Yup, but be aware they're compression drivers, and require HF compensation particular to the horn used. Also, the lower you play them, the steeper your crossover slopes should be, from what I've found.Originally Posted by edgewound
If Todd doesn't want those 3120A's, grab them for your testing. Not ideal, but you'll be in for a pleasant surprise....
This guy has/had them...., have at 'em. Drivers are 2425Js. Also said he had the big butt cheeks and may sell for $125/each.
http://www.recycler.com/asp/AdDetail...0&iC=45&iSC=45
Yup. They're compression drivers, and require HF compensation. Also, the lower you play them, the steeper your crossover slopes should be, from what I've found.
If Todd doesn't want those 3120A's, grab them for your testing. Not ideal, but you'll be in for a pleasant surprise....
Sounds like you have a good plan using the TAD woofers. I would run them against the 2234 and 2235 in a box program to see which of the 2 are the closer match.
Rob
it looks like the 1602's and the 2235's are near the same,
and the 1602's are rated 900hz max crossover
so it looks close.
IYO do you thing a person would be better of with a 10" mid bass then hand it over to the TADs for the lower end?
Hello Kartsmart
Why don't you start a new thread in DIY. Don't want to try to run a thread in a thread. Then we can get the whole forum in on it.
Rob
sorry thats what happens when I think out load
That's what I was trying to tell Zilch...
kartsmart... when you start the new thread, I have 2 cents worth to add to the discussion.
Widget
Only 2 cents worth?That's what I was trying to tell Zilch...
kartsmart... when you start the new thread, I have 2 cents worth to add to the discussion.
Widget
Getting the 2407H to play nicely two-way required considerable effort, particularly with respect to constructing a 24 dB/octave crossover for it.
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/a...id=12483&stc=1
Looking at the HF compensation, though, the curve appeared "textbook," i.e., 6 dB/octave compression driver. 1.2 kHz 3120A crossover would provide that. Indeed so, but it's only two poles. Worth a try to verify, tho, here with 2407H on PT-H1010 waveguide:
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/a...id=12484&stc=1
So, what crossover do I have that's 24 dB slope with textbook 6 dB/octave compensation? Active JBL M552/3 is what. Enable the 80-Series HF boost, and here's the results, all playing 2407H within +/- 2.5 dB and better:
1) OASR "Dr. Seuss" horn
2) PT-F95 "El Cheapo" waveguide
3) PT-F64 (with JBL 1" throat adapter)
4) PT-H1010 (also with adapter. Zilch's favorite PT-F1010 similar.)
Uncompensated curves (no filter) for PT-H1010 here:
http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...&postcount=776
To try out the 2407H, 3120A or M552/3 with CD compensation enabled will get there expeditiously....
Mentioned above, most any of the larger annular-ring diaphragm re-entrant compression drivers work as well with M552/3 compensation in a 100% active-crossed system.
These drivers' response doesn't extend much beyond 20 kHz, according to the specs, but they're good down to 1 kHz, perhaps lower. I've set the crossover there, the manufacturer's recommended frequency.
Here, the 1.5" exit BMS 4555 on vertical format 70° x 50° DDS CFD 1.5-70 Pro horn. LF is LE14A in retuned and inverted L55, as described above.
With PT-F1010 waveguides (bottom RTA and pic,) more keepers. Using these as mains and L99 "Hotrods" as surrounds, all's I need is to work up a center for complete "Dumpster" HT.
Lessee -- two LE10A MTM'd with PT-F77 (which don't exist) mounted vertical....
Remarkably inexpensive JBL 1" PT-F95 waveguide ($9.90, P/N 338800-001) benefits from application of CAE "Quiet Kote" damping to the rear side.
Four coats on this pair used half the can:
http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshow...number=268-250
"Case Study" here: http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...t=9166&p=90134
How does the Quiet Coat compare to the truck bedliner spray. Consistancey, is it a rubberized paint
This is more like a mastic than an elastomer. Called "Sprayable visco-elastic," there's no ingredients on the can. Recommended cleaning agent is Toluene. 18 oz. per can.
More info: http://www.partsexpress.com/pdf/268-250.pdf
http://www.cascadeaudio.com/
Hum hum ...
interesting idea for damping resonnance horn...
(Soprema is sell a stickson : bitume elastomere foil...)
It is possible to comment the result on subjective enveloppe and attack before and after ????
the sound is not too dead ??
thanks
Hi, Jean!
Somehow, I KNEW you'd have ideas on this!
I'm STUPID, of course. I didn't take impedance measurements before coating the back of the horns. I'll measure the next pair that comes in here first, though, so we can see.
When Mr. Widget was over here recently, he commented about the H3100 horns apparently having a thin coating of Aquaplas (also silica/mica in a binder, I believe) on the back, so I thought I'd try this on these cheap plastic horns, which "rang" when I tapped them, and imparted a slight, but unwanted, coloration to the sound when played. You know, "horny."
A single coat didn't help much. Label says maximum 1/32" thick. I went beyond that, in the end, to really dampen them, perhaps too much, as you suggest. The ring is gone; they now "thud," and the sound coloration is also gone.
Damping horns by adding resilient mass to the rear of them (asphaltic, bitumen) seems to have been common practice at one time; I'm surprised we don't see more of it today. The thick composite resin ones are inherently damped, I appreciate, but some of the metal ones could be hung outside as wind chimes....
Hello Zilch,Hi, Jean!
Somehow, I KNEW you'd have ideas on this!
I'm surprised we don't see more of it today. The thick composite resin ones are inherently damped, I appreciate, but some of the metal ones could be hung outside as wind chimes....
Long time…
You a DYEman now…
Yes I have few ideas on this question but first I tried to keep your feeling…
In regards on your set-up it is clear you not fix horn into a standard wood panel.
The mass of wood panel + the rest of weight box contribute to damping and it is probably caculated by engineer: Big chance the ringing is out just by fix it…
--------------------------
For the damping question:
Asphalt, lead or bitumen elastomer or any other hight viscosity damping is poor product audio:
Why ?? this stuff is degrading the transient response. Slow peak but long-time resilience energy effect. This thype of product pick-up energy and re-radiate slowly. The peak to peak is better but the floor noise is poor and blomm the attack of next response by lack of transient and maintaint higher internal noise in time.
See picture for more comprehension.
The other problem is tuning visco damping. If the damping is not tuning the result is poor than original situation . see picture 2 the maximum dampoing create a very hight peak response than original… the best damping in this case is 0.2 damping . So be careful to not create a displacement of coloration by excessif damping….
in fact structurally damping is really better approach than visco damping so never good cie go in the way of visco damping.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
