Home » Audio » Speaker » second array already in the works
Re: second array already in the works [message #60738 is a reply to message #60730] Tue, 01 September 2009 11:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Villain3g is currently offline  Villain3g
Messages: 22
Registered: August 2009
Chancellor
What did you end up with for spacing on your tweeters. Seems like 30 wouldn't be long enough, especially when modified. Do tweeters line not have to be as long a woofer lines?

Do you have any pictures of arrays that you've built?

When looking at the technical drawing of the Tang Band 13-1264SA, it actually looks like they can be cut down to 21mm. What are your thoughts? index.php?t=getfile&id=55&private=0index.php?t=getfile&id=54&private=0
  • Attachment: untitled.bmp
    (Size: 624.08KB, Downloaded 3244 times)
  • Attachment: untitled2.bmp
    (Size: 683.17KB, Downloaded 3219 times)
Re: second array already in the works [message #60741 is a reply to message #60738] Tue, 01 September 2009 16:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
If you read Griffin's paper, you need to make sure that the line is within line of sight of your ears either sitting or standing. I chose sitting since I'm 6'4" but its within standing for most everyone else.index.php?t=getfile&id=56&private=0


You are going to actually buy one of the tweeters to find out. That's what I did.

Marlboro
Re: second array already in the works [message #60742 is a reply to message #60741] Tue, 01 September 2009 19:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
index.php?t=getfile&id=57&private=0index.php?t=getfile&id=58&private=0

Two more photos.
  • Attachment: DSC00824a.jpg
    (Size: 62.51KB, Downloaded 3159 times)
  • Attachment: DSC00825a.jpg
    (Size: 160.03KB, Downloaded 3400 times)
Re: second array already in the works [message #60744 is a reply to message #60742] Tue, 01 September 2009 22:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Villain3g is currently offline  Villain3g
Messages: 22
Registered: August 2009
Chancellor
wow. Im having trouble getting a scale of those things. Looks like 3 1/2" woofers with about 5 1/4" ctc spacing. Interesting. That allows you to separate each enclosure. Are they ported in the back? Are there any benefits to having one shared enclosure?

Im thinking with the flange on the tang bands I can screw them down to a jig and cut them on my table saw. I bet its possible to melt the cut ends and fuse them together to make one long tweeter.

Im going to order some tomorrow. I'll tell you how the turn out.
Re: second array already in the works [message #60748 is a reply to message #60744] Wed, 02 September 2009 07:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
I chose to put each mid in its own separate enclose to eliminate any interaction in the back wash of sound. Additionally I didn't want any sound coming back through the front of the speaker to muddy the midrange, thus the 22.5 inch SEALED tubes stuffed with fiberglass TO A 4 lb/cu foot density, and wrapped in polyfill batting to keep the fiberglass strands out of the speaker itself.

Also using tubes you have no odd order harmonics in the back wash due to the characteristic of propagation of sound in a closed tube. This means that any sound that might come through will be clarifying sharp even order harmonics. There will be no harmonic distortion since each speaker only handles 6% of the total sound per channel. Each one never plays loud enough to distort in any way.

Its a little know fact that even inexpensive speakers will perform at high QUALITY levels when their volume is turned down low. its when they are required to play above 3 watts that they start to sound badly when they are inexpensive.

Marlboro
Re: second array already in the works [message #61157 is a reply to message #60711] Sun, 11 October 2009 22:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Villain3g is currently offline  Villain3g
Messages: 22
Registered: August 2009
Chancellor
I haven't forgotten about my line array dreams. I've been weighing options like cost and complexity.

I was wondering about the length of the tweeter line. A line of 32 modified Tang Band 13-1264SA would only be about 26.5". I was considering doubling that number to 64 tweeters per line. That would make the line closer to 53". Would this provide a noticeable pushback of the far-field transition? If so, then it might be worth the investment.

I'm also interested in bi-amping with an active crossover. Is that an active crossover in your setup Eric? Does it perform to your liking?

The Tymphany TPY04WO4O0016 are a 4" woofer that head down to 66hz. They should be able to meet up with my subs. Their flanges will allow for 4-3/16" spacing, sufficient for crossing them at 3khz.

So, my setup as of now looks like 32 or 64 tweeters and 16 woofers per channel, bi-amped with an active crossover crossed at 3k.

The drivers are going to come to about $1k... I guess that's on the low end of the spectrum for line arrays.

32 tweeters per line will get me down to about $720.

What say you?
Re: second array already in the works [message #61161 is a reply to message #61157] Mon, 12 October 2009 08:31 Go to previous message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
Active is way better. And although some people complain that an analog crossover is inferior to a digital, I have no problems with my Rane AC23.

The following is my two cents, and I could easily be wrong.

I sit about 9 feet from my speakers so the 30 inch tweeter line is about at the transition.

I would have some questions as to why you've chosen the speakers that you have. The tweeter only goes down to 3000hz , and thats its FS, which means that it drops like a rock below that. Even with a 24 DB OCTAVE CROSS I should think that you might have some loss of sound in the vicinity of 3000hz due to crossing at its FS rather than above it. The Dayton 20FA seems a better choice due to its not having its FS until 2005hz, which gives a good bit of leeway. You have to figure that the tweeter is going to be screeching at 2500hz and it will probably still be audible.

So with your electronic cross I'd want to cross higher than 3000, more like 3550 hz.

I wonder why the Tmpany's. I would have taken the three inch HV aluminums which go higher and have a higher x-max of 3.0mm. You will have to cross higher than 66, but you probably want to again because you have to expect that crossovers are not exact cutt offs, and your speaker still has to produce sound at half an octave below the cutoff. If you cross them at 66, there is no way that they are going to be producing distortionless sound at 33 hz.

But to each his own, and the system might work out just great for you, after all, people have told me that my system doesn't work, and it does admirably. Just my thoughts.

Marlboro
Previous Topic: Comb Filtering Misconceptions
Next Topic: Dedicated horn loaded mid -- big disappointment.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Apr 24 18:54:40 CDT 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Smith & Larson Audio
Smith & Larson Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest