XRK,
yes the sb65 is very interesting indeed (or even fr88ex) , but the ta6c00-04 is about half the price and i thought it could share most characterisitics. Plus it's black anodized like the woofer
. First i want to see if a smaller metal cone would provide less sharp dips, especially at high frequency. It might not show on response graph, but i can definitely hear them when passing a frequency sweep, especially when getting to the highest part ...
In the end, it may not even show up in real music and maybe every drivers shares more or less that, but i tend to assume in general the strongest of point smaller drivers is the upper octaves... and also 'm a bit curious in nature
yes the sb65 is very interesting indeed (or even fr88ex) , but the ta6c00-04 is about half the price and i thought it could share most characterisitics. Plus it's black anodized like the woofer
. First i want to see if a smaller metal cone would provide less sharp dips, especially at high frequency. It might not show on response graph, but i can definitely hear them when passing a frequency sweep, especially when getting to the highest part ... In the end, it may not even show up in real music and maybe every drivers shares more or less that, but i tend to assume in general the strongest of point smaller drivers is the upper octaves... and also 'm a bit curious in nature
Last edited:
FAST
Hello,
I found this thread looking for information about projects using the RS225. I became so interested that I read the entire 185 pages today. I am going to order the 10F mid tomorrow. I already have the woofers. I learned a lot from this thread and I plan to come back. I appreciate the open, sharing atmosphere. Thank you XRK971.
Hello,
I found this thread looking for information about projects using the RS225. I became so interested that I read the entire 185 pages today. I am going to order the 10F mid tomorrow. I already have the woofers. I learned a lot from this thread and I plan to come back. I appreciate the open, sharing atmosphere. Thank you XRK971.
xrk971, Would you say that this project is suitable for at first time builder long time reader/dreamer/thinker?
I have been looking at the 10F fullrange for a while now.
As you can see in my most recent thread, i'm interested in building a compact loudspeaker. It seems this could fit be criteria.
Can the cabinet-dimensions be changed as long as I keep the same volume?
My speakers can't be deeper than 10 inches.
Also this thread is 185 pages. Have you summed up crossover schematics and cabinet dimensions somewhere?
i'm also looking at Batemans "Unitized" Image Control Waveguide. Right now it's between your design and his or buying finished loudspeakers. My budget is 700 dollars per speaker. I need 4 speakers placed in pairs back to back in the middle of a fairly long living room.
I have been looking at the 10F fullrange for a while now.
As you can see in my most recent thread, i'm interested in building a compact loudspeaker. It seems this could fit be criteria.
Can the cabinet-dimensions be changed as long as I keep the same volume?
My speakers can't be deeper than 10 inches.
Also this thread is 185 pages. Have you summed up crossover schematics and cabinet dimensions somewhere?
i'm also looking at Batemans "Unitized" Image Control Waveguide. Right now it's between your design and his or buying finished loudspeakers. My budget is 700 dollars per speaker. I need 4 speakers placed in pairs back to back in the middle of a fairly long living room.
Hi AdamFelix,
Yes, this is a fine project for first time builder. It's a rectangular box fitted with an internal chamber shaped like cone or pyramid. The XO can be done point-to-point. As long as you keep the baffle width the same and the volume the same and the CTC distance between the drivers about the same (close as possible), it can all be modified to be taller/shallower etc.
The dimensions are in the first paragraph of Post #1. The XO is in Post #1.
Baffle is 10in wide x 18in tall x box is 13.75in deep (all external) and wood is 3/4in BB ply. CTC dist is 7.25in, woofer dist from top edge is 6.25in. Internal volume of main box is 24L, volume of Dagger is about 1.5L.
Cheers,
X
Yes, this is a fine project for first time builder. It's a rectangular box fitted with an internal chamber shaped like cone or pyramid. The XO can be done point-to-point. As long as you keep the baffle width the same and the volume the same and the CTC distance between the drivers about the same (close as possible), it can all be modified to be taller/shallower etc.
The dimensions are in the first paragraph of Post #1. The XO is in Post #1.
Baffle is 10in wide x 18in tall x box is 13.75in deep (all external) and wood is 3/4in BB ply. CTC dist is 7.25in, woofer dist from top edge is 6.25in. Internal volume of main box is 24L, volume of Dagger is about 1.5L.
Cheers,
X
Thanks for the reply!
I know this question is pretty specific, but how is the speaker performing at low listening levels? Some speakers needs a lot of power to come alive.
X,
How imperative would you say it is to utilize the "dagger" chamber? Could one alternately use a pvc pipe with cap or denovo .04cu ft cabinet heavily stuffed? The aim is to create a "black hole" that measures quite like OB. Could it be possible to run the Tc9fd in OB? I've had great success doing so in the past...
Thanks for your time.
How imperative would you say it is to utilize the "dagger" chamber? Could one alternately use a pvc pipe with cap or denovo .04cu ft cabinet heavily stuffed? The aim is to create a "black hole" that measures quite like OB. Could it be possible to run the Tc9fd in OB? I've had great success doing so in the past...
Thanks for your time.
That's exactly what I did with mine. I used the TC9FD which has a higher Qts than the 10F and probably works better in an "infinite baffle." I got the idea from this design that also uses the RS225:
Speaker Design Works
I just used a length of 4" PVC pipe that butts up against the inside of the front baffle and is open to the rear. I stuffed it with some polyfill and open cell foam to prevent any resonance. It works quite well, I can't hear any coloration in the sound (no other speaker I've heard sounds as clean and precise as these).
The 4in PVC pipe can work well - line the perimeter of the first 2in with felt. The open to the back and stuffed as a aperiodic is very good. Even with cap and stuffed can be good. You might have the one cylindrical resonant mode but with enough stuffing should be fine.
Note that 4ohm TC7 will have different sensitivity. There is 8ohm version that would be more appropriate. This speaker can use almost any 8ohm moderate sensitivity to low sensitivity full range as long as the bandwidth is wide and flat.
Note that 4ohm TC7 will have different sensitivity. There is 8ohm version that would be more appropriate. This speaker can use almost any 8ohm moderate sensitivity to low sensitivity full range as long as the bandwidth is wide and flat.
I actually tested the TC7FD-4ohm here:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ful...n-3-5in-drivers-round-5-a-14.html#post4494341
In addition to measuring quite well (black trace below), it did fairly well in the subjective listening tests too:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ful...n-3-5in-drivers-round-5-a-14.html#post4494341
In addition to measuring quite well (black trace below), it did fairly well in the subjective listening tests too:
like diferent gimbals
How do these sound different? To equalize the problem, I started with a new frequency in between 350Hz and 500Hz - say, 400Hz and apply the three different XO's in succession and record the same sound clip at the same position within minutes of each other. I post the sound clips below labeled only as A, B, and C. Please have a listen and let me know what you think sounds best, and why.
Rename file extension from .asc to .mp3 to listen.[/QUOTE]
well as I said, I hear (through a pair of cheap pc speakers) different set of gimbals. Have place somewhere the original source ? (by the way I like very much the FAST configuration/idea but with active linear filters & bi-amplification (post 119)
How do these sound different? To equalize the problem, I started with a new frequency in between 350Hz and 500Hz - say, 400Hz and apply the three different XO's in succession and record the same sound clip at the same position within minutes of each other. I post the sound clips below labeled only as A, B, and C. Please have a listen and let me know what you think sounds best, and why.Rename file extension from .asc to .mp3 to listen.[/QUOTE]
well as I said, I hear (through a pair of cheap pc speakers) different set of gimbals. Have place somewhere the original source ? (by the way I like very much the FAST configuration/idea but with active linear filters & bi-amplification
(post 119)
Last edited:
So which is it? External baffles 10" or 12"?
BTW I'm using 18mm plywood, so it closer to 10" if we maintain internal 8".