Designing a 2-way bookshelf speaker

A quick question tcpip, was the mdf was cut manually or CNC etc? I just got some mdf cut by a local carpenter with an error of 1 to 2 mm. How to eliminate it any suggestions

I think tcpip has already answered your query but I'd like to share my experience. My GRR 5.1 were entirely hand made. My carpenter used to mark sizes on the MDF board which are 2 to 3 mm more than the actual measurement and use either jigsaw or circular saw and then precisely mark on the cut-price. For the first two pieces, he used to do planing and angle measuring instrument to level it with a planer. For baffle and back piece, he used to fix the slightly bigger ones onto the box and used to use router to level them. Further, if he needs multiple boxes of same size, he used to have the first precision made pieces as templates then used to fix the slightly bigger pieces to the template with two or three thin nails and used to make use of the router to level them. Even speaker holes including countersinking were made using the router.
 
Last edited:
I think tcpip has already answered your query but I'd like to share my experience. My GRR 5.1 were entirely hand made. My carpenter used to mark sizes on the MDF board which are 2 to 3 mm more than the actual measurement and use either jigsaw or circular saw and then precisely mark on the cut-price. For the first two pieces, he used to do planing and angle measuring instrument to level it with a planer. For baffle and back piece, he used to fix the slightly bigger ones onto the box and used to use router to level them. Further, if he needs multiple boxes of same size, he used to have the first precision made pieces as templates then used to fix the slightly bigger pieces to the template with two or three thin nails and used to make use of the router to level them. Even speaker holes including countersigning were made using the router.
I will try to explain all of these valid points to my Carpenter.

But the problem with them is that they know everything and it's there daily task wala attitude.
 
Is anyone still interested in this project? :rolleyes:

I took a break from DIY audio for about one and a half years, partly due to other activities which I took up and partly due to stuff thrust on me. As they say in American, "life happens". Not all of it pleasant. But I can't complain -- I'm back on my feet and alive and kicking (albeit kicking a bit more carefully with my right ankle than my left!) and have survived too many big events to list here.

For those of you who had been following the project initially, my sincerest apologies. I let you guys down. If this is a dead thread for you now, it's perfectly natural. However, I have those half-complete bookshelf speakers to complete, and I've picked up the thread (pun intended) and will document every step as I go along.

Just finished SPL and Z measurements. Will post data now.

I just decided to post my images in a shared Google folder: https://photos.app.goo.gl/HmmpPcXfzYtMUsGB8 instead of posting them individually here. Since work on both the Bhairav and Bhoopali happened in parallel, many photos show both these enclosures. Some photos show internal bracing. I'm very happy with the inertness of the sidewalls, and the overall appearance. These are budget designs for me, and they don't look cheap or badly finished.
 
Last edited:
Is anyone still interested in this project? :rolleyes:

I took a break from DIY audio for about one and a half years, partly due to other activities which I took up and partly due to stuff thrust on me. As they say in American, "life happens". Not all of it pleasant. But I can't complain -- I'm back on my feet and alive and kicking (albeit kicking a bit more carefully with my right ankle than my left!) and have survived too many big events to list here.

For those of you who had been following the project initially, my sincerest apologies. I let you guys down. If this is a dead thread for you now, it's perfectly natural. However, I have those half-complete bookshelf speakers to complete, and I've picked up the thread (pun intended) and will document every step as I go along.

Just finished SPL and Z measurements. Will post data now.

I just decided to post my images in a shared Google folder: https://photos.app.goo.gl/HmmpPcXfzYtMUsGB8 instead of posting them individually here. Since work on both the Bhairav and Bhoopali happened in parallel, many photos show both these enclosures. Some photos show internal bracing. I'm very happy with the inertness of the sidewalls, and the overall appearance. These are budget designs for me, and they don't look cheap or badly finished.
very happy to see you come back sir !!!!:):)
 
Thanks a lot, all of you. :) I am fiddling with crossover design, flipping between XSim and VituixCAD. I will post as soon as I get something even half-done, to keep the discussion going.
 
Did some more work on measurements, and realised that I had made mistakes with the earlier set. So, had to re-do all of them again.

I had been trying to get a grip on ARTA, and missed a few things. I wired up the midbass drivers of Bhairav in series instead of parallel for the SPL measurements. Then I forgot to add the calibration file for my mic, so my SPL measurements went a bit haywire at the top end, because that's where my mic has a wide peak in its response. I also realised that I'm getting much better impulse readings at about 4ft distance instead of 6ft. Don't ask me why. And so on.

Here they are. I'm much happier with the current set of curves.



Hope some of you are trying crossover simulation with this data.
 
BHOOPALI (TM design)

For Bhoopali, the TM design, this is what I decided to go with as the crossover circuit. It's fourth order electrical.
iz2uqg.png

The values in the circuit need to be rounded off to sensible values. The numbers here are more accurate than we need. For instance, the resistance value of 2.040 Ohm can be just 2 Ohm, and 7.582 Ohm can be 7.5 Ohm or thereabouts. Capacitor value of 6.510 uF can easily be 6.3 uF + 0.1 uF + 0.1uF in parallel, and so on.

This is the SPL curve: fairly flat:
29w1hg2.png

There is a very gentle rise in the SPL curve with frequency. It is possible that the speaker will sound slightly on the detailed side. This rise will of course disappear as soon as you position them to listen slightly off-axis, maybe with a bit of toe-in. This gentle rising characteristic is a result of the tweeter's SPL curve -- there is nothing much one can do to fix it in the crossover. If I don't like this rising curve, I'll avoid using this tweeter in future projects. The midbass driver was a peach -- it was super simple to mate it with any crossover I could have wanted, because it had a wide, uniform, and smooth SPL characteristic. Typical of inexpensive poly-cone midbass drivers.

In this SPL curve, ignore anything below about 500Hz, since I took SPL measurements using a gated noise method which does not give me accurate SPL measurements at low frequencies. If I wanted to measure down to the 20s, I'd have to take nearfield measurements of the low frequency region and splice it with the gated high-frequency portion. Not needed for crossover design, since my crossover area is comfortably in the gated-measurement region.

And this is the impedance graph the software is predicting:
29fuq6c.png

Ignore everything in the graph below, say, 100Hz, because the impedance in that region will be determined by the box volume, the impact of the bass reflex port, etc, all of which have been kept pending when the measurements were taken. These measurements were taken just to let me design the crossover, which means anything below about 500Hz is unimportant for me here.

Therefore, if we just look at the range above, say, 100Hz, then the impedance does not drop below about 4.5 to 5 Ohm at any point. It's a fairly easy load for any modern amplifier. The final impedance curve will only be obtained after the crossover is built and the bass reflex port fitted.

BHAIRAV (MTM design)

For Bhairav, the MTM standmount design, this is the crossover circuit I arrived at. A fourth-order electrical topology for the tweeter, third-order electrical for the midbass drivers:
j5v9f8.png

I started with fourth-order electrical for the midbass too, but after optimisation to align with a fourth-order acoustic slope, the software told me that I could drop the second capacitor, which would have been the fourth component of the 4th order filter. So I'm getting 4th order acoustic slopes with a 3rd order electrical midbass filter.

You may be confused seeing only one midbass driver symbol in this circuit. You know that an MTM has two midbass drivers. Well, in my software, I do not work with two drivers because I take measurements of both drivers together, paralleled into one. So, both for SPL and impedance, there is only one measurement. The software would not be able to process this if I had entered two midbass drivers in the circuit -- that would have needed separate SPL and impedance measurements for each driver, something which is very difficult to do with an MTM box. You can't take an SPL measurement of just one driver if two of them are fitted in one chamber -- Driver #2 would become a passive radiator when you're pumping signal into Driver #1, and vice versa, making the SPL measurements meaningless. Therefore, the only way to take midbass measurements in an MTM setup is to hook them up as one, and then take one reading.

Once again, the values are down to three decimal places here, and will need to be rounded off in reality to get practical values. An error of 2-3% or so this way or that doesn't have any impact at all on the sound.

The crossover gives me this SPL curve, shown again with the total summed curve and the slopes for the individual drivers:
bj1gx.png

The summed SPL curve is quite pleasantly flat, which is partly just a testament to the drivers. The slight notch at about 4KHz to 4.5KHz both in the tweeter and the midbass driver curves is probably an artefact of reflections: I've always seen some small unevennesses introduced by the MTM driver layout on the front baffle. The emitted sound waves bounce or reflect from adjacent drivers a bit. That dip can be ignored. And dips in the SPL curve are very hard to notice by hearing anway -- it's peaks which colour the sound in more obvious ways.

One thing to note is the four or five squiggles of the midbass drivers from 5KHz to 10KHz. This is due to cone breakup. I hadn't expected this in this driver -- my previous experience with Kevlar cone drivers has been smoother SPL. However, I suspect there won't be significant audible impact of this. I believe metal cones have much more audible cone breakup modes. In fact, it's partly because of the cone breakup modes that I wanted to set a lowish crossover frequency and use a higher-order slope -- a 2nd order slope may risk the cone breakup region becoming audible.

The crossover frequency here is about 2.5KHz like the Bhoopali's case. In MTM, the crossover frequency is supposed to be set as low as feasible, but in this design's case, the tweeter would not be able to handle a very low frequency well. An MTM design therefore places demands on the tweeter to deliver clean sound to quite low frequencies, and this one, being a more budget-constrained design, uses a good tweeter which does not go very low.

The impedance curve of this crossover, as per the modelling software, is as follows:
33bjxxu.png

This impedance curve indicates that we can expect a 3-Ohm or slightly higher load on the amplifier for most parts. This is not easy for a weak amp, but most modern solid-state amps, even Gainclones and chip amps, will be able to deliver the few Watts of power we are expecting. If you remember, we are designing relatively low-budget standmounts for small Bombay bedrooms. This means that we don't expect to play very loud.

This lowish impedance is a problem with standard MTM designs. People like to connect their mid-bass drivers in parallel in MTM configurations for some reason. This means that they fit a pair of 8-Ohm drivers, and these give you a 4-Ohm nominal load after paralleling. This often means that the curve dips into the 3-Ohm region in reality, as is shown here.

When I had built my first Asawari (floorstander MTM), I had chosen 4-Ohm midbass drivers and connected them in series. That may be a better approach if you expect to drive them with an amp which will be uneasy with a 4-Ohm load.

Hindsight
Looking at the measured data of the drivers, the following thoughts arise:
  • For Bhoopali, I'd choose a different tweeter, just because that very slight rise in the SPL curve is not "nice". In fact, the tweeter I have used for Bhairav (the Tympany XT25SC90 ring radiator with small flange) may be perfect for a Bhoopali v2.0. It has lovely flat frequency response, and Bhoopali does not require a low crossover frequency. The XT25SC90 tweeter could have done the job.
  • For Bhairav, I'll use a different tweeter if I do it again. I'll want a tweeter which can be crossed over lower, so that I can suppress the cone breakup region of the midbass drivers (about 5KHz to 10KHz, as I have explained above) more strongly. I may also try a steeper slope. That will push up the crossover price by adding some more coils and capacitors, but may give a cleaner sounding speaker.


Now to order the crossover parts, build the crossover, fit the bass reflex port, and sit back and listen. That will take some time -- may be a month or two. Parts take time to arrive.

In the meantime, will welcome questions and opinions. :)
 
Last edited:
BHAIRAV (MTM design) redone

The cone break-up portion of the midbass drivers in the Bhairav SPL curve were nagging me, and I was getting the feeling that I could do better to suppress it. And there was that bit about the electrical 3rd order filter for the midbass -- what if I added a capacitor, made it electrical 4th order, and then played around with the values to see if I could get a steeper slope?

I am happy to report that it worked. The new crossover circuit now looks like this:
2e4zpmo.png


If you compare the earlier crossover with this one, you'll see that there's zero change in the tweeter circuit. One capacitor has been added to the midbass circuit, and the values of the L and C of that filter stage have changed.

The SPL curves, total and per-driver, are as follows:
2h572na.png


The big difference in this is the midbass drivers' response (the red line) in the region of cone break-up, 5KHz to 10KHz. The new curve pushes that portion down much more than we managed the last time. This will only make the sound cleaner. With the previous crossover, the cone-break-up region started at about 110dB at 5KHz, and went down to about 95dB just beyond 10KHz. With the new design, it starts at about 105dB at 5KHz, and is pushed down to about 75dB at 10KHz. So, 110dB becomes 105dB, and 95dB becomes about 75dB. That's pretty good, if I may say so myself, just with one extra capacitor. :)

The impedance curve is pretty much unchanged from last time, for all practical purposes:
2hchldk.png


I think now I'm happy, and I'll get busy ordering the parts. :)
 
Last edited:
@tcpip - thanks for sharing the schematics. The FR is flat in the passband. But what about filter phase? Can you share that too.
 
@tcpip - thanks for sharing the schematics. The FR is flat in the passband. But what about filter phase? Can you share that too.
The phase is present in both SPL and impedance graphs. The solid lines in both cases are magnitude, the dotted lines are phase.
 
For excellent sound that won't break the bank, the 5 Star Award Winning Wharfedale Diamond 12.1 Bookshelf Speakers is the one to consider!
Back
Top