Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DIY Flat Panel Speaker Love

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

  • LOUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Kornbread View Post
    The DAEX32EP-4 are the exciters that always STB. Some never made it past the initial freq response measurement as the solid leads quickly broke. They, and PE refusing to replace any more, were the reason I got out of the dml foray.
    I suspect, akin to a normal driver, they have an excursion limit. This is listed as NA in their spec sheet. I suspect it possible, in the pursuit of larger panels with more bass, that larger nodes? were being created and forcing the exciter past its excursion limits. This, combined with the poorly thought out solid leads, made for a very short lived exciter and a lot of aggravation.

    I have not seen the bass shakers you are referencing so this may not apply. With the daex32ep solidly attached to the panel, and the panel only being held to the frame by small tabs of whatever type of panel in use at the time, attaching the back of the daex32 to a frame crossmember (front remains attached to the panel) with hot glue noticeably improved the sound, and IIRC, bass.
    The fullrange exciters I have all have solid tabs to solder to which haven't broke yet, but I've been relatively gentle. Most of them have REALLY thin tinsel from the tabs to the VC though, and it's often tightly stretched against the spider?/support which doesn't inspire confidence....except with the squareDAEX58FP (which has everything hidden where I can't accidentally catch it on something) and the HESF which looks more decently constructed.
    I am curious if the fullrange exciters I have will all handle a 20-60hz signal at their rated wattage. So far they've been okay, but XMECH has to be a danger at some point, right?

    The BST-2 BassShaker doesn't have the same exposed VC/motor that's separate from the frame like most fullrange exciters, instead the outside is essentially JUST the frame (which wraps around all the way over the front and everything) while I expect the internal VC/motor moves a weight.
    It has wires instead of solid-leads or clips (which I hope are knotted inside the enclosure to stop against the exit hole and avoid pulling off the voicecoil if tugged). So far a little gentle pulling of the wires from a vacuum and a cat hasn't wrecked the pair under the couch.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kornbread
    replied
    The DAEX32EP-4 are the exciters that always STB. Some never made it past the initial freq response measurement as the solid leads quickly broke. They, and PE refusing to replace any more, were the reason I got out of the dml foray.
    I suspect, akin to a normal driver, they have an excursion limit. This is listed as NA in their spec sheet. I suspect it possible, in the pursuit of larger panels with more bass, that larger nodes? were being created and forcing the exciter past its excursion limits. This, combined with the poorly thought out solid leads, made for a very short lived exciter and a lot of aggravation.

    I have not seen the bass shakers you are referencing so this may not apply. With the daex32ep solidly attached to the panel, and the panel only being held to the frame by small tabs of whatever type of panel in use at the time, attaching the back of the daex32 to a frame crossmember (front remains attached to the panel) with hot glue noticeably improved the sound, and IIRC, bass.

    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Kornbread View Post
    Interesting. I had wondered about using a bass shaker on a large panel. Try solidly attaching the back of the bass shaker to something solid so it has something to push/pull from. Also try them close to the wall and see if that makes any changes.
    I think attaching the BassShaker itself to something super solid will stop it from being able to move/vibrate and stop it from being able to vibrate the panel...though it might get a wall to resonate deep bass as a side-effect (which could be interesting in its own right).

    I'll have to try the panel closer a wall like you mention. That should be more realistic for what anyone would normally do with a large panel. I was using a relatively short cord in the middle of the room during my quick "test" so I'm curious how different that might sound.
    I'll probably also need to grab a small section of plywood or something to let the screws anchor tight into something through the other side of the XPS...and see about some kind of temporary hanging method for the panel that won't put holes in the wall or ceiling.

    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post
    The Dayton Puck Bass shaker is fully enclosed in some sort of metallic casing but its not air tight so some mid to highs can leak out in free air but not so much when attached to a material. So basically the whole casing vibrates you can put either side to the panel and it will vibrate the panel. Unlike a exciter in which it only vibrates on one side were the plastic is attached to the voice coil.

    The metallic casing is to dense for high frequencies to pass through when attached so sensitivity in those mid to high frequency range are very limited. I seen a video of someone taking the casing off of one of the bass shakers and it looked like a pistonic jack hammer moving up and down attached to some type of plastic diaphragm and in turn it would pound the metal casing that it was enclosed in like a rubber mallet hitting a solid object to make a thud there fore vibrating the whole casing.
    Although this is not the Dayton Puck bass shaker I assume that the concept and design are fairly similar in most bass shakers. Bass Shaker Guts - YouTube

    Although the bass shaker can go lower then any commercially available exciter today IMO its bass is not as refined or articulate as a exciter.
    If I use 2 DAEX30HESF-4 with a sub amp it can play just as loud as the Dayton puck exciter but it wont reach as low as it starts to drop off at around 40hz.
    I'm pretty sure I have a DAEX30HESF-4 I can play around with. I remember it being one of my favorites among the exciters I tried a few years ago. I certainly don't remember it reaching anywhere near 40hz though...I'll obviously need to try some new surfaces/materials. What material and size were you using that let it get that low?

    This thread is making me excited to dig out the little transducer collection that I haven't played with in quite a while. I think the cheaper DAEX25FHE-4 was suprisingly decent for the price...and it looks like it might sound similar to the Thruster/DAEX32EP-4 albeit at 24w VS 40w power-handling.
    I remember being pretty underwhelmed with the much more expensive DAEX25SHF-4 (though I don't think it was $40 when I bought it). I thought the HDN-8 was kinda garbage and didn't care much for the "SquareFrame" models I tried for whatever that's worth.

    EDIT: Looks like I still have;
    DAEX30HESF-4 (easily the most robust-looking of any fullrange exciter I've tried, with thicker tinsel leads and reinforced connection to voicecoil),
    DAEX25FHE-4 (looks like a cheaper 30HESF-4, but seems to lack some of the HESF's sensitivity and also might lack some of the HESF's bass and treble),
    DAEX25SHF-4 (still looks cheaper and more fragile than the HESF and mostly just sounds louder in the mid-frequency...like a louder 25FHE at 4X the price),
    DAEX58FP (sounds better than I remember and no exposed+delicate tinsel. Thought it was a little quiet but then realized it's 8ohm...not bad).
    I think the HDN-8 and coin-type low watt exciter I had broke. If I remember right, the HDN-8 partly fried (pushed a little too hard when it never got nearly loud enough) and the coin-type got slightly torn/damaged trying to seperate it from a surface it was stuck against with its strong adhesive.
    Last edited by LOUT; 07-14-2021, 08:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    The Dayton Puck Bass shaker is fully enclosed in some sort of metallic casing but its not air tight so some mid to highs can leak out in free air but not so much when attached to a material. So basically the whole casing vibrates you can put either side to the panel and it will vibrate the panel. Unlike a exciter in which it only vibrates on one side were the plastic is attached to the voice coil.

    The metallic casing is to dense for high frequencies to pass through when attached so sensitivity in those mid to high frequency range are very limited. I seen a video of someone taking the casing off of one of the bass shakers and it looked like a pistonic jack hammer moving up and down attached to some type of plastic diaphragm and in turn it would pound the metal casing that it was enclosed in like a rubber mallet hitting a solid object to make a thud there fore vibrating the whole casing.

    Although this is not the Dayton Puck bass shaker I assume that the concept and design are fairly similar in most bass shakers. Bass Shaker Guts - YouTube

    Although the bass shaker can go lower then any commercially available exciter today IMO its bass is not as refined or articulate as a exciter.

    If I use 2 DAEX30HESF-4 with a sub amp it can play just as loud as the Dayton puck exciter but it wont reach as low as it starts to drop off at around 40hz.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kornbread
    replied
    Originally posted by LOUT View Post
    I finally got around to trying a BST-2 BassShaker attached to a large remnant of XPS (nearly 4ftX6ft, 1/2inch). It was attached off-center around 2feet from one end and maybe 1.5feet from the adjacent side. I tried holding it up by the driver (which seemed to work decently), holding it up by an edge of the XPS (which also worked alright but could be finicky, likely due to the tenuous attachement of the driver to the panel) and tried setting it down resting against surfaces while trying to avoid rattles a couple of different ways (which still tended to rattle at higher volume).

    I didn't take the time to hang it from the ceiling nor did I take the time to glue/tape the shaker's face to the panel, I just used some course threaded screws and gentle tightening. I'm pretty sure some double-sided adhesive along with bolts+washers or similar backing/support material for the screws to hold more firmly and a proper method of suspension would allow the amp/driver to push harder without rattling or otherwise misbehaving...but I wasn't really prepared for anything long-term and this was more just a quick curiosity.

    Soundwise, it seemed to push a lot deeper/lower and louder bass than any fullrange transducers I've tried, so I think a BassShaker (like the BST-2) could be a viable way to add lows to a DML-only setup. The bass seemed more directional than I'm used to experiencing, where facing the panel from the sides instead of the front/back was noticeably quieter...maybe a positive or a negative depending on the situation.
    Overall though, I think a small-ish conventional subwoofer still reaches noticeably deeper and louder while taking up less space...at least compared to the BST-2 and XPS. Considering the price similarity between a 1/2" 4x4sheet of cheap plywood and a $35 SD215-88 VS a 4x8sheet of material and a $25-50 shaker, I feel like the shaker+panel route probably only makes sense in a few niche situations or when aiming specifically for a DML-only setup. I could easily be wrong though, particularly if a different material and/or BassShaker performs significantly better without getting super expensive nor huge.


    Bit of a sidenote that was probably obvious to others but not to me; although the BST-2 gives a surprisingly balanced volume of fullrange sound in free air, attaching it to a panel does NOT seem to increase its mid/high-frequency output by much (unlike fullrange transducers which get a fairly fullrange boost when attached VS free-air)...I'm assuming the mids/highs from the BST-2 are mostly the bits that escape the internal driver's attachment to the metal shell without causing enough vibration to move the shell or an attached panel enough to act like a fullrange DML?
    In short, the BassShaker doesn't seem to give a full-range sound and instead focuses on lows..."Duh", I know, but probably doesn't hurt to mention.
    Interesting. I had wondered about using a bass shaker on a large panel. Try solidly attaching the back of the bass shaker to something solid so it has something to push/pull from. Also try them close to the wall and see if that makes any changes.

    Leave a comment:


  • badfish
    replied
    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post

    Oh my bad the Ultra is better then the Thruster in terms of sound quality, I thought it was a Q and not a U lol. The only reason why I dont recommend the Ultra is that there have been a lot of reliability issues with that exciter hopefully by now that problem is fixed.

    Exciters run full range so there strong suit is in vocals , guitars, strings, pianos but can get a bit shouty on certain tracks. If using EQ reduce the 1khz and 2khz to reduce shout.
    Awesome thanks again. Really enjoying the process which is the main thing. Hoping to have some new panels by early August and will report back.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    Originally posted by badfish View Post

    Thanks for the great feedback and all the info you've posted in the past. Taking notes!

    So the DAEX32-EP would be better than the 32EXU (the ultra) in this case? I'll have to read up on what a thruster exciter is. I have the 32U on order, but it's back ordered and the thruster is the same price.

    I have a sub incoming too to help on the low end side.

    Was sitting around last night probably reading this forum and radioparadise played some live acoustics including Over Now by Alice in Chains which sounded very good on my presently not top tier panels. Was pretty inspired - they seem as many have stated to really shine when you have lots of textured guitars / strings and vocals and when I considered they cost me 35 CAD each, that added another layer.

    Cheers
    Oh my bad the Ultra is better then the Thruster in terms of sound quality, I thought it was a Q and not a U lol. The only reason why I dont recommend the Ultra is that there have been a lot of reliability issues with that exciter hopefully by now that problem is fixed.

    Exciters run full range so there strong suit is in vocals , guitars, strings, pianos but can get a bit shouty on certain tracks. If using EQ reduce the 1khz and 2khz to reduce shout.

    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    replied
    I finally got around to trying a BST-2 BassShaker attached to a large remnant of XPS (nearly 4ftX6ft, 1/2inch). It was attached off-center around 2feet from one end and maybe 1.5feet from the adjacent side. I tried holding it up by the driver (which seemed to work decently), holding it up by an edge of the XPS (which also worked alright but could be finicky, likely due to the tenuous attachement of the driver to the panel) and tried setting it down resting against surfaces while trying to avoid rattles a couple of different ways (which still tended to rattle at higher volume).

    I didn't take the time to hang it from the ceiling nor did I take the time to glue/tape the shaker's face to the panel, I just used some course threaded screws and gentle tightening. I'm pretty sure some double-sided adhesive along with bolts+washers or similar backing/support material for the screws to hold more firmly and a proper method of suspension would allow the amp/driver to push harder without rattling or otherwise misbehaving...but I wasn't really prepared for anything long-term and this was more just a quick curiosity.

    Soundwise, it seemed to push a lot deeper/lower and louder bass than any fullrange transducers I've tried, so I think a BassShaker (like the BST-2) could be a viable way to add lows to a DML-only setup. The bass seemed more directional than I'm used to experiencing, where facing the panel from the sides instead of the front/back was noticeably quieter...maybe a positive or a negative depending on the situation.
    Overall though, I think a small-ish conventional subwoofer still reaches noticeably deeper and louder while taking up less space...at least compared to the BST-2 and XPS. Considering the price similarity between a 1/2" 4x4sheet of cheap plywood and a $35 SD215-88 VS a 4x8sheet of material and a $25-50 shaker, I feel like the shaker+panel route probably only makes sense in a few niche situations or when aiming specifically for a DML-only setup. I could easily be wrong though, particularly if a different material and/or BassShaker performs significantly better without getting super expensive nor huge.


    Bit of a sidenote that was probably obvious to others but not to me; although the BST-2 gives a surprisingly balanced volume of fullrange sound in free air, attaching it to a panel does NOT seem to increase its mid/high-frequency output by much (unlike fullrange transducers which get a fairly fullrange boost when attached VS free-air)...I'm assuming the mids/highs from the BST-2 are mostly the bits that escape the internal driver's attachment to the metal shell without causing enough vibration to move the shell or an attached panel enough to act like a fullrange DML?
    In short, the BassShaker doesn't seem to give a full-range sound and instead focuses on lows..."Duh", I know, but probably doesn't hurt to mention.

    Leave a comment:


  • badfish
    replied
    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post

    Tech Ingredients videos are beginner intro entry level design into DML technology. T.I. polk speakers sound better then his panels. lol Dont get me wrong though as DML's have a lot of hidden POTENTIAL.

    Sound quality is based on ones design as DML's are heavily design dependent. Better the design the better it will sound.

    DSP and EQ wont make a bad sounding panel into a good sounding panel. You're panel needs to sound good to begin with as EQ and DSP are only to fine tune a good sounding panel.

    Weakest point of DML is the lower frequencies due to limited pistonic motion and exciter design. This is why most people use a conventional cone powered sub for the lower frequencies and or use the Layered Sound technique that I have mentioned above in my other post.

    EPS has a warmer tone then XPS. Things to take into consideration are Density of EPS as there are different grades of density.

    All exciters are not created equal. IMO you should get the Thruster exciter instead of the DAEX-32Q.

    Most people use this exciter transducer as a fun novelty project but dont take it serious enough as they dont recognize its true potential.

    There are a few high end commercial brands that use DML/BMR bending wave technology.

    High End 2016 Munich: Göbel High End Loudspeakers - "Tin Pan Alley" - YouTube One of the most expensive speakers utilizing DML bending wave technology.
    Thanks for the great feedback and all the info you've posted in the past. Taking notes!

    So the DAEX32-EP would be better than the 32EXU (the ultra) in this case? I'll have to read up on what a thruster exciter is. I have the 32U on order, but it's back ordered and the thruster is the same price.

    I have a sub incoming too to help on the low end side.

    Was sitting around last night probably reading this forum and radioparadise played some live acoustics including Over Now by Alice in Chains which sounded very good on my presently not top tier panels. Was pretty inspired - they seem as many have stated to really shine when you have lots of textured guitars / strings and vocals and when I considered they cost me 35 CAD each, that added another layer.

    Cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    Originally posted by badfish View Post
    Hi All,

    New here and just authorized but have been reading this forum with focus of late. Like many, sucked into this DML speaker fun thought the world's best youtube.

    I built a couple quick panels using the home depot 2x2 project panel (which I think is XPS?) and post rounding the corners and sanding them, attached a couple DAEX-25's (the spider looking ones) to the back and hung them in my garage.

    Connected to a basic 50W amp, the sound was crazy harsh - the 4k band was especially ear grating. Using eqMAC and my mac as a source, I was able to deal with the highs and get to a better overall sound.

    I am about to order a mini-DSP-HD and a mic (a bit for this project, and just seems like cool kit in general) and will run some REW tests to see what my overall response is. (nothing like spending 500 bucks to fix your 35 dollar speakers)

    That said, reading here these panel's don't appear ideal and certainly while when EQ'ed my sound is interesting and there are definitely some qualities that intrigue me, they aren't really in the "good" category even by non audiophile standards - ear fatigue is quick.

    On that front, my lows are nearing non existent (will add a small sub, but even lower midrange not ideal). Did see a tool that suggested getting much under 240hz would be tricky with a 2x2 panel.

    I am going to coat these ones in glue/water and see if that helps with overall clarity but probably keen to build some cheap new panels.

    That said, wondering about building a newer panel on EPS, maybe toward the 6mm to 10mm thickness, and debating on smaller (12x12 ish) or something larger 1:618 ratio style, like 24x38 etc (trying to get a bit more lows).

    Also wondering if changing out the 5W DAEX-25 to a more robust DAEX-32U @ 20W would be a noticeable upgrade? They are so cheap ;-)

    Cheers and thanks all for the wealth of info here.
    Tech Ingredients videos are beginner intro entry level design into DML technology. T.I. polk speakers sound better then his panels. lol Dont get me wrong though as DML's have a lot of hidden POTENTIAL.

    Sound quality is based on ones design as DML's are heavily design dependent. Better the design the better it will sound.

    DSP and EQ wont make a bad sounding panel into a good sounding panel. You're panel needs to sound good to begin with as EQ and DSP are only to fine tune a good sounding panel.

    Weakest point of DML is the lower frequencies due to limited pistonic motion and exciter design. This is why most people use a conventional cone powered sub for the lower frequencies and or use the Layered Sound technique that I have mentioned above in my other post.

    EPS has a warmer tone then XPS. Things to take into consideration are Density of EPS as there are different grades of density.

    All exciters are not created equal. IMO you should get the Thruster exciter instead of the DAEX-32Q.

    Most people use this exciter transducer as a fun novelty project but dont take it serious enough as they dont recognize its true potential.

    There are a few high end commercial brands that use DML/BMR bending wave technology.

    High End 2016 Munich: Göbel High End Loudspeakers - "Tin Pan Alley" - YouTube One of the most expensive speakers utilizing DML bending wave technology.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kornbread
    replied
    I agree. The panels are ok, not great, unless the only thing you ever heard were WalMart specials, then they might be considered great.
    My next panels were going to be tufftrax, similar to plexiglass but more durable.
    The blue foamboard had a 'skin' or 'nasal' kind of sound I could never get rid of. Not necessarily overly harsh, just could not get rid of that annoyance. Don't think you will hear much difference sanding and adding glue to the surface, but who knows.
    Plain single layer cardboard panels treated with lacquer sounded more natural.
    If space is no issue, I've gestured about adding a full 4x8 sheet of 1/8 ply and a bass shaker for the low end.
    Lows ... my experience was that the exciters (don't remember the model#) were very fragile when trying to reproduce bass. Be warned. I would not be surprised to find that a crossover and exciters made more for specific frequency ranges, aka similar to standard cone n dome 2 or 3-way speakers, to be the ticket to a fuller freq range of reproduction.

    Leave a comment:


  • badfish
    replied
    Hi All,

    New here and just authorized but have been reading this forum with focus of late. Like many, sucked into this DML speaker fun thought the world's best youtube.

    I built a couple quick panels using the home depot 2x2 project panel (which I think is XPS?) and post rounding the corners and sanding them, attached a couple DAEX-25's (the spider looking ones) to the back and hung them in my garage.

    Connected to a basic 50W amp, the sound was crazy harsh - the 4k band was especially ear grating. Using eqMAC and my mac as a source, I was able to deal with the highs and get to a better overall sound.

    I am about to order a mini-DSP-HD and a mic (a bit for this project, and just seems like cool kit in general) and will run some REW tests to see what my overall response is. (nothing like spending 500 bucks to fix your 35 dollar speakers)

    That said, reading here these panel's don't appear ideal and certainly while when EQ'ed my sound is interesting and there are definitely some qualities that intrigue me, they aren't really in the "good" category even by non audiophile standards - ear fatigue is quick.

    On that front, my lows are nearing non existent (will add a small sub, but even lower midrange not ideal). Did see a tool that suggested getting much under 240hz would be tricky with a 2x2 panel.

    I am going to coat these ones in glue/water and see if that helps with overall clarity but probably keen to build some cheap new panels.

    That said, wondering about building a newer panel on EPS, maybe toward the 6mm to 10mm thickness, and debating on smaller (12x12 ish) or something larger 1:618 ratio style, like 24x38 etc (trying to get a bit more lows).

    Also wondering if changing out the 5W DAEX-25 to a more robust DAEX-32U @ 20W would be a noticeable upgrade? They are so cheap ;-)

    Cheers and thanks all for the wealth of info here.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    On the DIY audio forum on the topic of "a study of DML as a full range speaker", the most recent post one mentions using mineral spirits to dilute the oil based paint. Whats wrong with that? Well on certain materials especially EPS and XPS they are very susceptible to corrosive substances so one has to be very careful as it will eat through the panels.

    I cant warn him because I am banned from that site....I guess he will have to learn the hard way. lol

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    Originally posted by LOUT View Post
    It sounds like you're saying with all other things roughly equal, a smaller but significantly more bendable material will typically reach lower bass than a taller+wider significantly less bendable material.
    Then again, you didn't mention whether it was the more bendable or less bendable material that can reach lower, so maybe I have that switched around?

    It also sounds like (at least in a roundabout way) you're saying the material height/width doesn't necessarily need to meet a minimum size in relation to the wavelength of the low frequency it's trying to reach.

    This isn't what I was expecting to hear, but I also know next-to-nothing about DML speakers so I should've gone without any internal guesses in the first place. I thought material rigidity had more of an influence on SPL (sensitivity?).
    You have it switched around. Larger size panel equals more lower frequency response while a smaller panel equals less. A material that can bend more will produce more lower frequencies.

    The physics for low frequencies in DML's is similar to conventional cone drivers in where size does matter. A 2inch driver will not produce the same amount of low frequencies as a 12inch driver....the same way a small DML panel will not produce low frequencies of a larger DML panel.

    Larger the panel the more it will bend which equals more bass...smaller the panel the less it will bend means less bass.

    No, actually less rigid materials have better sensitivity. The main reason why most do not use wood as a DML material is because its main down fall is very low sensitivity when compared to EPS/XPS because wood is way more rigid then EPS/XPS. There are compromises to each different type of materials used.







    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    replied
    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post
    Its the point of bendability that determines how low you can go. Oh and of course one other factor is the transducer used as not all are created equal. A bass shaker will play lower then any exciter listed on P.E.
    It sounds like you're saying with all other things roughly equal, a smaller but significantly more bendable material will typically reach lower bass than a taller+wider significantly less bendable material.
    Then again, you didn't mention whether it was the more bendable or less bendable material that can reach lower, so maybe I have that switched around?

    It also sounds like (at least in a roundabout way) you're saying the material height/width doesn't necessarily need to meet a minimum size in relation to the wavelength of the low frequency it's trying to reach.

    This isn't what I was expecting to hear, but I also know next-to-nothing about DML speakers so I should've gone without any internal guesses in the first place. I thought material rigidity had more of an influence on SPL (sensitivity?).

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X