If you want to be real picky, yes. Softer walls will have a higher dampening effect, while harder and stiffer walls will have a reverbing effect. Though, on small speakers, I don't think you'll notice anything. There's still something like Lining that you can use to make them dampened slightly more. There's also a point at which when your enclosure is hard enough it just doesn't make sense to add more layers because there's just no positive effect of it. There's a strong negative effect with too much wood called 'Empty Wallet Syndrome'.
For subwoofers, I believe it's even less of importance. All it needs to be is rigid and stiff so the bass doesn't resonate the box (Unless it's a tline and designed to do so.)
That's where bracing and corner-pieces come in to play.
Cheers,
Anna
For subwoofers, I believe it's even less of importance. All it needs to be is rigid and stiff so the bass doesn't resonate the box (Unless it's a tline and designed to do so.)
That's where bracing and corner-pieces come in to play.
Cheers,
Anna
Last edited:
Look at member Speaker Dave's posts.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/search.php?searchid=15208687&pp=25
By the way, I am sorry that Speaker Dave has not written here since a long time.
His informations about loudspeakers are really first class.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/search.php?searchid=15208687&pp=25
By the way, I am sorry that Speaker Dave has not written here since a long time.
His informations about loudspeakers are really first class.
To answer your initial question: Yes, they can at times.
This topic is something of "a black art" and repays reading widely in the area of resonances but if you are looking at multiple layers then it would be a very good chance in investigate Constrained Layer Damping. That has a number of benefits. While in the general area of multiple/composit panels have you thought about sand filled walls? (Gilbert Briggs, early Wharfedale etc) But I suggest you read and look out for Damping (the "Q" factor) and become aware of some of the counter intuitive results people have found in listening tests at different frequencies.....e.g. how some very LOW "Q" panels, while theoretically favorable, are audibly inferior to a panel with higher "Q" on occasions. The BBC techniques, using thin panels, are also worth following up. The B&W Matrix design is a good model and if you have spare wood they are a challenge, audibly good and fun...
#4 scottjoplin; TRUE. (please give my regards to Newport) .
Cheers, Jonathan
This topic is something of "a black art" and repays reading widely in the area of resonances but if you are looking at multiple layers then it would be a very good chance in investigate Constrained Layer Damping. That has a number of benefits. While in the general area of multiple/composit panels have you thought about sand filled walls? (Gilbert Briggs, early Wharfedale etc) But I suggest you read and look out for Damping (the "Q" factor) and become aware of some of the counter intuitive results people have found in listening tests at different frequencies.....e.g. how some very LOW "Q" panels, while theoretically favorable, are audibly inferior to a panel with higher "Q" on occasions. The BBC techniques, using thin panels, are also worth following up. The B&W Matrix design is a good model and if you have spare wood they are a challenge, audibly good and fun...
#4 scottjoplin; TRUE. (please give my regards to Newport) .
Cheers, Jonathan
Last edited:
"Slipped disk syndrome" might be another problem. I built MLTLs out of 25mm MDF. I haven't weighed them but they feel somewhere in the 20kg range. (84x27x31.5cm). Then I added the drivers. 
I've seen an article regarding panel thickness and bracing in subwoofers. No real chance of me finding it again but the author professed surprise that going to 1.5" MDF was measurably better than bracing a thinner panel.
Nope, I can't find it.
J.
I've seen an article regarding panel thickness and bracing in subwoofers. No real chance of me finding it again but the author professed surprise that going to 1.5" MDF was measurably better than bracing a thinner panel.
Nope, I can't find it.
J.
How's the finances Lutjanus? You up for building two (or more) and letting us know the results of a comparison test.
Btw if you chase up panels/box construction threads here at diyaudio it won't be long before you will find post that are quite critical of MDF for a couple of reasons.
(a) apparently there health issues with the dust and
(b) there seems to be a widespread consensus that MDF sounds inferior to other materials especially plywood. It is noticeable that there is agreement on this point that MDF "sucks the life out of the music" and comments along those lines.....
Good luck in the noble art of DIY speakers.
I am not sure if there are support groups for addicts but be warned.......it is addictive ha ha.
Cheers Jonathan
Btw if you chase up panels/box construction threads here at diyaudio it won't be long before you will find post that are quite critical of MDF for a couple of reasons.
(a) apparently there health issues with the dust and
(b) there seems to be a widespread consensus that MDF sounds inferior to other materials especially plywood. It is noticeable that there is agreement on this point that MDF "sucks the life out of the music" and comments along those lines.....
Good luck in the noble art of DIY speakers.
I am not sure if there are support groups for addicts but be warned.......it is addictive ha ha.
Cheers Jonathan
Jonathan, you raise a good point about the health issues associated with MDF. I am aware of the resins and glues used and what they contain.
I have also read many opinions on how the MDF can sometimes suck the life out of speakers.
I actually prefer plywood for my enclosures, but I already have the MDF on hand.
Building two speakers with differing wall thicknesses is definitely and option and I could use my basic speaker measurement (holm impulse/rew & ECM microphone) to display the differences.
Last edited:
Acoustically? ... no.
It might create other problems , such as excessive weight or size, but that´s something else.
In fact, there´s people who built their enclosures out of concrete, go figure.
In fact you could find or build a cave on a mountain side, close its mouth with bricks, concrete, rocks or thick wood, and mount your speaker there.
You will be fine, unless Muhammad is nearby.
*Flamesuit on*
I'm going to stick my neck out and go against all generally accepted rules of thumb. When I built my last pair of speakers I focused on well established laws of physics instead of "known hifi how-to-do". My woofer cabinets are much smaller than they "should" be and the walls are downright flimsy compared to the tanks you see out there. It still worked out great!
I use electronics to compensate for the size, the walls are thin sandwiched plywood, the cabinet dimensions are chosen to minimize standing waves, the woofer placement is chosen to use in-room acoustics, internal bracing is designed to minimize vibrations and so on.
So, I have 15" woofers in nice tidy little boxes that blend in with the furniture and the bass stretches down to 25-30Hz or so. Neither my speakers nor my amps are even breaking a sweat when it's loud enough for me to want to leave the room.
So, why am I raving about this? I'm not trying to suggest that my choices are in any way superior to other methods of construction.
Dare to go your own way, read up on your physics and focus on what you want! I focused on my needs and chose my design accordingly, so can you. And when you're done you know that the speakers are really your own design are done the way you want them. There are more than one way to skin a cat...
I'm going to stick my neck out and go against all generally accepted rules of thumb. When I built my last pair of speakers I focused on well established laws of physics instead of "known hifi how-to-do". My woofer cabinets are much smaller than they "should" be and the walls are downright flimsy compared to the tanks you see out there. It still worked out great!
I use electronics to compensate for the size, the walls are thin sandwiched plywood, the cabinet dimensions are chosen to minimize standing waves, the woofer placement is chosen to use in-room acoustics, internal bracing is designed to minimize vibrations and so on.
So, I have 15" woofers in nice tidy little boxes that blend in with the furniture and the bass stretches down to 25-30Hz or so. Neither my speakers nor my amps are even breaking a sweat when it's loud enough for me to want to leave the room.
So, why am I raving about this? I'm not trying to suggest that my choices are in any way superior to other methods of construction.
Dare to go your own way, read up on your physics and focus on what you want! I focused on my needs and chose my design accordingly, so can you. And when you're done you know that the speakers are really your own design are done the way you want them. There are more than one way to skin a cat...
True, brace it properly and you can 'skin' even a large cab with thin paneling and get it stiff enough for high power output, though its bracing complexity will remind one of a '60 Birdcage Maserati's frame : https://thejudge13.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/the-birdcage.png
GM
: https://thejudge13.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/the-birdcage.pngGM
I have a similar question regarding the thickness of the enclosure, and was hoping for some insight.
First off, I do NOT consider myself an audiophile. While I appreciate a high sound quality, I am using cheap, low-powered components. This is more an exercise in woodwork for me, and my budget prohibits much else.
Long story short, I am using a the components of a pair of $15 bluetooth speakers (with surprising quality for being so cheap) for the build, because it's what I have on hand. I also have another speaker that I have parted out as well. The only info I have about them is that I have a pair of 3" 4ohm/5watt drivers, a pair of 3" 3ohm/3watt, and a pair of 2" 4ohm/3watt. All were originally powered by 3.7vdc battery packs.
I have a bit of 3/4" MDF lying around, but I was wanting to use Baltic birch plywood because it's what I'm familiar with.
Is 18mm ply overkill for such a project? Should I go thinner? Am I overthinking this?
First off, I do NOT consider myself an audiophile. While I appreciate a high sound quality, I am using cheap, low-powered components. This is more an exercise in woodwork for me, and my budget prohibits much else.
Long story short, I am using a the components of a pair of $15 bluetooth speakers (with surprising quality for being so cheap) for the build, because it's what I have on hand. I also have another speaker that I have parted out as well. The only info I have about them is that I have a pair of 3" 4ohm/5watt drivers, a pair of 3" 3ohm/3watt, and a pair of 2" 4ohm/3watt. All were originally powered by 3.7vdc battery packs.
I have a bit of 3/4" MDF lying around, but I was wanting to use Baltic birch plywood because it's what I'm familiar with.
Is 18mm ply overkill for such a project? Should I go thinner? Am I overthinking this?
The 18 BB is probably overkill in terms of the structural integrity required for such a small system - 12mm would more than suffice.
A critical factor with very small full range drivers is they generally have very shallow mounting depths that thicker materials can create a resonant chamber at the rear side of the through hole. I alway chamfer them with a 45dg bevel as deeply as the material and location of screw mounting holes will allow.
A critical factor with very small full range drivers is they generally have very shallow mounting depths that thicker materials can create a resonant chamber at the rear side of the through hole. I alway chamfer them with a 45dg bevel as deeply as the material and location of screw mounting holes will allow.
So if I understand you correctly, I need to make sure the magnet is fully inside of the enclosure.
If this is right, would I be correct to extrapolate that the height of the cone (without magnet) would be an ideal thickness for the mounting face? This obviously would be impractical for larger drivers, but is this a decent rule of thumb for small drivers?
The main problem with too-thick is you blow all your profit.
Small DIY work, that is not an issue.
The cabinet is bigger than it needs to be. I have some 5" thick wood slabs, which would be astonishingly big (and heavy!) for a 3" cone speaker box.
As chrisb says, the cone needs LOTS of clearance to flap/chuff as designed. For 3" speakers, I would be 1/4" panel for at least an inch back from the speaker. A bevel may be almost as good, but complicates mounting screws; I'd screw the driver to thin ply and mount that on a bigger hole on your lovely thick stuff.
Small DIY work, that is not an issue.
The cabinet is bigger than it needs to be. I have some 5" thick wood slabs, which would be astonishingly big (and heavy!) for a 3" cone speaker box.
As chrisb says, the cone needs LOTS of clearance to flap/chuff as designed. For 3" speakers, I would be 1/4" panel for at least an inch back from the speaker. A bevel may be almost as good, but complicates mounting screws; I'd screw the driver to thin ply and mount that on a bigger hole on your lovely thick stuff.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.