Site Links
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
In this Discussion
Who's Online (7)
- Dirk 4:12AM
- DrewsBrews 4:12AM
- kenrhodes 4:12AM
- rjj45 4:12AM
- ScottS 4:12AM
- Steve_Lee 4:12AM
- technodanvan 4:12AM
Please review the site Rules, Terms of Service, and Privacy Policy at your convenience. Rules, TOS, Privacy
Get familiar with the reaction system: Introducing the Reaction System
About the only project I have time to get done for Iowa...
...is another iteration of the reliable old Cabrini. In this case, the changes warrant not calling it the Cabrini any more, but I probably will anyways. I am thinking "Cabrini SM", short for "studio monitor" of course.
Woofers are "Drok" brand, a company that essentially sticker-engineered generic drivers and puts them out on Ebay and Amazon. They also have a wide range of audio electronics.
Woofers are "Drok" brand, a company that essentially sticker-engineered generic drivers and puts them out on Ebay and Amazon. They also have a wide range of audio electronics.
Fs = 54.60 Hz
Re = 3.64 ohms[dc]
Le = 228.00 uH
L2 = 421.96 uH
R2 = 15.94 ohms
Qt = 0.51
Qes = 0.60
Qms = 3.41
Mms = 16.40 grams
Rms = 1.649932 kg/s
Cms = 0.000518 m/N
Vas = 12.04 liters
Sd= 128.68 cm^2
Bl = 5.849851 Tm
ETA = 0.31 %
Lp(2.83V/1m) = 90.51 dB
Added Mass Method:
Added mass = 25.00 grams
Diameter= 12.80 cm
The other driver measured pretty close to the same. I was pleasantly surprised at the T/S parameters - I was fully expecting them to exhibit a much higher Qts.
Here are ported/sealed models using the Cabrini cabinet (0.5 cubic feet, added 0.5 ohm series resistance):
Sealed F3/6/10 of 72/56/43. That is pretty close to the original Cabrini woofer albeit at a much lowed Q. In fact, this models at pretty close to the "ideal" 0.707 Q.
Vented F3/6/10 of 56/47/39. That is a decent if not great extension, definitely low enough to enjoy a lot of different content:
The impedance curve indicates a minimal cone breakup, I had difficulty getting the driver to bottom out which tells me the soft parts are reasonably appropriately sized, and the inductance is actually pretty low - despite the rising impedance. I am guessing it should compete with any number of other affordable 6.5" drivers out there.
It is otherwise a bread and butter driver. The cone is attractive woven fiber, hard poly dustcap, foam gasket, basic stamped frame. It has stiffening ridges formed into the spokes of the basket - something a lot of inexpensive stamped drivers lack. 25mm voice coil vs the GRS 30mm, but the spider is larger. Vented out the back, so at least a modicum of attention to keeping the voice coil from starting a cabinet fire. Rubber surround. Lots and lots of mechanical throw. Loose suspension compared to the GRS. Overall, until I measure and listen, appears to be a definite upgrade over the GRS.
As far as the tweeter goes, I am debating right now between something easily available like the Vifa BC25TG, Dayton waveguide thing (which would fit with my 'studio monitor' theme), or something a little harder to find, or even already NLA. I have a pair of NOS Northcreek tweeters that would probably work stupendous (and allow me to cross nice and low). I also have a pair of these weird things:
Ebay find, you can usually pick them up on Ebay for around $30/pr. Audipur branded. These are very enticing to use, just to carry the "studio monitor" theme forward. All the studio guys in this area are on a ribbon kick these days, plus it is also yellow.
Virtually any tweeter I choose will require some modification to the cabinet. The GRS tweeter uses a very non-standard 103mm faceplate, so it is juuuuuuust a touch too small for standard tweeters. Will require some sandpaper work regardless. The planar tweeter pictured above is actually around 101mm, so would require modification of a different kind.
I hope to get these cobbled up and done this week.
The other driver measured pretty close to the same. I was pleasantly surprised at the T/S parameters - I was fully expecting them to exhibit a much higher Qts.
Here are ported/sealed models using the Cabrini cabinet (0.5 cubic feet, added 0.5 ohm series resistance):
Sealed F3/6/10 of 72/56/43. That is pretty close to the original Cabrini woofer albeit at a much lowed Q. In fact, this models at pretty close to the "ideal" 0.707 Q.
Vented F3/6/10 of 56/47/39. That is a decent if not great extension, definitely low enough to enjoy a lot of different content:
The impedance curve indicates a minimal cone breakup, I had difficulty getting the driver to bottom out which tells me the soft parts are reasonably appropriately sized, and the inductance is actually pretty low - despite the rising impedance. I am guessing it should compete with any number of other affordable 6.5" drivers out there.
It is otherwise a bread and butter driver. The cone is attractive woven fiber, hard poly dustcap, foam gasket, basic stamped frame. It has stiffening ridges formed into the spokes of the basket - something a lot of inexpensive stamped drivers lack. 25mm voice coil vs the GRS 30mm, but the spider is larger. Vented out the back, so at least a modicum of attention to keeping the voice coil from starting a cabinet fire. Rubber surround. Lots and lots of mechanical throw. Loose suspension compared to the GRS. Overall, until I measure and listen, appears to be a definite upgrade over the GRS.
As far as the tweeter goes, I am debating right now between something easily available like the Vifa BC25TG, Dayton waveguide thing (which would fit with my 'studio monitor' theme), or something a little harder to find, or even already NLA. I have a pair of NOS Northcreek tweeters that would probably work stupendous (and allow me to cross nice and low). I also have a pair of these weird things:
Ebay find, you can usually pick them up on Ebay for around $30/pr. Audipur branded. These are very enticing to use, just to carry the "studio monitor" theme forward. All the studio guys in this area are on a ribbon kick these days, plus it is also yellow.
Virtually any tweeter I choose will require some modification to the cabinet. The GRS tweeter uses a very non-standard 103mm faceplate, so it is juuuuuuust a touch too small for standard tweeters. Will require some sandpaper work regardless. The planar tweeter pictured above is actually around 101mm, so would require modification of a different kind.
I hope to get these cobbled up and done this week.
I have a signature.
Comments