FWIW: I haven't gone quite that small, but I have a pair of Slim Classic Golden Ratio dMar-Ken7.3 speakers, built from a Planet10 flatpack. I call them the "Skookums". In inches, they are 7 wide, 14.5 tall, and 10.5 deep. See post #29 in this thread for pics (and how they got their name). See also post #19 in this thread for some comments I made about them. The TL;DR version is: they are great.
Any thoughts on how the designs mentioned in this thread might compare to the CGR designs?
I know it's kind of an apples-to-oranges, given 3" versus 4" drivers, and Fostex versus Markaudio. But for someone who's only ever tasted an apple, how would you describe an orange?
Just looking for possible builds to do as gifts, where the Skookums might not be appropriate (e.g. cost or size).
The CGRs are all optimum volume (for our miniOnken style alignment), they are not restricted to 4" drivers.
The CGR for the Alpair 6.2m is 3.6 litre, i haven't done one yet, but the A6.2p could fit in one 5 litre. FF85wk uFonken could be reshaped into a CGR. Those are all smallish and for nominal 3: drivers.
There are also versions got larger drivers.
The CGRs came about as versions of the miniOnken that were easier to build than the full-on rectangular or trapezoidal miniOnken with the vents down either side of the front. We have a soft spot for phi, the golden number so we used it for the shape. They are all tuned the same. The vents are not as restricted as their more complex brethern, so they have a bit fuller, if less finessed bass response. Without the big bevels on the side they have a bit larger diffraction signature so the box cannot dissappear as well. That does not stop them from being very good.
As to being gifts, it would not be a hardship to be given any of these CGR or their brethern, and they cover a wide range of drivers.
dave
The CGR for the Alpair 6.2m is 3.6 litre, i haven't done one yet, but the A6.2p could fit in one 5 litre. FF85wk uFonken could be reshaped into a CGR. Those are all smallish and for nominal 3: drivers.
There are also versions got larger drivers.
The CGRs came about as versions of the miniOnken that were easier to build than the full-on rectangular or trapezoidal miniOnken with the vents down either side of the front. We have a soft spot for phi, the golden number so we used it for the shape. They are all tuned the same. The vents are not as restricted as their more complex brethern, so they have a bit fuller, if less finessed bass response. Without the big bevels on the side they have a bit larger diffraction signature so the box cannot dissappear as well. That does not stop them from being very good.
As to being gifts, it would not be a hardship to be given any of these CGR or their brethern, and they cover a wide range of drivers.
dave
This Lance design looks to be a great little computer desk speaker. I like that the design construction is relatively simple and that the finished speaker extracts some low-end extension from a 3" driver.
I understand the original lance design is for the FF85wk, but reportedly, the design is somewhat forgiving of other 3"drivers. What driver parameters are the more critical parameters if I were to take chance on trying an alternate? I am considering trying a highly recommended driver that I see, compared to the 85wk, has a bit higher QTS, but the FS and the cone area are very close (within 5%).
Pete
I understand the original lance design is for the FF85wk, but reportedly, the design is somewhat forgiving of other 3"drivers. What driver parameters are the more critical parameters if I were to take chance on trying an alternate? I am considering trying a highly recommended driver that I see, compared to the 85wk, has a bit higher QTS, but the FS and the cone area are very close (within 5%).
Pete
I think the Dayton RS100-4 may be close in specs to work. Slight 4dB bass overshoot at 80Hz, but stuffing will probably fix it.
If you tell me what the driver is, I'll look into it. It will likely need changing somewhat: I am not a fan of stuffing drivers into boxes designed for something else & hoping for the best. Cone area is more or less irrelevant for QW boxes; Q is rather more important. That's why I've designed quite a few of them (not all released -watch this space). As far as 3in widebanders go though, I've heard most of what's out there & the 85 is the pick of the bunch. Doesn't have quite as much on the bottom end as some, but midband & HF are exceptional.
Last edited:
LGK 1.0
FS 121 Hz
RE 6 ohms
Qms 3.22
Qts .656
Qes .828
Xmax 2.5 mm
L (1k) .75 mH
Rms .328 kg/second
Vas 1.81 Liters
Mms 1.66 grams
Cms 1.244 mm/newt
Bl 2.9 Tesla-M
SPL 87.3 db
Area 32 sq cm
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
FS 121 Hz
RE 6 ohms
Qms 3.22
Qts .656
Qes .828
Xmax 2.5 mm
L (1k) .75 mH
Rms .328 kg/second
Vas 1.81 Liters
Mms 1.66 grams
Cms 1.244 mm/newt
Bl 2.9 Tesla-M
SPL 87.3 db
Area 32 sq cm
If you mean FR88 / 89s, sure "OK", maybe in the strictest sense- but aside from cost, any particular reason to avoid the FF85WK?
Last year or so, I built a series of POC test enclosures for the FR88EX, and I personally preferred the performance of Fostex, or Alpair 6 hands down over the Fountek , and FWIW, both of the former were easier to install.
Both Founteks have very small margin on mounting flange and are very shallow in overall depth, so whether you use thinner material for baffle, or rebate and chamfer for clearance, the mounting holes are very close to cut-out (3.19 - 2.87)/2 = .16", and if you want to flush mount screws, which ours didn't come with, are countersunk for #4
Last year or so, I built a series of POC test enclosures for the FR88EX, and I personally preferred the performance of Fostex, or Alpair 6 hands down over the Fountek , and FWIW, both of the former were easier to install.
Both Founteks have very small margin on mounting flange and are very shallow in overall depth, so whether you use thinner material for baffle, or rebate and chamfer for clearance, the mounting holes are very close to cut-out (3.19 - 2.87)/2 = .16", and if you want to flush mount screws, which ours didn't come with, are countersunk for #4
I concur, while decent, FR88ex (we went thru a couple dozen) is a tier down in quality from FF85wk/Alpair 6.2. AFAIC the push up in price due to Neo cost pushed them out of serious contention.
Of you want a TL for them the folded (or straight) ML-TL Scott designed work well. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/210106-fountek-five-fr88ex.html
dave
A friend and I build a small pair of bass reflex cabinets for a set of FR88ex's a year ago. As Dave said, the A6 (have not heard the FF85wk) would be a step up. Good little unit no less, but I found the top end to be a tad harsh to my ears unfiltered.
My friend is considering breaking the cabinets down and re-designing as an active 2 way with some filter work up top and bass support down low.
My friend is considering breaking the cabinets down and re-designing as an active 2 way with some filter work up top and bass support down low.
Original A6? Current gen is better IMO. If you like a "relaxed" top the paper version.
dave