I agree with the first statement for rooms both large and small. Because of flat panel video displays, the trend is toward entertainment walls instead of entertainment rooms. I like this trend. Small extended range drivers mounted on the wall with bass augmentation is a good way to make the audio as "flat" as the video.
I would not, however, be so certain that mounting a loudspeaker in a wall or against a wall necessarily limits imaging. Reproduction of the "source" image (recording) is a function of the loudspeaker's transient coherence and the absence of vibrational modes producing conflicting and confounding imaging cues. There is nothing inherent in wall mounting that will reduce the transient coherence or produce other imaging cues. When the proper care is taken, wall mounting is not a problem for either accuracy or imaging. This is yet another example of incomplete understanding and myth belief.
On to other matters....I have already provided information on how to modify this driver and make it as accurate as any four-inch driver. Within that modification primer is the information on the exact location of the cone problem. For now, I believe that is enough information. As a guess is a hypothesis and a hypothesis is the beginning of experimentation, I see no problem with others guessing and experimenting. Maybe you can come up with a solution better than mine. If you do not want to do that, then I don't know how you will find more accurate sound than what is provided by the glue ring modification.
Peter, How sensitive is your design to Fs? The 1052's resonance is in the lower 60s, a bit lower than the lower limit of your design. Now, here is a design warning. Parts Express lists driver T/S characteristics different than Tang Bands. I would suggest using the Tang Band numbers in this instance. A Tang Band information sheet is included on page two of this thread.
I stated earlier that I would post more test results later. These include low frequency response graphs.
Lastly, I am often silenced by others ambiguous word choices and descriptors. For example,
Does this refer to some absolute scale of reproduction or just the qualities of the sound? Jimmy Page of Led Zepplin used overdriven tube amplifiers to achieve a quality of sound that was unique and appealing. It was not, however, accurate or undistorted. I am sure the ScanSpeak 8546-9900 has its own quality of sound, but it is no more accurate than Jimmy Page's guitar sound. It is not transiently coherent and the combination suffers from a number of severe vibrational modes that will add its own sound to whatever it is reproducing. If you like those qualities of sound, you will not find them in a more accurate driver.
Beyond this last paragraph I shall be silent now and in the future. This is not a "lived space" I have any desire to share or even visit for extremely short periods of time.
Mark
Sorry Mark for being ambigous. I am even MORE sorry for offendig you in anyway. What I meant to say is that my existing reference if a pair of home made speakers using Scan Speak 8546 and 9900.
I find that these drivers are very good. it took me some months of expermentation and listening tests (using listeners who would not be partial to what components I am using) to make this speaker sing.
I conducted a number of listening sessions using as many speakers and amplifiers (most of them commercial) as i could lay my hands on. None of these listening tests were using traditional measuring techniques. Instead we listened to a wide variety of music. From Rock to Jazz to Baroque to Classical. These listening sessions were quite long.
What we did notice that when we moved the speaker (Maggie SMGa, B&W 801, Theil CS 3.6, Sonus Faber Concerto, etc...) out into the room by 3-6 feet the imaging improved. Why I am not here to judge. It might be because a gerater ammount of direct sound was reaching us as compared to reflections. IT could be for other reasons. It couldbe for a combination of reasons.
These observations were the basis of my statements.
If however after this honest appology you still choose to remain silent I can only say that we both will be loosers. we because we will be deprived of your expriments and opinions and you becuase you might be deprived of some of the same from us.
Forums like this are a win-win situation for all participants. Occasionally someone like me makes a stupid statement. I dont believe the rest of the members of the forum need be "punished" for that.
We are all operating under various conditions in more counties than i know the names of across every time zone on earth (a few of us even visit from other planets
) there is bound to be some miscommuncation. I applogise again for the same.
I find that these drivers are very good. it took me some months of expermentation and listening tests (using listeners who would not be partial to what components I am using) to make this speaker sing.
I conducted a number of listening sessions using as many speakers and amplifiers (most of them commercial) as i could lay my hands on. None of these listening tests were using traditional measuring techniques. Instead we listened to a wide variety of music. From Rock to Jazz to Baroque to Classical. These listening sessions were quite long.
What we did notice that when we moved the speaker (Maggie SMGa, B&W 801, Theil CS 3.6, Sonus Faber Concerto, etc...) out into the room by 3-6 feet the imaging improved. Why I am not here to judge. It might be because a gerater ammount of direct sound was reaching us as compared to reflections. IT could be for other reasons. It couldbe for a combination of reasons.
These observations were the basis of my statements.
If however after this honest appology you still choose to remain silent I can only say that we both will be loosers. we because we will be deprived of your expriments and opinions and you becuase you might be deprived of some of the same from us.
Forums like this are a win-win situation for all participants. Occasionally someone like me makes a stupid statement. I dont believe the rest of the members of the forum need be "punished" for that.
We are all operating under various conditions in more counties than i know the names of across every time zone on earth (a few of us even visit from other planets
) there is bound to be some miscommuncation. I applogise again for the same.I am just posting some updates and revisions to the modifications. First, please do not be afraid to try the glue ring plus equalizer modification because another modification exists. I have included a frequency response graph of the worst-case response to this modification using the GemTac glue. Narrow notches in frequency response at 8.5 kHz are not particularly noticeable or offensive. Most modifications using the equalizer and glue ring will perform significantly better than the one shown here.
Second, there is a second section added to the equalizer. I guess you could call this the anti BSC circuit. I advise using the revised circuit and not attempting BSC. I have included both one and two meter response graphs. While linear in format (equal data density), the low frequency cut-off for these tests is 150 Hz.
Third, I have included a four-box test of low frequency performance. While it is possible to change the acoustic output between 60 and 180 Hz, in all boxes the low frequency roll-off begins at 95 Hz. F3, when compared to the highest bass output is about 72 Hz regardless of box design. I hypothesize that this is a limitation of the three-inch cone in this advertised four-inch driver. I have measured the same phenomena with other four-inch drivers and believe that it will be consistent across all available four-inch drivers with sub 100 Hz Fs.
I advise keeping internal box dimensions at least 6.75 inches wide and tall and 6.75 inches deep. I would go no smaller than these dimensions. With the revised prefilter/equalizer circuit, the driver performs well in this small cube. The associated upper register bass rise is helpful when listening full-range, and is even helpful when augmenting with a woofer. When using the .16 cubic foot box, use the revised prefilter/equalizer. When using larger boxes, vented or sealed, change the 15-ohm resistor of mod one to 18 ohms, but keep the small capacitor at .56 microfarad. When using the .16 cubic foot box, use the 18-ohm resistor and increase the .56-microfarad to 1 microfarad as shown in the schematic.
All audible octaves are important. The octave between 40 and 80 Hz is no less important than any other octave. While I have and can listen to this driver full-range, I would prefer to augment it with a woofer or sub woofer. Hearing and feeling the music in that 40 to 80 Hz range increases my listening enjoyment. I will use passive speaker level crossovers as low as 300 Hz. It is too expensive and too difficult to use speaker level passive crossovers lower than 300 Hz. For this application, a bi-amp setup is the only practical way to achieve the crossover.
When using the .16 cubic foot box, introduce an electrical drive F3 of 150 Hz, producing an acoustic F3 of 100 Hz and cross to a woofer at 100 Hz. If you go second order on the high pass and fourth order on the low pass, you can drive the 1052SA to its thermal power ratings while not exceeding claimed Xmax. With one driver per channel and an “average” sensitivity of 88 db after modification and equalization, you can produce 104 db levels at one meter holding to RMS ratings, and 101 db at two meters holding to music or peak ratings.
Last, but not least. This DIY stuff is supposed to be fun. Be willing to play with it. For example, I wanted to box this driver in something that looked different. I built a pair of different looking boxes. They turned out rather ugly and must be an acquired taste if it is possible to acquire such a taste. I am not sad that I built these boxes. The next pair will be better and I have a better idea of what must be if they are to be both different and still aesthetically appealing.
Best regards,
Mark
Second, there is a second section added to the equalizer. I guess you could call this the anti BSC circuit. I advise using the revised circuit and not attempting BSC. I have included both one and two meter response graphs. While linear in format (equal data density), the low frequency cut-off for these tests is 150 Hz.
Third, I have included a four-box test of low frequency performance. While it is possible to change the acoustic output between 60 and 180 Hz, in all boxes the low frequency roll-off begins at 95 Hz. F3, when compared to the highest bass output is about 72 Hz regardless of box design. I hypothesize that this is a limitation of the three-inch cone in this advertised four-inch driver. I have measured the same phenomena with other four-inch drivers and believe that it will be consistent across all available four-inch drivers with sub 100 Hz Fs.
I advise keeping internal box dimensions at least 6.75 inches wide and tall and 6.75 inches deep. I would go no smaller than these dimensions. With the revised prefilter/equalizer circuit, the driver performs well in this small cube. The associated upper register bass rise is helpful when listening full-range, and is even helpful when augmenting with a woofer. When using the .16 cubic foot box, use the revised prefilter/equalizer. When using larger boxes, vented or sealed, change the 15-ohm resistor of mod one to 18 ohms, but keep the small capacitor at .56 microfarad. When using the .16 cubic foot box, use the 18-ohm resistor and increase the .56-microfarad to 1 microfarad as shown in the schematic.
All audible octaves are important. The octave between 40 and 80 Hz is no less important than any other octave. While I have and can listen to this driver full-range, I would prefer to augment it with a woofer or sub woofer. Hearing and feeling the music in that 40 to 80 Hz range increases my listening enjoyment. I will use passive speaker level crossovers as low as 300 Hz. It is too expensive and too difficult to use speaker level passive crossovers lower than 300 Hz. For this application, a bi-amp setup is the only practical way to achieve the crossover.
When using the .16 cubic foot box, introduce an electrical drive F3 of 150 Hz, producing an acoustic F3 of 100 Hz and cross to a woofer at 100 Hz. If you go second order on the high pass and fourth order on the low pass, you can drive the 1052SA to its thermal power ratings while not exceeding claimed Xmax. With one driver per channel and an “average” sensitivity of 88 db after modification and equalization, you can produce 104 db levels at one meter holding to RMS ratings, and 101 db at two meters holding to music or peak ratings.
Last, but not least. This DIY stuff is supposed to be fun. Be willing to play with it. For example, I wanted to box this driver in something that looked different. I built a pair of different looking boxes. They turned out rather ugly and must be an acquired taste if it is possible to acquire such a taste. I am not sad that I built these boxes. The next pair will be better and I have a better idea of what must be if they are to be both different and still aesthetically appealing.
Best regards,
Mark
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I fear that this thread is dead. I regret that it has died because there is more to discover and research about the 1052 driver. I have stated a hypothesis that the low frequency output of this and all other low Fs four-inch drivers will begin to roll-off no lower in frequency than about 95 Hz and that this phenomena is independent of enclosure design. In support of this thesis I have provided the test results from four different enclosures. I have not tested either transmission line or band pass enclosures. Also, there are designs using multiple small diameter drivers in close proximity covering the same frequency range. We do not know the extent that the drivers couple or if this coupling will impact the ability of the array to reproduce frequencies below 95 Hz. Both of these are strands of potential investigation with the potential to yield valuable information whether the results are positive or negative.
Because this thread is likely dead, however, I am willing to go off topic to address something that may have happened within the last couple of posts. For me, the value of this type of venue is the possibility of asynchronous speech. After I make a post I do not hang on to see if there is a response. Indeed, my posting to this forum is usually the last thing I do while I am online. As I have explained before, I am not a fast responder and when I am building I may not check my e-mail for days.
I have also stated that the Internet is not a good teaching forum. Despite this, I shall attempt to instruct. In writing, paragraphs serve the purpose of separating ideas within longer essays. The last paragraph in my next to last post was a separate topic from the rest of the post. The topic of that last paragraph was the ambiguity of word and term selection and the problem that ambiguity caused ME. After saying what I had to say about ambiguity I stated that I had been silent on this in the past and would remain silent in the future. That referred only to the ambiguity of words and terms and nothing else. I was not threatening to take my "toy" and leave if everyone did not play according to my wishes.
One valuable idea to remember is that the only person’s behavior you can control is your own. I am willing to argue, to clarify, and to reason. If it becomes evident that the other is not reasonable, then I chose what I am to do. One thing I will not choose to do is to attempt to censor or exclude another. I do not threaten. If I am unacceptably annoyed by the discourse on this forum I will simply disappear. I will not give warning and I will not vent before I go.
There are several members and several topics that I avoid. This is both acceptable and expected behavior. I am certain that there are members who do the same with me. This is a big forum and no one should feel that they are forced to participate in any particular line or thread of discourse.
Now, Navin’s "apology" is typical Navin being mostly about Navin. It is, however, out of the character Navin presents in this forum to apologize. I do not know and I do not want to know, but I fear that someone may have tried to defend my honor for me. If that happened, then I thank them for the thought, but please rest assured in the knowledge that I can defend myself. In the now immortal words of Teresa Hines Kerry, if I believe that a person is deserving of being told to "just shove it," that I can do that and still feel good about myself.
Mark
Because this thread is likely dead, however, I am willing to go off topic to address something that may have happened within the last couple of posts. For me, the value of this type of venue is the possibility of asynchronous speech. After I make a post I do not hang on to see if there is a response. Indeed, my posting to this forum is usually the last thing I do while I am online. As I have explained before, I am not a fast responder and when I am building I may not check my e-mail for days.
I have also stated that the Internet is not a good teaching forum. Despite this, I shall attempt to instruct. In writing, paragraphs serve the purpose of separating ideas within longer essays. The last paragraph in my next to last post was a separate topic from the rest of the post. The topic of that last paragraph was the ambiguity of word and term selection and the problem that ambiguity caused ME. After saying what I had to say about ambiguity I stated that I had been silent on this in the past and would remain silent in the future. That referred only to the ambiguity of words and terms and nothing else. I was not threatening to take my "toy" and leave if everyone did not play according to my wishes.
One valuable idea to remember is that the only person’s behavior you can control is your own. I am willing to argue, to clarify, and to reason. If it becomes evident that the other is not reasonable, then I chose what I am to do. One thing I will not choose to do is to attempt to censor or exclude another. I do not threaten. If I am unacceptably annoyed by the discourse on this forum I will simply disappear. I will not give warning and I will not vent before I go.
There are several members and several topics that I avoid. This is both acceptable and expected behavior. I am certain that there are members who do the same with me. This is a big forum and no one should feel that they are forced to participate in any particular line or thread of discourse.
Now, Navin’s "apology" is typical Navin being mostly about Navin. It is, however, out of the character Navin presents in this forum to apologize. I do not know and I do not want to know, but I fear that someone may have tried to defend my honor for me. If that happened, then I thank them for the thought, but please rest assured in the knowledge that I can defend myself. In the now immortal words of Teresa Hines Kerry, if I believe that a person is deserving of being told to "just shove it," that I can do that and still feel good about myself.
Mark
Mark,
Thank you for all your experiments.
I dont know why you claim the 1052 thread to be dead.
Unlike you I probably spend more time on the forum than i spend building speakers.
One day I will get around to this driver. till then I am saving your notes.
The least your expriments did was to convince me that you dont have to use a expensive driver like Jordan's JX92. With enough expermentation one might be able to achieve the same or better response from a less expensive driver.
Thank you for all your experiments.
I dont know why you claim the 1052 thread to be dead.
Unlike you I probably spend more time on the forum than i spend building speakers.
One day I will get around to this driver. till then I am saving your notes.
The least your expriments did was to convince me that you dont have to use a expensive driver like Jordan's JX92. With enough expermentation one might be able to achieve the same or better response from a less expensive driver.
Reviving an old thread. Tang Band W3 526S ?
Howdy all!
Digging this gem out of the past, instead of starting a new thread. Used to build speakers but haven't in a long time.
I have a garage-sale find of a DIY center channel with six TB 526S's and a tweeter (haven't pulled it yet). The guy said it's a proven design, but I can't find anything that looks like it.
The problem is, it's a big deep box, to sit on a cabinet or whatever. But our TVs are wall-mounted, no cabinet. So I want to rebuild it for wall mounting. I thought about a sound-bar kind of thing - match the interior volume of the existing - but I'm not sure that's the best approach.
It is vented with four ports, each about 1.5" dia - I have not pulled them to see if they're different lengths. Crossover is inside, I'd probably move it out. No polyfill, which surprised me.
Has anybody ever seen this before? Plans? Suggestions for re-making as a wall-mount?
Thank you, great site!
Howdy all!
Digging this gem out of the past, instead of starting a new thread. Used to build speakers but haven't in a long time.
I have a garage-sale find of a DIY center channel with six TB 526S's and a tweeter (haven't pulled it yet). The guy said it's a proven design, but I can't find anything that looks like it.
The problem is, it's a big deep box, to sit on a cabinet or whatever. But our TVs are wall-mounted, no cabinet. So I want to rebuild it for wall mounting. I thought about a sound-bar kind of thing - match the interior volume of the existing - but I'm not sure that's the best approach.
It is vented with four ports, each about 1.5" dia - I have not pulled them to see if they're different lengths. Crossover is inside, I'd probably move it out. No polyfill, which surprised me.
Has anybody ever seen this before? Plans? Suggestions for re-making as a wall-mount?
Thank you, great site!
Attachments
Thank you!
Wow, this site is amazing! Thank you so much for the info! The designer's write-up makes me think a skinny box, front- or maybe down-ported, would work for my application. Some other folks weren't so thrilled with its performance, but since I have all the parts, what the heck. I'll take pics as I go...
Thanks again, great site!
c.
Wow, this site is amazing! Thank you so much for the info! The designer's write-up makes me think a skinny box, front- or maybe down-ported, would work for my application. Some other folks weren't so thrilled with its performance, but since I have all the parts, what the heck. I'll take pics as I go...
Thanks again, great site!
c.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.