[dhruvmeena96]

so its like a loop..extra air pressure not directed down the tube gets sent as back volume to woofer... interesting... couldnt that breifly change response?

Isnt this what you tried doing, where you had the sound bore with a T joint. Straight line from driver to ear. Bend back to the port? You said it sounded like open back headphones

All the sound buildup would be released more efficiently by three bores at back..

We are trying something else.

Its actually using backwave of driver and dumping in the front at certain damping factor to high pass and equalise the resonant response

 

[et.haan]

Yesterday I downloaded Rode Fuzzmeazure
Is the 711 accurate down to 20hz? I don’t feel like it is..... The HODVTEC I measured without the tube had a clearly much flatter response.... longer tube, low response got.....worse? Is it accurate for FFT waterfalls?
Here’s a 31618, 20mm tube, yellow damper at 10mm.
Be aware that i changed the visible range for frequency on the waterfall after the 31618...

I need to try without a damper, 400ms sounds really slow, doesn’t it?

There is a graph of an etymotic somewhere, can’t find it now tho

Also, would a Zobel circuit show on a waterfall?
Here’s my latest build with the SR. Its plugged into my macbook, not my denon.

The one without the artifact had normalization on. The one without normalization absolutely shows the resonance at 10-15k that the 711 is known for.

The one w. the artifact at 100hz looks like the lower limit of how low it can play. Or I bumped my table.

edit: i edited grammar, my writing at 7am, after 5.5hrs sleep isn’t great, sorry

 

[et.haan]

Found it. The 711 is definitely not accurate for response time. At least mine isnt. Ill try one with a metal housing eventually, but I doubt that the foam provides 200ms of damping

this is an interesting read: http://rinchoi.blogspot.com/2012/09/evaluating-accuracy-of-my-new-simulator.html

 

[komplexed]

Hi folks,

long time lurker from way back. I used this thread several years ago to successfully create some great ciem’s I use to this day.
I recently pulled my DIY IEM box out of storage and thought I’d try something new.
I have a number of BA’s including Hodvtec, Swfk, CI, and 3 pairs of GV.
With all this stock, I was curious if anyone has successfully added a CI to a GV to give it that extra punch?
Would this be possible while keeping the original GV crossover intact?

Cheers

 

[et.haan]

Hi folks,

long time lurker from way back. I used this thread several years ago to successfully create some great ciem’s I use to this day.
I recently pulled my DIY IEM box out of storage and thought I’d try something new.
I have a number of BA’s including Hodvtec, Swfk, CI, and 3 pairs of GV.
With all this stock, I was curious if anyone has successfully added a CI to a GV to give it that extra punch?
Would this be possible while keeping the original GV crossover intact?

Cheers

Hmm. I know in loudspeaker design, mixing 2 speakers playing over themselves is sin, and is hard to sound good. But MASM 7 does it and sounds really good, so I don’t know.

There’s no way you’re going to get 3 GV in. Maybe, just maybe, you could do 2 or 3 hodvtec and 2 or 3 TWFK. But it would stick very far out of your ear. I don’t even want to think about tubing. It would have to be long, and you would have poor treble with the GV. Phase would be a nightmare.

But what I don’t understand, why the GV? There are better drivers, if you want to do a no compromise build. Sonion 381dx, with knowles DWFK and WBFK separately dampened will sound much better.

Sonion 38 has more punch than Cl

CL is a broadband driver


edit: it is better to tune and refine an IEM, than to brute force more drivers. And much easier.

 

[komplexed]

Hmm. I know in loudspeaker design, mixing 2 speakers playing over themselves is sin, and is hard to sound good. But MASM 7 does it and sounds really good, so I don’t know.

There’s no way you’re going to get 3 GV in. Maybe, just maybe, you could do 2 or 3 hodvtec and 2 or 3 TWFK. But it would stick very far out of your ear. I don’t even want to think about tubing. It would have to be long, and you would have poor treble with the GV. Phase would be a nightmare.

But what I don’t understand, why the GV? There are better drivers, if you want to do a no compromise build. Sonion 381dx, with knowles DWFK and WBFK separately dampened will sound much better.

Sonion 38 has more punch than Cl

CL is a broadband driver


edit: it is better to tune and refine an IEM, than to brute force more drivers. And much easier.

I was thinking more along the lines of a single GV with a CI- 22955. I’m just wanting to use what I have, rather than buy new drivers.
I would imagine I’d need a good low pass on the CI so there’s not too much overlap.
I can fit a max of 3 tubes in my canal, so the GV and CI would fit nicely if I can make it all work together.

 

[et.haan]

I was thinking more along the lines of a single GV with a CI- 22955. I’m just wanting to use what I have, rather than buy new drivers.
I would imagine I’d need a good low pass on the CI so there’s not too much overlap.
I can fit a max of 3 tubes in my canal, so the GV and CI would fit nicely if I can make it all work together.

I would say that that is much more likely, but remember there is a GX driver with the CL and TWFK. I think it’s called the GK. Maybe do that, and incorporate ED mids.

Also, just because you can fit 3 tubes in your canal doesn’t mean you should. A 2mm tube for your tweeter is hugely beneficial.

 

[MamatYoSekmat]

Is the quality of the cl 30120 driver much different from cl 22955? But I did not find cl 30120 on the knowles website

 

[komplexed]

I would say that that is much more likely, but remember there is a GX driver with the CL and TWFK. I think it’s called the GK. Maybe do that, and incorporate ED mids.

Also, just because you can fit 3 tubes in your canal doesn’t mean you should. A 2mm tube for your tweeter is hugely beneficial.

Fair enough. I’m sure there are better ways to get this sound, but these are the drivers I have in my possession.
I have a set of monitors with GK’s that I use quite often for music. But they lack a bit in the mid range even when EQ’d.
The GV has amazing highs and mids, but no where near the bass of the GK.
I guess I’ll just play around with it and see what happens. I’m essentially looking the turn the CI into a subwoofer for the GV. If anything, it’s something fun to tinker with since I have no other use for these drivers.

 

[dhruvmeena96]

Fair enough. I’m sure there are better ways to get this sound, but these are the drivers I have in my possession.
I have a set of monitors with GK’s that I use quite often for music. But they lack a bit in the mid range even when EQ’d.
The GV has amazing highs and mids, but no where near the bass of the GK.
I guess I’ll just play around with it and see what happens. I’m essentially looking the turn the CI into a subwoofer for the GV. If anything, it’s something fun to tinker with since I have no other use for these drivers.

i have done some brute forcing to GV

but can i get your just GV build and how does it sound
like a review
and at what frequency you have to improve

CI-22955
zobel cap = 15uF
resistor = 27.5ohms

dual yellow damped to avoid cross over impedance swing

you can cross it if you want and i will suggest crossing it when you can control impedance swing

 

[et.haan]

Is the quality of the cl 30120 driver much different from cl 22955? But I did not find cl 30120 on the knowles website

Knowles has a bunch of unlisted drivers, although I cannot speak for them specifically, oftentimes it’s just a different impedance
I have a set of monitors with GK’s that I use quite often for music. But they lack a bit in the mid range even when EQ’d.
The GV has amazing highs and mids, but no where near the bass of the GK.
I guess I’ll just play around with it and see what happens. I’m essentially looking the turn the CI into a subwoofer for the GV. If anything, it’s something fun to tinker with since I have no other use for these drivers.[/QUOTE]
Gv and GK both have TWFK, if I am not mistaken. Try a custom crossover, with an L pad to match (and lower) the output of the Cl to the Hodvtec

 

[et.haan]

I am about to buy a bunch of drivers and other stuff, any other suggestions? Here is my list:

Est65da01 replacement
38X1XJ007 Sonion
4x 2389 for 2389D
WBFK 30019 (if I can find good price)

Also would like recommendations for good RAB.. preferably with a lot of tuning headroom
Anybody have a favorite DWFK? Or thoughts about the BK?
A bunch of dampers (1mm and 2mm)
Tubing restock
Connector restock

I’ll do MASM 7 soon.

 

[MamatYoSekmat]

Knowles has a bunch of unlisted drivers, although I cannot speak for them specifically, oftentimes it’s just a different impedance
I have a set of monitors with GK’s that I use quite often for music. But they lack a bit in the mid range even when EQ’d.
The GV has amazing highs and mids, but no where near the bass of the GK.
I guess I’ll just play around with it and see what happens. I’m essentially looking the turn the CI into a subwoofer for the GV. If anything, it’s something fun to tinker with since I have no other use for these drivers.

Gv and GK both have TWFK, if I am not mistaken. Try a custom crossover, with an L pad to match (and lower) the output of the Cl to the Hodvtec[/QUOTE]

I am about to buy a bunch of drivers and other stuff, any other suggestions? Here is my list:

Est65da01 replacement
38X1XJ007 Sonion
4x 2389 for 2389D
WBFK 30019 (if I can find good price)

Also would like recommendations for good RAB.. preferably with a lot of tuning headroom
Anybody have a favorite DWFK? Or thoughts about the BK?
A bunch of dampers (1mm and 2mm)
Tubing restock
Connector restock

I’ll do MASM 7 soon.

The seller said the same as CL 22955, only differed 2-4 ohms, but he did not know the response freq, so far I used cl, ed and twfk with cl damper from sponge earbuds placed at the end of Nozol CL sounds pretty good, but not a little in the bass section. And wanted to make more because that one had been stolen by a monkey after sunbathing after polishing

 

[MamatYoSekmat]

Knowles has a bunch of unlisted drivers, although I cannot speak for them specifically, oftentimes it’s just a different impedance
I have a set of monitors with GK’s that I use quite often for music. But they lack a bit in the mid range even when EQ’d.
The GV has amazing highs and mids, but no where near the bass of the GK.
I guess I’ll just play around with it and see what happens. I’m essentially looking the turn the CI into a subwoofer for the GV. If anything, it’s something fun to tinker with since I have no other use for these drivers.

Gv and GK both have TWFK, if I am not mistaken. Try a custom crossover, with an L pad to match (and lower) the output of the Cl to the Hodvtec[/QUOTE]
The seller said the same as CL 22955, only differed 2-4 ohms, but he did not know the response freq, so far I used cl, ed and twfk with cl damper from sponge earbuds placed at the end of Nozol CL sounds pretty good, but not a little in the bass section. And wanted to make more because that one had been stolen by a monkey after sunbathing after polishing

 

[et.haan]

Gv and GK both have TWFK, if I am not mistaken. Try a custom crossover, with an L pad to match (and lower) the output of the Cl to the Hodvtec

The seller said the same as CL 22955, only differed 2-4 ohms, but he did not know the response freq, so far I used cl, ed and twfk with cl damper from sponge earbuds placed at the end of Nozol CL sounds pretty good, but not a little in the bass section. And wanted to make more because that one had been stolen by a monkey after sunbathing after polishing[/QUOTE]
Makes sense. I know that there is also a CL out there without a center tap, but I forgot the model.

A monkey?