Originally Posted by Cal Weldon
Thanks for your concern, Cal, maybe I should have specified my needs a bit better, I am not looking for surround-type tear down the walls pumpin' 16 Hz bass, it is more a question of allowing the 604's to breathe freely; I have heard these in standard 7' and 9' boxes and I am quite convinced that they can sound even better, hence my request. And it was that post 604man is referring to, thank you!
Just my opinion, Bigger is better but only to a certain extent. I heard mine in several ported adventures and the last one with the slot ports in the back is by far better sounding than any ported box I've heard them in.
It would be good to review loudspeaker design tradeoffs..Efficiency,Bass extension & Box size...Go here: [url=http://www.trueaudio.com/st_trade.htm]TA Speaker Topics: Loudspeaker Design Tradeoffs www.trueaudio.com The physics dictate that Vb is to be made large.... Another issue is room gain, Do a Google search for "Room gain".....GC.....
Last edited by 604man; October 31st, 2011 at 07:42 PM.
There used to be a member here, Selmer Dave i think, who built 20+ cuft boxes for his 604's with very good results.
These drivers were originally designed to be driven with a ~matching impedance, ~doubling its Qts which if done with the proper coupling results in a ~current driven system where the speaker?s frequency response ~ mirrors its varying impedance, ergo can have considerable LF efficiency if tuned to Fs in a sufficiently large cab.
If some form of EQ is used with a very low output impedance, then more power is required, though with an acoustically large cab?s extra tuning capability it can be better blended to the room?s gain curve, reducing power/excursion consumption.
With all that in mind, using GPA?s 604-8G II specs, a T/S max flat alignment = ~33.9 ft^3 net Vb/24.8 Hz Fb, but for most efficient electrical coupling it would have to be slightly under-damped with an actual Fs tuning. These tunings though would typically be too high and may even need to be sealed for best room blend.
The pioneers decreed that the ?best? vented alignment was a net Vb that increases a driver?s Fs 1.56x in a sealed cab, then vent it to an Fb = Fs alignment or ~ 11.35 ft^3 net Vb.
Of the two, the larger cab has a bit more output around/at Fs which may/may not be worth the all the extra size/cost to the builder depending on room conditions and whether or not it?s misaligned to a lower Fb.
FWIW, in my own builds/recommendations, I generally ?draw the line? at Vb = Vas in these situations as an acceptable trade-off or ~16.35 ft^3 in this case.
GM
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
Consider mounting your 604's near the top of your cabinets, The center of my HF horn is 45 in. above the floor. See the photos in my post.
Let us know how the project is going.........GC
agreed.
originally the high efficiency speakers were driven by amps w/ low damping factors.
you know.
tube amps.
and some (amps) had variable damping factor adjustment controls.
so one might get some bass.
as the low efficiency/east coast/Boston sound came into vogue,
w/high damping transistor amps replaced most other amps.
and a high damped amp,
with high damped speakers,
makes little or no bass
since i've been reading Japanese stereo magazines
(not really read, i look at the pictures and schematics)
numerous articles, mostly in this magazine > ?A?C?G?[?o?? < - link
shows ways that several enthusiast have achieved bass in high damping speakers
those that use high efficiency speakers (and they are legion)
build their own amplifiers,
most are 1.5 watt, or near about variable damping amplifiers.
most are solid state.
the lower efficiency brigade, place motional feedback sensors in their drivers,
or build the drivers from scratch,
Last edited by tomt; November 9th, 2011 at 04:57 AM.
guns kill people,
like spoons made rush limbaugh,
fat ....
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks