For "8 hz" Dave : about MDF... ;-)

[Lionel]

http://www.lungster.com/l/speakers/mdffaq/mdf.html

[[email protected]]

The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing wood
in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials. Even if
heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve the same
degree of nonresonance, the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound like
MDF does. MDF is also hydroscopic and of poor machinability.

[ScottW]

Are you implying that natural wood or plywood are less hydroscopic than
wood? Perhaps to a degree it is, but because of its glue content MDF
is naturally anti-fungal.

Why not laminate MDF and get the best of both worlds? Sounds to me
like you acquired a taste for the sound of a lively cabinet. No
worries there. But that doesn't mean MDF "craps up the sound".

ScottW

[Arny Krueger]

wrote:
> The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
> to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing
> wood in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials.

Yet another unsupported global generalization from a well-known
luddite and know-nothing.

>Even if heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve
the same
> degree of nonresonance, the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound
> like MDF does.

"crap up the sound" - now that's a scientific term if I ever heard
one! ;-)

> MDF is also hydroscopic and of poor machinability.

Hydroscopic is a semi-popular illiterate form of the correct word
which is hygroscopic. Seems appropriate, all things considered.

[Lionel]

a écrit :
> The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
> to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing wood
> in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials. Even if
> heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve the same
> degree of nonresonance,

LOL ! I suggest you to add some plumb and concrete. ;-)

> the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound like
> MDF does. MDF is also hydroscopic and of


> poor machinability.

This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
serial CNC machining.
Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)

I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
as you haven't define what "wood" is.
At least MDF answers to international standards this
guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
But I'm wasting your time I'm sure that such "trivial"
industrial preoccupation don't interest you.

:-D

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :
> wrote:
>
>>The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
>>to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing
>>wood in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials.
>
>
> Yet another unsupported global generalization from a well-known
> luddite and know-nothing.
>
>
>>Even if heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve
>
> the same
>
>>degree of nonresonance, the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound
>>like MDF does.
>
>
> "crap up the sound" - now that's a scientific term if I ever heard
> one! ;-)


Don't mock him. Mr Weil and Mr Cerise are the RAO's MDF
experts... ;-)


>>MDF is also hydroscopic and of poor machinability.
>
>
> Hydroscopic is a semi-popular illiterate form of the correct word
> which is hygroscopic. Seems appropriate, all things considered.

If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.

[Lionel]

a écrit :
> The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
> to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing wood
> in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials. Even if
> heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve the same
> degree of nonresonance, the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound like
> MDF does. MDF is also hydroscopic and of poor machinability.

In the end you are propose us to manufacture a kind of
wooden barrel for drivers.

Do you what is the main particularity of an empty wooden
barrel ?

99,99999% of the time it is leaking...

;-)

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>serial CNC machining.
>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>
>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...

Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>>serial CNC machining.
>>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>>
>>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
>
>
> Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.

Around what, idiot ?
Around the fact that the intrinsic qualities and properties
of the MDF make of this material one of the best for speaker
manufacturing ?
Nothing new... This is the point of view that I defend since
the begining of this discussion.

Material MOE Density
MDF 0.53 48
Oak 1.55 38
Pine 1.3 29
Fir Plywood 1.2 33

Sorry you lose,

Again.

:-D

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:52:29 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>>>serial CNC machining.
>>>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>>>
>>>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>>>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>>>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>>>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
>>
>>
>> Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.
>
>Around what, idiot ?

Commercial realities.

Sorry that you couldn't understand that without me spelling it out for
you. Not too bright, are you?

BTW, since you're now the new MDF expert on RAO, you might want to
correct Mr. McKelvy about how easy MDF is to work with <chuckle>,
since that was one of original points that he disagreed with.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:52:29 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>>>>serial CNC machining.
>>>>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>>>>
>>>>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>>>>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>>>>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>>>>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
>>>
>>>
>>>Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.
>>
>>Around what, idiot ?
>
>
> Commercial realities.

The commercial reality is to find the *best* material for an
application.
In the chart that you haven't understood and that you have
snipped there was the explanation of the MDF *technical*
superiority over other materials.

> Sorry that you couldn't understand that without me spelling it out for
> you. Not too bright, are you?

Did I already say something else that the intrisic qualities
and properties of the MDF made of him one of the best
material for speaker manufacturing ?
Did McKelvy say something different ?
Did Jo say something different

Don't play the pretidigitator Dave you aren't enough
intelligent for that and moreover I'm sure that your
experience in the industrial field is extremely limited.

I know that you are *extremely* vexed because

you lose,

Again.

:-D

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:18:01 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:52:29 +0200, Lionel >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>>>>>serial CNC machining.
>>>>>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>>>>>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>>>>>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>>>>>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.
>>>
>>>Around what, idiot ?
>>
>>
>> Commercial realities.
>
>The commercial reality is to find the *best* material for an
>application.

In most large companies, this occurs with a very close emphasis on
cost strictures. Doesn't happen for a company like Wilson Audio, which
doesn't bother with MDF for the most part, but uses a superior
material for their top end speakers, but then again, you are going to
pay for it. Of course, this is trickling down to more prosaic
companies like JBL, which is using injection molding in some of their
products as well. Using the Arnold guidelines, MDF is passe.

>In the chart that you haven't understood and that you have
>snipped there was the explanation of the MDF *technical*
>superiority over other materials.

The problem for you is that I never claimed otherwise. If you go back
to what started you on this Tourette-esque episode from you, I simply
said that I didn't think that the *sound* qualities of MDF were the
main reason that it's being used. I later clarified that to mean in a
commercial sense, since it wasn't clear from my first post.

>> Sorry that you couldn't understand that without me spelling it out for
>> you. Not too bright, are you?
>
>Did I already say something else that the intrisic qualities
>and properties of the MDF made of him one of the best
>material for speaker manufacturing ?

Did I say that it wasn't? In fact, I believe that I made the same
point when it came to manufacturing.

>Did McKelvy say something different ?

Did I? I simply weighted the qualities differently than he did.

>Did Jo say something different
>
>Don't play the pretidigitator Dave you aren't enough
>intelligent for that and moreover I'm sure that your
>experience in the industrial field is extremely limited.

Yours must be if you deny that cost doesn't trump quality with all
things being equal (in major manufacturing).

>I know that you are *extremely* vexed because

I'M not the vexed one here. YOU'RE the one calling people idiots and
starting irrelevant attack threads. What's funny is that it's over
such a minor thing.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:18:01 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:52:29 +0200, Lionel >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>dave weil a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:10:59 +0200, Lionel >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>This is *totally* wrong. MDF is the prefered material for
>>>>>>serial CNC machining.
>>>>>>Have you already machined some wood ? ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm sorry Sir but your above remark hasn't any sens as long
>>>>>>as you haven't define what "wood" is.
>>>>>>At least MDF answers to international standards this
>>>>>>guarantee a minimum regularity in the manufacturing process...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ahhhh, now you're starting to come around.
>>>>
>>>>Around what, idiot ?
>>>
>>>
>>>Commercial realities.
>>
>>The commercial reality is to find the *best* material for an
>>application.
>
>
> In most large companies, this occurs with a very close emphasis on
> cost strictures. Doesn't happen for a company like Wilson Audio, which
> doesn't bother with MDF for the most part, but uses a superior
> material for their top end speakers, but then again, you are going to
> pay for it. Of course, this is trickling down to more prosaic
> companies like JBL, which is using injection molding in some of their
> products as well. Using the Arnold guidelines, MDF is passe.


Even you are right (this has to be proven) MDF is "passe".
So what the above doesn't bring anything to the discussion,
at least it doesn't confirm your opinion that for



>
>>In the chart that you haven't understood and that you have
>>snipped there was the explanation of the MDF *technical*
>>superiority over other materials.
>
>
> The problem for you is that I never claimed otherwise. If you go back
> to what started you on this Tourette-esque episode from you, I simply
> said that I didn't think that the *sound* qualities of MDF were the
> main reason that it's being used.

You are still wrong. This is a very good demonstration that
you don't understand the audio market and more generally the
marketing.
In HiFi market moreover in speaker manufacturing the major
actors are ready to *anything* to be *different* than the
competitor, this is so much true that they are spending huge
amount of money in R&D for uncertain improvement (beryllium
tweeter...).
All those major manufacturers' common point is that they use
MDF for speaker manufacturing.
They *spend* millions' $ in simulation, to find the best
possible shape, the best possible construction, the sexyest
line for their *MDF* boxes...
They nearly have only one technical common denominator :
the *MDF*.

The simple fact that they have chosen to invest their R&D
money in something else that in the box material is the
obvious proof that MDF was and is still the best *technical*
compromise.

Sorry,

You lose

Again


> I later clarified that to mean in a
> commercial sense, since it wasn't clear from my first post.



>
>>>Sorry that you couldn't understand that without me spelling it out for
>>>you. Not too bright, are you?
>>
>>Did I already say something else that the intrisic qualities
>>and properties of the MDF made of him one of the best
>>material for speaker manufacturing ?
>
>
> Did I say that it wasn't? In fact, I believe that I made the same
> point when it came to manufacturing.

You are a liar. This is what you have written :

"I doubt that this is the primary motivator in the design of
most cabinets. It's probably no better than fourth, behind
cost, weight and ease of use in construction."

And later :

"But I still maintain that the
use for most speakers is based more on cost than sonic
qualities."


>>Did McKelvy say something different ?
>
>
> Did I? I simply weighted the qualities differently than he did.
>
>
>>Did Jo say something different
>>
>>Don't play the pretidigitator Dave you aren't enough
>>intelligent for that and moreover I'm sure that your
>>experience in the industrial field is extremely limited.
>
>
> Yours must be if you deny that cost doesn't trump quality with all
> things being equal (in major manufacturing).


I say and I maintain that technical performances are the
main reason for use of the MDF in speaker manufacturing.


>>I know that you are *extremely* vexed because
>
>
> I'M not the vexed one here. YOU'RE the one calling people idiots and
> starting irrelevant attack threads.

Because *you* are an idiot Dave.
You have done an inane initial statement that you have
grotesquely amended 3 times...
IMHO you are a *joke* Dave Weil your statement about MDF is
as stupid as your affirmation concerning the Quad
speakers... A simple verification before would have proven
you wrong before you write anything. NOt my fault if you are
too lazy for that.


> What's funny is that it's over
> such a minor thing.

Minor thing ?
LOL, this remember me an accordion story...

:-D

[Arny Krueger]

Lionel wrote:

> If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
> is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.

I think Cal's idea of wood is 9837+-ply baltic plywood.

Hi-ply Baltic plywood is cool stuff, and it's what you use if you want
a speaker box to take a licking and keep ticking. That is unless that
is you want the box to be *really* tough, in which case you use some
kind of high-tech plastic.

Since living room speakers are not frequently required to be
roady-proof, Baltic plywood is kinda overkill in most applications.

However, given how intellectually spastic Cal likes to be, maybe
roady-proof speakers are exactly what his living room needs! ;-)

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>
>>If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
>>is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.
>
>
> I think Cal's idea of wood is 9837+-ply baltic plywood.

So in this case it is not a bad choice.

> Hi-ply Baltic plywood is cool stuff, and it's what you use if you want
> a speaker box to take a licking and keep ticking. That is unless that
> is you want the box to be *really* tough, in which case you use some
> kind of high-tech plastic.
>
> Since living room speakers are not frequently required to be
> roady-proof, Baltic plywood is kinda overkill in most applications.

I agree

> However, given how intellectually spastic Cal likes to be, maybe
> roady-proof speakers are exactly what his living room needs! ;-)


At least he is not very clear nor specific in his explanations.

[Arny Krueger]

Lionel wrote:
> Arny Krueger a écrit :
>> Lionel wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
>>> is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.
>>
>>
>> I think Cal's idea of wood is 9837+-ply baltic plywood.
>
> So in this case it is not a bad choice.
>
>> Hi-ply Baltic plywood is cool stuff, and it's what you use if you
>> want a speaker box to take a licking and keep ticking. That is
>> unless that is you want the box to be *really* tough, in which
case
>> you use some kind of high-tech plastic.
>>
>> Since living room speakers are not frequently required to be
>> roady-proof, Baltic plywood is kinda overkill in most applications.
>
> I agree
>
>> However, given how intellectually spastic Cal likes to be, maybe
>> roady-proof speakers are exactly what his living room needs! ;-)

> At least he is not very clear nor specific in his explanations.

Most of Cal's explanations have been so weakly-supported in the past
that I guess he's trying to avoid criticism on those grounds by simply
providing no explanations at all.

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>>Arny Krueger a écrit :
>>
>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
>>>>is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.
>>>
>>>
>>>I think Cal's idea of wood is 9837+-ply baltic plywood.
>>
>>So in this case it is not a bad choice.
>>
>>
>>>Hi-ply Baltic plywood is cool stuff, and it's what you use if you
>>>want a speaker box to take a licking and keep ticking. That is
>>>unless that is you want the box to be *really* tough, in which
>
> case
>
>>>you use some kind of high-tech plastic.
>>>
>>>Since living room speakers are not frequently required to be
>>>roady-proof, Baltic plywood is kinda overkill in most applications.
>>
>>I agree
>>
>>
>>>However, given how intellectually spastic Cal likes to be, maybe
>>>roady-proof speakers are exactly what his living room needs! ;-)
>
>
>>At least he is not very clear nor specific in his explanations.
>
>
> Most of Cal's explanations have been so weakly-supported in the past
> that I guess he's trying to avoid criticism on those grounds by simply
> providing no explanations at all.

This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
information to the discussion...

:-D

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:31:28 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>Arny Krueger a écrit :
>> Lionel wrote:
>>
>>>Arny Krueger a écrit :
>>>
>>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>If you want to perturb Mr Cerise just ask him to define what
>>>>>is "wood" in his description of the ideal speaker manufacturing.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I think Cal's idea of wood is 9837+-ply baltic plywood.
>>>
>>>So in this case it is not a bad choice.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi-ply Baltic plywood is cool stuff, and it's what you use if you
>>>>want a speaker box to take a licking and keep ticking. That is
>>>>unless that is you want the box to be *really* tough, in which
>>
>> case
>>
>>>>you use some kind of high-tech plastic.
>>>>
>>>>Since living room speakers are not frequently required to be
>>>>roady-proof, Baltic plywood is kinda overkill in most applications.
>>>
>>>I agree
>>>
>>>
>>>>However, given how intellectually spastic Cal likes to be, maybe
>>>>roady-proof speakers are exactly what his living room needs! ;-)
>>
>>
>>>At least he is not very clear nor specific in his explanations.
>>
>>
>> Most of Cal's explanations have been so weakly-supported in the past
>> that I guess he's trying to avoid criticism on those grounds by simply
>> providing no explanations at all.
>
>This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
>starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
>hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
>you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
>information to the discussion...

You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
original statement.

Sorry about that. It's your own fault for trying to make a mountain
out of a molehill.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :

> You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
> original statement.

LOL !
This surely explains why you haven't found a wife !!!

:-D

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:25:51 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>dave weil a écrit :
>
>> You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
>> original statement.
>
>LOL !
>This surely explains why you haven't found a wife !!!

I didn't know that I was looking...

[Arny Krueger]

Lionel wrote:

> This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
> starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
> hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
> you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
> information to the discussion...

For sure.

Weil's preferred payoff is shown by his snappy closings, always
clothed in massive amounts of self-congratulation such as: "You Lose.
Again".

Weil's goal is never the honest exchange of information, because he
actually knows very little that is worth exchanging.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:05:17 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Lionel wrote:
>
>> This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
>> starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
>> hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
>> you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
>> information to the discussion...

>Weil's preferred payoff is shown by his snappy closings

....and his snappy dressing, as well...

[Mike McKelvy]

Dave dances some more:

>BTW, since you're now the new MDF expert on RAO, you might want to
>correct Mr. McKelvy about how easy MDF is to work with <chuckle>,
>since that was one of original points that he disagreed with.


When I said it was difficult to work with, I was referring to how much
dust it generates when using a router, so much so that Home Depot will
not cut it for their customers. It also wears out blades pretty
quickly when being cut.

For the end caps of the sontube subwoofer cabinet I plan to use 3/4"
MDF laminated to 3/4" Baltic Birch plywood.
Biggest decision is what size to tube to use. With 20" I.D. it will be
34.75" tall, with 24" I.D. it will be 24.75" and with 30" 13.75". Have
to discuss it with the wife and get her preference. I have a hunch
shorter will please her more than taller, but want to make sure.

[Lionel]

dave weil a écrit :
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:25:51 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
>>>original statement.
>>
>>LOL !
>>This surely explains why you haven't found a wife !!!
>
>
> I didn't know that I was looking...

Yes I know. When the discussion is about *this* particular
subject I have understood that you don't know *anything*...

....You are excused.

:-)

[Lionel]

Arny Krueger a écrit :
> Lionel wrote:
>
>
>>This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
>>starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
>>hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
>>you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
>>information to the discussion...
>
>
> For sure.
>
> Weil's preferred payoff is shown by his snappy closings, always
> clothed in massive amounts of self-congratulation such as: "You Lose.
> Again".


LOL, Fully agree !
The "You lose, again" corresponding to the ejaculation in
Weil's onanist practice.

"You lose, again...
....Do you have a kleenex please ?"


> Weil's goal is never the honest exchange of information, because he
> actually knows very little that is worth exchanging.

Weil is suffering an *enormous* complex of inferiority.

[Lionel]

Mike McKelvy a écrit :
> Dave dances some more:
>
>
>>BTW, since you're now the new MDF expert on RAO, you might want to
>>correct Mr. McKelvy about how easy MDF is to work with <chuckle>,
>>since that was one of original points that he disagreed with.
>
>
>
> When I said it was difficult to work with, I was referring to how much
> dust it generates when using a router, so much so that Home Depot will
> not cut it for their customers. It also wears out blades pretty
> quickly when being cut.
>
> For the end caps of the sontube subwoofer cabinet I plan to use 3/4"
> MDF laminated to 3/4" Baltic Birch plywood.
> Biggest decision is what size to tube to use. With 20" I.D. it will be
> 34.75" tall, with 24" I.D. it will be 24.75" and with 30" 13.75". Have
> to discuss it with the wife and get her preference. I have a hunch
> shorter will please her more than taller, but want to make sure.

I appreciate your honest clarification Mickey.
Dave Weil isn't afraid in lying to "win" a debate...

[Clyde Slick]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:18:01 +0200, Lionel >

>
> I'M not the vexed one here. YOU'RE the one calling people idiots and
> starting irrelevant attack threads. What's funny is that it's over
> such a minor thing.

That sure made my yalmake spin!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> dave weil a écrit :
>
>> You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
>> original statement.
>
> LOL !
> This surely explains why you haven't found a wife !!!
>


His, or someone elses? Big difference!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> Lionel wrote:
>
>> This make me think to Dave Weil's prefered tactic : he
>> starts with a very specific affirmation and progressively,
>> hypocritely switchs to generalist and global concept that
>> you cannot proven wrong *BUT* that doesn't bring any usefull
>> information to the discussion...
>
> For sure.
>
> Weil's preferred payoff is shown by his snappy closings, always
> clothed in massive amounts of self-congratulation such as: "You Lose.
> Again".
>
> Weil's goal is never the honest exchange of information, because he
> actually knows very little that is worth exchanging.
>
>

You, OTOH, like to exchange body fluids.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Clyde Slick]

"Mike McKelvy" > wrote in message
oups.com...


> Have
> to discuss it with the wife and get her preference. I have a hunch
> shorter will please her more than taller, but want to make sure.
>

If shorter will please her, you will please her well.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "Lionel" > wrote in message
> ...
>> dave weil a écrit :
>>
>>> You're just mad because you inadvertantly ended up supporting my
>>> original statement.
>>
>> LOL !
>> This surely explains why you haven't found a wife !!!
>>
>
>
> His, or someone elses? Big difference!


Thank you Sackman but an old perderast like you cannot be of any support on
this particular subject.

:-)

[Lionel]

In >, Clyde Slick wrote :

>
> "dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:18:01 +0200, Lionel >
>
>>
>> I'M not the vexed one here. YOU'RE the one calling people idiots and
>> starting irrelevant attack threads. What's funny is that it's over
>> such a minor thing.
>
> That sure made my yalmake spin!

Just a delicate attention from me old man... Since your pins cannot spin
anymore !!!

:-D

[dave weil]

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 00:06:51 +0200, Lionel >
wrote to Arnold:

>...Do you have a kleenex please ?"

Yes, please wipe your mouth...

[Lionel]

"8hz" dave a écrit :

> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 00:06:51 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote to Arnold:
>
>
>>...Do you have a kleenex please ?"
>
>
> Yes, please wipe your mouth...


:o)

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> Material MOE Density
> MDF 0.53 48

All MDF isn't the same, either. I've seen a version made by
one firm that has a density of ~55 due to their use of hardwoods
in the mix. I was researching building speakers of my own
a year ago and found this one mill that mades denser MDF,
for a couple of dollars more a sheet.

The thing about manufactured products is that as technology
gets better, it easily outstrips the originals, at least
where building materials are concerned.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Mike McKelvy wrote:

> For the end caps of the sontube subwoofer cabinet I plan to use 3/4"
> MDF laminated to 3/4" Baltic Birch plywood.
> Biggest decision is what size to tube to use. With 20" I.D. it will be
> 34.75" tall, with 24" I.D. it will be 24.75" and with 30" 13.75". Have
> to discuss it with the wife and get her preference. I have a hunch
> shorter will please her more than taller, but want to make sure.

You might be better with 1 inch MDF by itself, with a thin laminate
applied. I think you can order sheets with your choice of woods
already applied.

[Mike McKelvy]

Joseph Oberlander said:

>You might be better with 1 inch MDF by itself, with a thin laminate
>applied. I think you can order sheets with your choice of woods
>already applied.


I think becuase the endcap will also be circular and 1.5" total depth
with those 2 materials will be more than enough. There are several
DIYsonotube subs on the net, and they all use pretty much the same
construction.

Why do you think it would be "better?"

[Joseph Oberlander]

Mike McKelvy wrote:
> Joseph Oberlander said:
>
>
>>You might be better with 1 inch MDF by itself, with a thin laminate
>>applied. I think you can order sheets with your choice of woods
>>already applied.
>
>
>
> I think becuase the endcap will also be circular and 1.5" total depth
> with those 2 materials will be more than enough. There are several
> DIYsonotube subs on the net, and they all use pretty much the same
> construction.
>
> Why do you think it would be "better?"

I'd suspect that 1 inch of MDF will have about the same end result
as the two 3/4 inch layers and save you a lot of gluing and whatnot.
Or, just go for 1.5 inch MDF. The plywood is usually added for
durability, but I doubt that you'll be moving this thing much.

[Mike McKelvy]

Cal does it again:

>The bottom line is that MDF, while satisfactory, is not as conducive
>to good sounding speakers as are laminated wood products employing
wood
>in sheet form, especially with sheets of other materials.

The bottom line is that speaker building is full of compromises. If
you want to use something other than MDF you should go ahead and do it.
In all the research I've done, nothing other than Birch Plywood is
considered better until you get into the are of non-wood materials,
such as Corian.

Even if
>heavier construction and bracing are required to achieve the same
>degree of nonresonance, the wood cabs just don't crap up the sound
like
>MDF does. MDF is also hydroscopic and of poor machinability

There is no such thing as non-resonance, there is only reducing the spl
of the standing waves, or dividing them up into smaller ones.

What eveidence do you have that MDF "craps up the sound" in any way?
The answer of course is zero, you are talking out your ass, again.