Guest " " Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Anyone heard a set? build a set? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Cool! Where did you come across this? for a 12" or 15"? Intended application? Regards, Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhoak Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 From the dimensions given in the drawing it has to be a 12" driver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panacea Engineering Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 It is basically a Jube base bin cut in half. This drawing has been around for years and I do not know of anyone that has built it. Don't know what affect the short cabinet would have on the total sound, if two were stacked. I.m sure that someone has probably built it, but I would venture to guess, it was not a success, sound wise. That is probably why we haven't heard more about it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Yes, I have actually built six of them. When I stack them (in pairs) like the regular Jubilee, they measure fine and sound good. In a half stack configuration, they would make a great center channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 The folding isn't the same as the actual Jubilee built by Klipsch. Look at the AES paper to see some of the differences. How this affects performance for good or bad is the question? miketn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 Hey Tom did you actually build from these plans or did you follow close to the AES folding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted August 15, 2012 Share Posted August 15, 2012 I think I like the non AES version better, espeacially in the area of the last turn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 There is quite a bit of guessing going on. The 6 half-cabinets I built followed the JAES geometry and folding. As noted, the above plans are a bit different and would advise against using them. If you plot out the inside and outside path distances you will see that the last turn is critical and I would not mess with these. So you can all stop with the speculation, I measured these half cabinets with both freq response and impedance measures. When two are stacked on top of each other and placed in a corner, they measure the same as the factory versions (as you would expect). If you use a single "half cabinet" and pull them away from a corner (as you might do if it used as a center channel), then you lose the "mutual coupling of two cabinets as well as the boundary loading from a corner. IOW, the peaks and dips at 100, 200, 300 Hz are more pronounced. This is to be expected. If you look at the new factory versions with the extra bracing, it starts to look like what I made. Food for thought, why not stack these three high rather than just two high? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 When two are stacked on top of each other and placed in a corner, they measure the same as the factory versions (as you would expect). If you use a single "half cabinet" and pull them away from a corner (as you might do if it used as a center channel), then you lose the "mutual coupling of two cabinets as well as the boundary loading from a corner. IOW, the peaks and dips at 100, 200, 300 Hz are more pronounced. This is to be expected. FYI-- A graph of the effects of stacking bass bins/subs is shown at Fitzmaurice's site: http://billfitzmaurice.info/forum/viewtopic.php?t=398 Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W. Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 The non AES version can be expected to have poorer hf extension than Klipsch's version due to some cancellation from the excessive path length differences in the final turn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrestonTom Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 The non AES version can be expected to have poorer hf extension than Klipsch's version due to some cancellation from the excessive path length differences in the final turn. Exactly!. That is why I suggested plotting the inside and outside path dimensions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.