LGK 2.0

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 3461 times.

hawkeyejw

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #20 on: 17 Nov 2021, 12:28 am »
So you’re saying I need to find a thinly veiled excuse to buy and build some of these.

Hobbsmeerkat

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2542
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #21 on: 17 Nov 2021, 12:29 am »
Here is the measured on axis response in one of our test boxes and with the step loss correction circuit.



And the spectral decay.


So you’re saying I need to find a thinly veiled excuse to buy and build some of these.
I'm already planning on building a pair myself.  8)

Skilly

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #22 on: 17 Nov 2021, 05:13 am »
Very Nice! I am getting stoked  for this now.
https://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/excited3.gif

subsonic1050

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #23 on: 17 Nov 2021, 07:24 am »
I'm ordering a pair the day they become available!

Chewbacca

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #24 on: 17 Nov 2021, 04:40 pm »
Going to make a small system for upstairs... No doubt, these will be the speakers! Looking into the Musical Paradise MP-303 to drive them. Looks like a nice little unit for the price!

Hobbsmeerkat

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2542
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #25 on: 4 Dec 2021, 02:00 am »
I 3D printed a test cabinet based on the parameters of the drivers.



(Its ugly cuz the print failed halfway through and I had to print the top half and epoxy it onto the good bottom half. Then i was too slow getting the bottom expoxied on, so I just used some spare filament and the side of my soldering iron to fill in the gap at the bottom.)

Having it front-ported actually allowed us to raise the sensitivity to 85db. But it was a little too shallow, so it was tuned to 86Hz instead of 80.

We're going to make some changes to its shape and port But it should be much faster to cut and assemble than the several days it took to print this one.

Currently the crossover will be mounted to the back panel.
The slotted port also likes some extra space to reflect off of and gives a smoother response in the vocal region.

I previously tested a "jet engine" style cabinet and it reduced the parts quantity by half, removing the need for one of the notch filters.



It measured really well, but had its own issues too though and isn't going to be practical for most people to build.. still pretty  cool though!

mkrawcz

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 490
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #26 on: 4 Dec 2021, 02:10 am »
You have my attention. I’ve wanted these speakers for 2 years now.

Skilly

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #27 on: 4 Dec 2021, 05:41 am »
That first one, beside the esthetics, Looks much larger than the cubic measures that were discussed. That looks more like 4.5 X10 X 7 with a front facing port. Since it will be on a stand-like structure, it could have a down firing port? I am wondering what the material you used for the 3D printer? You must have used a ton of it to make the walls thick?

Thanks for sharing them. I kind of enjoy the work-in-progress shots.

nlitworld

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1981
  • Strange things are afoot at the Circle K
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #28 on: 4 Dec 2021, 06:01 am »
That jet engine design looks rad! Completely over the top and impractical for most people to build, but a painted up set of those would be a super cool one of a kind speaker.  :popcorn: You guys should keep pushing the envelope. I triple-dog dare you.

Hobbsmeerkat

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2542
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #29 on: 4 Dec 2021, 07:04 am »
That first one, beside the esthetics, Looks much larger than the cubic measures that were discussed. That looks more like 4.5 X10 X 7 with a front facing port. Since it will be on a stand-like structure, it could have a down firing port? I am wondering what the material you used for the 3D printer? You must have used a ton of it to make the walls thick?

Thanks for sharing them. I kind of enjoy the work-in-progress shots.

The 4" x6.25" x 7.5" is the internal volume. So add an extra inch in each direction and you've got the external size. The walls are 1/2 inch thick.

The updated version will be 4.5" x5.75" x7.5" internally, and the port will need to be about 4" deep instead of the 2" in the current version.

I use PLA. Until this project I normally use 1KG spools. But im currently using a 3KG spool from Polymaker.

A down-firing port was the initial plan, but the front-mounted port allows for a small bump in overall effeciency
We may make both versions to see which one performs better.

I used 50% infill on the base and lower half, the upper half and top are 40% infill there's probably 1.6kg of filament in this version.

There's a bit of ringing going on at one frequency but I think it's likely just the cabinet resonances/reflections that dont exist in the original test cabinet.

That jet engine design looks rad! Completely over the top and impractical for most people to build, but a painted up set of those would be a super cool one of a kind speaker.  :popcorn: You guys should keep pushing the envelope. I triple-dog dare you.

Maybe sometime in the near future I can work on it a little more and use bondo to smooth it over some more.
But it's not in the cards at the moment.  :wink:

Hobbsmeerkat

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 2542
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #30 on: 4 Dec 2021, 07:53 pm »
Heres a comparison of the original LGK cabinet vs the most recent prototype. Its about half an inch wider, half an inch shallower and 2 inches shorter.

The next test cabinet will be another half inch wider and more shallow.



Here's the original stand i printed for it, its about 1-2 inches too tall, but it still looks pretty good tbh!



wgraft5

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 201
  • Wayne in Oregon
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #31 on: 4 Dec 2021, 08:01 pm »
That's really cool Hobbs  :thumb:

hawkeyejw

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #32 on: 5 Dec 2021, 01:15 am »
Oh wow thanks for telling us the dimensions, that really helps put it in context. That first photo I was thinking the 1.0s were 4” taller at least, I forgot how small those drivers are!

mzbrahce

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 75
Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #33 on: 6 Dec 2021, 03:42 pm »
Would these work in a line source?  I'm thinking Skinny 12....

Danny Richie

Re: LGK 2.0
« Reply #34 on: 6 Dec 2021, 05:02 pm »
Would these work in a line source?  I'm thinking Skinny 12....

They can be used in an array.