Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Contemplating the Silburys
Contemplating the Silburys
Contemplating the Silburys Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th February 2019, 10:12 PM   #1
nbqr is offline nbqr  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Sweden
Default Contemplating the Silburys

Hi, I've just joined the site! I would appreciate some input on cabinet designs.

On a whim, I recently bought an unused pair of Alpair 10m, 3rd generation, and am contemplating which design to build.

A couple of years ago I by chance heard a pair of Quali-fi speakers using one of the smallest Mark Audio drivers. I was pretty gobsmacked by the sound of those tiny drivers and so when a pair of 10m's showed up on the second hand I grabbed them. (No retailers carry them here in Sweden.) I absolutely love the simplicity of a single driver design with no crossover.

By far the most intriguing enclosure design I've seen is the Silbury. I'm no bass junkie but too little bass kills any speaker.

A simpler, cheaper, and smaller alternative would be the Pensil. I'm on the fence on which of them to build.

Some points in favour of the Silbury are the relatively small footprint for such a large speaker, the fact that the three sides of a speaker juuust fit on one sheet of 2440mm x 1220mm raw material (I think?), and the presumed higher value should I decide to sell them in the future. The only real downside that I can see is that they are not fun to move.

The points in favour of the Pensils is the simplicity and lower material cost. WAF is not a factor since I have no W.

I'd appreciate input, particularly in terms of sound!

A thought also struck me: would a half Silbury work? I. e. only building the lower half of the speaker.

Thanks!
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2019, 02:42 AM   #2
zman01 is offline zman01  Bangladesh
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dhaka
Contemplating the Silburys
Quote:
Originally Posted by nbqr View Post
By far the most intriguing enclosure design I've seen is the Silbury. I'm no bass junkie but too little bass kills any speaker.



A simpler, cheaper, and smaller alternative would be the Pensil. I'm on the fence on which of them to build.
As an alternative, there is the Frugel-Horn XL or FH-XL too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nbqr View Post

A thought also struck me: would a half Silbury work? I. e. only building the lower half of the speaker.
Again, if you are inclined towards a horn with rear loading, then the FH-XL is an option.

I have not heard the Silbury, but having listened to other Scott Lindgren designs for wide-band (full-range) drivers, suspect that they would be pretty good. And they would look grand in your room.

Btw, how big is your listening space?
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2019, 10:37 AM   #3
nbqr is offline nbqr  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by zman01 View Post
And they would look grand in your room.

Oh yes they would
My listening room is ... undefined. I currently live in a 32 square meter, one-room apartment which is largely one space (apart from the toilet.) But I'll be moving some time later this year, no idea where to really.

The thing that puts me off the FH XL is the larger depth, I don't know the exact figure but I think I've read that it is greater than 50 cm, whereas the Silbury is 40 cm.

Actually, a hifi shop a few hours away has the Quali-fi Wagner in store, I've seen them but not listened. They are big front-firing horns, based on the 12p I think, that were (just realized this) co-developed with Scott. I should listen to them!
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2019, 12:27 PM   #4
Scottmoose is offline Scottmoose  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Guilty as charged. Somewhat different design criteria & goals involved however, so they don't sound quite the same.

You can't cut Silbury in half I'm afraid; it's a complete speaker; the acoustical load and dimensions are functional. Sorry.
__________________
"'That'll do", comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' James May -The Reassembler
www.wodendesign.com Community sites www.frugal-horn.com http://frugal-phile.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 05:45 PM   #5
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
While I’ve not heard the Silburys, I can relate my experience with A10.3 in the Pensil and FHXL - something I’ve posted several times before. If you have the floor space required, the XLs will deliver a more enveloping spread of soundstage and “fuller” bass than the Pensils. Indeed, I’d go so far as to extend that postulation to all three sizes of FrugelHorns vs floorstanding MLTL, etc variants I’ve heard with numerous different full range drivers.
That said, as one who has long adapted to the domestic constraints of smaller enclosure footprints, the Pensils are far from a compromise.
__________________
Technology honors no Hippocratic oath
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 06:36 PM   #6
nbqr is offline nbqr  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Sweden
Thank you for your input. Actually, the Silburys and Pensils have nearly identical footprints, which is a big reason why I like them. Chris, is there something that the Pensils do better than the horns? And Scott, would you mind expanding a little on the design objectives?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 07:06 PM   #7
planet10 is online now planet10  Canada
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Contemplating the Silburys
Quote:
Originally Posted by nbqr View Post
Some points in favour of the Silbury are the relatively small footprint for such a large speaker, the fact that the three sides of a speaker juuust fit on one sheet of 2440mm x 1220mm raw material (I think?)=
The 18mm cut plan for Silbury shows 3 sheets needed, with well over a half sheet left.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 07:16 PM   #8
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Dr Lindgren may have his own observations/ technical comments, but at least for me, the only thing a Pensil family design “does better” than the appropriately sized Frugel Horn for any given driver is take up a smaller footprint. That remains the singular reason I don’t have a FH in either of my two systems.
In addition to their DxW area, his rear mouthed horns and taller Olson style manifold designs (Maeshowe, Silbury, Avebury, or their Fostex siblings) have the requirement for a minimal clear distance to rear wall that the Pensils, Poplar MLTL and numerous other front vented enclosures do not.
__________________
Technology honors no Hippocratic oath
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 08:54 PM   #9
Scottmoose is offline Scottmoose  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
A bit of a YMMV case. Optimally damped the pensils are a very flat / TL style impedance load, which is useful in some circumstances. And while they're acoustically large for a vented alignment, they do take up a bit less space. Rear termini shouldn't need all that much space to the front wall / corner since boundary loading is part of the expansion, though they do need some, & this will vary depending on room construction &c., so as you say, they do (or can) score on that front also.
__________________
"'That'll do", comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' James May -The Reassembler
www.wodendesign.com Community sites www.frugal-horn.com http://frugal-phile.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2019, 10:50 PM   #10
jimbro is offline jimbro  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: somewhere in Texas
Correct me if I'm wrong guys, but I believe the fhxl's need corners and the silburys don't, if that's an issue.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Contemplating the SilburysHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Contemplating speaker building Raccoon1400 Multi-Way 18 28th February 2014 11:05 PM
Contemplating a budget MTM project using full/extended range speakers goldorak Full Range 17 27th February 2014 05:40 PM
Contemplating First Full Range Build. Suggestions? Xaborus Full Range 44 4th October 2013 08:12 PM
Contemplating the Saburo- opinions please strider75 Full Range 7 29th April 2008 10:24 PM
Contemplating This Fostex Fe127 Project JimOfOakCreek Full Range 18 20th March 2008 03:13 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:16 PM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2020 diyAudio
Wiki