Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIY Speakers and Subwoofers' started by BillWaslo, Mar 31, 2012.
Excellent job, Craig!! They turned out very nice.
Thanks Java , your build thread was a great inspiration. BTW, I watched your videos on the new surrounds, Erich's flatpacks look great! A guy could get spoiled working with those!
Nice Craig. Those look unreal!
Thanks Tux! I'm sitting at work thinking about what to play through them next. : Sick I tell ya!
Sonny Rollins maybe?
Here's the wifey's grills. I didn't cover the waveguides,every good relationship has compromise
I was able to use 1/4" oak that I used for the seos12 template for the hole section and then cut out around it to make these. This wasn't planned,I had the template laying around and noticed the hole may be a good fit and it worked out perfect. The only other thing I had to do was glue some 1" square pieces to the corners and along the center to allow 1/2" clearance and a spot to attach the velcro strips that I used to attach them to the boxes.
Great choice - to leave the horns exposed !!
I actually liked the previous look better. Maybe smth like this:
But I'd say that even a simple ring made od of Dibond would satisfy your spouse:
I agree, but she is happy with the grills I do like the idea of only covering the woofer as in the picture, I may try this one day.
Craig, something looks wrong in this cross over... Both tweeter notches should go to the negative lead. Am I missing something?
Yeah I think Tux is right.
HF+ should be connected to R2/C2 out.
L4 should be connected to C6 on one side like it is and HF+ on the other (R2/C2).
R6 should go from neg to C5, then C5 goes to L3 and L3 to HF+ (R2/C2).
Oh man! I see it now,glad I posted those pics, Thanks for the heads up! Looks like I have a little project.
Maybe you improved the sound ;D
Attached is another way of looking at it. Just that one notch needs to look like the other. Annoying, but simple fix.
Ah, glad you got it. Posted while you posted.
No problem bud, thanks for the help!
I doubt I improved Bills xover! Thanks again.
Got one done,clarity is a little better,which will be a bonus to me, who was happy with them being hooked up bassackwards ;D . It is strange to me they sounded as good as they did to be connected the way I had them. ???
The notches are relatively subtle, not huge changes just ironing out some wrinkles.
You made the same mistake I did. It looked like the right way to hook up the HF to me. That's why we noobs need "adult supervision".
Like you, it didn't sound too bad to me with the goof, but sounded outstanding after the fix.
HAHA, adult supervision! Seriously though, I'm thankful for these guys taking the time to help us noobs stay on the path.
I updated the pics to show the wrong section and the fixed section so hopefully to not "lead a noob astray" that maybe looking at that for guidance.
just trying to figure out the best Seos12 solution for my budget.
Could someone please clarify which Eminence 12A woofer is referenced in the OP.
Is it the
I really appreciate it.
There are 3 designs using 12" Eminence woofers. But in this thread, the Karma-12 speaker uses the Delta 12A which is the lower priced model in a ported enclosure. And the other model that Bwaslo worked on uses the Deltalite 2512 with the neo magnet in a sealed enclosure.
Jeff Bagby has a model called the Tempest which uses the Delta Pro-12A.
Thanks, that helps.
I have already ask the same question over at diyaudio forum but I am also posting here as it is very relevant to this thread.
I am looking at a SEOS12/Eminence Delta 12lfa built as it seems to give out the best bass extension/performance among the 12" eminence drivers.
What type of enclosure will give me the best bass performance with that driver? Size is not a problem as long as width and depth are not more than 45cm (16"). No problem with height.
Will a TQWT a ML-TL or a back loaded horn be better than a simple BR enclosure? Is that driver suitable for such an enclosure? Is it worth the trouble?
I tried the TQWT calculator and came up with a suitable design with an internal volume of 133.3lt and email@example.comHz while the WinISD simulaton for a 133.3lt ported box using the exact same port tube as the TQWT design gives me f3@34Hz and f6@27Hz.
Is there a way to sim the TQWT design? Do you think it wil be a better option than the simple ported design?
Any better options?
There is also one more thing that troubles me.
The space I have available can fit speakers up to 45X45cm facing forward and only a couple inches from back wall.
However the SEOS designs require toe-in and that can be a problem with a very large box.
Do you think I can get away with toe-in of the waveguide only? (maybe some slight toe-in of the cabinet as well)
If I go for the TQWT enclosure the waveguide will be outside the box so physicaly it is possible to angle just the waveguide.
I don't know how much that will affect crossover design and response and if it can be adjusted by experimenting with the waveguide position.
Yeah, that can work. Try to keep the waveguide arranged so that there isn't a shelf below it, though. IOW, have it toe in to extend over the baffle front, not back behind the baffle.