Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is this a reputable design?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is this a reputable design?

    http://attlid.eu/p_bellicose.html I really like the idea of it and it could be very attractive if finished well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • #2
    Why not? I would like to know where the woofer and full ranger are crossed. The full range maybe a little high.
    Kenny

    http://www.diy-ny.com/
    DIY NY/NJ 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGwA...ature=youtu.be
    Man does not live by measurements alone, a little music helps.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by kenny_k
      Why not? I would like to know where the woofer and full ranger are crossed. The full range maybe a little high.
      I dunno! But I'm 99% sure I'm going to start building it by next weekend. Just didn't find any links to it on here so I wondered. It seems perfect to start a HT Build around. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #4
        You should post some details or a link.
        Kenny

        http://www.diy-ny.com/
        DIY NY/NJ 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGwA...ature=youtu.be
        Man does not live by measurements alone, a little music helps.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by kenny_k
          You should post some details or a link.
          I probably will. Why do you think he didn't use the 4" tang band instead? In his write up he says the w3 gets hot. Could similar results be had with the w4 even if it needed to be padded the 2 db? Ive read else where that the 3 produces better highs and I assume that's why. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

          Comment


          • #6
            Seems legit, though I question the choices. With a lot less lumber he could have built a subwoofer and a pair of High-SAF 5- or 6-inch 2-ways. Maybe he had his reasons, but I wouldn't call 4' tall a "compact floorstander". To relieve strain on the W3-1364S maybe he could have used a pair? I dunno, not the route I would have taken, but to each his own. Music tastes and preferences may be involved. This may or may not be a good fit depending on what you like to listen to.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kenny_k View Post
              Why not? I would like to know where the woofer and full ranger are crossed. The full range maybe a little high.
              Off-hand - roughly 175hz?
              The article does reflect a particular design philosophy; some aspects are more important to Emil Attlid then others.
              My assumption would be that others would NOT have his design criteria .
              "Not a Speaker Designer - Not even on the Internet"
              "If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by turn2 View Post
                Seems legit, though I question the choices. With a lot less lumber he could have built a subwoofer and a pair of High-SAF 5- or 6-inch 2-ways.
                +1. Maximum SPL is only about 100dB, which is not what one would settle for in a 'serious' home theater, while the 25Hz f3 is a lot lower than one needs for music. I guess there might be applications where it's viable, perhaps home theater in an apartment.

                www.billfitzmaurice.com
                www.billfitzmaurice.info/forum

                Comment


                • #9
                  This design really boils down to F.A.S.T. = full-range and sub woofer technology. There are lots of designs out there that use this principal. I have found that it is pretty easy to play with, build a full range design that can play down to 200hz and match it with a sub that can play up to 200hz.
                  I currently have mark audio chp-70p sitting on top of my subwoofers. My receiver has enough crossover options to tune it for my room. This cheap system uses no crossover parts but still sounds good. they have a laid back sound that works great for background music, blues, and jazz. Heavy rock starts to show the speakers laid back tendency to a fault but still remains enjoyable.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The crossover schematic and accompanying plot suggest s crossover point of about 400hz. Its compact in the sense that it has s small footprint. Its not everyone's cup of tea to be sure. They will have a narrow sweetspot as the widerange driver is going to suffer off axis and the top end response has quite a rise to it that probably smooths out some in the off axis.

                    Im certain that this is not intended for HT, but dedicated 2ch. Wide range without subs being necessary. Im sure it will handle the vast majority of the builders musical taste.
                    https://www.facebook.com/Mosaic-Audi...7373763888294/

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by kenrhodes View Post
                      This design really boils down to F.A.S.T. = full-range and sub woofer technology. There are lots of designs out there that use this principal. I have found that it is pretty easy to play with, build a full range design that can play down to 200hz and match it with a sub that can play up to 200hz.
                      I currently have mark audio chp-70p sitting on top of my subwoofers. My receiver has enough crossover options to tune it for my room. This cheap system uses no crossover parts but still sounds good. they have a laid back sound that works great for background music, blues, and jazz. Heavy rock starts to show the speakers laid back tendency to a fault but still remains enjoyable.

                      I second what kenrhodes said. Not only that, but I also have a pair of CHP-70's and subwoofer combo that is my daily office system. It's actually nice enough that I could be satisfied if it was my only system. I use this amp http://www.parts-express.com/tpa3116...x-50w--320-610 and a Kenwood Basic C1 for what little EQ I use.
                      The FAST concept gets a lot of attention in this thread http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-...f-monitor.html
                      I'm in the "planning" stages of one as I type this post.
                      Mike
                      "We're speaker geeks, not speaker nerds. Nerds make money!" Marty H
                      Bismarck, North Dakota
                      My Current System: Jolida SJ502A, Squeezebox Touch, and Carmody Sunflowers
                      My Garage System:Marantz 2238B and Nano-Neos

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Those "slotted vent" designs are OK for moderate bass output, but can result in high turbulence and chuffing at high output levels. Rectangular ports with a very narrow width can have a lot of turbulence along the long wall, and that design uses a width of only 1" (24mm). That may be OK with a 6-1/2" driver, but it won't scale up to an 8" driver. There is a good article on port turbulence in general at this link. The article doesn't provide any models or "rules" for rectangular ports, although it has some illustrations that depict the wall turbulence and show why a high aspect ratio can result in problems. The design is probably OK with that 6-1/2" driver for moderate listening levels, but it might have some "issues" at really high volume levels.
                        Free Passive Speaker Designer Lite (PSD-Lite) -- http://www.audiodevelopers.com/Softw...Lite/setup.exe

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by neildavis View Post
                          ...The design is probably OK with that 6-1/2" driver for moderate listening levels, but it might have some "issues" at really high volume levels.
                          I believe the author put aside port issues.
                          Noted this:
                          The main issue with these speaker is thermal compression in the full range driver. In their very existence, they were never meant to play at high sound pressure levels.
                          ( emphasis mine )
                          "Not a Speaker Designer - Not even on the Internet"
                          "If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by neildavis
                            Those "slotted vent" designs are OK for moderate bass output, but can result in high turbulence and chuffing at high output levels. Rectangular ports with a very narrow width can have a lot of turbulence along the long wall, and that design uses a width of only 1" (24mm). That may be OK with a 6-1/2" driver, but it won't scale up to an 8" driver. There is a good article on port turbulence in general at this link. The article doesn't provide any models or "rules" for rectangular ports, although it has some illustrations that depict the wall turbulence and show why a high aspect ratio can result in problems. The design is probably OK with that 6-1/2" driver for moderate listening levels, but it might have some "issues" at really high volume levels.
                            When I came across this design I was toying with the f.a.s.t. Principal. I was considering pairing my M8ns with a set of the 4" tang band. The concern was that the w4 would be a bit loud for a single 8". Would you agree? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, the tb will be louder. You could either use a pair of m8ns or pad the tb down to match.
                              https://www.facebook.com/Mosaic-Audi...7373763888294/

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X