Zilch's AK Design Collaborative - Econowave Speaker

[S_Denlinger]

Horn is going on top. You can see the waveguide cutout in one of the cabinets in my avatar picture. I joined in 2016, and took that picture then, so that's how long this project was paused. The waveguide edges just fit the width of the cabinet nicely.

 

[S_Denlinger]

As I get closer to ordering crossover components for this project, a few questions come to mind. Thanks to this helpful thread, https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/identifying-your-advent-loudspeakers.126376/ I know that my Advent 4002s are the successor to the Advent /1, and they have the same woofers as the “New Advents”. It also seems like there are two schematic versions of the standard Advent econowave crossover—one for <95 dB/W woofers and one for >95 dB/W woofers. Does anyone know which ones were in the New Advents, i.e., the 4002s? It appears that the crossover layout is the same, just different component values for the resistors and capacitors.

As @Pete B points out, the 4002s have a smaller cabinet volume than the Large Advents. How would this affect crossover design?

I know that more recent contributions to this thread talk about the performance of the Dayton Audio H6512 waveguides with the Selenium D220Ti drivers, but I purchased this combination for this project back in 2017—did I mention that I procrastinate?--and I would prefer not to start over with new drivers/waveguides. Is there an easy way to modify the crossover design to mitigate those deficiencies? @Pete B, I looked at your posts from Sept. 2022 about the original crossover design, would one of those be a better crossover design to use?

 

[Pete B]

The box size does not alter the crossover.
Actually, you might be interested in this thread and my minor mod (one resistor and reverse the horn) to the Advent Econo:

Presentation at Frankenfest 4-1-2023 "Why Waveguide Speakers"

I gave this presentation and demo of the Jackgiff/Bauhausler (JB) Large Advent Econowave at Frankenfest. The slides are available for download from my google drive with this link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AwAH8Sb0E3YA3Vx9huzZnakc7Xqh0nyf/view?usp=sharing I'd known for years that WG based...

www.audiokarma.org

This is how I arrived at the modification and should be interesting if you want to understand how the design came about:

Measuring the "Jackgiff/Bauhausler" (JB) Large Advent (LA) Econowave 2022

When I decided, with a lot of push from Zilch, to build the large Advent Econowave I just wanted to build them and enjoy them. This is the thread from June of 2009 where Zilch and I discuss this build: https://community.classicspeakerpages.net/topic/5541-original-advent-econowave-update/...

audiokarma.org

Here's my mod, one resistor across the woofer, 20W is best, and reverse the horn:

 

[GordonW]

2226 needs a sub, BUT it will compress the room. Great woof

Adding a 35 gram mass ring (as used in the JBL 2235) under the dust cap, will make a 2226 go down to 28Hz, in a 6.5 cubic foot vented box, tuned to 27Hz. At least that's what BassBox says, when I simmed it with that mod to the woofer. Sensitivity at 2.83V is still over 94dB, and sensitivity at one watt, is just over 92dB. The 2226 will not power-compress significantly at anything under 150 watts, so that's close to 114dB output capacity, with unencumbered dynamics, from a SINGLE cabinet. And the midrange response of the 2226 is almost ruler flat- it only peaks about 2dB just before upper rolloff, compared to other woofers that sometimes peak 10dB or more.

That could be spectacular.

Regards,
Gordon.

 

[Ragnarsson]

I'm new to this forum, therefore I don't know if it is the right place where to post my request (apologizes to the moderation if not):

I'm looking for a pair of QSC PL-000446GP or B-52 PHRN-1014 or PRV Audio WG35-25-B, waveguides used in Econowave Deluxe.

I'm located in the Europa Union.

 

[EarlK]

I'm new to this forum, therefore I don't know if it is the right place where to post my request (apologizes to the moderation if not):

I'm looking for a pair of QSC PL-000446GP or B-52 PHRN-1014 or PRV Audio WG35-25-B, waveguides used in Econowave Deluxe.

I'm located in the Europa Union.

@Ragnarsson

If your project is using a 1500hz crossover point ( or above ) then consider a Chinese clone of the horn found in the EV EVX112 speaker.

Here's a very HiRez study ( 40db vertical scale ) looking at the available response from the horn ( + comparing to 2 other types ) when mated to a Celestion CDX1-1731 driver.
- One can see that the red trace ( is actually a bit flatter >> less dramatic ripple ) than the 152i horn ( or it's clones ).



These traces were all made by Matt ( MTG Designs ) and once you've checked out his website, I'm sure you'll agree with me that they're very trustworthy.

 

[dn92]

Thanks.
I’d like to avoid ordering from China.
The objective is to cross around 1kHz, maximum 1.2kHz. 1.5kHz is too high. QSC waveguide is bigger and one could expect to be able to cross it lower.

All of these measurements from MTG are very nice. But when I observe SEOS18 I’m surprised to see that the frequency response is not going lower than for smaller horn presented there.

Was it a capacitor present before the driver?

 

[EarlK]

Thanks.
I’d like to avoid ordering from China.
The objective is to cross around 1kHz, maximum 1.2kHz. 1.5kHz is too high. QSC waveguide is bigger and one could expect to be able to cross it lower.

All of these measurements from MTG are very nice. But when I observe SEOS18 I’m surprised to see that the frequency response is not going lower than for smaller horn presented there.

Was it a capacitor present before the driver?

@dn92

The reason the SEOS18 ( in MTG's measurements ) doesn't appear to reach any lower than the SEOS15 ( or even this EV ELX112 ) is that the low end is limited by the LF capabilities of the driver being measured ( the Celestion CDX1-1731 ).

To show the SEOS18's LF ability, Matt would need to use some model of a Lansing legacy driver ( such as the JBL 2425 ) having higher compliance ( iow; @ 600hz fs or less ).

 

[Ragnarsson]

I plan using another compression driver, that can go lower (but more expensive) such as BMS 4550/18s NSD1095N or Faital HF10AK. So let's try this waveguide.
I'll report about mesurement with one of these drivers. Thanks EarlK for the infos.

Anyway if someone has a pair of QSC waveguide (or the PRV or B52 cloes) for sale, I'll remain interested.

 

[Pete B]

Thanks.
I’d like to avoid ordering from China.
The objective is to cross around 1kHz, maximum 1.2kHz. 1.5kHz is too high. QSC waveguide is bigger and one could expect to be able to cross it lower.

All of these measurements from MTG are very nice. But when I observe SEOS18 I’m surprised to see that the frequency response is not going lower than for smaller horn presented there.

Was it a capacitor present before the driver?

If you don't want to order from China, consider the Eminence WG-10, or the JBL 8x8" guide:

JBL 6X12 Clone Waveguide, Eminence H290S , Pi H290C and Others Compared

The Pi Speakers H290C Waveguide is a variation on the Eminence H290 WG with the primary difference being that the Eminence is close to an OS taper and the H290C makes it true OS. The differences are described in this thread provided by @safebet ...

audiokarma.org

See more about them all at MTG's site.

JBL 8x8: https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/jbl-pt-d95hf-8x8-waveguide-90x50-deg.1005288/

I didn't read any details from you but you could also consider a wooden horn at higher cost to avoid ordering from China.

 

[Pete B]

MTG design uses the WG-10, note that he also uses a LaVoce 1" VC driver (DF10.101L)
and finds that it works very well even with a fairly low crossover point 1.4K:
LaVoce brags about the use of computer design for the motor so perhaps it is true
and they really know what they're doing:

MTG Designs - VBS-10.2

Design description and goals: Bigger Brother to the VBS-6.2 this is another design that delivers a very high level of bang for your buck. A 10" 2-way with a horn loaded compression driver that does not sacrifice sound quality in its ability to deliver high output for very reasonable costs. Ideally

www.mtg-designs.com

The top octave droops a lot and I'm surprised that he didn't use a cap across R5 to lift it.

He writes:
"I finally got around to finding another compression driver that I feel is equally suitable for this design, the LaVoce DF10.101L. I had the idea to try this driver as its screw on twin worked so well in the Flex-8 designs I had recently worked on. Mounted to the WG10 the DF10 did require some more crossover work then used in the Flex-8 but overall it actually requires one less part and provides a slightly smoother response in the treble range while costing less then the original Peerless did making the design an even more insane value. The only downside is a little less high frequency extension from the DF10, however I find this to be very minor considering the intended use. The DF10 even handles the relatively low 1400Hz crossover point without giving any signs of increased distortion or compression, which is amazing for the 1" voice coil! That makes the low frequency better then many of the drivers with 1.4" voice coils I've tested and even a few at the 1.75" size."

 

[turnitdown]

Adding a 35 gram mass ring (as used in the JBL 2235) under the dust cap, will make a 2226 go down to 28Hz, in a 6.5 cubic foot vented box, tuned to 27Hz. At least that's what BassBox says, when I simmed it with that mod to the woofer. Sensitivity at 2.83V is still over 94dB, and sensitivity at one watt, is just over 92dB. The 2226 will not power-compress significantly at anything under 150 watts, so that's close to 114dB output capacity, with unencumbered dynamics, from a SINGLE cabinet. And the midrange response of the 2226 is almost ruler flat- it only peaks about 2dB just before upper rolloff, compared to other woofers that sometimes peak 10dB or more.

That could be spectacular.

Regards,
Gordon.

Could you model that 2226 with mass ring in 4cu. ft? Which outcome is better in the same size box the modded 2226 or 2234? Which has the lowesr f in that cabinet?

 

[GordonW]

Could you model that 2226 with mass ring in 4cu. ft? Which outcome is better in the same size box the modded 2226 or 2234? Which has the lowesr f in that cabinet?

4 cubic feet is on the verge of too small, for flat response (underdamped).

That said- with 4 cubic feet- if you line all the walls except the front baffle, with 4 inch thick fiberglass insulation, and tune the box to 27Hz (vent frequency), you will get an f3 of 34Hz. Not bad.

By comparison- the 2235, in 4 cubic feet, vent tuned to 31Hz, will go down to about 34.5Hz f3. Not appreciably different.

OTOH- the 2234, in 4 cubic feet- the optimal tuning is about 39Hz. F3 is about 40Hz.

I would expect the 2226 to have better midrange behavior, above 1KHz.

Regards,
Gordon.

 

[turnitdown]

4 cubic feet is on the verge of too small, for flat response (underdamped).

That said- with 4 cubic feet- if you line all the walls except the front baffle, with 4 inch thick fiberglass insulation, and tune the box to 27Hz (vent frequency), you will get an f3 of 34Hz. Not bad.

By comparison- the 2235, in 4 cubic feet, vent tuned to 31Hz, will go down to about 34.5Hz f3. Not appreciably different.

OTOH- the 2234, in 4 cubic feet- the optimal tuning is about 39Hz. F3 is about 40Hz.

I would expect the 2226 to have better midrange behavior, above 1KHz.

Regards,
Gordon.

Thank you so much. I have a pair of 2226H and 4507 (I think) cabinets. 34Hz is good and the midrange is attrative. I think I will try this. I have 2234 cone kits and mass rings to make 2235s, but better midrange and almost the same Fs is close enough using the 2226 pair.

 

[djnagle]

4 cubic feet is on the verge of too small, for flat response (underdamped).

That said- with 4 cubic feet- if you line all the walls except the front baffle, with 4 inch thick fiberglass insulation, and tune the box to 27Hz (vent frequency), you will get an f3 of 34Hz. Not bad.

By comparison- the 2235, in 4 cubic feet, vent tuned to 31Hz, will go down to about 34.5Hz f3. Not appreciably different.

OTOH- the 2234, in 4 cubic feet- the optimal tuning is about 39Hz. F3 is about 40Hz.

I would expect the 2226 to have better midrange behavior, above 1KHz.

Regards,
Gordon.

It’s funny how I became “super low end” focused over the years. I would scoff at 34hz low end. Now I realize I don’t listen to any music that goes below 35hz.

 

[S_Denlinger]

Since I've never installed an L-pad attenuator before, I'll ask this simple question. On a Dayton Audio L-pad, are the pins on the bottom? From the printing on the back, it seems like they should be.

 

[EarlK]

Since I've never installed an L-pad attenuator before, I'll ask this simple question. On a Dayton Audio L-pad, are the pins on the bottom? From the printing on the back, it seems like they should be.
View attachment 3277944

Numbering of the terminals is best done with the shaft visible and pointing towards the user.

With that accomplished ( opposite to your picture ) and with the terminals still at the bottom >> they're labelled 1, 2, & 3.

 

[Pete B]

I think I found those to have it stamped into the terminal, don't remember for sure.

 

[turnitdown]

4 cubic feet is on the verge of too small, for flat response (underdamped).

That said- with 4 cubic feet- if you line all the walls except the front baffle, with 4 inch thick fiberglass insulation, and tune the box to 27Hz (vent frequency), you will get an f3 of 34Hz. Not bad.

By comparison- the 2235, in 4 cubic feet, vent tuned to 31Hz, will go down to about 34.5Hz f3. Not appreciably different.

OTOH- the 2234, in 4 cubic feet- the optimal tuning is about 39Hz. F3 is about 40Hz.

I would expect the 2226 to have better midrange behavior, above 1KHz.

Regards,
Gordon.

I just checked and have 5cu ft cabinets. What is the setup for a modded 2226H in that volume? Stuffing, port and Fs. Thanks.

 

[GordonW]

I just checked and have 5cu ft cabinets. What is the setup for a modded 2226H in that volume? Stuffing, port and Fs. Thanks.

The same tuning (27Hz vent frequency) will work with the modified 2226, in 5 cubic feet, with the same wall lining (4" thick fiberglass on all walls). It will just go down to about 32Hz, instead of 34Hz. The response isn't much different, otherwise.

Regards,
Gordon.