MJL21193 said:
Your Titebond link confirms what I said before, yellow glue is aliphatic resin. 😉
marce said:
You kill me marce. 🙂
Scottmoose said:
Yes, the thick curtains most likely would make a positive difference, but casting about for some suitable acoustic treatment, I drew a blank.
Unless you've violated point one in set one (good design) plywood or MDF makes no difference.
If the driver basket is thin enough and large enough, there might be a small difference, but you have violated point 2 in set one (good drivers).
No crossover means one driver covers entire audio range, this violates end point in both sets (good sound).
MJL21193 said:
You tell 'em John. Far too long have we had to put up with all these single driver types cluttering up diyAudio. If it isn't at least a three way then they have no chance! 😀
pinkmouse said:
Aliphatic resin is added to increase tack and bond strength, it's still mainly PVA. I didn't say you were completely wrong Al. 🙂
MJL21193 said:
Got it in one (or six)! And, any one of the six being 'not good' can cause the whole lot to be 'not good'.
I disagree, in principle, with your idea that 'no crossover' is bad (in all cases, at least). I haven't heard many single driver speakers that produce good sound for all musics for all tastes, but I have heard a couple that work really well... So, in some cases, I think 'good crossover' = 'no crossover'. For multiple driver speakers, however, this is not true IMO.
MJL21193 said:
Good design has to take into consideration the materials being used, and i can do a better design using BB plywood than i can MDF (and not for lack of trying)
dave
Cloth Ears said:
Crossovers are evil... but if you want to have a truly full-range speaker you can't live without them.
Active is typically better than passive (althou a single cap on a synergistic tweeter can be the winner at the top).
If you can't enjoy the music listening to just the midrange driver, then i figure it is not worth-my-while pursuing it.
dave
buggsson said:
Hello - have a look at the paper mentioned in post 32, it explains the mass loading method and what it achieves. 9mm ply is used and the research showed that using 18mm didn't improve things - they just had to use twice as much mass loading to damped the walls. Tricky blighter, science.
Harbeth continue to use this approach. Now, what we need is someone to build a fullrange driver cabinet using this approach.
Placing a crossover in the middle of the telephone band (I don't care how good it is), like 99% of multiway designs, is not a clever idea. That's what I call bad design. XO's should be placed in regions where our hearing is less sensitive & where's were less likely to hear the transition from one driver to another. However, we don't want to get into an XO / no XO discussion here as it's not the point of the thread.
As Dave said, good design should also account for the material. Re 'unless you've violated point one ply v MDF makes no difference' -rubbish. Sorry, there's no polite way of putting that. (it's meant in the spirit & no animosity... axe... pass me my axe... 😉) You have one dense, but structurally weak material, against a lighter stronger one, with completely different resonant behaviour, even when both are appropiately braced & damped to suit the design goals, amd you expect the sound to be identical? Would that life worked that way.
As Dave said, good design should also account for the material. Re 'unless you've violated point one ply v MDF makes no difference' -rubbish. Sorry, there's no polite way of putting that. (it's meant in the spirit & no animosity... axe... pass me my axe... 😉) You have one dense, but structurally weak material, against a lighter stronger one, with completely different resonant behaviour, even when both are appropiately braced & damped to suit the design goals, amd you expect the sound to be identical? Would that life worked that way.
Scottmoose said:
Excuses for building a fullrange speaker:
1/ I can't be bothered with driver matching and crossover optimization because I can hear the transition from woofer to midrange to tweeter!
2/ Crossovers are evil, Man.
3/ I'm using less of the planet's resources, just doing my part for the environment.
4/ I'm poor/cheap.
A true fullranger maintains an elite attitude to defend his position, raining derision on the rest of us for not agreeing with him.
A concession to your point of view is that fullrange is now probably the dominant speaker type for music, as so many of these "home theater in a box" sets have been sold.
Now, 99% of the population gets the benefit of fullrange.
Spectacular.
Scottmoose said:
Hi Scott,
In my experience (obviously less than yours, since I'm a relative toddler on this forum, as I have only been here since March/07, and my life didn't exist before that), life does work that way. The differences that you refer to are so small, 99% of the population could not hear the difference. The other 1% are members of this forum, and routinely lie to themselves (and others) about how acute their hearing (and good taste) is.
MJL21193 said:
Says who? Both sides can use that comment about those who don't favour their favoured method of musical reproduction.
MJL21193 said:
Most of those little HT in a box are vile. And that's putting in mildly. I doubt you'd get many people disagreeing. 🙂 What's 'my point of view' BTW?
No excuses needed. Plenty of reasons though.
1) I have in the past. But why use one if you don't need to? Why make something more complicated than it has to be. And even with a good XO done by someone who knows what they're doing, you can frequently hear the transition.
2) They're an additional pain the backside that can be done without through careful design.
3) Never heard that one before. Complete nonsense, but best not let the marketing types hear you or they'll get in on the act... 😉
4) Some cost more than multiways.
So far I was able to stand about 1 1/2 pages of the argueing about which is best and what type of glue to use. My God! Doesn't anyone pull out the test equipment and see whats what anymore?
A calibrated mic, a plotter, an analyzer, pink noise, and warble generator if you please. One can easily tell one heck of a lot about the porting, construction, ringing, and so forth.
MDF is fine if you want to take the extra effort to brace the enclosure to end up with a dead box. The same is true of BB plywood. You build, you test, you modify, you check porting if needed and you sit back with a cold one and enjoy the fruits of your labor.
It all boils doen to personal preference here. You build what suits your budget and your fancy. You build what will satisfy the usage you have in mind. Either will work fine........in my humble opinion.
A calibrated mic, a plotter, an analyzer, pink noise, and warble generator if you please. One can easily tell one heck of a lot about the porting, construction, ringing, and so forth.
MDF is fine if you want to take the extra effort to brace the enclosure to end up with a dead box. The same is true of BB plywood. You build, you test, you modify, you check porting if needed and you sit back with a cold one and enjoy the fruits of your labor.
It all boils doen to personal preference here. You build what suits your budget and your fancy. You build what will satisfy the usage you have in mind. Either will work fine........in my humble opinion.
Agreed (with the caveat that again, it depends on if you're actually designing a dead box or not). Wish I could afford to take the kind of measurements I'd like to, but the open maw of my PhD has swallowed almost everything.
BTW, if beer is the beverage of choice, can I put in my recommendation for Black Sheep Ale, if you can get hold of it. Hales from the depths of Yorkshire. Best served just below room temperature to my taste buds, though some prefer it just on, or even chilled. 🙂 Best to sample all three really... 😉
BTW, if beer is the beverage of choice, can I put in my recommendation for Black Sheep Ale, if you can get hold of it. Hales from the depths of Yorkshire. Best served just below room temperature to my taste buds, though some prefer it just on, or even chilled. 🙂 Best to sample all three really... 😉
burnedfingers said:
Hi burned,
If you had of read a bit more of this thread, you would have came to a reply where I posted this link:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=98834&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=14
This is testing that I performed (though not very sophisticated) on three different materials.
Testing, is pretty much a waste of time here, as the results will be panned as either inconclusive or lacking in fine resolution.
The best is to entertain yourself with the heady banter that results from opposing points of view.
Scottmoose said:
No, dead serious. My numbers might be wrong - more like 99.999% of the population couldn't hear a difference.
Remember, we are talking about the material that the box is made from.
MDF is the only material that is widely used, but lowly regarded. It is continually picked on, like the fat kid in the school yard.
You (and Dave) have it that if you decide to use MDF, you are wasting your time, the results will be completely compromised. Better to do nothing, rather than use MDF.
That's just not true.
Yours (and Daves) opinions are highly regarded here. You should qualify such statements about the poor quality of boxes built with MDF as those of your own point of view, and not based in fact.
MJL21193 said:
I've been assuming you were writing with a degree of humour John, possibly as a devil's advocate but that last charming generalised statement suggests to me that this is not the case. I've been posting on the optimistic basis that that was indeed what you were doing, and I've deliberately kept mine humourous, even holding off on the highly offensive 'liars' remark earlier, on that basis. Wish I hadn't now. So I'll mention very plainly that I don't relish remarks of that sort, made in that fashion, and nor do a lot of other people here.
You write as if you know exactly what the favoured design approach of every person here is. You are wrong. You do not. You patronisingly imply that you and a select few here are the only people interested in measurements (& by extension, can design a loudspeaker enclosure). Also incorrect. As you might have noticed from my own interest in measurements generally, my use of MathCad to model designs, and my citing of Youngs Modulus etc etc. I suppose that doesn't count, nor does the interest of anyone else in such things?
You have done a fine job over the past couple of pages of suggesting that people who like FR / WR drivers are blinkered, and then proceed to rubbish anyone who doesn't happen to agree with your own take on things (such as remarks to the effect that FR / WR drivers can't give 'good sound', whatever that is). Which appears rather self-contradictory. All 'heady banter' of course with your judicial self far above it. But as you appear to have no real interest in cabinets for FR / WR drivers, I wonder exactly why you're here?
Scottmoose said:
Now, now, I've got you all riled up.🙂
No, I didn't imply any such thing, and really, I don't give a hoot about measurements. I only care how it sounds.
My interest in measurements comes from blanket statements about the inferiority of MDF as a building material. If it is so inferior, it should be measured and quantified.
I'm just like most here, still learning. I haven't made up my mind about what's the best speaker alignment or the best material.
I have voiced opposition to only one thing here, that's using solid wood for speakers.
As I've said before, I'm a professional carpenter, not a professional speaker builder/designer.
As for my being here, I usually don't involve myself in the fullrange discussion, as I don't have any interest in that right now (that may change in the future, as I'm a flexible individual). The topic was MDF though. I do have interest in any discussion of the pros and cons of using MDF.
Aha. Fair dos. Sorry if I misinterpreted your intentions John -might I suggest a little more use of the smilies for humour etc? (I'm just as bad sometimes). This is one of the problems of forums compared to, say, talking to someone -there's no inflection etc. which helps interpret things. 🙁 Far more positives than negatives of course WRT forums. 🙂
FWIW, I believe MDF is viable if it's used correctly. 3/4in as-is doesn't work especially well, but building up the mass with layers or adding concrete board a la Bob Brines works. Personally I prefer to push vibration modes up rather than down, as IMO the less energy stored in the enclosure the better, but whatever works best for the individual.
I believe you're generally right re solid wood for cabinets, at least for the vast majority of people. TC & Scott, and a few others can do it, with superb quality materials & great experience, but the rest of us would likely have more problems than anything else, at least for major panels. Combinations with other materials might be interesting -Terry's first TQWT used alder for the front, ply sides & particleboard for the rear IIRC -he liked tuning the sound via the cabinet as well as the actual design; possibly more so. As ever YMMV. Not something I can do.
If I had the space & money, I'd be running a good FR driver wide-range, preferably in a front-horn with twin supporting woofers (Tom Danley style tapped horn would be about right) and horn-loaded supertweeters. That's basically my general take on audio -have a wide-band driver across our most sensitive hearing regions, and support at the extremes with dedicated drivers where necessary. For some music, with the emphasis on the midband, an FR driver alone can be enough -I've yet to hear a multiway of the usual type anyway that can match my 167 based MLTLs on, say, Loreena McKennitt recordings. :)
FWIW, I believe MDF is viable if it's used correctly. 3/4in as-is doesn't work especially well, but building up the mass with layers or adding concrete board a la Bob Brines works. Personally I prefer to push vibration modes up rather than down, as IMO the less energy stored in the enclosure the better, but whatever works best for the individual.
I believe you're generally right re solid wood for cabinets, at least for the vast majority of people. TC & Scott, and a few others can do it, with superb quality materials & great experience, but the rest of us would likely have more problems than anything else, at least for major panels. Combinations with other materials might be interesting -Terry's first TQWT used alder for the front, ply sides & particleboard for the rear IIRC -he liked tuning the sound via the cabinet as well as the actual design; possibly more so. As ever YMMV. Not something I can do.
If I had the space & money, I'd be running a good FR driver wide-range, preferably in a front-horn with twin supporting woofers (Tom Danley style tapped horn would be about right) and horn-loaded supertweeters. That's basically my general take on audio -have a wide-band driver across our most sensitive hearing regions, and support at the extremes with dedicated drivers where necessary. For some music, with the emphasis on the midband, an FR driver alone can be enough -I've yet to hear a multiway of the usual type anyway that can match my 167 based MLTLs on, say, Loreena McKennitt recordings. :)
- Status
- Not open for further replies.