Hi, first time poster so thanks for all the useful info and expert advice on the forum. I'm building a small cabinet for a stand-alone, wifi/bluetooth home streaming music centre. Movable to any room in the house, compact, easy to use with good quality sound. The cabinet will be approx 600mm W x 200mm H x 300mm D (but can be varied to a limited extent) to house a Fosi MC 101 Class D amp, Wiim Mini streamer (aux out to aux in on the amp) and two small full-range drivers. Each driver will be in enclosed boxes at either end with the amp mounted through the baffle in the middle with Wiim behind, both in a separate central (vented) box. The cabinet ends will be kerfed to create a soft, rounded look which may have some acoustic benefits? Front baffle will be an Australian hardwood called Tasmanian blackwood (19mm) with the case in 15mm veneered ply. Rear ports. A mockup image is below.
I'd like to use Mark Audio drivers for this project and would like to ask which ones you would recommend? The driver units can be 5-7cm and ideally would be gold to match the amp and timber. Volume of each speaker cabinet can be 4-6 litres but I could stretch to 9 litres each by extending height and depth if justified in terms of improvement in sound.
In a prototype I used Dayton Audio PS95-8s in 3.7 litre boxes with a DA KAB amp which sounded good but lacked some bass. I understand bass will be limited in such a small system but am hoping MA drivers would offer some improvement at the low end. This is not a boom box, so it's not just about the bass, I would like to have good mid and upper range too. Most important is to get good, clear sound stage from two drivers close together in near field/small room listening setups for all types of music. Also where on the front baffle would you place the drivers - at the far ends next to the curve or further in towards the middle? Do you see any issues in matching MA drivers with the Fosi (one review on the MA site suggests MA drivers and Class D amps are not a good match)? Any issues achieving the required box volume by departing from the online MA speaker plans by increasing depth and decreasing the other dimensions?
I'd like to use Mark Audio drivers for this project and would like to ask which ones you would recommend? The driver units can be 5-7cm and ideally would be gold to match the amp and timber. Volume of each speaker cabinet can be 4-6 litres but I could stretch to 9 litres each by extending height and depth if justified in terms of improvement in sound.
In a prototype I used Dayton Audio PS95-8s in 3.7 litre boxes with a DA KAB amp which sounded good but lacked some bass. I understand bass will be limited in such a small system but am hoping MA drivers would offer some improvement at the low end. This is not a boom box, so it's not just about the bass, I would like to have good mid and upper range too. Most important is to get good, clear sound stage from two drivers close together in near field/small room listening setups for all types of music. Also where on the front baffle would you place the drivers - at the far ends next to the curve or further in towards the middle? Do you see any issues in matching MA drivers with the Fosi (one review on the MA site suggests MA drivers and Class D amps are not a good match)? Any issues achieving the required box volume by departing from the online MA speaker plans by increasing depth and decreasing the other dimensions?
Last edited by a moderator:
I have played various drivers with the SMSL A50 using the same TPA3116 x2 as the Fosi Audio MC101.
There is nothing wrong with MarkAudio and a Class D amp. In fact, it's so good.
CHN-50P is recommended for making compact integrated models.
I paired the phone (Bluetooth), SMSL A50 (using mobile battery, 20V, 5A), and CHN-50P and it sounded very good.
The box is a 4L double bass reflex.
There is nothing wrong with MarkAudio and a Class D amp. In fact, it's so good.
CHN-50P is recommended for making compact integrated models.
I paired the phone (Bluetooth), SMSL A50 (using mobile battery, 20V, 5A), and CHN-50P and it sounded very good.
The box is a 4L double bass reflex.
Attachments
I'll second that.
There maybe some useful tricks to that. A fellow DIYer here has a 3 speaker setup; I think the middle is mono, while left is L-R, R is R-L; that may take some doing electrically with the amp you've committed to. There's a whole thread in here on it.
Typically you need open, unobstructed space between the speakers to get soundstage with depth. The tricks are an illusion on top of the ordinary stereo illusion, which may prove to be satisfactory for this type of build.
I've got A5.3 in 4.4 liters tuned to 58Hz (with some dsp to fill out the low end) driven by an MA12070 based class D amp for desktop speakers. Phenomenonal sound with surprising bass. They won't bring down the house dB-wise, of course. But they're more than loud enough to fill my home office.
Thanks for the replies. I like the briefcase Dave! I'm amazed at what these drivers can do in such small spaces.
By coincidence the MA distributor in Australia (Darcher) has also suggested the 6M and has kindly simulated them for me in a 4L cabinet showing a flat response from 85Hz and -3db at 66Hz. That is plenty good enough. I don't plan to use DSP, just the bass and treble controls of the amp. Four litres is the sweet spot for this cabinet design since it seems to offer promising bass levels whilst keeping the overall cabinet size manageable. It also pushes the speakers to about half a metre apart for a small improvement in stereo separation (if placed at either end of the baffle, is that a good idea?). I'm after a balanced sound across the spectrum, so not bass heavy, but I would like my belly to wobble just a little bit when a kettle drum is played! If a similar bass response can be achieved in less than 4L then my belly is all ears!
Reassuring to hear that Class Ds are not a problem, the description of the 6M in various threads as "warm", "rich" and "like a glass of whisky" also appeal. The CHN-50P sound promising but unfortunately don't seem to come in gold (yes, looks matter in this one!). The 3-speaker design sounds interesting but doesn't fit the 'one box' brief.
My only concern with the cabinet design is that while the speaker boxes would achieve 4L they would differ significantly from the published designs in dimensions. Internal measurements for each box are currently coming out at 234mm wide x 104mm high x 250mm deep with 25/68mm rear ports (creating 4.1 litres after accounting for the curved ends and port), one curved wall and the rim of the drivers sitting very close to the top and bottom edges of the baffle to keep overall box height and length in proportion. Is this a problem? Any "must not do's" I should be aware of?
By coincidence the MA distributor in Australia (Darcher) has also suggested the 6M and has kindly simulated them for me in a 4L cabinet showing a flat response from 85Hz and -3db at 66Hz. That is plenty good enough. I don't plan to use DSP, just the bass and treble controls of the amp. Four litres is the sweet spot for this cabinet design since it seems to offer promising bass levels whilst keeping the overall cabinet size manageable. It also pushes the speakers to about half a metre apart for a small improvement in stereo separation (if placed at either end of the baffle, is that a good idea?). I'm after a balanced sound across the spectrum, so not bass heavy, but I would like my belly to wobble just a little bit when a kettle drum is played! If a similar bass response can be achieved in less than 4L then my belly is all ears!
Reassuring to hear that Class Ds are not a problem, the description of the 6M in various threads as "warm", "rich" and "like a glass of whisky" also appeal. The CHN-50P sound promising but unfortunately don't seem to come in gold (yes, looks matter in this one!). The 3-speaker design sounds interesting but doesn't fit the 'one box' brief.
My only concern with the cabinet design is that while the speaker boxes would achieve 4L they would differ significantly from the published designs in dimensions. Internal measurements for each box are currently coming out at 234mm wide x 104mm high x 250mm deep with 25/68mm rear ports (creating 4.1 litres after accounting for the curved ends and port), one curved wall and the rim of the drivers sitting very close to the top and bottom edges of the baffle to keep overall box height and length in proportion. Is this a problem? Any "must not do's" I should be aware of?
Sure it does - just move that thing in the middle out of the way. I'm quite lacking on experiential follow up to what I've read, so I cant vouch for the 3 speaker arrangement other than it seems to be pretty good idea for a console style system. You'd have to find and read the thread and convince yourself of its worthiness.
In a reflex, it is the volume, shape doesn’’t play into it until one dimension becomes significantly larger than any of the others.
The second generation Alpair 6s, like the A12pw, were underapprciated and sadly have gone away. A6.2m is sort of a sweet spot between the 3” A5 and the 4” A7.
My miniOnen alignment maxes out at 3.6 litres but also requires a slot vent with high R (we quit using plumbing pipe a long time ago). The alignment doesn’t go the lowest but is noted for its finesse and elegance as low as they go. Mine are in the universal A6.2 2.5 litre enclosure.
Should be noted that materials thickness contributes significantly to gross volume.
dave
The second generation Alpair 6s, like the A12pw, were underapprciated and sadly have gone away. A6.2m is sort of a sweet spot between the 3” A5 and the 4” A7.
My miniOnen alignment maxes out at 3.6 litres but also requires a slot vent with high R (we quit using plumbing pipe a long time ago). The alignment doesn’t go the lowest but is noted for its finesse and elegance as low as they go. Mine are in the universal A6.2 2.5 litre enclosure.
Should be noted that materials thickness contributes significantly to gross volume.
dave
I had a look at this 3-speaker thread:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-for-the-phantom-center-image-problem.393540/
Not sure if that's the one you mean, but it seems to be still in the experimental stage. I think I'll wait for a more resolved solution before considering that in a future project.
Dave, that's great info thank you. Where would the DIY speaker community be without you? From your comments it seems going below 4 litres with the A6 requires a slot vent, which wouldn't work here. So unless there's a rear-ported design below 4L, I think that's what I'll go with. Good to know that the different dimensions won't affect the outcome, and I'll make sure to keep the internal dimensions sufficient.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-for-the-phantom-center-image-problem.393540/
Not sure if that's the one you mean, but it seems to be still in the experimental stage. I think I'll wait for a more resolved solution before considering that in a future project.
Dave, that's great info thank you. Where would the DIY speaker community be without you? From your comments it seems going below 4 litres with the A6 requires a slot vent, which wouldn't work here. So unless there's a rear-ported design below 4L, I think that's what I'll go with. Good to know that the different dimensions won't affect the outcome, and I'll make sure to keep the internal dimensions sufficient.
Not exactly what you have described, but a compact system featuring wide-band drivers:
https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/portable-and-tabletop-speakers/isetta
It should be possible to accommodate MA drivers in a design concept like this too.
https://sites.google.com/site/undefinition/portable-and-tabletop-speakers/isetta
It should be possible to accommodate MA drivers in a design concept like this too.
Yes, thank you, I had seen Paul Carmody's Isetta design during my research for this project. I guess I'm trying to bring the Decca radiogram from the fifties and sixties up to date replacing the radio receiver and record player with just a streaming device and amp in one unit with integrated speakers. With the Isetta and its central woofer Paul seems more influenced by the boombox concept. Mine is a boom box for the lounge. There's a few companies doing the 'lounge streamer' concept such as Ruark (R410) and of course endless multi-room wireless speakers including Sonos, but I thought I'd have a go at creating a piece of audio 'furniture' for just one room in the home that would look and sound good. With the Alpair 6s I hope the sound is taken care of, I just need to work on the looks...
Appreciate everyone's help - you have a very supportive community here.
Appreciate everyone's help - you have a very supportive community here.
Woody99,
With reference to your first post, where you have mentioned that your target dimensions are 600mm x 300mm x 200 mm. With 15 mm ply for cabinet walls, that leaves approx 26 liters of internal volume. Understand that some of the internal volume will be reduced due to cabinet bracing and the space needed for the electronics, but should still leave you with 23-24 liters? May I ask why you are thinking of getting the drivers housed into 4+ liter boxes?
With 9-11 liters for each cabinet, you should be able to use a larger driver capable of more low frequency output vs the Alpair 6.2M. Only worry is that the 2 drivers still be quite close given the 600 mm width limitation...
With reference to your first post, where you have mentioned that your target dimensions are 600mm x 300mm x 200 mm. With 15 mm ply for cabinet walls, that leaves approx 26 liters of internal volume. Understand that some of the internal volume will be reduced due to cabinet bracing and the space needed for the electronics, but should still leave you with 23-24 liters? May I ask why you are thinking of getting the drivers housed into 4+ liter boxes?
With 9-11 liters for each cabinet, you should be able to use a larger driver capable of more low frequency output vs the Alpair 6.2M. Only worry is that the 2 drivers still be quite close given the 600 mm width limitation...
Last edited:
Great photos Dave of the radiograms. I'm hoping that the concept at least will come back in digital form so that we can enjoy our music in one place and still have something pleasant to look at when it's not in use. Better suited to our small living spaces too.
Good question Zman01 about console size. This project is about finding the sweet spot between console size and sound quality. I did some scale drawings of the 600x300x200 console but it looked rather bulky. When I found out that a good sound could come from the 6.2Ms in a 4L box it allowed me to reduce the overall size, currently at 658x134x250. Slightly wider to address the stereo separation issue but otherwise not as tall or deep. I'm still thinking about where along the console is the best spot for the drivers - at the far ends or futher in.
About 20% of the volume has to be sacrificed for the central electrics box (amp and streamer) and the curved ends means further volume reductions (I'm getting good at working out the volume of half a cylinder!). Did I get the balance right? Only time will tell. Larger drivers would have given better sound but a taller unit - an SUV rather than a sports car! The driver spacing is definitely an issue, but again I have to try this in the real work to see what this sounds like. I'm hoping the 6Ms will give a reasonable degree of separation despite being close together. If you think about lounge listening, most people are moving around the room doing other things while listening to music, so I guess it's more about giving a satisfactory ambience in the room rather than serious listening within the speaker triangle. Let's see...
Good question Zman01 about console size. This project is about finding the sweet spot between console size and sound quality. I did some scale drawings of the 600x300x200 console but it looked rather bulky. When I found out that a good sound could come from the 6.2Ms in a 4L box it allowed me to reduce the overall size, currently at 658x134x250. Slightly wider to address the stereo separation issue but otherwise not as tall or deep. I'm still thinking about where along the console is the best spot for the drivers - at the far ends or futher in.
About 20% of the volume has to be sacrificed for the central electrics box (amp and streamer) and the curved ends means further volume reductions (I'm getting good at working out the volume of half a cylinder!). Did I get the balance right? Only time will tell. Larger drivers would have given better sound but a taller unit - an SUV rather than a sports car! The driver spacing is definitely an issue, but again I have to try this in the real work to see what this sounds like. I'm hoping the 6Ms will give a reasonable degree of separation despite being close together. If you think about lounge listening, most people are moving around the room doing other things while listening to music, so I guess it's more about giving a satisfactory ambience in the room rather than serious listening within the speaker triangle. Let's see...
If I'm imagining this box sitting on a pedestal, perhaps not right up against a wall, you could make it a bipole for some of that ambience. Of course, whatever "ambience" means as a superlative. To me it means perceptibly bigger sound than you'd expect from the size of the device.
I embarked on a similar project in 2022 and after much deliberating landed on what is pictured below, with success.
This is Pluvia 11s in the Compact Monitor 0v8 enclosure back-to-back (610 x 225 x 185) with a simple TPA3116D2 board (has bluetooth too!). Darcher appears to still stock the P11s locally 🇦🇺 which are available in gold. Perhaps call Dan, his website is a mess.
There's other options that use smaller MA drivers but larger boxes, so... I'd honestly save yourself the hassle and just do what I did, unless you want to go much deeper in to the R&D for this exercise. If you want punch then this is the way to go. Avoid smaller.
Stereo separation is as good as you'll get given the size constraints and using FR driver's also has limitations depending on what genre you're in to. This is a form-factor and design goal that has compromise in it. Don't expect it to blow you away.
Tip: I also added some stuffing and eggshell foam the the rear panel which improved the tone markedly.
This is Pluvia 11s in the Compact Monitor 0v8 enclosure back-to-back (610 x 225 x 185) with a simple TPA3116D2 board (has bluetooth too!). Darcher appears to still stock the P11s locally 🇦🇺 which are available in gold. Perhaps call Dan, his website is a mess.
There's other options that use smaller MA drivers but larger boxes, so... I'd honestly save yourself the hassle and just do what I did, unless you want to go much deeper in to the R&D for this exercise. If you want punch then this is the way to go. Avoid smaller.
Stereo separation is as good as you'll get given the size constraints and using FR driver's also has limitations depending on what genre you're in to. This is a form-factor and design goal that has compromise in it. Don't expect it to blow you away.
Tip: I also added some stuffing and eggshell foam the the rear panel which improved the tone markedly.
Last edited: