Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DIY Flat Panel Speaker Love

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

  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    I totally get what you are saying. Although I havent tried many caps what I've noticed from all the caps I have tried is that they IMO "COLOR" the sound for better or for worse. In my DML designs I prefer the colored sound of the Jantzen Z standard as they help smooth out the shout and sibilance from my DML panels combined with the Audiocap Theta smoothing it out even more but adding extra detail. So I guess it comes down to each individual design as well as other factors like you mentioned and of course personal preference.

    The Dayton poly/metal caps (DMPC/PMPC dont suit my DML designs very well as they can sound a tad bit sharp/harsh/grainny on certain vocals and instruments. I just tested the Dayton DFFC film and foil caps and they are much more suitable to my liking as they smooth out the sharp/harsh/grainny sound of my DML panels. The difference IMO of the Dayton film and foil and the Audiocap Theta is the Theta is clearer with more detail but it cost almost 7 times the price of the Daytons but its not 7 times better. lol

    Leave a comment:


  • DeZZar
    replied
    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post
    OMG. Anyone that says they cant tell the difference between NPE and all other higher end caps must be smoking crack or deaf as heck. LOL
    Yeah it all boils down to the overall quality of the system from source all the way to room. Someone running cheap drivers with museum grade nostalgia amplification streaming spotify out the headphone jack of their phone won't hear a difference (most likely).

    Originally posted by Unbiasedsound View Post
    Now I am wondering just how those Jantzen Alumen foil Z caps would sound like compared to the Audiocap theta? Or the Jantzen Z superior or Silver? Maybe later down the road.
    In theory as the caps get better they simply get closer to sounding like there isn't a cap at all. The best cap is no cap.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    My P.E. package worth of $140.00 in capacitors have arrived today. I upgraded from a combination of NPE/Jantzen standard to Jantzen Standard/Audiocap Theta and OMG. Anyone that says they cant tell the difference between NPE and all other higher end caps must be smoking crack or deaf as heck. LOL

    The Jantzen S/Theta cap combo OMG just took my DML panels to a whole another level. It took away the shout/harsh/grainess/sibilance and gave out more clarity and detail. I hear subtle details in tracks I am familiar with that I've havent noticed before. I dont think I could ever go back to NPE. I did buy some Dayton film foil but havent tested them out yet but will soon once I have more time. Only down fall is the cost. The theta cap cost around 4 times the price of the exciters I use and in fact is the most expensive part of my DML panels. LOL

    I was skeptical at first because of the price of those expensive caps and some mixed reviews but I guess you do get what you pay for when buying those expensive caps. Now I am wondering just how those Jantzen Alumen foil Z caps would sound like compared to the Audiocap theta? Or the Jantzen Z superior or Silver? Maybe later down the road.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    As I mentioned before if you look at all the BMR drivers none of them are larger then 3.5 inches. Why? because once the diaphragm starts getting larger the more the high frequencies will suffer. The smaller the driver the better the high frequency because at that small size only the high frequencies are being produced due to physics. Once the diaphragm starts getting larger it will produce more midrange frequencies. If it gets even larger then midbass then bass then sub bass the larger it becomes. If Tectonic made a 6,1/2inch BMR driver it would no longer be classified as full range but rather a mid/woofer or wide band in which it would have to be coupled to a tweeter with crossover as a 2 way design like Phase Technology speakers which use a flat BMR like driver for the mid/bass and a 1inch dome tweeter for the highs. Even Sony and Technics made a BMR type of speaker with there APM series of flat diaphragm speakers that utilized a tweeter and mid/woofer or tweeter, midrange and woofer. Like I said BMR technology is nothing new.

    Phase Technology - YouTube


    Sony APM-77W exclusive design by Oldplayer.ru (винтаж аудио) - YouTube




    TECHNICS SU-A6 SE-A5 & Technics SB-M2 тест Oldplayer - YouTube

    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    commented on 's reply
    After comparing some measurements side-by-side, it looks like the whizzer cones could be giving a boost around 10Khz and up which is certainly more than I was thinking they did. I'm not sure how much of the sound up there is distortion though, so that might or might not be a problem (I don't know if the usual mention of woofer distortion in the high frequencies is linear or non-linear). They still have relatively poor off-axis dispersion compared to most dome tweeters, but maybe that's because they're still fairly large-diameter, larger than most dome tweeters around 1" at least.?

  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    Bass from DML's is design dependent. There is a flaw in the exciters design so bass is limited, this is why the BMR was invented as it fixes the exciters flaw. There is also a reason why a BMR driver is (3.5) "SMALL".

    Its not really about the beaming its more about the dispersion. High frequencies come out of the center/middle of the cone are closest to the voice coil and disperse outwards towards the edges of the surround material hence why the whizzer cone or plug/dust cap is in the center of the driver. The larger the diaphragm becomes the less prominent the highs will sound as it has to travel across that huge surface area. The smaller the diaphragm the more prominent the highs will become as it does not have to travel that far from the center. This is why smaller panels will have better high frequencies as opposed to larger panels. When you throw a pebble into the pond the highs are in the middle and radiate outwards untill it reaches the edges of the pound but the bigger the pond the weaker the ripples become once it reaches the edges. Not sure if you understand my analogy? lol

    Look at the paper cone tweeters on P.E. Most people dont realize that some of the sound radiating off that
    "paper", cone tweeter is coming from the MYLAR and or ALUMINUM dust cap in the center which increases the high frequency sounds....I AM GIVING YOU HINTS LOUT. lol

    My question to you is have actually HEARD them side by side?....as two drivers can have similar specs but sound fairly different which will further prove that the whizzer cone/phase plug/dust cap does make a difference. I highly doubt that a reputable brand like Tang Band (or any other high end brand) would use whizzer cones on there bamboo full range drivers just for gimmicks.

    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    replied
    I certainly won't argue about there being a lack of deep-bass from most DML's.

    I think the main reason larger tweeters aren't common is because their beaming starts at lower and lower frequencies as conventional drivers get larger and larger.
    Do DML panels also beam at high frequencies, and does their beaming start at lower frequencies if the DML panel size increases?

    I've seen one or two of the larger "full-range" drivers with similar frequency-response and similar high-frequency output both with and without whizzer cones, so I'm starting to think whizzers might be more of a gimmick than a feature. I also haven't seen any whizzer equipped larger full-rangers that managed to avoid high-frequency beaming.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    My statements are not based on assumptions and guesses though, they are firmly based on what actually works and not just my self but from others before me like Bertagni, NXT/Tectonic. This tech is nothing new as its been around for a very long time, we are not trying to reinvent the wheel here. If you look at all the professional designs of Bending wave technology today you will see that they use DML for the mid to high frequencies because they know DML's are inadequate in the bass department. The very expensive Goebel speakers use a mid/high BW transducer while using conventional cone drivers to cover bass. Manger audio uses there patented Bending wave transducer for mid/highs combined with a conventional cone driver for bass. I use a DML panel for mids/highs combined with a powered sub for bass. Also all the DML/Bending wave transducers are "SMALL" meaning around 12inches or smaller. You will not see a commercially based Bending wave panel that is 24inches or larger and its not due to cosmetic reasons but actual physics. Why are high frequency drivers 1inch and under? Why not make a 10inch dome tweeter? because physics will dictate that it wont sound good which is why dome tweeters are around 1inch. The saying size does matter is very true when it comes to speaker drivers. Full range conventional cone drivers range from 4-8inch but most of them use a "WHIZZER" cone and or a hard type of plug in the middle to increase high frequency response because when the diaphragm is too large the highs are spread out more and the high frequencies become less prominent due to the midrange over powering the highs. The whizzer cone or hard phase plug focuses the high frequencies and prevents them from spreading to the outer edges of the surround material. Every size driver has a "optimal" frequency response as drivers are usually classified into 3-5 catagories. Tweeter, Midrange, Woofer, Subwoofer, Full range.

    1-3inch= Tweeter

    3-5inch= Midrange

    5-1/5-8inches= mid bass

    10-21inches=Bass



    All I can say is experiment on your own to see if what I and some others have said is true or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • LOUT
    replied
    I feel like I'd prefer something like objective measurement and direct comparisons before settling upon some/many of those statements super firmly. I'm pretty sure the DML wave formation (flexing-larger/smaller-waves VS pumping-all-at-once) causes different driver diameter/size physics, and conventional drivers (and BMR) use a very flexible surround that doesn't greatly impede their movement rather than attaching more directly to the surrounding frame...so it might be important to follow that philosophy if attaching to a frame under that plan (except instead of just following pumping/Y-axis motion it'll need to non-impede the wave/flex motion which may be really difficult).

    The comparison to an open-baffle is probably pretty sensible, but it might be important to keep in mind how much of the "back-side-wave" is SENT via the front of the DML because of the flexing/pattern simultaneously with the opposite pattern since the entire panel is flexing rather than pumping-all-at-once. Otherwise a strangely-shaped enclosure could theoretically help the DML's low-end quite a lot (which I'm pretty sure it doesn't).

    This is all just my assumptions and guesses though, so plenty of salt is recommended (the sceptical kind, please...not the bitter/mean kind :P ).

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    After over 6 years of experimenting with DML panels I have learned what a DML panels is. I see so many people on others sites thinking that a DML is a whole completely different animal but in reality its not.

    Here is the truth, DML's are more similar to conventional cone drivers then not because of the fact that the physics that work for conventional cone drivers apply to DML as well.

    A DML is basically like a open baffle speaker but instead of a cone diaphragm uses a flat diaphram.

    This is the reason NXT/Tectonic went from DML panels to a BMR driver which is basically a similar concept but utilizing a conventional cone design using a steel structure to hold the magnet as well as the diaphragm material in place. This BMR concept is nothing new though as Dr. Jose Bertagni has utilized this so called BMR design way before NXT/Tectonic existed.

    This is the reason why I highly recommend using a frame and surround to hold the DML diaphragm in place with a spine to hold the exciters magnet in place just like a conventional cone driver and or a BMR driver. This is one of the FIRST and the most BASIC STEP to building a good sounding DML panel.

    It seems most people dont even want to follow these tried and true basic steps, instead want to hang there panels by a string because a youtuber with 2 months experience told them to. LOL

    If you want to build a DML panel using a single exciter then you build it like you would a single full range conventional cone driver. If you want to use 2 exciters per panel you have to build them like you would a 2 way conventional cone driver utilizing cross overs. If you look at Bertagni speakers he even uses crossovers in his design as his latest designs use 2 or 3 way crossovers like the traditional conventional cone speakers. When using 2 or more exciters on the same panel crossovers can help to reduce cancellations but nothing can completely stop the waves from overlapping. The only way to do it is to use seperate panels the same way one would use SEPARATE drivers.

    Even the size of the DML panels matter when it comes to physics. When you look at conventional cone full range drivers from fostex, tang band, etc. they mostly range from 4inch to 8inch. You are NOT going to see a 24inch full range driver, yet many DML panels are 24inches and over. This is the reason I went from larger DML panels to smaller DML panels as you cant defy physics.

    To much people are over thinking the concept of DML designs thinking they have magical physical capabilities that defy physics when in fact they are very similar to conventional cone drivers.




    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    That guy in the video posted above didnt even do the basic water/glue mixture treatment.

    Best shape is square or rectangle.

    Also if one is using NPE caps with there DML panels using "by pass caps" will increase the sound quality of the NPE caps. I use 0.68uf and under Dayton or Jantzen metalized polypropolyne. I am going to try the dayton film and foil by pass caps next to see how they sound.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unbiasedsound
    commented on 's reply
    Yes I know all those panels sound awful. lol

  • Unbiasedsound
    replied
    Testing Viewer Suggestions on “The World's Best Speakers” from Tech Ingredients - YouTube






    Leave a comment:


  • badfish
    replied
    Just some love here. Added a minidsp 2x4 HD and brought my SVS cylinder up (from my home theatre to my garage with my basic panels). Used the DSP crossover to cut out 150hz and below and on my basic home depot panels and played around. bunch with with the EQ. Sound I've achieved at this point trends to very questionably awesome until you remember I'm driving two 22$ insulation panels with a 70 buck amp from amazon. No question 10k systems sound better, and the addition of a 400 DSP and a 1000$ sub make a huge difference, but the mid/high are excellent and the value is mind numbing. Can't wait to build some real panels.

    Do notice some probably clipping with my amzn 50W amp.. Might try something with a tad more headroom.

    Leave a comment:


  • bilidru
    replied
    I've assembled my first panels. Finally I went with 4mm thick plywood of 40,5 x 40,5 cm for the speakers. I thought they had more deep tones than the 2cm thick xps panels. (Didn't get thinner ones in the stores) I also added a 2cm thick EPS of 55x45cm as a subwoofer.and I'm happy with the result.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X