Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Introducing: The Pit Vipers (Ooh Yeah!!!)

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

  • #91
    What would you estimate the 2.83v sensitivity of the speaker.

    Comment


    • Paul K.
      Paul K. commented
      Editing a comment
      I did model what Paul C. built and documented. The 2.83v/1m sensitivity came out to ~93 dB SPL, but that did not include baffle step compensation, so the final sensitivity should be about 89-90 dB SPL I'm estimating. My modeling also showed Paul C's intentions in that around 150 Hz, the output starts rising as frequency decreases, ending up almost 3 dB higher at 50 Hz or so. Paul C. did state after I sent him these modeling results that they were pretty much what he got.
      Paul K.

    • Paul Carmody
      Paul Carmody commented
      Editing a comment
      Paul K's numbers are spot on

  • #92
    A couple more observations/questions:
    It's hard to tell from the picture, are the drivers surface or flush mounted ?
    Would a roundover on the baffle edges provide any benefits?

    Comment


    • #93
      Originally posted by Serenitynow View Post
      A couple more observations/questions:
      It's hard to tell from the picture, are the drivers surface or flush mounted ?
      Would a roundover on the baffle edges provide any benefits?
      I flush mounted the drivers, and would recommend that to anyone who builds it.

      As for a roundover, there's no reason not to. However I also figured some guys might even go with the really vintage look of having the baffle inset. So really I'm gonna say whatever you do on the baffle is gonna be up to your personal aesthetic taste.
      Isn't it about time we started answering rhetorical questions?

      Paul Carmody's DIY Audio Projects
      Twitter: @undefinition1

      Comment


      • #94
        Ok. Great. Thanks again Paul

        Comment


        • #95
          This is a retro treatment of Wolf's Zinger design. The woofer was surface mounted since it overlapped the tweeter flange. Same series Dayton DVC sub as in the Pit vipers, 8". The driver looks fine surface mounted and sticks out less than 1/8". The Dayton DC series mid on the Pit Viper definitely looks bad surface mounted.

          Click image for larger version  Name:	image_80591.jpg Views:	0 Size:	52.5 KB ID:	1487667

          Comment


          • #96
            Originally posted by djg View Post
            This is a retro treatment of Wolf's Zinger design. The woofer was surface mounted since it overlapped the tweeter flange. Same series Dayton DVC sub as in the Pit vipers, 8". The driver looks fine surface mounted and sticks out less than 1/8". The Dayton DC series mid on the Pit Viper definitely looks bad surface mounted.

            Click image for larger version Name:	image_80591.jpg Views:	0 Size:	52.5 KB ID:	1487667
            Nice looking speakers there !

            Comment


            • djg
              djg commented
              Editing a comment
              Thank you. I bought some PE black grille foam but never got around to installing it.

          • #97
            Originally posted by djg View Post
            This is a retro treatment of Wolf's Zinger design. The woofer was surface mounted since it overlapped the tweeter flange. Same series Dayton DVC sub as in the Pit vipers, 8". The driver looks fine surface mounted and sticks out less than 1/8". The Dayton DC series mid on the Pit Viper definitely looks bad surface mounted.

            Click image for larger version Name:	image_80591.jpg Views:	0 Size:	52.5 KB ID:	1487667
            Great job on those. Yes that's the sort of "inset" look I was talking about.
            Isn't it about time we started answering rhetorical questions?

            Paul Carmody's DIY Audio Projects
            Twitter: @undefinition1

            Comment


          • #98
            Ya know, the more I look at these Pit Vipers, the more they remind me of the early '90s Advent, JBL and Infinity speakers. I always loved the sound and looks of those.
            I think I'll try to model the appearance of mine after those

            Comment


            • djg
              djg commented
              Editing a comment
              Vintage grill cloth is available on Ebay.

            • invaderzim
              invaderzim commented
              Editing a comment
              I think the design of djg’s zingers would look great on these

          • #99
            The point of the inset baffle was to work with a grill. Generally a piece of 1/8" hardboard with holes for the drivers, covered with grill cloth. Or a grill cloth covered frame. None of that is particularly good for the sound. Recessed flush mount drivers on a baffle with rounded edges is today's style and considered better for the sound.

            Going retro is a style consideration you can choose knowing it's not optimum.

            Thought I'd mention that before someone else did.

            Comment


            • Ultramega retro. Someone with a cnc could do a modern version.

              Click image for larger version  Name:	649367659_large_300f0210d95c59265af29be08908e700-668440173.jpg Views:	0 Size:	193.7 KB ID:	1487697

              Beyond retro. JBL L100 foam grill.

              Click image for larger version

Name:	jbl_2.jpg
Views:	397
Size:	86.8 KB
ID:	1487702

              Comment


              • In case it might be of interest, the attachment shows 3 graphs depicting modeled system bass responses for an input of 2.83v/1m for the Pit Vipers as built, and two different single-fold TLs, one an ML-TL and the other a tapered TL.
                Paul
                Pit Vipers.doc

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paul K. View Post
                  In case it might be of interest, the attachment shows 3 graphs depicting modeled system bass responses for an input of 2.83v/1m for the Pit Vipers as built, and two different single-fold TLs, one an ML-TL and the other a tapered TL.
                  Paul
                  [ATTACH]n1487700[/ATTACH]
                  Trying to learn a little here.
                  I see the differing responses of the woofer in all 3 cabinet models. Couldn't the same effect be accomplished with EQ adjustments ?

                  Todd

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Serenitynow View Post

                    Trying to learn a little here.
                    I see the differing responses of the woofer in all 3 cabinet models. Couldn't the same effect be accomplished with EQ adjustments ?

                    Todd
                    Todd, I honestly can't be sure but I doubt EQ could do what you're asking. The modeling uses multiple data inputs to provide the results: T/S values of the woofer, the enclosure's volume, and for the TLs, the dimensions of the cabinet, especially the lines' lengths and configurations, along with locations of the woofer and port or terminus plus the density and location of stuffing in the line. The responses shown by the red lines in the graphs are, of course, idealized, not taking into account room effects or dimensions or baffle step losses or none of the little variations in the woofer's actual output.
                    Paul

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Paul K. View Post

                      Todd, I honestly can't be sure but I doubt EQ could do what you're asking. The modeling uses multiple data inputs to provide the results: T/S values of the woofer, the enclosure's volume, and for the TLs, the dimensions of the cabinet, especially the lines' lengths and configurations, along with locations of the woofer and port or terminus plus the density and location of stuffing in the line. The responses shown by the red lines in the graphs are, of course, idealized, not taking into account room effects or dimensions or baffle step losses or none of the little variations in the woofer's actual output.
                      Paul
                      Thanks Paul K
                      I think I understand what you're saying.

                      Comment


                      • Paul Carmody

                        I see now that the 5.0mH Iron-Core inductor specified as L4 in the crossover network is back-ordered and delayed through PE until the end of August. 🤬

                        Is there a suitable substitute for this component without more complex modifications to the crossover ?

                        Thanks again.
                        Todd

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X