I just started a tweeterless project after this was mentioned in the other thread, but it is more like a typical 2 way. I will post it up soon when I get a little more time. I have an interest in fullrangers lately for some reason. I think this is a fun experiment, and would like to try it out even though I doubt I will be able to make it to the event. I feel like some sort of aperiodic 5-6 inch full range with a larger woofer could be fun.
@Wolf said:
Gross volume inside the exterior walls of the enclosure. Bracing, xovers, drivers, ports, PRs, damping, etc all come out of the 1.25ft^3. IE, absolute maximum internal volume if nothing were there but outer shell of cabinet should be 1.25ft^3 or less.
OB wideband was brought up, but what about OB woofers? Basically a piece of plywood with woofers mounted OB with relatively small sealed wideband enclosure?
When I look at your schematic, in front of the wideband driver is two parallel and one series notch? When I think of a contour filter I think of an RC filter. If you are allowing L1 with C1 and R1 the notch can become a high pass with a big cap?
A contour can be a notch, LR, or CR; and then series or parallel. They all shape or tilt the response to a degree. Contour in the sense of this endgame theme is that there really is no xover from one driver to the next since they operate together.
The way I view your query is that a large cap as C1 will kill off your bass below that area. Not really a good idea if you want bass from your cascaded woofers. This is why they are cascaded in wiring. As I stated in the graphic, you have to use either of the other components or both R1 and L1 with C1. If you use R1, then the response will tilt up as you will attenuate below Fc of C1. It will not function as a highpass unless R1 is huge, and then it is against the stated allowed methods.
Is it not clear that a series highpass cap or capless-shunting-highpass is not allowed? Pretty sure I said that....
If a notch and C4 set to a large value to try and skirt what is plainly stated as not allowed is tried, then L3 is still required for BSC. This means the highpass as suggested in C4 would essentially be nonfunctional. C4 is intended as a method for breakup suppression.
And to add again- this circuit is just an example to show what could be done, and what is not allowed.
Another example of why I chose the example layout I did....
If you wanted a shelving filter/bump-reducer with a large 600uF cap and 3mH coil in parallel for C1/L1, this is also okay. If the coil is a small value above Fc, it shorts the Highpass out. If it is larger than Fc, then it makes a small dip in the response and does not highpass the system either.
I'm thinking of placing the widebander and 0.5 woofer within an H-Pass type tapered line and resonating chamber system to control the widebander's cone motion at low frequencies.
Since I was asked 'why', as the reasons may not yet be clear...
When using a wide range, most people do not use them full bandwidth. They are augmented to the nines for best results. Being that we have to make it a challenge, and the main deficiencies being bass extension and BSC, and that you typically don't see 1.5ways. It solves the problem of BSC, and divides the bass between the woofer and wideband to reduce the load on it. It is to make the Widebander have an easier job of doing it all.
Are external bass reflex ports allowed? The reason I am asking is because I am getting a fairly good power handling type alignment with a particular full range driver, but it requires a 0.50" ID by 36" long port attached to a very small box. The only way to do this would be to use a very long external PVC port.
I understand why you ask, but I feel a thin slot port with a turn or 2 in it could likely work positioned adjacent the back or side panel. You could even have the port as you describe folded into a chamber contained. I think it would be hard to allow such a round port structure and try and express or police adherence to the volume requirements.
If I were using a PS180 or PS220 as my widebander, this would work. But I am trying to use a PS95-8 in my project and the subchamber will be way too small to fit a PR onto the sides of the subchamber. But I think I have a solution. Menards plumbing department to the rescue!
Thinking a piezo exciter full/broad ranger (in combo with a woofer) may not fall within the '4 corners' of this build contest..? Just need a LP / contour filter on the W for the transition, and one on the full ranger ~7.5kHz, with a lightly supported plate... maybe the whole front 'baffle face' with side firing woofers?
If I were using a PS180 or PS220 as my widebander, this would work. But I am trying to use a PS95-8 in my project and the subchamber will be way too small to fit a PR onto the sides of the subchamber. But I think I have a solution. Menards plumbing department to the rescue!
@tajanes said:
Thinking a piezo exciter full/broad ranger (in combo with a woofer) may not fall within the '4 corners' of this build contest..? Just need a LP / contour filter on the W for the transition, and one on the full ranger ~7.5kHz, with a lightly supported plate... maybe the whole front 'baffle face' with side firing woofers?
@Wolf said:
$500 for the DEV kit, and you need to sign an NDA.
Just trying to think outside the box. But yes, $500 and no need for its eq.
Sooo...
maybe a standard cheap piezo driver 'run full' having its natural lower-end roll off..
or, a cheap exciter
Edit / Rethinking this: I don’t see a std piezo as fairly qualifying for this build as it wouldn’t really be a 1.5way. Yes it can run ‘full range’ but they are tweeters. Now the exciter…
Comments
I just started a tweeterless project after this was mentioned in the other thread, but it is more like a typical 2 way. I will post it up soon when I get a little more time. I have an interest in fullrangers lately for some reason. I think this is a fun experiment, and would like to try it out even though I doubt I will be able to make it to the event. I feel like some sort of aperiodic 5-6 inch full range with a larger woofer could be fun.
OB wideband was brought up, but what about OB woofers? Basically a piece of plywood with woofers mounted OB with relatively small sealed wideband enclosure?
When I look at your schematic, in front of the wideband driver is two parallel and one series notch? When I think of a contour filter I think of an RC filter. If you are allowing L1 with C1 and R1 the notch can become a high pass with a big cap?
A contour can be a notch, LR, or CR; and then series or parallel. They all shape or tilt the response to a degree. Contour in the sense of this endgame theme is that there really is no xover from one driver to the next since they operate together.
The way I view your query is that a large cap as C1 will kill off your bass below that area. Not really a good idea if you want bass from your cascaded woofers. This is why they are cascaded in wiring. As I stated in the graphic, you have to use either of the other components or both R1 and L1 with C1. If you use R1, then the response will tilt up as you will attenuate below Fc of C1. It will not function as a highpass unless R1 is huge, and then it is against the stated allowed methods.
Is it not clear that a series highpass cap or capless-shunting-highpass is not allowed? Pretty sure I said that....
If a notch and C4 set to a large value to try and skirt what is plainly stated as not allowed is tried, then L3 is still required for BSC. This means the highpass as suggested in C4 would essentially be nonfunctional. C4 is intended as a method for breakup suppression.
InDIYana Event Website
And to add again- this circuit is just an example to show what could be done, and what is not allowed.
Another example of why I chose the example layout I did....
If you wanted a shelving filter/bump-reducer with a large 600uF cap and 3mH coil in parallel for C1/L1, this is also okay. If the coil is a small value above Fc, it shorts the Highpass out. If it is larger than Fc, then it makes a small dip in the response and does not highpass the system either.
InDIYana Event Website
[Rubbing hands] Aw yeah, think I've got a plan and have all the parts on hand.
Damn I wish I still worked from home.
I'm thinking of placing the widebander and 0.5 woofer within an H-Pass type tapered line and resonating chamber system to control the widebander's cone motion at low frequencies.
If that works for you, Bill, knock it out as I'd love to hear it!
InDIYana Event Website
I'm not going to complete, but maybe someone will horn load the fullrange.
Come on Meredith
Curious what folks think horn loading would help with.. (no sarcasm)
In my mind it would need to be pretty huge to negate typical baffle step.
Otherwise, it seems a slightly boosted top end is desireable on widebands in order to get some wider radiation of the top octaves?
I was just looking for something more interesting than just a sealed enclosure.
Could DCR the widerange cab to limit xmax.
InDIYana Event Website
How about making the full range omni?
Sure, could do that! Omni is worth a shot...
Since I was asked 'why', as the reasons may not yet be clear...
When using a wide range, most people do not use them full bandwidth. They are augmented to the nines for best results. Being that we have to make it a challenge, and the main deficiencies being bass extension and BSC, and that you typically don't see 1.5ways. It solves the problem of BSC, and divides the bass between the woofer and wideband to reduce the load on it. It is to make the Widebander have an easier job of doing it all.
InDIYana Event Website
I do appreciate this part of the INDiyana event, even though I am not quite up to it yet
So who's doing a unity horn?
I call "not it".
Could work...
InDIYana Event Website
The horn loading would help with dispersion of the FR-HF driver.
Are external bass reflex ports allowed? The reason I am asking is because I am getting a fairly good power handling type alignment with a particular full range driver, but it requires a 0.50" ID by 36" long port attached to a very small box. The only way to do this would be to use a very long external PVC port.
Make a stand out of the port/pipe?
I understand why you ask, but I feel a thin slot port with a turn or 2 in it could likely work positioned adjacent the back or side panel. You could even have the port as you describe folded into a chamber contained. I think it would be hard to allow such a round port structure and try and express or police adherence to the volume requirements.
InDIYana Event Website
Could always use a PR.
If I were using a PS180 or PS220 as my widebander, this would work. But I am trying to use a PS95-8 in my project and the subchamber will be way too small to fit a PR onto the sides of the subchamber. But I think I have a solution. Menards plumbing department to the rescue!
Flexible hose coiled inside the box.
Thinking a piezo exciter full/broad ranger (in combo with a woofer) may not fall within the '4 corners' of this build contest..? Just need a LP / contour filter on the W for the transition, and one on the full ranger ~7.5kHz, with a lightly supported plate... maybe the whole front 'baffle face' with side firing woofers?
https://flora.tech/piezoelectric-speaker/
Or, maybe a standard cheap piezo driver 'run full' having its natural lower-end roll off..
You're going to port your HF driver?
$500 for the DEV kit, and you need to sign an NDA.
InDIYana Event Website
Just trying to think outside the box. But yes, $500 and no need for its eq.
Sooo...
maybe a standard cheap piezo driver 'run full' having its natural lower-end roll off..
or, a cheap exciter
Edit / Rethinking this: I don’t see a std piezo as fairly qualifying for this build as it wouldn’t really be a 1.5way. Yes it can run ‘full range’ but they are tweeters. Now the exciter…