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

[rpb]

What would you estimate the 2.83v sensitivity of the speaker.

[Paul K.]

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 K's numbers are spot on

[Serenitynow]

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?

[Paul Carmody]

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.

[Serenitynow]

Ok. Great. Thanks again Paul

[djg]

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.

[Serenitynow]

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.

Nice looking speakers there !

[djg]

Thank you. I bought some PE black grille foam but never got around to installing it.

[Paul Carmody]

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.

Great job on those. Yes that's the sort of "inset" look I was talking about.

[djg]

Thank you very much.

https://techtalk.parts-express.com/forum/speaker-project-gallery/1417352-what-i-am-making-from-wolf-s-zinger-design

[marvin]

Paul, Why can't I not read your signature line in every post!?! Somehow my eye is attracted to it even though it reads the same every time! Aarrrgh!

[Serenitynow]

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

[djg]

Vintage grill cloth is available on Ebay.

[invaderzim]

I think the design of djg’s zingers would look great on these

[djg]

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.

[djg]

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



Beyond retro. JBL L100 foam grill.

[Paul K.]

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

[Serenitynow]

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

[Paul K.]

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

[Serenitynow]

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.

[Serenitynow]

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