with the knuckle test, may add dowel under the woofer, may add shorty dowel at center of flare port(s).



FWIW, note that the drawings Doug linked to are for the previous FF85K ( "miniSigma" 😉), and that the T/S parameters for the WK series are revised enough that the "factory recommended" BR enclosure is 1 liter smaller at 3.5, and tuned to 92Hz with a 40 x 100mm (round) port.

As to the question of "no magic" or lack of (implied) discernible sonic improvement of materials such as quality plywoods vs MDF, let me again add my croaky voice to the chorus of dissenters to that position. Over the past 10yrs I've on several occasions built identical designed enclosures from MDF, Baltic Birch / Appleply and laminated block core bamboo plywood. To my ears there's no question that of the material types listed, MDF comes dead last in terms of sonics. Considering that almost any complement of decent drivers for a "full-range" or multi-way system can cost several times the cost differential between MDF and BB, and even discounting my labor to $1/hr I'll opt for the quality materials every time.
 
Darn...I don't know what driver I have now, other than 85. I'll look for the specs that came with. They could be 5 years old :scratch:

Do they have the UDR surround borrowed from the sigma series?

Now Now, mdf is not dead last, maybe cheap chip particle board....that said these compact "W" boxes sound very nice. Also it's a new game when you use 1" thick material.

Cheap particle board is often better sounding then MDF. 1" MDF has the stiffness of ~ 15mm BB, and is cable of storing WAY more energy (that oozes our as a really low level time-smeared yuk, wiping out any hop of great DDR).

dave
 
I don't think I'll ever build a box with a tube or square again, the sides ports are fasinating.

I did find my paper work, it's the older version driver. Also have the folded horn plans that I once saw and said phooey/never.......but that was the old me.
 
Build uFonken.

239019d1315420505-minionken-fonken-picture-gallery-ufonken-macassarebony.jpg


dave
 
Status
Not open for further replies.