this 42" tall coupler imo was a good performer dynamically speaking with high output capibility with low cone excursion and no visable offset effects. (there's ~no midrange gain vs direct radiator so getting giddy with coupler might not be good)what doesn't seem to be known is how far down the apparent front pipe's cross-section can be pulled vs Sd and whether front tuning can be lumped and examined by looking at the 3rd Z peak. (a 32" high box with 8CF bulk and no front shelf had 3rd Z peak @195Hz vs K15 @~155Hz)
what are practical front chamber aspect, bulk constraints and tuning ratios for effective couplers?
how might one put Poppe's paper to useful work?
front view 18K (~12% larger in bulk than K15)
input Z with vent set to side gapped position
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - freddyi 11:07:55 03/03/07 (7)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - GM 14:56:30 03/03/07 (6)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - freddyi 17:49:14 03/03/07 (5)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - GM 18:50:29 03/03/07 (4)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - freddyi 22:08:11 03/03/07 (3)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? - GM 02:06:25 03/04/07 (2)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? 3rd Z peaks - freddyi 07:29:20 03/04/07 (1)
- Re: Karlson-coupler aspect - what might be juggled for aspect & performance? 3rd Z peaks - GM 15:55:08 03/04/07 (0)