I don't think the braces are really necessary with only 1 wpc. Start feeding those Altecs some real power, and then you'll see why all of us solid state guys brace our cabsOriginally Posted by LowOhms
Bigger is better with 604's, so it seems with some owners, especially with a large front baffle. I used the basic 620A cab with my old 604K's.
Here's an AA member "Garg0yle"'s monster ( 15-16^3) 604 corner cab build.... seems pretty large and impressive. When I get a another pair of 604's, and a set of corners in my upcoming house, I'll will try this cab myself.
I think he has detailed plans in the thread if I recall too.
-chris
I don't think the braces are really necessary with only 1 wpc. Start feeding those Altecs some real power, and then you'll see why all of us solid state guys brace our cabs
I feel that your perceptions about amps, on ALTECS ......is totally wrong! I don't like to add braces internally, as most do, so, instead, I use over 400 pounds of concrete to mass-load each 825 enclosure.
I have a 1.3 Watt amp in my living room, playing A5 VOTTs, and (a) The woofer cone hardly ever moves and (b) it has FAR better dynamic range and dynamic contrasting,.... much-more so than ANYTHING any users of 100-200 Watt FET musician-amps have ever heard, on an optimized ALTEC .
To do this successfully, I use VERY modern industrial film caps in my amp and crossovers, capable of 1,500 Amperes of instantaneous peaks. And I use the latest modern designed WIMA Pulse Caps, that readily outperform prior capacitor technologies, as I employ them. Good wiring also, for transfer-function maintenance. ALL of these techniques, maintain dynamic contrasting.
Adding bracing internally, in my opinion, is just like making the Woofer cones heavier, to handle " more power " going into the Woofer. History has shown that to be a folly. The enclosure should have been made out of one inch Baltic Birch, or EuroPly, from the onset. THAT is the correct way to do it.
It would astound you, if you were here to listen, and try to wrap your mind around the fact that its only 1.3 Watts. I will be going to a 2A3 Amp this year, which will have three times the power.
There are many reasons for this, who cares what they are....not I. All I know, ( that is important to me ) is " it IS that way !! "
Have fun, and not said to insult you at all E1. WE two can disagree nicely.
Jeff
Thank you for the reply and info! The larger baffle like GM prefers is the way to go for sure imo . Would you happen to have a link to that build by Garg0yle you mentioned. I wonder if it's corner use specific or could also be used away from corners like the Billfort idea etc..
Anyhow thanks for any info,
Dave.
Here's a different take from across the Pacific.. Not considering it, but thought I'd share it in case no one has seen it.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...022285876f.jpg
Go ahead and brace.
The air does not flow in speaker cabinets. The air molecules molecules are equally distributed throughout the interior of the cabinet and mainly serve as a medium for the soundwave to propagate from the speaker diaphragm. The wave has very different properties than fluidic flow(e.g. air).
Untitled Document
Panel vibration, see page 3:http://www.kef.com/uploads/files/en/...ormation_r.pdf
More detailed: Loudspeaker construction . This guy's expertise is acoustics - Table of Contents for Art Ludwig's sound page
Complex: http://sem.org/wp-content/uploads/20...perimental.pdf
If a statement(Incorrect) based on intuition is proffered and emphasised in large colored bold type(see post #7), this considered post should be in flashing huge neon lighting. IMHOOC.
Last edited by mah; June 21st, 2017 at 06:52 AM.
Opinion is only as valid as its verifiable supporting evidence.
Thanks mah for the info and links. Lots of good reading there!. So building cabs out of un-braced .5" drywall is out of the question then I see lolJoking aside I do believe in bracing up a cab the size for a 604 and using good void free thick ply ,wood, strategic bracing etc.
I'm pretty sure ( within even the near past) that GM has specified minimally intrusive bracing ( to get the highest SQ and most benefit when implementing an MLTL design ).
FWIW ( & IMHO ), there is quite good cause to keep the loaded transmission line (ie; "slug of air", as exists between the driver & port ) as devoid of physical intrusions as is possible .
Hello Dave,
Sorry I did not post the link, I usually do. I must've hit "reply" without proof reading!
Here ya go.... I found it to be a great thread!
Audio Asylum Thread Printer
I'm pretty sure ( within even the near past) that GM has specified minimally intrusive bracing ( to get the highest SQ and most benefit when implementing an MLTL design ).
FWIW ( & IMHO ), there is quite good cause to keep the loaded transmission line (ie; "slug of air", as exists between the driver & port ) as devoid of physical intrusions as is possible .
Yes sir, " minimally intrusive " as in a good musical instrument, say , as like a Strad violin.
Some here have given us scientific / engineering PROOF,
(1) that we can add all the bracing we want,
(2) that wire in the crossover, or to the drivers, is of little importance.
If its been published by a college-educated person, ass/u/me it must be true. ......No need to LISTEN at all - to determine what works.
We can implement our hi fi perfectly - from published theories.
I can't help but wonder to myself, how Gargoyle's LOVELY speakers would sound, if they were wired them as I have suggested, amp to drivers ? It would exhibit, aurally, a far better energy transfer function. I loved seeing that AA post on the enclosure.
Jeff Medwin .... Low Ohms
Last edited by LowOhms; June 21st, 2017 at 02:22 PM.
Bookmarks