[roymail]

My next little project will be a simple 11.5" x 5" x 30" for a 127e in either aperiodic or BR using the wide side as the baffle for each driver.

My understanding is that aperiodic damping allows more control over the driver.  Am I right or wrong in that assumption?

I realize the BR may be more efficient and provide a bit more low end, but that's not my primary goal with this speaker.

Is there an advantage and/or preference one over the other?  Thanks everyone. 

[JCS]

I don't know about aperiodic vs. BR for your application, but with h= 30" I wonder if you have modeled this for quarter-wave action?  The tall thin box is likely to have more than Helmholtz resonance going on. 

My second thought is: have you considered building a Metronome?  I have built two of them: FE108eSigma and F120a.  Both work quite well (although the F120a doesn't like SS amps.)  Tall, thin, high WAF.

If you are looking for good software to help with modeling, I can recommend MJK's MathCAD worksheets (see www.quarter-wave.com ).  I began using them after I found out that I could download a free trial version of MathCAD (MathCAD Explorer) from Martin's site (or other places.)

Cheers,  Jim

[roymail]

JCS, thanks for your input.  I'm now looking more seriously at this design.  Any thoughts?  I've got to keep it easy as I have limited skills and tools.
http://www.planet10-hifi.com/tom-zHorn.html

[chrisby]

also worth a look are the Mileva



but my personal favorite (although a stand mounter)



plans for both available at

http://www.planet10-hifi.com/boxes-fostex.html


having built several (or more)  of all these designs,  the Mileva is the simplest of the three

[JCS]

If you are interested in a Metronome build, there is a huge thread on DIYaudio.com

You can check on my build of the F120a Met using the following url and scrolling down to message #597. 
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/85410-metronome-60.html
Note that my displeasure w/ the F120a was reversed with the substitution of tubes for SS amp.  Also note, while the Met tables give dimensions for the FE127e, I ran a model of the FE 127e in the cab I built for the F120a--the model says that the FE127e should be a fine match for that cab; this despite the much different dims given in the Met tables; I can only conclude that the design is more forgiving than one might expect.  (From looking at the T/S specs, you can see that the F120a should have a larger cab than the FE127e.)

Photo shows the F120a Met (56.2" tall)  next to FE108eSigma Met  and OB with FF85k/Alpha 15a.

Cheers,  Jim

[TerryO]

My next little project will be a simple 11.5" x 5" x 30" for a 127e in either aperiodic or BR using the wide side as the baffle for each driver.

My understanding is that aperiodic damping allows more control over the driver.  Am I right or wrong in that assumption?

I realize the BR may be more efficient and provide a bit more low end, but that's not my primary goal with this speaker.

Is there an advantage and/or preference one over the other?  Thanks everyone. 

Without modelling I wouldn't know what to recommend, but aperiodic loading is generally successful with tubes, especially SETs as it tends to damp the impedence curve at the low end which, if not held in check, can cause flabby, or reduced, bass extension.

Best Regards,
TerryO