or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Hey guys...we need a little rallying here...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hey guys...we need a little rallying here... - Page 9

post #241 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"The problem is that its not a raw measurement, it was EQed flat and that is why I liked Brandon's measurements. Is there a raw measurement somewhere."

here you go.

 

Geddes Review Horn vs Waveguide.pdf 404.171875k . file
post #242 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Is off topic. This is about getting a QSC waveguide source and the secondary discussion is about designs a better waveguide. None of that has to do with any projects I have going, I have a thread on that topic that had enough discussion already.

Lets try to keep a little bit on the topic of finding new DIY waveguides.

How do you know when you've found a better horn if you don't know what it is you're trying to improve on?

Just because it's your project doesn't mean you can't provide useful information to the discussion....especially since you're the only one voicing complaints about imaginary issues. I say imaginary because you don't want to quantify what you don't like and I think you might not realize that you could easily quantify your problem. I don't understand the need to be so defensive here.

Professional engineers would refer to this as research and we cringe at the thought of redesigning something without starting from a known data point. How do you know you've got what you want if you can't measure it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

Its cool to disagree with him but you have no more data then he does so again its just subjective opinion back and forth.

lol, he has no data, and the only data he shows contradicts what he's claiming his magical approaches fix. Like I keep saying, let's see the data...I'm not about to dig up every article in the JAES that has covered the issues of diffraction, horn throat distortions, and mouth reflections. This was common knowledge back into the 70's. That's not to say that designs fixed it in the 70's, but the physics were already there. Compression drivers and phase plugs have gotten better, which have dramatically alleviated the need for cutting corners....and more modern computer models make it easier to design for better polars...even without diffraction slots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

I never considered calling the 360 deg directivity a lost of control, very interesting that you would post "Loses pattern control below 900Hz" when I think its 100% constant directivity.

Well all of the published and peer reviewed literature as well as the professional industry is using the terms the same way I am.

If 360 degree polars are your goal, then why the heck are you using horns for the HF?

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

YOu and I also have a different definition of beaming because beaming starts before -10dB down, its closer to -6dB around 45 deg. at that means the 15PR400 is beaming above 1KHz. Do you have some links to that define beaming for you?

According to your definition, every single horn is "beaming" through its main passband, and is only "constant directivity" at frequencies where the mouth is undersized.

Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

I do own the Faitalpro 12PR300 measured by Augerpro, found here
http://sites.google.com/site/driverv...talpro-12pr300

I know it beams around 1500Hz, again its all about the size of the woofer and its impossible for a 15" not to beam before 2KHz.

I just showed you a 15" that doesn't truly beam until ~3kHz. This is why I like to talk specific data. Just because you can find a 12" driver that was designed without the polars in mind is irrelevant.
post #243 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

"it just barely starts to beam"

that is an optical illusion of the compressed 10db per unit scale used in the chart.

the driver is down about 6db at around 1.2 khz at 45 degrees, which is about right for a 15". then it is down about 12db by 2.4 khz at 45 degrees, which is also about right for a 15". as you go out past 3khz, it is down 20db at 45 degrees. most would call that "significant beaming". it doesn't look like a bad driver though. would be nice to see some distortion plots if they are floating around.

"There are certainly 15" drivers out there that beam, but it has nothing to do with the fact that it is a 15" driver. It has to do with the shape of the cone and dust cap. In this case, the dust cap can act like a phase plug and the diaphragm behaves like a straight-walled horn."

that is an interesting theory, but i have never seen one in practice, whereas almost every 15" that i have seen is down 6db at 45 degree somewhere in the 900hz-1.3khz region depending on the driver geometry and actual driver area.

Well it sounds better than the TD15M at low levels, and it's a cheaper driver...

Sorry for the crappy paint skills, but overlaying the off-axis and the on-axis shows the two responses being within a couple dB over the constant directivity bandwidth. It should also be noted that this is just a single random 45 degree measurement. It's better behaved at smaller angles since the 45 degrees is outside the coverage angle of the diaphragm. I'd say this driver is more of a 60 degree beamwidth which would look better at 30 degrees.


LL
post #244 of 9844
Thread Starter 
mb, you are using the term controlled directivity very strangely. the term applies to a horn's ability to provide the same frequency off axis as on axis.

this driver does not have any sort of controlled directivity in it.

you are getting faked out by faital pro's use of extremely narrow vertical elements, which make the whole thing appear much flatter than it is.

here is a different scale, with the -6db and -12db points marked with black lines. they are at frequencies consistent with every other 15" driver that i have seen.

those points may move around a little with the cone and dustcap shape, but no way is this a controlled directivity driver. (if it was controlled directivity both of the black lines would be the same height.


LL
post #245 of 9844
Thread Starter 
hey penn, i missed some of the posts. that waveguide that you posted, the 15" eos, looks nice. if possible, one design idea might be to complete the rectangle around the mouth (the baffle around the horn). this would make it much easier to install, as you would cut a rectangle out of the baffle instead of an ellipse. if it is not clear what i mean, imagine a rectangular piece of material in which the horn is pressed, so you end up with a single piece that is the eos and the part of the baffle around the eos.

you also ribbed me again for mentioning jbl. i suppose that is what i get. it was actually wayne parham that introduced me to controlled directivity speakers back in 2003 or 04. i didn't hear of dr. g. until a couple of years ago, maybe 3 years ago, i forget anymore. i always thought is 4pi's were cool. one reason that i like the horn on the k2 is that it is about the right size. its about as large as i'd want to go for a medium sized room speaker. it also has a good angle choice 90x50 and is well damped sonoglass. while jbl doesn't directly support our diy gang, they do so indirectly by publishing massive amounts of information that is quite valuable, at least to me. i remember a comment from one guy at the company that said they don't support diy anymore because they had to "answer a hundred questions for every driver they sold" or something like that. there is some diy support, or at least there used to be for diy at the lansing heritage forum. probably not that much anymore. also, i might be part japanese because i kind of like all the history too. jbl is really big in japan.
post #246 of 9844
One thing I have read is that the biradial designs are not easy to copy. I did create a thread once asking about a DIY K2 design.

btw, I think understand what you are saying about those EOS and we can definitely make the mouth extend to a flat square flanged for mounting on a baffle.
post #247 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by MBentz View Post

How do you know when you've found a better horn if you don't know what it is you're trying to improve on?

Just because it's your project doesn't mean you can't provide useful information to the discussion....especially since you're the only one voicing complaints about imaginary issues. I say imaginary because you don't want to quantify what you don't like and I think you might not realize that you could easily quantify your problem. I don't understand the need to be so defensive here.

Research is going on. Others have the same designs, XOs and like the sound. Its all subjective and even when I did the black fabric, simplistic blind test I heard issues. Its more of a thing for me to figure out. Its one of those individual things.

Not defensive, there is an open thread on the topic. This is not my thread and this isnt about any specific build so in trying to keep us remotely on topic Im just saying you can go search out the other thread and post there. When Im back on that project I can do what ever suggestions you have.

Quote:


If 360 degree polars are your goal, then why the heck are you using horns for the HF?

Do you know of any designs that have tweeters with 360deg polars? I thought that was impossible but yes Im more interested in constant directivity then controlling directivity to 60 or 90deg. My point though is that woofers have perfect full 360 directivity down low and your definition of them losing control is not an accurate one.

Quote:



I just showed you a 15" that doesn't truly beam until ~3kHz. This is why I like to talk specific data. Just because you can find a 12" driver that was designed without the polars in mind is irrelevant.

You showed be a 15" that is > 6dB down at 1500Hz...That is what the majority would call beaming, its losing control before that point. You can choose to have a different definition/opinion but its not a correct opinion. A Speaker with that 15" driver XOed even above 1200Hz would not be considered high quallity IMO.

You also showed it from a manufacturers site, we are only interested in real and accurate 3rd party measurements of products, do you have any of those??
post #248 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

you are getting faked out by faital pro's use of extremely narrow vertical elements

Nope. Changing the zoom doesn't change the data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

(if it was controlled directivity both of the black lines would be the same height.

If it was perfect, then of course the black lines would be the same height. However, +/-2dB is just as good correlation as most all of the horns being thrown around here....and we're even measuring outside of the good window for the driver.

For what it's worth, you should be choosing black lines at the nominal points of the response, not at the worst case dips and peaks that are caused by issues unrelated to the polar response of a rigid diaphragm of that shape.

Anyways, you guys are getting way too caught up in trying to prove a point instead of trying to get at the more fundamental understanding. Attached is the predicted polar response for 3.5kHz on a 15" diameter piston:


At 45 degrees we should be over 20dB down, but we're not...and that's because the diaphragm isn't flat (like the lab12 for instance). Changing to a conical shaped diaphragm allows the designer to gain some control of the polars.

If you wanna do your own homework, take the piston polar response prediction at every frequency between 900Hz and 3.5kHz and compare that to the frequency response of the real world 15" driver.

Btw, there are better drivers out there than the Faital Pro...it was just a convenient one to pull out remotely that demonstrated the behavior well enough.

And just to stress the point, there are horns out there (*cough* Geddes *cough cough*) that have just as much aberration to them.
LL
post #249 of 9844
Heck, I like beating a dead horse...

Here's the off-axis behavior for a standard piston....if it were behaving truly like a piston, then you'd see the frequency response falling as you go up in frequency:



I personally prefer to try to match the polars of the woofer to the polars of the tweeter so that there is a smooth transition in the power response of the system....it also gets rid of the vertical null from the two acoustic sources at the xover frequency because the two lobes don't overlap in the vertical plane.
LL
post #250 of 9844
Thread Starter 
that is exactly what is happening.

it doesn't matter what points you pick. i picked the -6db and -12db points. i didn't choose the peaks and dips first. the horn that we will be working with is likely to be -6db at about 45 degrees off axis. that is why i chose that number.

here is a whole bunch of measurements. then i aligned them along their bottom so that you can see how directivity is collapsing as frequency is increasing. there is no "constant directivity horn effect" at work in this driver. if there were those black lines would be the same height and that red arrow would point sideways, not up. we are not looking at +/- 2db, we are looking at about an 18 db collapse.

i guess that we will just have to agree to disagree.

you misread your own post by the way. it clearly shows that at one wavelength, you should be down 6db at 45 degrees, which is right. that corresponds to around 1100hz for a 15 inch driver +/-, nowhere near 3.5khz.





Quote:
Originally Posted by MBentz View Post

Nope. Changing the zoom doesn't change the data.

If it was perfect, then of course the black lines would be the same height. However, +/-2dB is just as good correlation as most all of the horns being thrown around here....and we're even measuring outside of the good window for the driver.

For what it's worth, you should be choosing black lines at the nominal points of the response, not at the worst case dips and peaks that are caused by issues unrelated to the polar response of a rigid diaphragm of that shape.

Anyways, you guys are getting way too caught up in trying to prove a point instead of trying to get at the more fundamental understanding. Attached is the predicted polar response for 3.5kHz on a 15" diameter piston:


At 45 degrees we should be over 20dB down, but we're not...and that's because the diaphragm isn't flat (like the lab12 for instance). Changing to a conical shaped diaphragm allows the designer to gain some control of the polars.

If you wanna do your own homework, take the piston polar response prediction at every frequency between 900Hz and 3.5kHz and compare that to the frequency response of the real world 15" driver.

Btw, there are better drivers out there than the Faital Pro...it was just a convenient one to pull out remotely that demonstrated the behavior well enough.

And just to stress the point, there are horns out there (*cough* Geddes *cough cough*) that have just as much aberration to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MBentz View Post

Heck, I like beating a dead horse...

Here's the off-axis behavior for a standard piston....if it were behaving truly like a piston, then you'd see the frequency response falling as you go up in frequency:



I personally prefer to try to match the polars of the woofer to the polars of the tweeter so that there is a smooth transition in the power response of the system....it also gets rid of the vertical null from the two acoustic sources at the xover frequency because the two lobes don't overlap in the vertical plane.


LL
post #251 of 9844
Man these types of threads always seem to go the same way. Bummer. It was going pretty good for a few days talking about modifying a current wave guide, or designing a new one. We're up to 250 posts, and the thread is heading in the wrong direction.

Guys, you're never going to agree, there are thousands and thousands of posts on other forums that just go back and forth about the same stuff. I never knew waveguides were like politics and religion!

Can the QSC be modified to make it better? If so, how?

Can we narrow all this talk down to just 2 designs and go from there?

Can we take those 2 designs and blend them into one final idea? Or do we just need 2 designs?
post #252 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"Man these types of threads always seem to go the same way. Bummer. It was going pretty good for a few days talking about modifying a current wave guide, or designing a new one. We're up to 250 posts, and the thread is heading in the wrong direction."

what did you think of the latest proposal by penn? i thought that one seemed like the best. a 15" diameter eos ~90x50 with the baffle surrounding it as part of the unit so that it could be mounted in a simple rectangular cutout?

this one:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post19567620
but with the added baffle portion.
post #253 of 9844
The entire concept of directivity-matched 2-ways hinges upon the desired dispersion pattern of the constant-directivity waveguide used for the high frequencies. Irrespective of what happens in the verticals (a separate, also thoroughly wrung-out matter), given a 90° - 100° horizontal pattern, NO 15" woofer is going to mate with that very far from crossing in the region of 1 kHz. In this context, a "breakup-free to 5 kHz" 15" woofer is an academic exercise. The appropriate crossover region for a 60° pattern waveguide is easily determined form the piston directivity plot above or the governing forumula, fully documented in the literature for decades.


********

The direct comparison between the EconoWaveguide and the GedLee Abbey was once again recently posted here, and in the immediately subsequent post:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi...ml#post2383303

I have posted them here in AVS and on other forums; Geddes has since removed this "white paper" from his site.

"Patrick Batemam," Summa owner, posted that, as measured and illustrated by Geddes, the EconoWave was too constant to be considered constant directivity.

[I was awarded a 48-hour sabbatical for posting where I thought his head resided over there.... ]
post #254 of 9844
Mbentz, you can go build a 2-way with a 15" driver XOed above 1500Hz and enjoy it. It will be one of very few period

We will just agree to disagree.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post

Man these types of threads always seem to go the same way. Bummer. It was going pretty good for a few days talking about modifying a current wave guide, or designing a new one. We're up to 250 posts, and the thread is heading in the wrong direction.

Can the QSC be modified to make it better? If so, how?

Can we narrow all this talk down to just 2 designs and go from there?

Can we take those 2 designs and blend them into one final idea?

Sorry about that Eric but I thought we have our 2 designs.

1. Get Dayton to provide the QSC clone.
2. Make a EOS waveguide. You have the files Jack created already.

There really isnt a mod that is generic enough to improve the QSC in all cases. We could change the throat angle to match one driver maybe the B&C DE250 but that is about it.

One thing I learn a long time about about open discussions is that only a few ever really do anything, it ends up being their time and money, its amazing that there is so much free input but then nothing after that

Remember Mayhem running all those polls, to find out what the optimal AVS DIY design would be? It was a predictable conclusion.

I have to ask, what do you want?? You are going to put a lot of effort into something like this maybe so you might as well get what you want.
post #255 of 9844
Thread Starter 
it seems that there are a lot of companies creating these kinds of enclosures.

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...8/Default.aspx

also available in 12"

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...7/Default.aspx

maybe the osw already exists.



i guess that isn't os though.
post #256 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post


Sorry about that Eric but I thought we have our 2 designs.

1. Get Dayton to provide the QSC clone.
2. Make a EOS waveguide. You have the files Jack created already.

There really isnt a mod that is generic enough to improve the QSC in all cases. We could change the throat angle to match one driver maybe the B&C DE250 but that is about it.

One thing I learn a long time about about open discussions is that only a few ever really do anything, it ends up being their time and money, its amazing that there is so much free input but then nothing after that

Remember Mayhem running all those polls, to find out what the optimal AVS DIY design would be? It was a predictable conclusion.

I have to ask, what do you want?? You are going to put a lot of effort into something like this maybe so you might as well get what you want.

So that's what happened to that project, eh.

Also, did Jack model the predicted polar response of that 15" EOS he worked up for you??
post #257 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

it seems that there are a lot of companies creating these kinds of enclosures.

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...8/Default.aspx

also available in 12"

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...7/Default.aspx

maybe the osw already exists.



i guess that isn't os though.

But then is it better than OS? It looks to be a separate part from the baffle, quick Goog didn't provide and promising links, anybody know where you can order Wharfedale parts?
post #258 of 9844
Thread Starter 
the 15" one on this guy is 2" and the 12" is 1.4" iirc. i was just kicking out the idea that something pretty close may exist, as it seems every pro company has an enclosure that looks something like that one.

this link shows the guts of the small one in the line.

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Default.aspx?tabid=149

the horn and the front baffle are one unit.
post #259 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBDiver View Post

But then is it better than OS? It looks to be a separate part from the baffle, quick Goog didn't provide and promising links, anybody know where you can order Wharfedale parts?

I'm about a week or so ahead on this. I originally sent those ideas to Penngray and Zilch simply because they know 50x more than I do about the different shapes and how they perform. I should have something soon to look at in person and if it's promising, I could see if Zilch wants to test it.

I looked at a few other wave guides that seemed to be molded into the baffle, but they really aren't. That line you see around the WG is where they join the 2 pieces together.

Making a 1 piece baffle isn't easy with a deep waveguide, so they do 2 separate pieces. And that might just be the way it has to be with manufacturing, I'm not 100% sure just yet. I know Behringer has a 1 piece, but the WG isn't shaped quite the same.
post #260 of 9844
Those look great!

But looking at the pdf brochures, they have really high XO's - 1.8 kHz for the 15" and 2.4 kHz for the 12".

So either the WG's only hold pattern control down to those freq, or they opted for higher power handling for the CD at the cost of pattern matching between the drivers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

it seems that there are a lot of companies creating these kinds of enclosures.

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...8/Default.aspx

also available in 12"

http://www.wharfedalepro.com/Home/Pr...7/Default.aspx

maybe the osw already exists.



i guess that isn't os though.
post #261 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"So either the WG's only hold pattern control down to those freq, or they opted for higher power handling for the CD at the cost of pattern matching between the drivers."

crossing too high seems like part of the idiot proofing that is part of the pro audio market where "how loud can it go" matters a lot. i have seen quite a bit of this. all p.a. is not this way, but it is quite common to see it.

"I'm about a week or so ahead on this. I originally sent those ideas to Penngray and Zilch simply because they know 50x more than I do about the different shapes and how they perform. I should have something soon to look at in person and if it's promising, I could see if Zilch wants to test it."

cool. :-) can't wait to see what you have got going there.
post #262 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post


I have to ask, what do you want?? You are going to put a lot of effort into something like this maybe so you might as well get what you want.

I'm not an audiophile. I know what sounds good to me, and most decent well thought out designs sound pretty good, or can be made to sound pretty good with slight tweaking. In the end I'm easy to please.

I doubt my hearing is as good as yours or most guys debating all this, so either design would work fine for me. Heck, once it's been narrowed down to 2 really nice waveguides, wouldn't using different drivers alter the sound more than the difference between those 2 waveguides?


My reasons for wanting to do this are much more simple. It involves everything I want to learn more about right now. Some odd fascination I have with speakers, plastic manufacturing, and of course.... curves.
post #263 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by LTD02 View Post

crossing too high seems like part of the idiot proofing that is part of the pro audio market where "how loud can it go" matters a lot.

they also have DTF Dynamic Thermal Filament - Integral High-Frequency Driver Overload protection

which sounds a lot like a fuse
post #264 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz View Post

they also have DTF Dynamic Thermal Filament - Integral High-Frequency Driver Overload protection

which sounds a lot like a fuse

Light bulb....
post #265 of 9844
Thread Starter 
"DTF™ Dynamic Thermal Filament
which sounds a lot like a fuse"

that's hilarious.

i was looking for a design that might work with a largish baffle that we could just diy a simple box behind. then i came across the jamos again. that looked like a possibility. a thick baffle could solve a good deal of the resonance issue. after farting around for a little while, i arrived at something like this. it is kind of a blend of the jamo, the poland design, and some others. by angling the sides of the rear enclosure as well as its back, i bet it can be made to feel smaller than it really is. would there be any advantage in the tilt for less floor bounce or is that just getting stupid?



sorry for not having the engineering software. this is microsoft word! but, it does employ some golden ratio stuff. all must be proper in proportion. ;-)
LL
post #266 of 9844
*Gets up, puts down popcorn and puts on fire suit.*

So, all this back and forth about xover points and beaming and this driver can't go past 1.3k or 1.5k or whatnot, this CD/WG combo does not sound good below 1.6k, or 1.3k or whatever...

This might be a dumb idea, but why not then make it a 3 way design, xover the 15 lower and the CD/WG higher and put in something nice to handle the mids?

I have not had a chance to build any of the Ewaves, or any other Waveguide design so I guess I am missing out on the Magic of them.

Quote:
Yes, I have heard the QSC horns. I was a very early adopter. I have both the HPR-122i and HPR-152i waveguides. I even own the Celestion CDs that are in the actually QSC speakers. I have tried the QSC horns with many CDs (Celestion, Radian, BMS). Currently I have the Radian 475b in them matched with TD12Ms. They sound awesome for HT, simply mind blowing but if I put a quality CD in from a favorite band and play it a average levels and listen closely there is something that sounds off sometimes. For critical listening I still like my 3-way ribbon designs.
Yes, I know Ribbons are an entirely different animal, but 3 way designs work well with those, Look at the Statements. Before I stumbled upon the Ewave craze, I was (and eventually still am) planning on building a set.
I have had the chance to listen to some Great 2 way Ribbon designs, and I do agree, for critical listening they sound amazing.

Anyway

//derailthred

Quote:
...Im not in DIY to be average either, I am search for the best sound period...
I think this is a great statement. Why on earth would we spend all of this time, effort, and material to build something that was only somewhat decent.
We can go to any Big Box and pick up a pair of "Decent" speakers.


I think the proposed idea of an EOS WG that ended up flat as to flush mount onto a baffle sounds awesome. So, let's try to iron out what we really want/don't want and work towards completing an idea to be prototyped.

Max
post #267 of 9844
While we are throwing ideas in the pot, which means deviating from the design of an optimal waveguide, why aren't we designing with an MTM in mind? That gives us greater flexibility on the XO value and improved sensitivity with the woofers. Just an idea...
post #268 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antripodean View Post
While we are throwing ideas in the pot, which means deviating from the design of an optimal waveguide, why aren't we designing with an MTM in mind? That gives us greater flexibility on the XO value and improved sensitivity with the woofers. Just an idea...
Something like this possibly?
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1265019
post #269 of 9844
Stgdz's waveguides are 3-way waveguides and not really MTMs.

I own those too and the 6.5" woofer used didnt measure all to well. I sent mine to Augerpro

http://sites.google.com/site/driverv...ments/oddities
post #270 of 9844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erich H View Post
I'm not an audiophile. I know what sounds good to me, and most decent well thought out designs sound pretty good, or can be made to sound pretty good with slight tweaking. In the end I'm easy to please.
If it looks good its half the battle

Quote:
I doubt my hearing is as good as yours or most guys debating all this, so either design would work fine for me. Heck, once it's been narrowed down to 2 really nice waveguides, wouldn't using different drivers alter the sound more than the difference between those 2 waveguides?
You would be surprised to find out that my highest usage audio device is earbuds, after that its my Ipod dock in my garage

One thing I can say that once we start listening to the better designs we start to hear the flaws in other designs Honestly That has been a really let down for me over the past 4+ years.

Quote:
My reasons for wanting to do this are much more simple. It involves everything I want to learn more about right now. Some odd fascination I have with speakers, plastic manufacturing, and of course.... curves.
You and me both, in some way the build is far more exciting then the speakers I build and listen too daily.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: DIY Speakers and Subs
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › DIY Speakers and Subs › Hey guys...we need a little rallying here...