# Econowave Deluxe



## mkvdubstyle (May 12, 2010)

Hi all:

Has anyone on the forum built a speaker called the "Econowave deluxe"? It was designed by Zilch, a man who musically blended woofers and cd's and the end result is quite amazing. 

His design called for a qsc waveguide, a B&E 250 compression driver and an eminence 3012lf woofer. I may be wrong with the part numbers as my memory is not what it used to be. This was put together using a crossover of his spec and design and built using a parts express trap pa cabinet. 

I want to build a pair of the same speakers but using a traditional rectangle shaped enclosure. The research I have done suggests that as long as I keep the same dimensions on the front baffle same as the trap enclosure and mount the speakers on centerline the sound quality will not diminish. 

I would mount the waveguide on the front baffle exposing the rear of the guide and the cd. I have always liked that look, and at the same time I can use any type of port for the woofer of my liking. I could also design the woofer enclosure counting the displacement if the woofer alone. 

I'm on the train home so it makes things difficult to paste links to the design. It's in the parts express forum and can be found by searching for "flex your pcd mettle"

Does anyone have any suggestion for the build? Inspiration has hit and I need to build something...

Sent from my HTC Panache using HT Shack


----------



## fusseli (May 1, 2007)

I haven't seen that particular build, there must be multiple Econowave designs. What suggestions are you looking for? If the Econowave Deluxe is a proven design, then there won't be much that you should alter aside from your choice of finishing.

I'd go off of the outter dims of the PA trap cabinet. The CTC spacing and orientation of the drivers must also remain the same.


----------



## maxmercy (Apr 19, 2008)

Here you go:

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?p=1626379#post1626379

Page 1 of the thread includes most variants.

JSS


----------



## mkvdubstyle (May 12, 2010)

My plan was to make the front baffle identical to the pa box used in the design and only change the cab portion that houses the woof. I was planning on using a mindsp as an electronic xover utilizing the same xover specs as the designs call for. I have 2 integra m504's

Sent from my HTC Panache using HT Shack


----------



## fusseli (May 1, 2007)

Nice plan. You will want to make sure you match the ELECTRICAL roll offs, not ACOUSTIC. There's a big difference. With active Xovers you would be very easily able to tweak the FR of the speaker if you have any good measurement gear. That said, if you could measure and tweak together your own Xover you may even be able to acheive better than the original passive.

Also, the smallest dimension (baffle width) is the most important to keep the same. If you keep the planned dimensions that will be fine. Another improvement would be to roundover the baffle edges >1/2" if possible.


----------



## mkvdubstyle (May 12, 2010)

When it comes to construction that is my exact idea. Rear mount the woofer just like the original with a 1/2 roundover and maintaining the width of the front baffle which I think is 17 1/2 inches. The waveguide is installed through the front of the baffle and I was thinking of designing my own support braket out of wood to support the back of the guide and cd. Finishing it the same as the rest of the cabinet. 

I have been trying to decide what port shape to use, a slot port is talking to me. Or perhaps a passive radiator. I would like something different than your typical round port. 

Any suggestions?

I am going to order the galaxy audio spl meter that is recommended in the REW forum. Using both REW and the spa meter I can learn to tune the xo as well as possible. I was thinking I would need the tools for tuning but I am new to the concept of electrical rolloffs, can you suggest any reading to gain a better knowledge of it?

And I thank my fellow shacksters for all the info and advice.

Sent from my HTC Panache using HT Shack


----------



## mkvdubstyle (May 12, 2010)

I've been working on a drawing that I will post with some more details. Google sketch confuses me, so this one is old school hand drawn. One I have final measurements and model the woofer for the best volume ill post it for constructive criticism.

Sent from my HTC Panache using HT Shack


----------



## fusseli (May 1, 2007)

If you go with a PR over a port, you'll want to play with a simulation a bit until you are able to match the same tuning as with the port. Shouldn't be too hard to do. A slot port should be fine. Ask if you need help sizing your port or PR.

My biggest recommendation is to be ready to take measurements so that you can dial in your filters. I've never tried matching active to passive slopes before so I don't know how much fiddling it will take, but in theory it should work just fine.


----------



## gmannel (Jan 16, 2012)

Got my drivers! BC250, QSC, 2512, and my miniDSP.
Box will be scratch built. Size is not a consideration as will be behind a screen.
In general, for an Ewave, what would lead one to choose, or reject:
1) Sealed
Smaller size? Any acoustic advantage?
2) Vented
Better efficiency? Bass extension?(less important as already have TubaHT)
3) Passive radiator
Would this have a detrimental effect on the constant directivity goal?

And finally, if I model the 2512 using TS parameters, etc, rec.box size is 2.37 cf. Manufac spec sheet says 0.8!! What do I believe? That's a huge difference!


----------



## fusseli (May 1, 2007)

"Recommended" box sizes from manufacturer or some modelling program will very likely not match up, they are most likely different alignments. The box volume, tuning, and type of enclosure make up the alignment. Go with what you would like best. If you need help deciding just say so. 

A passive radiator would not change directivity just as a ported design wouldn't. The radiator or port only contribute in the low bass range where they are tuned. The SQ advantage to a sealed .707 alignment is that it is optimally damped, changing the way the woofer returns to rest. This alignment also suffers very minimal group delay (aka slopiness) in the bass range compared to PR or ported. That's not to say that a PR/ported design can't have clean, tight bass.

This is a BIG advantage of you going with active Xovering. With passive Xovers, changing alignments will also change the speakers impedance profile. This usually (not always) can have varying effects on a passive crossover. One of many reasons why they say to build a proven design exactly as it was originally designed.


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

gmannel said:


> Box will be scratch built. *Size is not a consideration as will be behind a screen.*


Then I would build a tapered TL.


----------

