Home-Made IEMs
Sep 6, 2018 at 5:49 PM Post #7,667 of 16,031
Guys, got a issue to discuss. It is well known that the bigger inner diameter of the soundbore, the better HF extension. Low inner diameters works almost as a lo pass filter limiting in the audible way HF.
On the other hand, if there is more soundbores in one earphone getting straight to the ear, the sound is more focused, detailed, clear, the soundstage is wider, instruments are more separated.
My measurements shows that the difference between 1ID and 2ID above 5kHz with the same tube length could be up to 10dB (smaller ID, quieter HF).
BUT, many pro audio companies use multi bore constructions (up to four or five soundbores in each headphone). The ID of each bore couldn't be bigger than 1mm.
And the question - how do they got so many bores, that do not affect the high frequencies making sound muddy and not clear? How do they deal with it? I have made in my opinion great construction , four drivers with three soundbores (3x2ID), that hardly fits to my really big ear canal. It will be impossible to fit it into the smaller one. The solution could be usage of smaller ID bores, but it affects sound too much right now.
Sample picture below.
10018102.jpg

Just using logics, you could either put more treble extension drivers and keep small tubes or have one larger tube with smaller tubes for drivers focusing on lower frequencies. Everything is a compromise.
I don't agree with your argument about more tubes = better sound. There is a limit to everything and I'd argue that 2 or 3 bores are optimal.
 
Sep 7, 2018 at 12:18 PM Post #7,668 of 16,031
I don't see how more bores = better separation. Also, doesn't the extension depend on the driver placement too? In my tests, using one big bore and placing the driver randomly doesn't always yield better HF extension though.
 
Sep 11, 2018 at 11:35 AM Post #7,669 of 16,031
I'm getting close to finishing my first build and I just can't get over the HF roll-off of the GV. This is my first build and I don't have any experience with tuning BAs, but I've had pretty consistent HF roll-off throughout testing with different combinations of dampers and tube length. Would it be possible to extend my HF by adding an SWFK to my build? Has anyone done this with a GV? Would it even be worth it?
 
Sep 11, 2018 at 12:37 PM Post #7,672 of 16,031
Try using 2mm ID tube for the twfk and using different length/damper combinations.
You should be extent further in the >2khz region. Expect a boost of about 3-6db depending on your config.
 
Last edited:
Sep 11, 2018 at 2:43 PM Post #7,677 of 16,031
Wow man those shells are looking marvelous! Great work! I never managed to have my shells be this clean and uniform :)

Im having uneven thickness every time and hair lines everywhere. Inside looking messy. Well im still doing something wrong obviously :)
 
Last edited:
Sep 11, 2018 at 3:15 PM Post #7,679 of 16,031
Try using 2mm ID tube for the twfk and using different length/damper combinations.
You should be extent further in the >2khz region. Expect a boost of about 3-6db depending on your config.
I gave it a trial run with the bigger tube on the TWFK and shoved it into a comply tip and I can tell it's better. When I'm home from work I'll enlarge the bore and see how it sounds. Thank you!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top