My first rig... progress thread
Printed From: Speakerplans.com
Category: Plans
Forum Name: New Projects Forum
Forum Description: Forum for new speakerplans projects, in memory of Tony Wilkes, 1953 - 2014
URL: https://forum.speakerplans.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=100816
Printed Date: 24 April 2024 at 3:15am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.06 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: My first rig... progress thread
Posted By: Khyber
Subject: My first rig... progress thread
Date Posted: 06 December 2017 at 11:46pm
|
I have decided to document my first build in here. after a lot of deciding i am building a full reflex rig. but i want it be visually pleasing too, but second to any technical needs. i have already learned a lot regarding design etc from a few guys on here in my other threads and so far this is what i have come up with... i plan to try and source some coloured foam for behind the grill and add some detail in 4mm ply to the mouth of the Vent. I do have a concern though... will the air moving in and out of the vent cause undesired noise from blowing past the decorative parts??    |
Replies:
Posted By: concept-10
Date Posted: 08 December 2017 at 2:55pm
| Acoustically transparent foam is fine and you can get it in various colours, do not paint speaker cloth, bad idea. |
Posted By: concept-10
Date Posted: 08 December 2017 at 2:56pm
Nice looking rig though 
|
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 4:54pm
| Thanks guys. I like the look of coloured cloth behind a black grill its so difficult trying to get a reflex design to look anything other than a box but i do like the result. Building them to look that good on the other hand... haha wont have time to start the build until well into the new year though :( |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 5:52pm
|
If you want to make a reflex design look less like a box, focus on build quality and attention to detail rather than flare. There's really nothing wrong with the 'just a box' aesthetic, provided you take care to balance and tune the aesthetic. That's what sets pro boxes apart from standard DIY builds after all, and since you seem to wish to go all out on fancy components and extra expense in non-functional areas you may as well direct your attention to the fine details, because that's what people will really notice and remember, not just another variation of the crazy paving brace (which frankly seems a little tacked on in this design as it's not serving a clear function, which I feel compromises the credibility of the box to some degree). Also consider a v-baffle arrangement, that's about as badass as a dual 15 reflex can can look imo, and you could get some custom grilles cut to protect the drivers cheaply enough if you sunk them into your extra thick baffle - Cnc or laser cut of a couple or 460mm discs wouldn't break the bank and would look very original. There are some commercial v-baffle bass cab designs which give just the sort of aggressive/futuristic flare aesthetic you seem to be shooting at, so you could look to them for inspiration. I wouldn't get too hung up about the aesthetics of the bass to give the system a visual identity though - the midtop design can define a rig with even the plainest looking subs, so long as it's all designed to go together. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 6:27pm
|
Can't find the specific example of the cab I'm thinking of - it's a 218 sub with eighteensound drivers, possibly 18nlw9600. Has the vent in the centre of the 'v' so it's like a \_/ shape but the angle on the baffle isn't tight. Maybe 15 degrees or so. I think you'll find you use the kick bins on their side a lot more often than upright so that's something to consider. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: DMorison
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 8:55pm
TW Audio?   |
Hemisphere wrote:Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 9:09pm
|
That's the one! Modelling something like this in WinISD might not be so intuitive though. To some degree the baffle may act as an extension/flare of the port so it you modelled it only up to the end of the centre port it might not be accurate. If the reason for the v-baffle is primarily to add character to the box it wouldn't need to be even 15 degrees though. 7.5 would do the job. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: smitske96
Date Posted: 09 December 2017 at 11:37pm
|
First of al the BSX is 2X 21" (I believe 21NLW9600(1)?) They describe the enclosure as "Hybrid", definitely not fully horn loaded down to 27 Hz. But probably till 70/80 fish Hz, looks allot like a scaled up version of the Seeburg Acoustic Line TSE sub. Ive heard both, and the B30 definitely lacks the real "low-end", but is really punchy. BSX does have the "low-end" and that was a real nice experience!
|
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 10 December 2017 at 7:54am
|
I swear I saw that or a very similar cab described as bass reflex, or if not it may have been published with a 100dB sensitivity spec which weighted against the clearly 'horny' style. Was thinking it may have been like an rcf esw1018. The design style/layout could definitely be carried over to a reflex build if care was taken not to let the unusual baffle arrangement impact on the port behaviour (the top and bottom panels could be cut out with a V shape to let the port open directly to the front of the cab, like the hf section of a line array box ie) ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: smitske96
Date Posted: 10 December 2017 at 9:56am
| If the idea for this cab is a reflex, then I think there's allot of wasted space. |
Posted By: DMorison
Date Posted: 10 December 2017 at 2:05pm
EAW describe the SB1000 and all it's versions/derivatives as Vented boxes - the angled cavity the drivers sit in does give a bit of gain but mainly up higher than the crossover, and helps act as a massively flared vent, reducing the chance of extraneous noise from that.
|
Posted By: gen0me
Date Posted: 10 December 2017 at 2:34pm
|
But sb1000 has ports like normal br instead of those Which is probably tapped horn with chamber. |
Posted By: DMorison
Date Posted: 10 December 2017 at 2:55pm
Could be, depends on the internal layout - it could still be mostly BR for the actual acoustic loading. TW claim "Hybrid" which is really a meaningless term - it could be very like the EAW's in that the angled cavity just gives a little more gain at the high end of the response, all the way to being mostly tapped horn (or even dare I say it like two miniscoops mouth to mouth ;-) ). Absent an internal layout or an impedance trace, all we can do is speculate, which doesn't really help the OP. Anyway, the point of putting it in the thread was just as a visual example of how one can create a more interesting appearance without making significant changes to the complexity of the modelling/build, which I think this still does.
|
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 16 December 2017 at 12:18pm
|
That's a damn nice cab! The V arrangement looks sweet. doubt i could confidently simulate a cab like that though :( would make it impossible to tune the port after the build would it not? I would have to be very confident it was all right first time round before starting a build or would you recommend designing the cab and just build the 1, load it and measure? hmm do i take it back to sketchup and play some more with angled baffles? got me tempted. |
Posted By: DMorison
Date Posted: 16 December 2017 at 1:53pm
Unless you stick with a proven cabinet+driver combination, you're best to assume that your 1st cab is a prototype and may need tweaking, yes. For that kind of layout, your best bet would be to make the whole rear panel removable on said prototype, and make the vents a bit shorter than the model predicts. That way, if they do prove to be tuned higher than you want, you only have to open the back of the cab and glue in strips of wood to extend them to reduce the tuning frequency. (That's the opposite of the common advice to start long and cut shorter as you measure and refine; on the basis that shortening a built in plywood port will be a lot harder than shortening a plastic tube after the rest of the cabinet is closed up.) Re: Simulating - if you stick with shallow angles as Hemisphere was suggesting, they'll make very little difference to your model - continue to treat it as a regular vented box. Just remember to account for the changed internal volume of the cabinet. HTH, David.
|
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 16 December 2017 at 3:11pm
|
Thanks David that clears that up, i can't not have a go at modelling something now :) i guess when it comes to building prototypes i could just build and test them both. I would only be losing the cost of wood for one cab and would find a use for the wood somewhere else. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 4:20pm
first draft of new design... haven't got around to mid-tops yet but the basics of the sub and kick bins are here :) thoughts? |
Posted By: concept-10
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 4:38pm
| Like it š |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 8:33pm
Just whipped up the shells of the mid tops The flat panel in the center of the MTs are for the comp horns.  |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 8:44pm
Fantastic - I feel better about being so harsh on the originals now  Not sure the midtop design is very practical though. What happens when you're using a smaller bass section? I think stacks look better when the midtops are less wide than the rest of the stack, but that's just personal preference. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 9:43pm
|
Thanks man appreciated. Thanks for the inspiration, i'm much happier with these now. Shoulda posted this one too... I plan to start with this first. 1 sub 1 kick then MT then another kick etc... as a mono stack then double it to stereo, then dream about the 1st pic as 1 side of a full stack haha :)  Haven't braced the MTs yet but here's the guts of the other 2 as well. yet to go into detail about the vents yet, some of them may need to be dummy's. The baffles and everything else are braced well though.  |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 9:54pm
|
Looks nice but sub to kick ratio is all wrong. Look at your excursion plots with high power input and you'll see the subs will be excursion limited while the kicks are thermally limited. Most of the energy is in the sub region and outdoors bass will be much weaker. Think 2:1 or 3:2. Bracing is overkill (and not optimal either lol but more than sufficient) . Looks like the inside of a 10 grand B&W hifi, your bottleneck for limiting panel vibrations in the design as shown will be the carpentry skills of the box builder and other fine details like how you secure the driver to the baffle, cabinet hardware, quality of ply, etc, not the panel arrangement. Open area on some of the bracing looks like it may cause some peculiar issues in the upper bass but I'm not sure about that - you can make those holes bigger or elongate them to capsule shape without issue. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 10:10pm
|
Haha OK ill read up on excursion limits etc i'm clueless ;) but very willing to learn. I was thinking myself too many kicks. So if i went 3 subs and 2 kicks would the 1 MT be fine? They are 12" not 10". Could you recommend any books that cover building these kinds of rigs, all i can seem to find are books on building home systems and the likes. I could really do with an infographic or flow chart of the entire signal path from source i.e. the DJ mixer right up to the driver. I would be able to picture the final package including all the auxiliary equipment etc.. better that way. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 10:14pm
|
So instead of splitting it into essentially (removing all the circle cutouts) a 3x3x3 compartment would 2x2x2 be sufficient? |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 10:21pm
|
3 double 18 subs to 2 double 15 kicks. Basically: Mixer to processing (crossover/dsp/effects) to amps to speakers. You need enough amp power for the speakers and enough processing to protect the drivers, split the frequency bands and tune the rig to the environment. That can all be done by one box (dsp). ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 21 December 2017 at 10:27pm
|
Woah really?? Even for hard dance/trance etc... wouldn't be too 'subby'? It's more tight and punchy over sub bass. For dub i would understand? Or is the newbie showing in me :) |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 12:25am
Newbie showing I'm afraid  I mean..really massive fundamental failure to understand the theory on the most basic level, tbh, if you think you'll need more kicks than sub for any sort of music. Check out the 'show off your soundsystem' threads, just scroll through all the rigs, most of them will have an obvious kick section, count the bins. They're not all dub rigs! Look at dance music playing through a spectrum analyser and think about it. 6dB louder requires twice as many cabs, and in most dance music the 30-80Hz region will be 10-20dB up most of the time. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 12:57am
Cheers man, That's why I'm here asking questions after all. i have been
through a lot of the 'show off your soundsystem' and checked haha i
agree :) This look more like it? Ripped out some guts too.  |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 8:03am
|
You still have the ratio backwards. 3 sub drivers to 2 kicks. I understand you're new to this but I worry you're too new to be thinking about building some massive high end rig if you can't at least see that anything less than a 1:1 ratio would give an unnecessary amount of headroom to the kick region. If your sub box peaks at 135dB per driver and your kicks peak at 134dB (for sake of argument - it may be a couple of dB off one way or other), then a 2:1 ratio of kick to sub would give 5dB more headroom to a region that never plays louder...ever. At least certainly not in any kind of dance music. No matter how hard it is, the loudest notes reproduced will be the fundamentals of the kick drum and the bass notes. The higher bass notes (ones with their fundamentals in the kick region) will always be produced at lower amplitudes in music. Reverse the ratio (2x18 sub for every 1x15 kick) and you get 7dB more headroom on sub, which may be overkill indoors but will prove invaluable outdoors. A more modest 3:2 ratio gives about4dB extra headroom on sub which is nothing really. You also have to keep in mind power compression losses will be much more pronounced on the sub because the rms of the lower bass is much, much greater than the kick, that can eat into another 2 or 3dB of headroom in long sessions at high volume. Consider that many midtops (Funktion One ie) incorporate a kick region. Can you imagine an F1 stack with 3 double 18 bass and even SIX midtops precariously balanced on top? Let alone NINE! That's what you're doing with this rig plan. Your port gets too close to the rear wall of the cab btw.. You should leave a gap of 2x port diameter ideally - you might get away with less but 1x port diameter is no good. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 9:39am
| Aha i think im with you now im fresh headed, a few too many Disaronnos last night had me confuddled i think. So indoors say the 6 single 18s down the bottom with only 2 of the double 15s and 1 double 12 top box. And outdoors could get away with chucking 2 more subs in? |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 10:28am
|
The top box would be your bottleneck in that arrangement, especially as fidelity is your goal. You really don't want your mids to be strained to keep up indoors. 6x single sub 2x double kick 2x midtop. More typical use might be 3x or 4x sub per side, 1x kick 1x midtop. Your bass section looks good in a 3/2 arrangement but then you have issues with stack height with your midtop design. I think you may need to go back to the drawing board lol What you're going to be forced to contend with if you want your rig to look special is that there's a reason systems look the way they do and if you want to play around with that you need to understand those reasons before designing the system, else you'll be shooting in the dark with your design choices. Bass and kick designs look good btw but I think the midtop will be annoying on it's side when the extra 35cm of having the CD at the top of the cab could make the difference between a viable or unviable stacking arrangement. There's also no reason for your mids to be vented unless you plan to use them as monitors sometimes, but they're really better off sealed. Again with the fidelity issue, you're really not going to want your mids in a straight box enclosure. It won't splay well in multiples for one thing, and you'll get standing waves in the cab from the parallel walls. A trapezoid is the typical solution to both problems. That will introduce added build complexity but if I understood correctly, you will be getting assistance with the build? ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: doller
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 11:03am
| Did a festival last spring and the main stage had 8 of those TW audio boxes so 16x 15'' drivers. Running off the Powersoft K3. I have to say I wasn't impressed. It was pumping it out but 8 scoops on the same stage at a regge festi was twice the thump. Just saying. and the TW was maybe 3 x the price. sounded nice though. |
Posted By: rosssss224
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 11:09am
| A single K3??! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 11:20am
|
yeah I'm following you. Ill scrap the MT and re-think. No planned assistance in building but i do have my own workshop and laser cutter. i plan on using the laser cutter to make 6mm routing jigs for the complex stuff and hole cutting and a plunge saw for all the straight and miter cuts. I am still struggling to source any decent reading material related to these kinds of builds not home theater/studio rather than asking questions about every possible thing. Edit* the port depth was just random haven't worked them out yet just drew them in i know in reality they will need to be a lot shorter Edit 2* Just clicked the link in your (Hemisphere) sig haha not sure i have even reached the peak of MT Stupid yet. I feel like i have not even left sight of base camp :) :) |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 12:08pm
|
If it's also your first build then I would settle on one design which won't change - sub is probably best as it will be most pronouncedly unforgiving on a poor build, but also most flexible on design/form - build a prototype and see how you get on, then you can develop a plan for the midtop. It'll give you time to think about it and also to familiarise yourself with the processes and your capacity to apply them in the real world. There may be more to it than you think and you don't want to risk biting off more than you can chew. Plus you'll have some tangible results to go on - that's the most likely way you'll get this idea off the ground if you're serious about it. I'm not sure what your options are for a book that'll walk you through the assembly process tbh. Like a lot of people most of my understanding is from tireless reading and writing on forums and websites. There are some really well documented build threads out there with step by step photos and detailed chronicling of development down to the fine details. The difficulty is there are so many ways to skin the cat, so to speak, dependent on your tools and skills, and such a wide array of design options that require different techniques, it would be hard to condense that into a 'one size fits all' resource. Maybe there is one but I don't know it. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 12:17pm
|
I'm either at the peak of Mt Stupid or the plateau of sustainability depending on what we're talking about Mostly Mt Stupid to be honest. I'm in the Valley of Despair on a lot of subjects but I'll rarely comment on those. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: toastyghost
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 1:17pm
Whilst Iām well known for bringing as much sub as we ever need, you mostly choose your number of mid high packs for coverage not SPL. Itās actually very common to see 3 or four a side F1 subs with five or more Res5 on top. |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 22 December 2017 at 1:57pm
|
So you reckon one 2x12 midtop for 4 15" kicks and 6 subs will be enough indoors if coverage isn't a key concern (but fidelity on the mids is)? Or did you mean to comment on my F1 stack illustration? ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: doller
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 6:26am
| no ross off 4. He said he was running 8r. I am feeling bad about dissing the tw stuff now. It did sound real nice. It is a very compact box so it has it's limits I guess. The one thing that stood out was the build quality. Really nicely made. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 10:11am
Thanks for all the advice especially Hemisphere. i did whip up another design the angle on the trapezoid is 15 deg is that sufficient? Removed the vents and put the compression driver in its place.  I think i will do that probably spring summer before i get time to start building. But i will start with a sub as its the simplest design out of the 3. I am excited to say the least. Though i do expect evereything that can, to go wrong, as it always does. |
Posted By: smitske96
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 10:41am
My experience with the B30/S30 is that the thing kicks really hard (with good amplification). It definitely does not have the real low end extension, then you need the BSX (which is pretty loud).
|
Posted By: mstep77
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 12:29pm
| Liking the look of your designs! Nice work. Have a look at some of Tony Wilkes' designs to give you an idea on bracing. Yours looks great but I would say there is an unessessary amount and you're making work for yourself! And nobody want that :-). You said you play hard dance music? Will it only be this or other styles? Also indoors or out? Also have a look at the rig pictures on the main site. Especially Dom's pile of HD 15's to se what he thinks about sub to kick ratio... many hard dance/techno sound systems and even garage prefer maybe 3 or 4 kick drivers per sub as the kick section is more important in this kind of music. I must say it's not MY preference and am very much into the lower stuff but it's a matter of taste and not fact. Also have a look at an old free party system called Surge. This was all kick too but was good for that style. For a first rig and especially indoors I think you're on the right track. Depends a lot on tour budget too though. I like the idea of your angled baffle on the mid top section to get the angle of dispersion for the vertical axis. This is a clever idea. It probably has been done before but I haven't seen it from memory. Not ideal for a hire company with many boxes, but for a rig that does the same thing every time it's spot on. Good stuff. Keep us updated. Feel free to ask more questions. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 3:58pm
| Cheers dude. I shall check out Tonys designs. Keep being told too much bracing so will sort it all out. Yeah it will be predominently psytrance and the likes which doesn't need real low end as its EQed out the mix anyway not much below 40hz. But i want to be able to play dub too so extra subs would be handy for that. Will be mixed indoors and out but probably more indoors. Think i saw doms hd15s will take another look. nearly went witht them myself and X1s but decided for a full reflex system instead. Thanks for the postive comments. Its faith like this that will push me to make this work. :) cheers guys |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 23 December 2017 at 9:20pm
|
The only reasons to have more kicks than sub is for cone area/air movement in the kick frequencies and a marginal increase in clarity (less strained drivers), but really marginal as they'll rarely be strained anyway in music. Any rig that actually plays their kick frequencies louder than their sub will fail to reproduce the music pleasingly. Look up the Fletcher-Munson equal loudness contour. The ear needs the sub to be significantly louder to even sound equal, and this is irrespective of music program. The disadvantage of lack of sub headroom dwarfs that advantage. Psy is not all high-passes sharp at 40 (try putting some music by Tron through a spectrum analyser and look what's going on in the 30-40hz region). It may be a few dB down from peak but the content is often there and it's important - anyway you cross your subs higher than 40hz. You are seriously not going to want to skimp on the 40-70Hz region for psy. Just because a rig - even a well known one - uses an arrangement doesn't make it sensible - it may be part of a sound they're going for specifically but will lack flexibility. Btw the main advantage of an X1/HD15 rig is that you will be able to find a wealth of build threads to walk you through the process - makes them perfect for a first build with no experience. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: doller
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 8:12am
| sorry for the thread hijack. Smitske arn't the k3's the amps that tw sell with the system? The guy is a big Turbo fan he has a stack of tms 4s so likes his kick. As I said a good sounding box. I would like a bit more low. But if I really complained about how it all sounded I would be an idiot. TW do make nice speakers. I love the speakon connectors on the top boxes and monitors. |
Posted By: doller
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 8:28am
 that was the racks. The labs wrere doing side fill and mon. |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 11:46am
|
The other reasons you'll see free party/techno rigs favour a higher kick to sub ratio, or just go pure one way kick (preferable imo) are the substantial economical/logistical benefits. You get considerably more bang for your buck with a kick bin, you can pack a much more powerful rig into one van, and you'll get less grief from the noise police and/or actual police if you play less sub. All of which is antithetical to the goal of high fidelity reproduction of music - any music. So I think it's wrong to attribute these rig design choices to musical taste/preference. That doesn't make them irrational, but it's a specific rationale, not related to your needs as far as I've understood them. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 12:06pm
| Well said i agree there. Although free parties will deffinatly be part of my plan i want it to sound the doggys bollwox. i guess i wont truly know the ratio until its nearly a full rig and i can hear it and decide then wether it needs mor subs or kicks. Newb question... can you assign different presets for different rig setups and genre choice etc on the crossover? |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 1:18pm
|
If it's digital, yes. Generally. RTFM ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 3:47pm
| Haha i would if i knew what i was looking for... are Behringer as crap at making crossovers as they are dj mixers? |
Posted By: concept-10
Date Posted: 24 December 2017 at 4:12pm
| For the money a Behringer ultradrive is a very good bit of kit, and will do everything you require. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 05 January 2018 at 10:54pm
|
Hey everyone. Happy new year to you all. Sooo... The cab designs are coming along smashing nearly there now, they all match and look sweet just tidying them up and making sure there aren't any silly errors etc... couple of questions... Firstly CD Horns. I presume on the inside of the enclosure it doesn't matter if they are not airtight does it? as the CD is sealed within itself am i right? as ideally that is where i want my handles and would be easier if they don't need boxing off  Secondly... Back to bracing :/ arghh I have read a lot about the B&W 'matrix' Bracing to be waaaay overkill which was my original choice. And looking at the Gsub for example it just utilizes a few cross bars so would something like this i have pulled off Google be sufficient for a single 18" enclosure?  Many Thanks :) |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 12:16pm
This is how its looking so far...  |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 12:44pm
 looks good! Surprised nobody's mentioned it yet, but you DO NOT want to put any form of woodwork in front of your CD horn unless you REALLY know what you're doing Also, its generally good practice to get the HF as high up as possible then angle it down onto the audience so they're not receiving it full blast into their lug'oles ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 12:47pm
|
Cheers for the heads-up dude Shall sort that out. Shame really... :( . Is this down to the HFs being more susceptible to dispersion then. |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 12:50pm
|
not so much dispersion as the shorter the wavelength, the more catastrophic any obstruction to its path is. Think of it like when you're washing the cutlery... water flows from the tap straight down to the drain happily, but put a spoon in the way and you end up looking like you've pee'd yourself ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 12:54pm
| Haha well put, I am definitely a victim of that one :). i think i might keep the MT design the same but remove the CD and make some separate CD horn boxes to sit on top like an ol' skool Reggae tweeter box or something. |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 1:16pm
|
CD doesn't need to be boxed in, no. The kick bin would look a lot better if you didn't have that pointy triangle and just recessed the port as far as the angles on the baffle. That's only a few cm and I doubt it'll impact on performance much more than recessing a port behind a grill and foam cover. You'd be talking a fraction of a dB in variation. I actually think the midtops would look a lot better with a full face flat grille, rather than the angled baffle and vent to match the bass and kicks. The thing is, even if you do have a flat front facing baffle inside, it looks like the tops are pointing downwards which anyone with a basic understanding of sound systems knows is a bad idea.
I wouldn't advise using thin bars for bracing a powerful PA sub. The main issue with that bracing layout is that none of the braces touch the corners of the cabinet. If you have a very solid build that might not be such a problem, but for a first build there's a definite chance that the inner corners of the cabinet would benefit from a bit of bracing running over them. (Edit: Actually that's probably a bs understanding of why you need your braces to touch the corners.. the more accurate reason is that the corner allows you to distribute and secure stability from two panels instead of one. Cross-linking the strong points of a box to the weak points (and to other strong points) as much as possible with as few panels as necessary is the basic idea. What you had already was fine, you just didn't need as much of it. As was previously advised you might want to have a look at some of Tony Wilke's designs, other build threads, or just look at pro audio cabinet designs in general to get an idea of what's suitable. You can add more if you think you need it but it's best to stick to formats that are tried and tested. Obviously these are just my personal design gripes and there's no accounting for taste, but here's what it might look like approximately.  ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 1:22pm
Get yo' TRON hatin' ass up on outta here... 
What?! if he has flat faced Mid/Highs all he'll end up doing with his intended config is building tilt boards... It's not like he's talking about verticle arrays of the things or even using them for anything more than Dance music stacks? ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 1:29pm
Who said anything about hating Tron?  I offered him up as an example of psychedelic trance with significant bass content below 40Hz.
Two subs and one double kick would be another common config (low ceiling rooms, or gigs that just won't be needing four subs but can't survive on kicks alone) where a downwards firing HF would be an issue.
------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 07 January 2018 at 1:41pm
TRON as in the movie what with the bright neon lines and profile accentuating aesthetic style  Didn't catch the part of running it with it's trousers missing... giving the infinitely flexible nature of the fact its not built yet, I would be tempted to mount the HF on a pivot so you could angle it from within it's own box ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 4:20pm
|
Hopefully you won't use my modifications because I'd be quite tempted to call it an original design if it weren't for the fact it was a half hour Photoshop edit of your hard work! Another comparison with the same colour/stylings to make the differences more clear:  I think it benefits from a balance between the sub and tops. The dimension ratios and the angle of each pair of sub grilles approximately match those of each midtop, and with a little tweaking could be made to match them identically. I think it helps that each box has it's own character but with similarities enough to form a coherent stack, instead of each mirroring the character of the other. It also keeps all the vents vertical. The midtops don't need to be 2x12 if you've only got one 2x15 kick bin, but as Toasty mentioned you'll get the benefits of wider coverage and at least your mids will be clean as a whistle.
------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 4:46pm
|
Having 2x12ā in one cab doesnāt do anything for your dispersion with how these cabs look designed (IIRC having them one above the other actually narrows the dispersion slightly) Toasty was saying that you usually see a disproportionate number of mid-his put out but at lower gain in order to achieve the dispersion? ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 5:13pm
|
I mean because he'd have two boxes splayed in this stacking arrangement where one might do (or a pair of 1x12s) ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 5:59pm
|
Ah, I get you now... This threads got me thinking of a design for a coaxial mid-hi that can tilt within its own box for various stacking arrangements though š¤ ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 7:18pm
|
Sorry, Lacking time to put some replies together (kids, work etc..) I will read over the last 24hrs of comments deeper and get back to you in due time :) |
Posted By: FrederikMA
Date Posted: 08 January 2018 at 8:36pm
A compact 2*12 or 2*10 reflex design with a CD capable of going low enough on a rotatable horn like 18sound Xr2064 or Xr1496 can make such flexibility possible. When you want wide dispersion, place the speaker vertically, lower the crossover and rotate the horn to 90 degrees horizontal. When you want narrow dispersion, put it on its side, rotate the horn for 60 horizontal and increase the crossover a bit. It's a delicate design but does for a single box solution. Quite a few brands makes such boxes too. Best regards Fred |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 09 January 2018 at 11:37am
|
So having taken into account what everyone is posting here, say for example pointing the MT baffle down at 7.5 deg isn't a good idea etc (why?) i struggle to then find any relative theory explaining the reasoning behind this. Rather than me whipping up design after design and people telling me it wont work I think i would rather read up on theory behind all of this speaker design malarkey. I know most will just say use the search function but when your not quiet sure on what your searching for its a bit more tricky. So then a lot of you may tell me stick to proven designs but then haha yeah you just don't know me... :) Basically i would like to build this rig i will be designing myself, but the main reason for undertaking this project isn't to have a rig by the end of it, its for the learning process leading up to that. One of the few documents covering things like this is this one https://celestion.com/speakerworld/downloads/patech/109.pdf" rel="nofollow - https://celestion.com/speakerworld/downloads/patech/109.pdf but that doesn't even really touch on any theory So if anyone can point me in the direction of some reading material that covers as much theory as one might need to start designing a rig and know why certain things will or will not work.. enlighten me :) Then in future i might not have all my post received with change this change that. as i said before i am doing this for the reason of learning the theory behind building speaker cabs not just to own a rig by the end of it. Lastly i take all these comments as constructive criticism positively i am not digging at anyone (I wouldn't ask the newbie questions if i wasn't able to take ridicule) :) |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 09 January 2018 at 11:58am
|
The trouble is you're asking people who've learnt their way around the woods (and not all the way around them either, just the specific routes that they've needed to familiarise themselves with to reach their desired destinations) by walking through it, if they can send you a link to the map. Maybe some people started with a map. I didn't so I really don't know what to recommend. There are some books - The Loudspeaker Cookbook by Vance Dickason is one I've heard recommended many times but haven't read. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/1276116-best-diy-book-best-speaker-theory-book.html There are a whole bunch of book suggestions here, but which one is most suited to your specific needs I don't know. You know you could have used the search function to find these titles. Edit: Even if you read all these books it still won't be the same as having a map, although it will give you a lot of useful information about the field. Or woods as the case may be. Unless you're hyper-aware and able to process new knowledge and information brilliantly, and quickly discern that information which is most relevant to your requirements as you read it, then you may struggle to determine which sections of these volumes of dense technical information are particularly relevant to your goals, and may miss something important or fail to draw the link between a piece of information and the issue you're facing, or an issue that you don't even know you're facing. This is particularly true if you're determined to produce something unique. It's that desire specifically which makes things difficult. There's a connection here with the Dunning-Kruger effect of not knowing enough to know how much you don't know. The books will help with that, but if you want to do this right they're probably going to make the goal of producing the system (if you're determined to entertain bizarre features like downwards-firing HF and CD horns recessed into the woodwork for the sake of producing a unique aesthetic) seem a lot further away.
------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 09 January 2018 at 1:35pm
|
I see what your saying man, That's the kind of approach i would normally take - Enter woods, map as i go, but with something of this complexity i.e designing a rig i thought it may be the better approach to ask around for maps for say. maybe i should just grab my torch and enter them scary woods :) again i wont be starting any building this instance (im still short of a plunge saw and few other bits and bobs) but hopefully in the summer ill get started on my first sub. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 12:32pm
|
Made up a shortlist from the plethora of available drivers to work with now. Also been working on the X-over freqs for the WinISD simulations and cab tuning. If say for example stacking to play hard electronic music having the sub upto 70-90Hz then Kick upto around 180-200Hz (maybe even 250Hz), would i then be better off when playing reggae adjusting the X-over of the sub upto 180-200Hz (or whatever the mids take over from) and just not stacking the kicks as the reggae doesn't really need anything in them freqs to hit hard? In a lot of dancehall the perc sits way back in the mix anyway and the subs would be more than capable upto 200Hz. I have seen a few systems doing this. Thoughts?... |
Posted By: Hemisphere
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 1:52pm
|
You could do but there are reasons not to as well. Imagine for example the part of a track where the lowest fundamentals of the vocals or some other definition critical sounds are creeping into the upper bass region (and if not entirely, at least within the audible range of the crossover) And at the same time you've got a 35Hz bass note driving your subs to maximum excursion. At that time you would be better with a separate kick cab, not for SPL or weight but for clarity between frequency bands. ------------- Phase 1: Post on Speakerplans Phase 2: ????? Phase 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zc4bGkU05o" rel="nofollow - Profit! |
Posted By: Jo bg
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 1:58pm
|
while the 100 - 200 hz range could not be so prominent in reggae, you still need quality there, and few big subs maintain it up there. you see many reggae sounds going from horn loaded to reflex kicks, but few without them. if you really want to run your rig three way i'd look at mid tops that reach at least 100/120 hz...
|
Posted By: valve head777
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 2:02pm
|
Reggae Soundsystem has a quite particular frequency response which might not be the best template for a system that plays a variety of styles. You could 'tune' a general system to make it sound like a reggae Soundsystem tho. Agreed on the need for clarity on low mids/upper bass. ------------- Freedom of choice, choice of freedom. |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 2:15pm
|
Thanks for the clarification :) Edit- Im planning 4 way 18" Sub up to 70-90Hz 15" Kick 70-90Hz - 180-200Hz 10" Mid Bass 180-200Hz - 4-5KHz 1.4" CD 4-5KHz - 20Khz > |
Posted By: RoadRunnersDust
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 4:16pm
|
You will struggle to get a non-horn loaded 10ā to reach much beyond 2k5... Common cross frequencies for 10/12ā to HF are 1k8-2k5... most common being 2k2 in my experience ------------- www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk" rel="nofollow - www.guildfordcablecompany.co.uk |
Posted By: bass*en*mass
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 5:12pm
|
^ ideally not even that high as the 10" will beam a lot.. + you wont require a 1.4" hf, bms 4550 would do, crossed at about 1.6khz have a look at bluearans 1581 cab using the sonitus audio 8" horn+de250hf, xover around 2.5khz |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 11 January 2018 at 6:26pm
|
Will do guys, Much appreciated :) funny isn't how when they state usable frequency range (and a lot of other parameters for that matter) it appears almost impossible to ever translate that into practice. I am documenting everything i'm learning here as notes, i haven't tried digesting this much info since school. Even then i didn't really try ha. keep it coming! i have practiced alot of 'disciplines' autodidactically but this has got to be the hardest in terms of scientific and mathematical thoery :) *Edit - Do the rest seem sensible? |
Posted By: Khyber
Date Posted: 18 January 2018 at 11:33pm
|
Pretty happy with this one! Took some working out to get the adjustable arms calibrated but it works. Full adjustable every 2.5Ā° from flat up to 20Ā°    |