For me the screws were to aid with the alignment.gedlee said:
ok well that's mostly what I wanted to know. I wasn't sure how it compared in cost to good old wood for the baffle itself. I have no experience in casting parts or using this material in this way, but was impressed with the strength and dampening of some finished pieces I have of it. I can see it making a great enclosure.
Hello gedlee,
Thanks for contributing a lot of useful information on this site.
I'm interested in purchasing a pair of Nathans, primarily to listen to stereo music ( I wouldn't be using them for Home Theater, and don't have the space, budget, and electronics to incorporate the recommended subs).
What are your thoughts on porting the Nathans for LF extension? If that’s something that’s possible, would you be willing to recommend any necessary crossover modifications?
Thanks
Thanks for contributing a lot of useful information on this site.
I'm interested in purchasing a pair of Nathans, primarily to listen to stereo music ( I wouldn't be using them for Home Theater, and don't have the space, budget, and electronics to incorporate the recommended subs).
What are your thoughts on porting the Nathans for LF extension? If that’s something that’s possible, would you be willing to recommend any necessary crossover modifications?
Thanks
sba said:
sba,
The nathans as well as the whole summa line was designed around a complete system thought. With this in mind, multiple subwoofers placed around the room gives incredible bass. The porting of the nathans to gain a little bit of low end would be contradicting this goal.
This can sound expensive but Geddes has recommended a few 100$ units that would work quite well. This is one time in life where a quantity is better than quality.
I have a set of nathans with multiple subs and it is THE way to go.
sba said:
All that I can say here is that you are more than free to try such a thing, and I might even consider giving you the recommended port sizes, but I don't see that as yielding any benefit to the situation. If you can't afford to do bass, then don't do bass, but I suggest that you leave the Nathans as they are since they are right the way they are. In any case no crossover mods would be required.
300Z said:
Is this aimed at me? I didn't see the original post. What was the question? Crossover point of which product?
"All that I can say here is that you are more than free to try such a thing, and I might even consider giving you the recommended port sizes, but I don't see that as yielding any benefit to the situation."
It sure looks like there's a big benefit to me; the plots show the 10PS26 sealed and vented, both in 1 cu ft.
It sure looks like there's a big benefit to me; the plots show the 10PS26 sealed and vented, both in 1 cu ft.
Attachments
I guess if you don't use subs that would be a significant improvement. I didn't really know since I have never done it. I don't suppose you subtracted the volume of the port from the box volume. There is certainly no reason why ports couldn't be added to the enclosure. I might try this for those who don't want to opt for subs.noah katz said:
300Z said:
I don't usually look at the electrical aspects of the crossover, only the total acoustic response. The crossover point is at about 1500 Hz. The LP would be 2nd order and the HP would be (electrically) first order, but acoustically this ends up being more like third order. The waveguide "specs" are a 90 degree OS waveguide with foam plug, and a 1" throat. While I'm sure these details might interest some, its really the end result, i.e. the Polar FR that really matters no matter how you get there.
Power handling would be a conservative 100 watts with about a 94 dB sensitivity. This would give it about 104 dB MAX_SPL, which I also think is likely to be quite conservative. WIth four of them used as surrounds this would be ear splitting levels on par with the Abbey. As a stand alone speaker for stereo its acceptable, but would need some subs. A pair of these and a pair of subs would be a good choice for stereo.
Thank you for your response.gedlee said:
But I got one more question regarding the crossover... have you addressed the twin impedance peaks in the tweeter in the crossover?
Why is the power handling rated at 100watts?gedlee said:
A while back when I ran some calculations on these drivers (altho in a ported box) when high passed around 75hz these drivers could handle over 200w without exceeding x-max and is capable of 117dB continuous.
With a sensitivity of 94dB I assume there's no BSC?
Leo
300Z said:
Of course - thats obvious from the frequemcy plots isn't it?
300Z said:
Its the tweeter that limits the power handling not the woofer.
BSC is taken care of since the crossover is designed based on data measured in the actual box thats used so any BSC would automatically be accounted for.
gedlee said:
I listened to the Nathans with and without a sub. (A single small 8" "sub" that probably only really goes down to 50-60 Hz.)
The Nathans sounded good by themselves, but they were kind of "thin." Adding in just enough sub to fill in was very beneficial.
Ideally, people would use multiple subs as you have recommended. If they can't do that, one inexpensive sub is better than none IMO.
I'm just thinking that, as you mentioned, your speakers work very well as designed, so why mess with them? Adding a sub or two or even three is not very expensive and complicated for anyone who has built a pair of Nathans or Abbeys.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.