outlawaudio? also a sprker building q
Printed From: the12volt.com
Forum Name: Car Audio
Forum Discription: Car Stereos, Amplifiers, Crossovers, Processors, Speakers, Subwoofers, etc.
URL: https://www.the12volt.com/installbay/forum_posts.asp?tid=44738
Printed Date: August 06, 2025 at 11:14 AM
Topic: outlawaudio? also a sprker building q
Posted By: kfr01
Subject: outlawaudio? also a sprker building q
Date Posted: December 08, 2004 at 5:05 PM
Does anyone have any experience, directly or through word of mouth, with the internet only home audio manufacturer www.outlawaudio.com?
(I know this isn't car audio related, but I highly respect the opinion of members on this board).
Anyway, it seems like they're possibly more bang for the buck than say Rotel. The reviews look decent.
Also, on my home audio / theater speaker building project ... I ordered 2 Extremis drivers, and will probably order these Seas TDFC tweeters.
My plan is to build a two piece enclosure, starting with a 2-way enclosure on top. This way I'll be able to gain experience with a more simple design by completing / perfecting the top unit first. I then hope to add a bass unit beneath when I become more comfortable with crossover construction, turning it into a 3-way.
Here's one diy project I found as my inspiration for this project: here
One more question. I notice that some high end speaker companies port their midrange compartments, even in 3-way designs. Some folks on diyaudio.com told me this was so the audible xo slope could be entirely electric, rather than the riskier matching of driver rolloff + electric to achieve final acoustic slope. i.e. nearly 2 octaves below the xo point could be flat if ported, before implementation of the high pass xo on the midrange. How do you feel about this? Do I sacrifice too much transient response and risk too much in the way of port bloat / resonance / group delay? ------------- New Project: 2003 Pathfinder
Replies:
Posted By: stevdart
Date Posted: December 09, 2004 at 5:47 PM
Most of that is over my head, kfr01, but I will make comments on a couple of points. Ever since the internet access company I was using (and paid a year in advance for services with) disappeared in the middle of the night, I have been leary of the business of doing business by internet ONLY. Any brick-and-mortar establishment carrying the company name, paying taxes, and belonging to the BBB may further their sales by offering internet sales. I'm all for it. But I don't trust the invisible cyber-sellers. A few quotes follow from the Outlaw web page: "By offering these products directly to you via the Internet, we can eliminate the additional markup required to support a traditional "bricks and mortar" retail store." Supporting just one established showroom isn't asking too much. "The "Outlaws" are a group of audio/video product designers, engineers, and marketers who have been in the consumer electronics industry for a long time." Do these rebels have names? "The term OUTLAW seemed fitting for the name of our new company - a company that would break all the conventional rules of retail commerce." There are good reasons we have conventional rules of retail commerce: consumers want it that way. On the other topic, I don't like the look of the piggyback system you linked to. Do you? Why don't you work out a 3-way crossover for the whole shebang and build one unit? You can tweak the crossover at any time, and would have the benefit of hearing all the components of the system at once. Oh, and I would port mid drivers anytime their T/S parameters call for it. The little JBL mids I used in my rear surrounds called for ported. Do these high-end drivers you referred to need the porting like my JBL's do?
(Just commenting to keep your thread alive lol)
Posted By: kfr01
Date Posted: December 09, 2004 at 6:52 PM
Good comments on the internet only retailer. I don't think their prices are quite good enough to justify the long term risk in this case. Thanks for the comments!
Well, having never done this whole crossover building thing, I was thinking I'd reduce my risk via the piggyback system... but I guess I should just go all out if I'm going to try at all, eh? :-)
Well, WinISD calls for porting of the Extremis drivers. Sealed I'm down 3db at ~70hz, Adire's ported recommendations haven't even started rolling off at that point. I think porting might be the way to go for the midrange in this case. Seems like since the Extremis has the extension I should use it for as smooth a rolloff as possible.
The problem I then seem to run into porting the midrange is the port resonance and length. 3in diameter I'm looking at 23" port lenth w/ the 1st port resonance ~280hz. Dropping it down to 2" gives me a more manageable port length, at 10", but the port resonance of 660hz is well into the heart of my midrange. Does anyone out there w/ speaker building experience have any advice on this. Stevdart, where was your port resonance at, did it have any audible effect?
btw. thanks for keeping my little thread alive. :-)
-------------
New Project: 2003 Pathfinder
Posted By: stevdart
Date Posted: December 09, 2004 at 7:14 PM
With my project, I clearly spent too much on the crossover compared to the end value of the speakers. Being rears, and dipole design so that they work only as rears, I don't really have the benefit of listen-testing for the nuances you would find in main speakers. As far as port opening size, I don't see why you couldn't use as little as a 1" for mids. Think of the shallow amount of excursion in the mid woofer and it's comparative power output. What size are those? And did a check with a vent calculator lead you to go with a larger port? I used 1" with the 4.5" mids in the rears, but the power going to each rear is all of 20 watts. And the EBP for those woofers is 190! You should see the feeble bass response with those things sealed. Question: what does the port resonance do? Does it interfere with the sound at that frequency? The first port resonance on mine is 1691 Hz. I'm still not done completely with them, and so haven't listened to them much yet. I just had them set up for a test run one day while coated in primer grey. But just from that much, I was impressed by their performance and almost invisible presence. Next time I work on a crossover, I'll go through the steps DYohn outlined in this post. It allows testing of the crossover and listening to the results while keeping component leads at full length. So if something is changed out, the component can just be snipped out and it's still completely usable for the next project. My method was faith. Everything was glued and soldered and tucked away, so changing something would give me a component with short leads in most cases....harder to use the component again. That is, if I could get it unstuck from the gob of hot glue.
Posted By: kfr01
Date Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:08 PM
Excellent. Thank you for the advice on the crossover. The books and other resources kinda tend to skip over the practical stuff. The extremis is adire's new 6" midrange. Thanks for the vent calculator / airspeed link. Very helpful. Using that calculator it doesn't seem like I'd be creating too much airspeed with even a very short 1.375" port. EBP for the Extremis is 190? WinISD gave me 78.6. Either way, I think ported is probably the way to go. To be 100% honest with you I'm not sure what port resonance does. I assume it boosts the sound at that frequency. I'll have to crack open the loudspeaker cookbood before bed tonight. Anyway, thanks again for your help and response!  ------------- New Project: 2003 Pathfinder
Posted By: stevdart
Date Posted: December 09, 2004 at 11:16 PM
Glad to make this thread a dialogue instead of a monologue! The EBP I referred to was for the woofers in my set...I didn't check out the Extemis. But yeah, I think anything in the 70's should call for a vented enclosure, although I know they can go either way. The low end really drops off when sealed with that EBP, methinks.
|
