If you haven't read it already...
http://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/t-speakers_e.html
I read most of this guy's other output. He seems to have his feet on the ground. He gives the drivers and boxes a fair shake.
w
http://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/t-speakers_e.html
I read most of this guy's other output. He seems to have his feet on the ground. He gives the drivers and boxes a fair shake.
w
Sigh. Do you have a problem with me or something? If you have, how about discussing via PM? I couldn't care tuppence if you don't agree with me, but you might want to try presenting a balanced argument, rather than making sarcastic posts of no value whatsoever to anyone.
In re the TNT review, I read it shortly after it appeared. IIRC, Bob Brines & I had pretty much the same reaction at the time. Of course the box is an MLTL (the HxWxD dimensions & laws of physics dictate it). It's just not a very well optimised one, as the very rough response plots on TNT clearly show. Given that it's supposed to be able to accept another driver if you feel so disposed, that hardly comes as a surprise. I've heard several of these CSA cabinets over the past couple of years, with both Lowthers & AN drivers & a variety of amplification. Unfortunately, they were mediocre at best acoustically, with a poor balance, weak LF extension, and some unpleasent midrange leakage & resonant issues, all of which conforms to what a MathCAD sim shows. A better optimised cabinet gets much more out of them. I know, because I've done it. I'd really like to say they were great enclosures, & extract the optimal performance out of the drive units, but I'd be lying. The drivers, which are genuinely decent, deserve better.
In re the TNT review, I read it shortly after it appeared. IIRC, Bob Brines & I had pretty much the same reaction at the time. Of course the box is an MLTL (the HxWxD dimensions & laws of physics dictate it). It's just not a very well optimised one, as the very rough response plots on TNT clearly show. Given that it's supposed to be able to accept another driver if you feel so disposed, that hardly comes as a surprise. I've heard several of these CSA cabinets over the past couple of years, with both Lowthers & AN drivers & a variety of amplification. Unfortunately, they were mediocre at best acoustically, with a poor balance, weak LF extension, and some unpleasent midrange leakage & resonant issues, all of which conforms to what a MathCAD sim shows. A better optimised cabinet gets much more out of them. I know, because I've done it. I'd really like to say they were great enclosures, & extract the optimal performance out of the drive units, but I'd be lying. The drivers, which are genuinely decent, deserve better.
Scottmoose said:
Hi,
I am using MK's worksheet and want to build a MLTL cabinet for the usher 8945, I cannot seem to a get the FR flat like what you did for the AN driver. I have the MK worksheet. Would be able to suggest a starting point for for the correct cabinet size? The detail TS spec is below:
Specifications: *Power handling: 80 watts RMS/90 watts max *SD=150cmcm" *Le: .46 mH *Impedance: 8 ohms *Re: 5.8 ohms *Frequency range: 35-8,000 Hz *Fs: 35 Hz *SPL: 87 dB 2.83V/1m *Vas:34l *Qms: 1.96 *Qes: .366 *Qts: .308 *Xmax: 6.0mm , bl=8.37 n/a,
thanks
Only if you are incapable of separating the two. You may wish to note that strictly speaking, Scott's comment was not ad hominem... Also, I think Scott's "nasty habit" comment is merely a common turn of phrase in the UK (and some of the colonies), and he meant nothing malicious. Perhaps you may wish to lend Scott the same benefit of doubt you afford Mr Dicks?
Personally, I prefer to discuss matters rather than debate or argue them; others feel differently, needing something other than contributing and learning through an exchange of concepts, information, etc. Comments like 'yeah, whatever' could hardly be considered beneficial to anyone... Please, keep it cool (in a good way)
Raymond
Scottmoose said:
Alright, well to be honest I want to stay away from a BSC circuit, so that rules out an 8" in a MLTL, but will a 10" be fine then in an MTLT enclosure such as the one you described? I plan on eventually building a BLH with a 206E in it either way, but I feel I have a lot of research to do before choosing a design for that project. I am also going to be building my own tube amp, nothing special just a K-12 kit. The room is small, maybe 20' by 25' with carpeted floors, but cabinet size is not an issue (I have no care for WAF, yet).
ttan98 said:
Surely. Q is a bit low to be ideal for MLTL loading. Doesn't mean you can't use them, just that it takes a bit more work. Therein lies the limitation of MathCAD of course: it's one of the best modelling programmes on the planet, but it can't design a box for you.
Anyway, see what you think of this: 48in x 9in x 7in (HxWxD -you can reverse the second two if you want), Zdriver 17in, vent 2in up from the internal base, 3in diameter x 5in long. Stuff 0.485lbs ft^3 from the top 29in down. Alternatively, line the top, back & one side-wall with 1in acoustic fiberglass down to the bottom. This is the QW equavalent of an EBS alignment which will match well to room-gain in practice.
In practice, I'd suggest at least a couple of window braces. 3/4in baltic birch ply would be my choice for the build material & doubling the front & top panel would reap rewards. If you want to use MDF, you'll need to get the thickness up to at least 1 1/4in to match the stiffness of the ply -easiest is to laminate 1/2in to 3/4in. A BSC circuit will be needed unless you're planning to use them up against a rear-wall or in corners.
Hope that helps?
Scott
Attachments
despotic931 said:
Crikey. We'd call that quite a large room in the UK. Anway, that MLTL above was in fact for the regular stamped frame AN Super10, not the new Cast Frame model.
Hmm. You might have the wrong idea about baffle step here. It's nothing to do with the driver per se. Baffle step loss is related to the width of the front baffle. Basically, when wavelengths become longer than the baffle is wide, the speaker, which above this frequency has been radiating into 2pi space, makes a transition into 4pi radiation space. Which is a fancy way of saying that above the step-frequency, the output of the driver has been relatively directional, and firing toward the listener, while below it, output becomes omni-directional. The net result in practice is that below the step-frequency, you get an apparant loss of sound pressure levels (i.e. volume) because the energy is being radiated all around the room, rather than being directed forward, at the listener. A BSC circuit attenuates everything above the baffle-step frequency by a set amount (usually ~3db), which rebalances the sound.
You can freqently get away without a circuit by positioning the cabinets close to a wall (I'm not using one on my own FE167E MLTLs for just this reason), or making them extremely wide: 30in is about right -this pushes the step-frequency downward far enough to be countered by room-gain, without needing any correction. A trifle large for most people of course.
FWIW, I suspect you'd find the AN10in units perfectly acceptable in an MLTL without a circuit if you position them right. And there are other possible cabinets which won't require a circuit, if you don't like the idea of them.
Scottmoose said:
Crikey. We'd call that quite a large room in the UK. Anway, that MLTL above was in fact for the regular stamped frame AN Super10, not the new Cast Frame model.
Hmm. You might have the wrong idea about baffle step here. It's nothing to do with the driver per se. Baffle step loss is related to the width of the front baffle. Basically, when wavelengths become longer than the baffle is wide, the speaker, which above this frequency has been radiating into 2pi space, makes a transition into 4pi radiation space. Which is a fancy way of saying that above the step-frequency, the output of the driver has been relatively directional, and firing toward the listener, while below it, output becomes omni-directional. The net result in practice is that below the step-frequency, you get an apparant loss of sound pressure levels (i.e. volume) because the energy is being radiated all around the room, rather than being directed forward, at the listener. A BSC circuit attenuates everything above the baffle-step frequency by a set amount (usually ~3db), which rebalances the sound.
You can freqently get away without a circuit by positioning the cabinets close to a wall (I'm not using one on my own FE167E MLTLs for just this reason), or making them extremely wide: 30in is about right -this pushes the step-frequency downward far enough to be countered by room-gain, without needing any correction. A trifle large for most people of course.
The room is a shared family room/entertainment room, and is very cluttered with furniture etc. I suppose it is very large actually, especially for a listening room, but in my head I compare it to my basement room at my previous house where my music equipment had a larger space (maybe 800 sq. feet) all to its self. As you can imagine I miss it .
I guess i do need some educating on BSC circuits. Just a couple quick questions. Do they color the sound at all, and do they lower the efficiency of a driver? Can you point me in the direction of a recommended article where I can read up on them a bit? (I'm not against a little self education)
One other question, I run a Mac, any good free software for drawing up speaker plans?
Thanks
-Justin
gurley123 said:
That sounds like a pretty big room to me here in the US also. I'm a little envious.
What is the top end like on these 10"? What little common audio sense I have would suggest it is quite beamy. What are some of the experiences of the owners around here?
I thought about that too, maybe ENABLE?
Larger drivers will beam more than a smaller one. I gather the AN10in isn't too bad in this regard, though I haven't heard these particular units, so I can only pass on the reports of owners.
A badly designed BSC circuit will mess things up, so its important to get the values right. Also, it's an annoying fact that passive components are not all created equal. For example, a poor quality inductor will have a fairly high resistance, and this will increase the effective Qe of the driver beyond what you're expecting. And so on. I'm not saying go out and buy Audio Note Silver capacitors or something daft like that (for the price of one of those things, you could build a pair of First Watt F4 monoblocks for pity's sake), but do make sure the components are of a decent standard, and of the correct value for your application.
A BSC circuit will reduce driver efficiency, but that's a price worth paying to get a better balanced response. Also, most FR units with reasonable motor-power have a rising response, beyond what you can practically lift the LF up to, so it also helps compensate for that. If you want a good guide to the subject, then I'd suggest you have a read of these:
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/tech/index.html
http://www.quarter-wave.com/General/BSC_Sizing.pdf
A badly designed BSC circuit will mess things up, so its important to get the values right. Also, it's an annoying fact that passive components are not all created equal. For example, a poor quality inductor will have a fairly high resistance, and this will increase the effective Qe of the driver beyond what you're expecting. And so on. I'm not saying go out and buy Audio Note Silver capacitors or something daft like that (for the price of one of those things, you could build a pair of First Watt F4 monoblocks for pity's sake), but do make sure the components are of a decent standard, and of the correct value for your application.
A BSC circuit will reduce driver efficiency, but that's a price worth paying to get a better balanced response. Also, most FR units with reasonable motor-power have a rising response, beyond what you can practically lift the LF up to, so it also helps compensate for that. If you want a good guide to the subject, then I'd suggest you have a read of these:
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/tech/index.html
http://www.quarter-wave.com/General/BSC_Sizing.pdf
wakibaki said:
Ordered my drives a few days ago. Spoke to DD, cool guy! He says he manufactures/designs his drivers with 1950s concepts. Can't wait to hear them. Hate to state the obvious but digital to back to analog, solid state to tubes, multi-speaker to fullrange, hmmmmm....
BTW, I like the company name. One of my favorite quotations. "Commonsense is the least common of the senses." -Voltaire.
True enough. FR units generally haven't moved on a great deal (in terms of the technology applied) since the 1950s, which were themselves just refinements on a theme which can be traced back to the 1930s; Bell Labs, Lowther-Voigt etc. They're very much a traditional type of loudspeaker -no bad thing.
IIRC, Voltaire was also responsible for the [in]famous 'God is not on the side of the big batallions, but with the best shots' remark. A philosopher with common sense? Unusual.
IIRC, Voltaire was also responsible for the [in]famous 'God is not on the side of the big batallions, but with the best shots' remark. A philosopher with common sense? Unusual.
gurley123,
I have the AN Super Cast 10" in a 2.8 MKII Ambience enclosure as shown in the photograph in my post earlier in this thread.
I wanted to build the Ambience to improve the sound while I was casually listening from various positions. With my first set of AN Super 10" in the 2.8 Series I enclosure, the sound was so good when sitting in sweet spot, but lost a lot of it's charm when I was not sitting in the sweet spot. The high end would go away.
The Ambience has really improved the sound of the speakers when not sitting in the sweet spot. The regular 8" on top helps to make up for the lost high end and re-enforces the bass.
In my room that has 18' ceilings, I have plenty of bass.
I'm very happy with them.
Allen...
I have the AN Super Cast 10" in a 2.8 MKII Ambience enclosure as shown in the photograph in my post earlier in this thread.
I wanted to build the Ambience to improve the sound while I was casually listening from various positions. With my first set of AN Super 10" in the 2.8 Series I enclosure, the sound was so good when sitting in sweet spot, but lost a lot of it's charm when I was not sitting in the sweet spot. The high end would go away.
The Ambience has really improved the sound of the speakers when not sitting in the sweet spot. The regular 8" on top helps to make up for the lost high end and re-enforces the bass.
In my room that has 18' ceilings, I have plenty of bass.
I'm very happy with them.
Allen...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.