[BHAGWAN]

Originally Posted by ScarySkulls

Oh! eBay. And I thought you had this old range i.e. 240 all along while your other thread was going on.

So why the old range off eBay and not the New and Seemingly Improved 242 for the New car?

No sir, I never had it;
I just got it 4 days back.

I used to like Dynaudio - the old range for home.
Hence, for nostalgic & cost issues, I went in for the 240 in place of the 242. I sure hope it was not a 'big' mistake !!
I will know in 2 weeks time - after the install is complete.

[clipto333]

Originally Posted by gunbir

Sorry bro, the new MD102 tweets are in fact better. Having used/heard both, I would not know any reason to buy the earlier set apart from low price.

oh, i was talking about the md100 tweet. sorry. i thought the esotec came with md100s. my bad.

cheers
clip

[JPL]

Originally Posted by BHAGWAN

BTW - My Sub enclosere is almost finished. Filled in the concrete & tiles + fevicol [resin]. Will screw in all the sides tom. Shall try and take snaps & post tom. Hope it works well. Really scared::::

Bhagwan can you please explain the use of concrete and tiles in the sub enclosure

what advantages in sq do you find with the above construction? btw congrats on the equipment and the install

PS: I hope you have some WIP pics on the sub enclosure.

[BHAGWAN]

Originally Posted by JPL

Bhagwan can you please explain the use of concrete and tiles in the sub enclosure

What advantages in sq do you find with the above construction?

PS: I hope you have some WIP pics on the sub enclosure.

I shall try and explain;

My enclosure is a sealed box - issobarik loading - design - clamp shell - opposite phase wire install.

Basically I chose this for 2 reasons :-

A] Space Constraint [very very important]
B] 2 woofers in 1 small box

Why did I make the box the way that I did ?

Basically, a sub enclosure should not vibrate / sing along with the drivers. The more intert the enclosure the better the driver will play. There are many ways to make an enclosure 'less resonant'
Polymer - Male & Female joint - Concrete Loading - Extensive Brace use etc. etc.
Concrete is the cheapest and fastest way that I know of.
Besides my enclosure is non parrellell sided and a bob in a box design.

I shall try and take some snaps and post tom or day after. Promise. It may help in the explaination.

I have a reason for ever thing, I shall explain all.
I also line the inside of the enclosure with Butamine & Damping material & lightly stuff it with glass woll + recron + horse hair [difficult to source]

[JPL]

Thank you for the reply. I am as n00b as they come, its just that I have never heard the use f concrete and tiles in a sub enclosure.

I can agree "Basically, a sub enclosure should not vibrate / sing along with the drivers. The more intert the enclosure the better the driver will play. There are many ways to make an enclosure 'less resonant'"

I am sure that you have a pretty good explanation adding to the one that you have already posted ( as you have pretty good exposure to high end audio and also appreciating the same)

Is this ingenious idea? or do you have a inspiration for the same? and also why the use of so many items like horse hair, butmaine? have you tested the boxes with each one of them etc..can you please explain the process on how you have arrived on the final sub enclosure..

I am just curious and fascinated by this idea thats all and trying to learn something from your experience.

Thank you.

[ScarySkulls]

Originally Posted by BHAGWAN

I just got it 4 days back.

Thanks for the heads up Sir.

Originally Posted by BHAGWAN

I went in for the 240 in place of the 242. I sure hope it was not a 'big' mistake !!

Nahi Nahi Sir, it shouldn't be. From the other thread, I can make out that you were in Delhi recently. You surely must have requested for an audition of the 242+Genesis combo, before putting down your hard earned cash for the older 240's.
Sorry for overlooking that fact earlier.

best wishes for the install and let us know how it goes.

[BHAGWAN]

Originally Posted by JPL

Thank you for the reply. I am as n00b as they come, its just that I have never heard the use f concrete and tiles in a sub enclosure.

I can agree "Basically, a sub enclosure should not vibrate / sing along with the drivers. The more intert the enclosure the better the driver will play.

I am sure that you have a pretty good explanation adding to the one that you have already posted ( as you have pretty good exposure to high end audio and also appreciating the same)

I am just curious and fascinated by this idea thats all and trying to learn something from your experience.

Thank you.

Sir, I have a reason for what ever I do.

RCC is the cheapest & easiest material to work with;
Why does no 'commercial company' work with it ?
Cost of Transport & Weight of the final product.

Cadence Audio - Pune - has used a variant of this in the enclosure of their speakers.

The 'Best' speaker cabinate in the world can be made with RCC. However, the same will get so heavy, that it will not be 'transportable'
You see, I face a simmiliar problem. My sub enclosures weigh 50 kgs +++
Not this one, cause it is really very very small. But the ones in my Swift & RS are 'really heavy'

Butamine & other materials.

This is used for mid range frequency absorption.
I do not like to play the sub above 80 cycles. I cut it @ 12dB per octave @ 80 Hzs. So the woofer plays till 120 cycles down 12 dB. Those frequencies need to be absorbed. These materials help. Hence, I use them.

Non Parrellell walls is a very well known concept - avoid standing waves.

Please do feel free to ask. I shall try my best to answer to the best of my abilities, for more serious and technical matters our Moderator is more qualified and technically inclined to address - Mr. Navin - please do contribute.
Thanks

[BHAGWAN]

Originally Posted by ScarySkulls

Nahi Nahi Sir, it shouldn't be. From the other thread, I can make out that you were in Delhi recently. You surely must have requested for an audition of the 242+Genesis combo, before putting down your hard earned cash for the older 240's.
Sorry for overlooking that fact earlier.

best wishes for the install and let us know how it goes.

I would have loved to have auditioned that car;
What car is that set up installed ?

However, I was in ND with wife;
Had to attend a wedding.
Was very very tight on time.
Met LBM for 20 mins. That too cause he was so kind so as to come to my 'railway bogie' to meet me. Else it would not have been possible.

I will come to ND for a car audio trip.
That time I shall audition all possible cars that I can.
Should be fun.

I will start the install on Saturday - That is the day I can get the car in my hand. During the week the car is used by my better half.

[navin]

Originally Posted by BHAGWAN

A] Space Constraint [very very important]
B] 2 woofers in 1 small box
Basically, a sub enclosure should not vibrate / sing along with the drivers.

Originally Posted by JPL

Is this ingenious idea? or do you have a inspiration for the same? and also why the use of so many items like horse hair, butmaine?

There used to be a Swedish speaker company (Rauna) in the 70s and 80s that used concrete enclosures. I think their first model was called the Opus 3. Later they had the Tyr, Balder, Liera, Freja, and Njord.

The Njord used 2 6.5" Seas woofers flanking a Seas tweeter (the Freja I think was also a MTM using different drivers). The speaker was delivered white and you could paint the box any colour you wished. I think they now only make turntables and are called Opus 3 now. LBM, you google-abilities might be able to help here.

Acoustic Energy also uses concrete to damp the insides of the box. KEF did this on the prototypes for the 104/2's "bass bin" but found it added to much cost to the speaker for production. If google cant find this info then then we know that "There are some things google can find for everythig else you have to rely on senile old men". :-)

Concrete is stiff but also heavy. my argument is that heavy cabinets tend to store energy and release this energy after some time. the heavier the cabinet the more energy it will store. so the cabinet should be light, and the energy should be dissapated using other means (converting to heat using loose horse hair). To get horse hair you need to find the manufacturer of good paint brushes. :-)

[BHAGWAN]

I took a few snaps;

Shall try and post.

I hope the snaps come on.

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by ScarySkulls

You surely must have requested for an audition of the 242+Genesis combo, before putting down your hard earned cash for the older 240's.

The Dynaudio System 240s aren't complete lemons. I have myself not heard them side by side with the 242s, but from whatever I have heard from credible people who have, there isn't a world of difference as it is somehow being projected here. In fact some folks have told me that the older one is more typical of the Dynaudio sound. Bhagwan has extensive experience with a lot of Dynaudio gear, all of which have used drivers of the same generation as the 240. He likes that sound, and hence there was little chance he could go wrong with it. He had asked me this, and this was the exact same opinion I had given him.

Edit: I just realized that I misread your post, SS. Sorry bout that.

[JPL]

Originally Posted by BHAGWAN

Sir, I have a reason for what ever I do.

RCC is the cheapest & easiest material to work with;
Why does no 'commercial company' work with it ?
Cost of Transport & Weight of the final product.
Yes, that does make sense.
Cadence Audio - Pune - has used a variant of this in the enclosure of their speakers..................... Mr. Navin - please do contribute.
Thanks

Originally Posted by navin

Concrete is stiff but also heavy. my argument is that heavy cabinets tend to store energy and release this energy after some time. the heavier the cabinet the more energy it will store. so the cabinet should be light, and the energy should be dissapated using other means (converting to heat using loose horse hair). To get horse hair you need to find the manufacturer of good paint brushes. :-)

Thank you for the explanation Bhagwan and Navin, Bhagwan seem like you have covered all the bas(s)es as Navin has also explained.

Though I did not understand "I do not like to play the sub above 80 cycles. I cut it @ 12dB per octave @ 80 Hzs. So the woofer plays till 120 cycles down 12 dB. Those frequencies need to be absorbed. These materials help. Hence, I use them" being the n00b I am, however will google and try to know about the same.

I understand that you are looking for good sq as in your home audio and hence implemention the techniques that you have mentioned..thank you for the pics also heheh the construction looks neat and professional..great to see so much enthusiasm.

Keep up the good work and enthusiasm sir, waiting for the final pics and your feedback.

[Autophile]

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

The Dynaudio System 240s aren't complete lemons. I have myself not heard them side by side with the 242s, but from whatever I have heard from credible people who have, there isn't a world of difference as it is somehow being projected here. In fact some folks have told me that the older one is more typical of the Dynaudio sound. Bhagwan has extensive experience with a lot of Dynaudio gear, all of which have used drivers of the same generation as the 240. He likes that sound, and hence there was little chance he could go wrong with it. He had asked me this, and this was the exact same opinion I had given him.

Edit: I just realized that I misread your post, SS. Sorry bout that.

Hi Ajay,

Its true that System 240MkII aren't lemons. We have extensively used system 240MkII's since last three years on variety of amplifiers like McIntosh, TRU Technology, Audison VRx, Genesis Series III fed by sources like McIntosh MX 5000, Clarion HX-D2, Nakamichi CD-700, Panasonic Tube and many others.

The MD100 (Tweeters) sounded bright always even after many hours of breaking in. We tried different location, active-passive systems etc but no respite. Lowering the tweeter level would result in loss of detail.

Then Dynaudio released System 242. After breaking them in we swapped them in the same car same location. The tonality of the tweeter was better it had more detail yet less harshness and it was blending with the midbass better than the outgoing model.

The changes are subtle but they are all good and very well required. The System 242 definitely sounds better than System 240.

Rest comparing the two Dyns one should make sure that they have got equal mileage on them, Dyns require a hell lot of break-in period before reaching their true potential.

B, If you are going for Alpine 9887 then I would suggest that you go active and exploit the full tuning capabilities of 9887. This way you can align the tweeter-midbass-subwoofer better. If you are using the passive networks then make sure tweeter is not very far from midbass.

[BHAGWAN]

Dear Sir,

'Moniker Names' would be appreciated;

Thanks,

Appreciate the compliance.

Regards,

[BHAGWAN]

Originally Posted by Autophile

The MD100 (Tweeters) sounded bright always even after many hours of breaking in. We tried different location, active-passive systems etc but no respite. Lowering the tweeter level would result in loss of detail.

Then Dynaudio released System 242. After breaking them in we swapped them in the same car same location. The tonality of the tweeter was better it had more detail yet less harshness and it was blending with the midbass better than the outgoing model.

The changes are subtle but they are all good and very well required. The System 242 definitely sounds better than System 240.

Rest comparing the two Dynaudio for one should make sure that they have got equal mileage on them, Dyns require a hell lot of break-in period before reaching their true potential.

If you are going for Alpine 9887 then I would suggest that you go active and exploit the full tuning capabilities of 9887. This way you can align the tweeter-midbass-subwoofer better. If you are using the passive networks then make sure tweeter is not very far from midbass.

Sir,

Thank you;
Nice post.
Some one is talking sense on this thread.
I can learn a lot from you.

I am sure you have a lot of experiance and can share the same with me.
It is appreciated by me.

Going Active was an option. However, the cost would have gone up by another 55/- K [Steg Amp]. I would need to buy 1 extra amp for the front comps. This I did not want to do.

Putting the Tweeter just above the mid bass is technically the correct thing to do & would love to do it, however, I have had poor results in the past.
Yes the integration is better, but the sound stage is too low & the players & the instruments do not 'leave' my car. This is very very important to me.

If the Tweets run 'hot' then put them on - 3 dB on the X-Over [passive box] & drop the level on the HU under the X-Over Section by 3 to 5 db. Depending on where it is placed on the dash & how much off axis you are.
This is very very complicated to write here. Maybe when we meet next, we can talk about this.

None the less, thanks for posting.
Nice to chat and touch base again.

All the Best !!

I still need to 'audition' your Thesis & Mille set up !!! When ? Where ? Not in ND - I hope...........