[cnm_mike]

Danny,
I already have two of your 12" sealed servo subwoofers so I would vote for a cheap but good solution that fills the gap between the LGK's MMTMM bottom end and the top end of the subwoofers.
Mike

[tull skull]

I am not sure how this will play out but Jparkhur nailed what I was originally trying to get at; Individual front baffle components. I also think it would be awesome if the 100 degree offset could be addressed in the kit. Possibly have the front baffle angled on each side so the wings can be easily glued to them.

[Folsom]

I just had a thought:  What about 3D printing the baffles?  Might be more expensive.  Might not be. 

Just thinking outside the MDF box.

3-D printing isn't as cool as it sounds. There might be some high end machines out there that can make some things, but most of the time you're better off having injection molds done. The 3-D print is just a prototype for most projects currently.

Trust me, I think about cheaper speaker cabinet construction all the time. I have a few ideas. But it's always coming back to setup fee vs. labor fee for the types of enclosures/baffles. The easiest thing to do is skip the fine finish, and go with something a bit different. I like using plywood and leaving it exposed in a tasteful way.

[MarvinTheMartian]

Danny:
I did a search on "neo3 waveguide" and found one unexpected response  "Plasticine".
Sounds like the ideal prototyping medium to me, MDF base, form measure, re-form measure etc. etc. etc.
Tweak until you reach your ideal target, make a production stamp mold or cut out profile templates for us DIY plasticine people.

My original question/quest is completely unrelated ...
"Would a matching waveguide on the back of an OB neo3 make an audible difference?

Inquiring minds Shawn
 

[Jonathon Janusz]

Well, because getting a ten foot or so extrusion of this size might be a little cost prohibitive, anybody have a waterjet and a huge brake press?

Danny, of the "huge pile of LGKs" designs, maybe the one that just runs the line of drivers to the floor might be best?  If the LGKs were put together in a line all the way up and down, would the output radiation pattern (line source from the woofers vs. point source on the single tweeter) muck with things at all?  I'm just thinking about some of the past discussions regarding Fred's budget line array projects built with similar driver layouts.

How would the 8" servos sound with a similarly angled U-frame baffle to the LGK array?  Keeping the same baffle angles, even if there has to be a step in there to step down to the upper baffle width, might make it more aesthetically pleasing than a transition from a square frame to the upper baffle?

The wing did not pass the WAF test 

I have some hard work ahead of me 

Using the LSX as example, in person and finished nicely, the big outer wing really makes the speaker look similar to a traditional box speaker until you are almost looking directly at the short side, and the short wing should neatly hide the "uglies" of the back of the drivers until you're at a crazy viewing angle from the inside of the speaker.  If you need any help in the convincing, check out some of the pics from RMAF last year; they might help. 

[ebag4]

I wanted to see what I might do with this design using my servo 12s.  This is what I came up with, I am not in love with the look but am struggling to come up with anything better without having two speakers per channel (LGK Stack and Servo Sub Stack).



I am thinking a grill cloth might be used over the solid side and the cutout side.

Thinking about this a little more, I came up with this which I like quite a bit better.

[HAL]

If you angle the top two corners of the OB sub at 45degrees, I think it would look really good with the array on top.  Would not look as square that way. 

Just a thought.

[ebag4]

If you angle the top two corners of the OB sub at 45degrees, I think it would look really good with the array on top.  Would not look as square that way. 

Just a thought.

Haha, the same thought occurred to me!

[PDR]

Or......instead of angles at the top you could make the top of the lower
"H" box round on top........I knew a guy that did that once.....

[HAL]

Like the angled top!   

[ebag4]

Or......instead of angles at the top you could make the top of the lower
"H" box round on top........I knew a guy that did that once.....

Yes, that fellow is quite the craftsman.  Tough to pull off but it may look better than the angles.

[Captainhemo]

I could series/parallel 16 of the LGK's into an array and let them really handle from about 200 or 250Hz down to 100Hz or so. This would make a very thin (4.5" wide at the front) tower with 8 above and 8 below the MMTMM, and all in an open baffle. That will make the lower ranges super tight and fast, and play down low enough to reach open baffle subs in separate towers.

Couldn't resist, suspense was killing me  (yeah I know, my PS skills suck but gives the idea) 




-jay

[oz_audio_todd]

Am I missing something, or is it worth doing 4 x 165's in a ported box as a reasonably priced base?? (for bass    ).
I am aware it would be pretty sizeable, but I'm pretty sure OB's need some space anyway?? (does OB have to be 20Hz to 20k to be effective??)

[nickd]

Ebag & Captainhemo, you guys have mad skills with the computer rendering.

No wonder Danny puts this stuff out there. Prototypes developed while you wait!

Ebag, is that drawing based on 8's or 12's in the angle top sub section? If the scale is close, it looks very nice. I don't know how much the wing angle has to do with driver reinforcement in the lower octaves? It would be nice if it that angle could be tweaked a bit for aesthetics.

After looking at both designs, the choice has become far more difficult on which to build. I'm guessing Danny will say the tall line will sound best but the cost and floor space requirement of two OB cabinets per side will have to figure into the decision. 

[stevenkelby]

With the full length line source, could a line of 8" subs be mounted in the 12" wing?

Or in another baffle behind the LGKs, like this:

[Danny Richie]

Good morning everyone. I love seeing all the ideas flying out there and everyone thinking out loud. Seeing where you guys would like to see this go gives me some direction and ideas to hit everyone's targets.

I am going to go through some of this thread and try to hit a few of the questions.

Danny:
I did a search on "neo3 waveguide" and found one unexpected response  "Plasticine".
Sounds like the ideal prototyping medium to me, MDF base, form measure, re-form measure etc. etc. etc.
Tweak until you reach your ideal target, make a production stamp mold or cut out profile templates for us DIY plasticine people.

My original question/quest is completely unrelated ...
"Would a matching waveguide on the back of an OB neo3 make an audible difference?

Inquiring minds Shawn

It took a while to get the design of the waveguide down. This speaker design does make it pretty easy though as now the waveguide can just be CNC cut into each baffle.

Adding a waveguide to the back will change the response on the front side also. The output on the back side will not be as perfect as the front side, but still very good, and in phase. No additional waveguides needed.

[Danny Richie]

These are looking like a great  speaker guys. From everything posted, there are obviously lots of options  for  bass  both sealed and open baffle. 
Biggest issue I see is this wave guide and  the cost associated with  producing a baffle  with it.  Being so diffuicult to  machine, it sounds like it will be slow going   and time consuming I think coming up with somethng that can be included inthe kit ( like  someone else mentined an insert or faceplate) would be important.

Are you guys going to be doing a prototype of the  full LS  version soon ? Anxious to  read about  results  and see pics of  that vesion

-jay

A CNC cut flat pack will not be that much. Ben Daniels offered CNC cut flat packs of the LGK cabinets for $80 a pair. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=120804.msg1295793#msg1295793

Yes, I will have to test each version including the full array.

[Danny Richie]

Am I missing something, or is it worth doing 4 x 165's in a ported box as a reasonably priced base?? (for bass    ).
I am aware it would be pretty sizeable, but I'm pretty sure OB's need some space anyway?? (does OB have to be 20Hz to 20k to be effective??)

Optimal air space for four of the M-165 (8 ohm) woofers in series/parallel is about 4.4 cubic feet of air space, ported. that would be a pretty big box.

OB's on the other hand really just have a frame.

If an OB design can get down pretty low then you can fill the bottom end with typical subs. In this case these little drivers only reach to 200Hz. So something has to reach up to that range.

[Danny Richie]

Couldn't resist, suspense was killing me  (yeah I know, my PS skills suck but gives the idea) 




-jay

And that looks awesome.

[Danny Richie]

With the full length line source, could a line of 8" subs be mounted in the 12" wing?

OB subs have to face forward. If you turn them at an angle than you shift the cancellation point towards you and get no bass.

Mounting them on a back panel can work but not as well as a separate sub tower.