Jealous!!! Great work Alan!! :Thumbs up::Thumbs up:Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen
Printable View
Jealous!!! Great work Alan!! :Thumbs up::Thumbs up:Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen
Then I guess this would be considered 'piling on' in the 'ole schoolyard.
I couldn't wait for another free set of 1005Bs, so I picked up this pair of really clean tar-filled 805s this morning.
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2013/06/42.jpg
They came with these pretty cool mounting frames. And yes, they weigh a ton. I can't imagine what a tar-filled 1803 would be like.
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2013/06/43.jpg
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2013/06/44.jpg
And they're already singing...
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2013/06/45.jpg
I forgot how hot those 288s are. I might have to go back to the 802-8Gs.
Wow Alan, super nice !Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen
From what I understand , you've got the tools to properly balance the 288s to what's under them / you just need to muster up the will to do it .
:)
Slick! FWIW, though, the stands are generating mass quantities of spurious reflections, so adding open cell foam [~30 ppi] in the gaps and all over the faces to mimic the M19s foam 'baffle' is a good plan.
GM
Ask and ye shall receive:Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc.../2013/07/1.jpg
I only did the top and bottom for now. We'll see how it sounds.
Very Nice Alan ! I think you will like those horns better once you get them setup properly... I also agree that the 288's need some serious attenuation with a single woofer.. Think those are heavy my TF 1005's are even heavier.. The 1803's or 1505's need a forktruck.. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by alancohen
The 288's are way more efficient so they will sound much louder than the woofers. They do need some serious attenuation.
They are looking Good ! :cool:
I'm back to the 802s. They are more balanced. I think what adds to the issue is the 802/288s are 8 Ohms, the 515Bs are 16.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altec Best
And thanks, they do look good.
Yes it will add to the problem.. As the 288's will get twice the power than the 515's with the resistance (Ω) mismatch.. In my DIY dual woofer box I have all 8Ω drivers (4- 416-8B's) so I was thinking of running the woofers in parallel at (4Ω) and the 288's at (8Ω) to help with the attenuation of the 288's.. I'm still playing with this idea however.Nothing set in stone..I need to pickup an active crossover to play with as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by alancohen
The 802's can't touch the 288's in the midrange IMHO.. If you can get them properly attenuated ? I think you would enjoy them a bit more.. The 802's will extend higher though and do sound better up in the higher frequencies ...It's a catch 22 though IMHO.. The alternative would be to add a tweeter above the 288's and do a 3-way.
I'm boning up on this miniDSP stuff and finally getting ready to bi-amp. That should solve all issues.
IME, impedance of the drivers certainly affects passive XO design, but doesn't have much of an attenuation or SPL impact.