Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

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

  • Re: about the shape...

    Originally posted by Paul Carmody View Post
    One could achieve the exact same-sounding speaker using rectangular enclosures, just as long as the interior volume of the cabinets is the same.
    So, I found the measurements on the website for building these straight-sided, but I didn't see if they were internal or external dimensions. I tried calculating the volume both ways, (I assumed 3/4" MDF) to see which matched up with the angular version, and I couldn't get the numbers to jive. I also tried converting 62 liters to cubic inches, and came up with a totally different number.

    So for a rectangular build, what would be the internal dimensions to get the correct cabinet volumes? I can figure the panel sizes from there.


    Thank you for an excellent design, and thanks in advance for your help!

    EDIT: Nevermind! I found it in the *other* tarkus thread. External dimensions, 3/4" material, check. Off to the races!
    Last edited by hoosiercheetah; 03-05-2013, 01:39 PM. Reason: found it!
    Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has.
    Tarkus of Egypt

    Comment


    • Re: about the shape...

      Happy building and welcome to the Tarkus club! They are great speakers, you will love them. Just make sure you post a build thread with lots of pictures.
      My modest builds:
      Armadillo TM, A.K.A. Lil' Dillo
      Tarkus/Armadillo build #2
      Armadillo Center Channel
      Au-Rock-O Sub
      Tarkus
      Staining MDF tutorial

      Comment


      • Re: about the shape...

        For future reference, you can generally use any dimensions you want so long as the baffle width is the same and the internal volume is the same.

        Originally posted by hoosiercheetah View Post
        So, I found the measurements on the website for building these straight-sided, but I didn't see if they were internal or external dimensions. I tried calculating the volume both ways, (I assumed 3/4" MDF) to see which matched up with the angular version, and I couldn't get the numbers to jive. I also tried converting 62 liters to cubic inches, and came up with a totally different number.

        So for a rectangular build, what would be the internal dimensions to get the correct cabinet volumes? I can figure the panel sizes from there.


        Thank you for an excellent design, and thanks in advance for your help!

        EDIT: Nevermind! I found it in the *other* tarkus thread. External dimensions, 3/4" material, check. Off to the races!
        I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now.
        OS MTMs http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=220388
        Swope TM http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=221818
        Econowave and Audio Nirvana AN10 fullrange http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=216841
        Imperial Russian Stouts http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...=1#post1840444
        LECBOS. http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...ghlight=lecbos

        Comment


        • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

          Looks like at the very least you will have a nice looking pair of speakers.

          Comment


          • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

            I'm looking forward to the project. This will be my first speaker build. I"m a bit nervous about putting together the boxes, but I have co-workers who are going to help with that part of it. I"ll defiantly write up a build thread once I get started!
            Nonsense. You're only saying that because no one ever has.
            Tarkus of Egypt

            Comment


            • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

              Hi all,

              I've jumped and purchased some drivers for the Tarkus and I'm after some advice with regard to active tri-amping of this design.

              To fill in the picture, this will be my first speaker build, though I have made a few pre amps and power amps along the way. Even if I start off with a passive crossover "as designed" build I'm sure to experiment with bi and tri amping along the way so I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion on going straight to an active setup.

              Thanks,
              Tani.

              Comment


              • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                Hi all,

                I've jumped and purchased some drivers for the Tarkus and I'm after some advice with regard to active tri-amping of this design.

                To fill in the picture, this will be my first speaker build, though I have made a few pre amps and power amps along the way. Even if I start off with a passive crossover "as designed" build I'm sure to experiment with bi and tri amping along the way so I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion on going straight to an active setup.

                Thanks,
                Tani.

                Comment


                • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                  Originally posted by taniknight View Post
                  Hi all,

                  I've jumped and purchased some drivers for the Tarkus and I'm after some advice with regard to active tri-amping of this design.

                  To fill in the picture, this will be my first speaker build, though I have made a few pre amps and power amps along the way. Even if I start off with a passive crossover "as designed" build I'm sure to experiment with bi and tri amping along the way so I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion on going straight to an active setup.

                  Thanks,
                  Tani.
                  What exactly is the question? Are you asking what's better, passive or active? I'll answer active, as long as you're cool with the added cost and equipment list of external crossovers/DSPs and amplifiers. Having said that, it really defeats the original intent of this design, that being a good, efficient, budget speaker. If you really want to experiment, I'd say go ahead and build them with the passive crossovers as per the design and get some time with them, learn what they do or don't do well, then go active and see which you like better, can you fix what you didn't like when passive, is there anything that doesn't jive like it did passive?

                  PS Consider your desire with bi/tri-amping when designing your input plates. Make them removable but easily sealable so you can make replacements with the right connections depending on passive, active, bi/tri-amped.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                    Dang double posts. Happening a lot lately.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                      Originally posted by taniknight View Post
                      ...so I thought I'd ask everyone's opinion on going straight to an active setup.
                      .
                      System optimization includes optimizing the resource allocation, spending the budget where it provides the most benefit.

                      If you are achieving very similar transfer functions with active fiters vs passive filters, then resulting response will also be very similar.

                      Using active filters to divide frequency spectrum ahead of the amplifiers multiplies the number of amplifiers needed.

                      The power dissipated in the passive filters increases the power output requirement on the amplifiers to get the same output from the loudspeakers, but you need fewer amplifiers.

                      So which is more expensive, a powered active filter and more amplifiers, or passive filters with fewer ampifiers that are more powerful?

                      The passive crossovers cost ~$100 for the pair ~4 years ago when Paul published the build. In that application I would not suggest substituting active filters and more ampifiers. See the post at the link below.

                      http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...24#post1670824

                      If you are adding a subwoofer system to these, then for that I would suggest separate amplifiers for the subwoofers in combination with active crossovers to divide spectrum and shape response for both subwoofers and satellites.
                      "Our Nation’s interests are best served by fostering a peaceful global system comprised
                      of interdependent networks of trade, finance, information, law, people and governance."
                      - from the October 2007 U.S. Naval capstone doctrine
                      A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower
                      (a lofty notion since removed in the March 2015 revision)

                      Comment


                      • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                        Would these speakers be sufficiently powered by an 80 watt per channel receiver?

                        I am impressed w/ the networking capabilities of the Yamaha R-N500 stereo receiver and wanted to mate it with the Tarkus speakers.

                        I am on a tight budget fellas so please don't suggest separate components or anything involving more buckaroos.

                        http://www.crutchfield.com/p_022RN50...html?tp=47041#

                        Comment


                        • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                          Most definitely. 80 watts is fine. I'm assuming that since it's Yamaha, those are "real" watts, and not just inflated numbers like the cheap audio equipment mfrs are prone to write.
                          Isn't it about time we started answering rhetorical questions?

                          Paul Carmody's DIY Audio Projects
                          Twitter: @undefinition1

                          Comment


                          • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                            I've run mine off a 15 watt T-amp just for fun, even that would be enough for some people. That's one of the benefits of large speakers, they are usually more efficient than smaller ones so you don't need a ton of power to get loud. That said, you can never have too much power :D I think 80 watts should put you somewhere around "neighbors calling the cops on you" territory with these.
                            My modest builds:
                            Armadillo TM, A.K.A. Lil' Dillo
                            Tarkus/Armadillo build #2
                            Armadillo Center Channel
                            Au-Rock-O Sub
                            Tarkus
                            Staining MDF tutorial

                            Comment


                            • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                              " I'm assuming that since it's Yamaha, those are "real" watts, and not just inflated numbers like the cheap audio equipment mfrs are prone to write."

                              Good enough. Time to order some parts. I may go ahead and start a separate Tarkus thread so you seasoned veterans can maybe babysit me through this upcoming build.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Next up in the shop: a LOUD, paper-cone 3 way

                                "I think 80 watts should put you somewhere around "neighbors calling the cops on you" territory with these."

                                If you knew my actual physical location here in the Boonies of the Ozark Mountains you would understand there's little likelihood of getting a noise complaint from the neighbors. If the sheriff showed up I would be more inclined to think they were looking for some Shine. :rolleyes:

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X