Dylanl Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Has anyone done this with positive results? I know of one other forum member that has. If you have does it seem to tighten the bass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 My take on it... On any number of tweaks, if Mr. PWK had thought it would have made an appreciable difference, he would have sent them out from the factory like that. JMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynnm Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 LUDDITE !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 wire is wire! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 But some of those tweaks cut into your bottom line, too. Some may be personal preference, while some could be considered great, even if PWK didn't send them out that way. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRBILL Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Listen to your daddy (D). DR BILL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 If you only knew how basic and cheap some of my interconnects are. btw Dr. Bill, the Dynaco is sounding great. The new power tranny from Ned does run cooler and I'm liking it. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylanl Posted January 30, 2005 Author Share Posted January 30, 2005 That is odd response since many of the tweaks I have made ( Rope caulk horns, sealing the bass bin, better crossovers etc. ) have all been positive and made the sound much better than stock. Answer this: why do so many other companies agree that insulating a cabinet is a good thing? Are you saying there is no chance of reflection in the Dog House? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Dynamatting the doghouse does have some benefits if small. I put a square on each surface to lower the resonance. Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynnm Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 Point taken! I will not argue that PWK's original design cannot be possibly improved upon. Any improvement on the Klipschorn bassbin's bass response will not however be likely be the result of any tinkering with its physical dimensions.That said adding insulating materials to the bass would change its character.The question is whether a change would be desirable. I do not suggest that the Khorn could not be improved upon at any cost but if I were to attempt to improve it I might try a different woofer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylanl Posted January 30, 2005 Author Share Posted January 30, 2005 I have not open my second set up yet to have a good look inside. I have read where others Dog houses were leaking. Maybe just making sure it is completely sealed air tight. I plan on sealing the slot in the motor board and then filling the Dog house with compressed air. If everything is glued tight it should hold air. I just figured that why I am in there I should dampen the enclosure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricktate Posted January 30, 2005 Share Posted January 30, 2005 I put a strip of that sound damping stuff from parts express on each inside board of mine but i forgot to put it on the woofer door..lol...woofer door was being painted and i forgot it.But hey cant hurt huh...Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMcD Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 I stuffed the back chamber of a bass horn and hoped for an improvement. There was no change. The measurement was made with an LMS system which is pretty much the industry standard. It is not only others in the industry which use acoustic material in boxes. PWK used it in the Cornwall. However, he did not in the bass horns. He had said that if some mod to the K-Horn would make it work better, he'd do it. The cost of stuffing is measured in cents, not dollars. Therefor the decision must have been based on science alone. One scientific reason may be that the back chamber of a K-Horn is relatively small. Most surfaces are very close to the back of the diaphragm in terms of the uppermost wavelenght being reproduced. There is not enough distance to have standing wave effects. OTOH, in something like a CW, the box dimensions are larger and the bass system is being asked to reproduce notes up another octave as compared to the K-Horn. Further, other manufacturers of bass horns such as JBL or EV did not use stuffing either, to my knowledge. So lack of stuffing is the rule in bass horn back chambers. The only exception was SpeakerLab. In their SK, they had people put in a big wad of building insulation. It may have been wishfull thinking more than science. Best, Gil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylanl Posted January 31, 2005 Author Share Posted January 31, 2005 So, I guess it is up to me then to try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 ---------------- On 1/31/2005 12:22:45 PM Dylanl wrote: So, I guess it is up to me then to try. ---------------- Yep, I'd say go for it. It is certainly among the most easily reversible mods/tweaks if you don't like it. Could be interesting to do one Khorn at a time to see if you can hear any difference from the treated and untreated speakers. There is at least one forum member who has posted on stuffing a LaScala doghouse with noticeable and pleasing results. At this moment, I can't remember who it is. What sounds good to your ears is the best test of any audio choice, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Hey, Dad - Gotta add, PWK also sent them out the door with the K77/EV T-35 on them. That's a 1957-era tweeter with a rather poor frequency response... Let's call a spade a spade, and remember that PWK was manufacturing these things at a PRICE POINT, not making them sound AS GOOD AS POSSIBLE. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 D-Man, Point well taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Daddy D, Thank you Sir, you are gracious and a pleasure. I would like to add a couple notes about cabinet insulation, if I may. The 1970's SpeakerLab "K" Klipschorn knockoff building plans illustrates about 3 inches of fiberglass stapled directly behind the woofer in the back chamber, so I know that this was in fact offered commercially at the time. The common accepted practice is that triangular-shaped back chambers only require insulation on the bottom. As to whether the Khorn itself, having a pyrimidal back chamber and thus, no real "bottom", it remains a matter of personal choice. As to whether PWK mad a good decision or bad, it remains a matter empirical testing in my opinion. I have tried it in my own horns although they are DIY designs whose back chambers more closely resemble the LS/BELLE but enclose virtually the same volume as a Khorn back chamber EXCEPT with a flat bottom, and can report on the effects directly. There is a slight tendancy for the Khorn to be slightly undersized for the throat and expansion rate that can be somewhat "corrected" by the inclusion of SOME insulating material. The tendency for the upper mid-bass to sound "hollow" or somewhat "nasal" can be elliminated by the inclusion of a small amount of insulation. I have found that this seems to be caused by soundwaves "bouncing" back through the cone from the back chamber into the horn throat. It will tend to soften the upper mid-bass to a degree. The idea is to only add enough to prevent the "bad" reflections. Too much insulation will unbalance the cone, allowing uneven excursion, and will sound "boomy" or overly muffled. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 This is a tweek in futility. You wonte hear an improvement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 Are you saying that you tried it and didn't hear any difference? Nothing wrong with that, but give some details. DM 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.