Yup. Purifi will likely be much cleaner and have better off axis upper mid response. A better driver in many ways. But what does it cost? I mean, a Lamborghin is a mcuh better car than my Mazda but that also is not the point if it is unaffordable.
The point of using the Seas A26RE4 is for the two drivers' "complimentary design characteristics. A26RE4 easy top-end roll-off simplifying the crossover, few (two) crossover components, easy load 89dB 8Ω speaker. Never get away with two crossover components utilizing Purifi PTT8.0X04-NAB-01 with its on-axis 15db rise at ~ 5.2K and 7K. Gussing will require a steep high-order cross-over and notch filtering. Plus it is a 4Ω driver. Good luck driving that combo with a single-digit SET amp.
Purify is testing a paper cone version of the PTT8.0 with higher sensitivity that might be interesting (https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ifi-woofer-speaker-builds.352063/post-6985732), but considering the aluminum cone isn't released yet, could be a while....
Has anyone considered the Peerless DA32tx00 tweeter for this? Its a similar sensitivity to the Seas woofer? I would have thought such a large tweet should be good for the low frequency low order x-over? the monster breakup above 20khz worries me a bit, but I have seen very little written about the Peerless tweeter.
https://doc.soundimports.nl/pdf/brands/Peerless by Tymphany/DA32TX00-08/DA32TX00-08.pdf
https://doc.soundimports.nl/pdf/brands/Peerless by Tymphany/DA32TX00-08/DA32TX00-08.pdf
Hi Patrick,
I hope you're still active in this forum.
Sorry to bother you, but have you measured the resulting change? Adjustments in the XO?
You also state that the magnet should be mounted as a bucking magnet, i.e. with the same polarity (e.g. N to N, or S to S) to the existing one, i.e. that the two magnets repel each other. Did I understand correctly? It confuses me a bit, because if I understand physics correctly, this should reduce the magnetic field, which then also achieves shielding. However, in order to increase the magnetic flux, the magnets should probably be connected in series (so that the fields attract each other), i.e. N to S or S to N, isn't that right?
I apologize if I might be a bit complicated, but I have not yet tackled this increase in magnets and I would like to do it right. Especially since this project of yours is somehow the closest of all the ones published here to the actual Orangutan O-96.
Cheers,
Sam
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi,
I not measured the states before because I only focusing the end resoult, I put the magnet to increase the flux and the efficiency also.
https://europe-audio.com/Product.asp?mfr=Scan-Speak&part=107005&Product_ID=8157
Hi,
Thanks for your reply. Did you do any adjustments to the X-over? If I see correctly, you added 2 magnets to each bass speaker, am I right?
How satisfied are you with the final result? What amplifier are you using to drive the speakers? I use single ended 300B (7W/channel); before I had AN-E speakers, but the sound was a bit "dirty", but now I have custom made semi-Onken style 15'' bass and Yuichi Arai 480 wood horn (96 db/1W/1m), but the speakers are very big (too big for the living room). That's why I'm thinking about this matter.
Kind regards, Sam
Vented, i would avoid, there is no need. The planset i linked to earlier covers that and aperiodic.
Scott & i did a Classic TL for it (from before Woden was Woden), an ML-TL is probably a possibility.
http://p10hifi.net/tlinespeakers/FAL/box-plans/classicTL-revisited-WD.pdf
dave
Scott & i did a Classic TL for it (from before Woden was Woden), an ML-TL is probably a possibility.
http://p10hifi.net/tlinespeakers/FAL/box-plans/classicTL-revisited-WD.pdf
dave
Sealed could give a slightly lean low frequency response (room depending). 42ltr sealed, with a QTC of 0.85 will give about the most balanced response for a sealed enclosure. You could go smaller, but you lose depth and gain a hump in the lows (That extra punch in the lows can sound fun though). A port tuned to 20hz (1.59" Diameter x 6" long port) in 56ltr would suite my room fine, and with room gain I'd achieve good bass all the way down to 25hz. The other advantage of a low tuned port, is the fact that It can also go louder. With a port tuned to 20hz, the driver is hardly moving when producing deep bass.
If you have problems with bass boom in your room, I'd go for sealed. In my room, ported would sound better.
Obviously, you could build a 56ltr vented enclosure and stuff the port to see what it sounds like, but 56ltr sealed will sound rather lean.
I would like to attempt the aperiodic build from planet10 as my first diy speaker, but I would like to use a different tweeter, just for an additional challenge and fun. What was the reasoning behind the position of the tweeter with respect to the woofer? Would it be possible to put it above the woofer or closer to it without other changes to the enclosure?
You want it as close to the woofer as possibly. Mirroe image off-set gives you a few more set-up possibilities and will greater distribute any edge diffraction effects from the tweeter.
If you really want to push it how about something like Alpair 5.2/3 or Fostex FF85wk and a REALLY low XO? That is a drawing only partially completed.
dave
If you really want to push it how about something like Alpair 5.2/3 or Fostex FF85wk and a REALLY low XO? That is a drawing only partially completed.
dave
Having attempted a few "I can do this" my own design builds before trying a few completed planned builds, I would suggest you make something to plan first, then tinker with it. there is a lot of satisfaction from building your first DIY speaker even from a plan, and testing crossover builds can get expensive quickly. You could certainly enlarge the tweeter hole from P10s plans to accommodate another tweeter, or build the front soundboard to be removable and swap in different options.
Either way its a fun project! I built the sealed plans, and enjoyed them in my primary system until I found a pair of k horns. Now I use them in my workshop all the time.
