Jump to content
Ricci

Ricci's Skram Subwoofer & Files

Recommended Posts

On 2/26/2020 at 2:20 AM, klipsch said:

A few of us have sh50s and skrams. One even has sh50s, skrams, and skhorn ūüė≤. There's also an individual that had sh50s for LR with a sh96 as a C who now has one skhorn.

I think the quote you shared explains things quite well.  All I could do is reiterate that with a different subjective contribution. 

The synergy horn design is marketed as a true point source. They do magical things for my ears in my room.  Combined with some skrams and the only thing I may end up changing is adding more skrams. I have 2 extra channels on this Amp that aren't beigg used right now, so that's just a waste, right? 

If you have an opportunity to listen to any synergy horn, I highly recommend it. Danley allowed the unity horn to be implemented by Yorkville. There was a u15 and a u215 IIRC (passive and active versions). Those designs were not full point source as the bass was handled by drivers outside of the unity horn. However, they can still be found and are usually not too expensive. Could be another option to pursue in hearing a danley loudspeaker design. 

Thanks for suggesting the Yorkville version as well. "There was .." - are they out of production? The U15 looks interesting, and where I've found them listed are not that expensive.

Question is though, and this concerns the current Synergy horns as well, whether they're dialed-in too hot in the HF-region, being that they're likely to be used where the listening distance is more pronounced (like outdoors, or bigger indoor venues)? Indeed that's crucial, because I'd be using them in a domestic environment where the listening distance won't exceed ~10-12 feet. 

The bass capacity some of the people here have¬†implemented in their homes¬†is substantial, to say the least. Skrams and Skhorn used in conjunction.. - makes my pair of MicroWrecker tapped horns seem almost puny by comparison..¬†ūüė≤

On 2/26/2020 at 2:47 AM, jay michael said:

I've got a pair of Sh-46 for pa work and a pair of Sm60f in my living room, both of which have been used with my Skrams. I love them more and more every time I get to hear them. The Sh-46 can effortlessly get extremely loud yet sound silky smooth at the same time. They are the best sounding pa speaker I have personally heard, and I get that feedback over and over again when I get them out for shows. Besides sounding awesome they also have unreal pattern control which is something I never considered being important until I owned them.  Consistent sound quality is a given with synergy horns, especially in indoor venues.  You can put the sound where you want it and keep it away from from walls and ceilings with ease.  I figure I would need 8 or more skram's to keep up with the pair of 46's.  The sm60f's on the other hand have more of a hifi sound to them. They are just magical in my living room and also pair up nicely with the Skrams.  The guy who I bought them from upgraded to the sh-50's and said the sm60f's sound every bit as good, but just don't go quite as low as them.   Some sh-50 are on my wishlist..... someday.  Pic added from last weekend

https://imgur.com/gallery/UO0MrG7

Thanks for sharing your impressions. While I'd love to try out the SH46's they seem not to be well-suited in a "hifi" set-up due to the early HF roll-off, but other than that I gather they'd be a wonderful addition to one's home system, not least as HT-speakers (with subs)! 

The SM60F is more like it for what I'm looking at, and that you've tried them out successfully with the Skrams is important info; my intention is to use a pair of Synergy horns all the way down to my tapped horn subs (crossed in the vicinity of or slightly below 80 Hz), although I am wondering whether a dedicated midbass horn would be a better choice so to have a horn-loading here that actually acts like a horn (with dispersion control lower in frequency) and then crossing the SM60F higher? That's why I'm looking at the SM96 with a wider coverage and dispersion control further down. The SH50's would be great, but I'm afraid they're too expensive for my budget as is. 

Do you feel the SM60F lacks energy in their lower operating range crossed over to the Skrams, compared to the SH46?

EDIT: on second thought, the Danley's or Yorkville's being too "hot" in the HF-region for domestic use likely won't  be a problem in my case, being that they'll be used through a Xilica XP-3060 DSP unit anyway with DRC Designer corrections. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, m_ms said:

Thanks for suggesting the Yorkville version as well. "There was .." - are they out of production? The U15 looks interesting, and where I've found them listed are not that expensive.

Question is though, and this concerns the current Synergy horns as well, whether they're dialed-in too hot in the HF-region, being that they're likely to be used where the listening distance is more pronounced (like outdoors, or bigger indoor venues)? Indeed that's crucial, because I'd be using them in a domestic environment where the listening distance won't exceed ~10-12 feet. 

Yes. I am pretty sure the Yorkville unity designs have been out of production for years. Yorkville refers to the unity series as Legacy on their website. However, I have seen them available on different sites in the States (marked as New). Perhaps there is still stock out there? Diyaudio guys have cloned the unity horn section with success.  A guy not far from me ran / is still running the passive version of the 215s. He is Gorilla83 on AVS. Back in 2014 there was a good GTG at his place. The 215s were very good. I thought they were much better than the big equivalent JTRs that we heard in his room as well. 

I'm pushing my 4th decade and while I treat my hearing with care, I cannot hear above 18khz anymore. I thought the Danley speakers usually have an upper rolloff despite the compression driver they use VS dialed hot HF.  My ears enjoy them from about 13 feet away. However, I do run them through a minidsp and have added 3 or 4 few PEQs. 

Beastaudio in AVS, had sm60fs. He eventually went to 50s. Now he has JBL cinema style speakers. Maybe he can help as well with your questions. He had an skhorn now as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, m_ms said:

Thanks for suggesting the Yorkville version as well. "There was .." - are they out of production? The U15 looks interesting, and where I've found them listed are not that expensive.

Question is though, and this concerns the current Synergy horns as well, whether they're dialed-in too hot in the HF-region, being that they're likely to be used where the listening distance is more pronounced (like outdoors, or bigger indoor venues)? Indeed that's crucial, because I'd be using them in a domestic environment where the listening distance won't exceed ~10-12 feet. 

The bass capacity some of the people here have¬†implemented in their homes¬†is substantial, to say the least. Skrams and Skhorn used in conjunction.. - makes my pair of MicroWrecker tapped horns seem almost puny by comparison..¬†ūüė≤

Thanks for sharing your impressions. While I'd love to try out the SH46's they seem not to be well-suited in a "hifi" set-up due to the early HF roll-off, but other than that I gather they'd be a wonderful addition to one's home system, not least as HT-speakers (with subs)! 

The SM60F is more like it for what I'm looking at, and that you've tried them out successfully with the Skrams is important info; my intention is to use a pair of Synergy horns all the way down to my tapped horn subs (crossed in the vicinity of or slightly below 80 Hz), although I am wondering whether a dedicated midbass horn would be a better choice so to have a horn-loading here that actually acts like a horn (with dispersion control lower in frequency) and then crossing the SM60F higher? That's why I'm looking at the SM96 with a wider coverage and dispersion control further down. The SH50's would be great, but I'm afraid they're too expensive for my budget as is. 

Do you feel the SM60F lacks energy in their lower operating range crossed over to the Skrams, compared to the SH46?

EDIT: on second thought, the Danley's or Yorkville's being too "hot" in the HF-region for domestic use likely won't  be a problem in my case, being that they'll be used through a Xilica XP-3060 DSP unit anyway with DRC Designer corrections. 

There are better options for home use then the sh-46.  I have used them in my house for testing and tuning during the winter but side by side with the sm60f I prefer the 60's sound for reasonable in house listening volumes. The funny thing about the 46 is despite the published response it never feels lacking in high freq sparkle.  In a lot of ways I prefer how the high frequencies sound out of them compared to most other pa speakers, and many other people who have used them echo that opinion.  I've spoken with a few people who have done the sm60f to sh50 upgrade path and they all seemed to think the sound quality is near identical between both boxes minus the low freq capability.  I actually had the choice to buy the sm60f or the sh50's as the guy I was dealing with that both for sale at the time.  In the end my decision was a practical one, I was looking for something more portable that could be used as a "b" system or fills to my 46's when I needed the extra cover. The 60's also came with tilting pole mounted hardware that makes them really flexible to deploy so in the end they fit my requirements better.  The 50's he has were also install models so they had no handles which would be fine for the living room but tough for pa work. 

Both the 46 and the 60f have a similar low frequency roll off in the 65 hz or so area.  Neither box has much "bass" to speak of but they were designed to be used with a sub.   The 46 trades low freq response for increased spl,  and the 60f trades low freq response for a smaller size.  Match with a good clean sounding sub and I think you will be very happy.

If my decision criteria was different in the sense I was buying specifically for home use I would have gone with the 50's for sure.   Tough choice to make, good luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be the odd man out but I actually didn’t think the high-end or low-end on the SH-50s (BeastAudio’s) was that impressive, at least from a detail and articulate standpoint.  To me, the high-end on the SH-50s seemed rolled off and when we looked at the measurements, sure enough, the high-end started rolling off around 17,000 Hz.  On the low-end there was plenty of midbass but I didn’t find it as detailed as I would have liked.  On the flip side, I thought the soundstage and point-source of the speakers were phenomenal.  But overall, I liked my JTR 212s over the SH-50s because the detail was better on the 212s.  I ended up taking my 212s to Beast’s house so the listening was blind A/B back and forth.
 

I actually started a thread on AVS trying to get Danley to produce a home-theater version of the SH-50/60 with a slightly better compression driver but after some initial talks with a Danley person in the thread, it didn’t end up going anywhere.

 

Edit: I should also mentioned that my sealed 212s were at a severe disadvantage when comparing midbass.  But up top the 212s were noticeably better to my ears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two notes:

First,  I have found sine waves to be a terrible test signal to assess the bandwidth limits of human hearing.  I don't hear sine waves too well above 16 kHz, but with real world content, I hear contributions from frequencies to 20 kHz and beyond even at fairly quiet volumes.  My wife once complained about an annoying treble harmonic in a music passage, which I identified to be at 20.8 kHz, and she confirmed that the annoyance was gone after I filtered it out.  Yet in sine wave tests during the same session her ears didn't respond above 10.5 kHz.  (!)

Second, frequency response shape in the upper treble is tricky to interpret.  In-air absorption is quite profound at the upper reaches.  For example, at typical room  temperature (T) and relative humidity (RH), response at 20 kHz drops ~0.5 dB per meter of distance.  The particulars of the in-air roll-off shape also depend a lot on RH differences, which could vary dramatically from day-to-day in some climates, like mine.  Any published anechoic speaker response measurement will have been performed at some distance (1 or 2 meter or more) from the speaker and should exhibit at least some droop at the top.  If the distance, T, and RH are all published, it's theoretically possible to estimate what the speaker itself is doing, but otherwise all you can do is guess.  Also, evidence suggests that humans adapt very well to air-induced roll-offs and probably also to roll-offs that "look like" an air-induced roll-off.  Harman did binaural room scanning (BRS) studies of distance effects in cinemas.  The BRS used measured impulse responses at different rows inside a real cinema to assess perceptual consequences of in-air roll-off.  The study concluded that the treble sounded essentially the same at the different distances.

A thing to look for in a top-end roll-off is whether it's smooth and gradual or it's abrupt.  A lot of compression driver + horn combos drop abruptly above a point somewhere below 20 kHz (often a break-up resonance) , and those speakers will obviously not reproduce the content above the cut well and will also likely audibly ring at the abrupt transition point.  Another thing is that when listening indoors with reflections, off-axis response likely contributes a lot to the sound, and compression driver + horn combos very often have significant polar response variation in those upper reaches even if they look pretty smooth on-axis.  So just because a response looks smooth on-axis doesn't mean it will sound smooth if the off-axis is rough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dgage said:

I may be the odd man out but I actually didn’t think the high-end or low-end on the SH-50s (BeastAudio’s) was that impressive, at least from a detail and articulate standpoint.  To me, the high-end on the SH-50s seemed rolled off and when we looked at the measurements, sure enough, the high-end started rolling off around 17,000 Hz.  On the low-end there was plenty of midbass but I didn’t find it as detailed as I would have liked.  On the flip side, I thought the soundstage and point-source of the speakers were phenomenal.  But overall, I liked my JTR 212s over the SH-50s because the detail was better on the 212s.  I ended up taking my 212s to Beast’s house so the listening was blind A/B back and forth.
 

I actually started a thread on AVS trying to get Danley to produce a home-theater version of the SH-50/60 with a slightly better compression driver but after some initial talks with a Danley person in the thread, it didn’t end up going anywhere.

 

Edit: I should also mentioned that my sealed 212s were at a severe disadvantage when comparing midbass.  But up top the 212s were noticeably better to my ears.

That's what I love about this hobby. Such difference in variations. In my room, I do not have that rolloff with my sh50s. I'm a fan of horns and metal tweeters. I loved the flagship titanium mb quart component system I put in my first car 20 years ago. Still miss it.  However, when I heard the big bad towering and impressive looking JTRs, it was the first time I understood ear fatigue and "tinny-ness" I had read about on the forums for decades from people who did not like Klipsch speakers. Was it the room? The seating position? The source? The amp? Etc? I do not know, but I will absolutely jump at the chance again to hear the JTRs to try and understand the variations of opinions and how mine were so different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, klipsch said:

That's what I love about this hobby. Such difference in variations. In my room, I do not have that rolloff with my sh50s. I'm a fan of horns and metal tweeters. I loved the flagship titanium mb quart component system I put in my first car 20 years ago. Still miss it.  However, when I heard the big bad towering and impressive looking JTRs, it was the first time I understood ear fatigue and "tinny-ness" I had read about on the forums for decades from people who did not like Klipsch speakers. Was it the room? The seating position? The source? The amp? Etc? I do not know, but I will absolutely jump at the chance again to hear the JTRs to try and understand the variations of opinions and how mine were so different. 

Interestingly, my 212s are the aluminum horn versions and I like them better than the wooden horn versions.  Like you said, lots of opinions. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, klipsch said:

However, when I heard the big bad towering and impressive looking JTRs, it was the first time I understood ear fatigue and "tinny-ness" I had read about on the forums for decades from people who did not like Klipsch speakers.

I have some lower budget Klipsch speakers and I find em less fatiguing than my Sennheiser HD650 which are often praised to have a very flat FR. When I first tried the HD650 I was very disappointed. I didn't expect crazy deep bass from an open back design obviously, but the hump in the upper bass/lower mids were immediately apparent and muddied the sound a lot. Plus the boosts in the treble region, which made sibilant vocals really annoying and general listening experience pretty unpleasant over time.

I've kept them after all after I accepted the fact that there are basically no heaphones which are perfect without EQ. When EQ'd flat the Senns sound great, especially in the mid range.

I'm soon going to pull the trigger on ribbons for a DIY project. They can't quite keep up in dynamic range, but their definition seems to be stellar. And they're good to like 100khz so I can  annoy some dogs. Gonna be exciting.

@SME I very much agree with your observations on sine waves vs bandpassed noise. I've recently had to mix a wierd bass guitar sound, which had some very high crackle, which I identified to be some sort of pick noise above 17khz. I still hear 18khz sine waves at fairly low volumes, but it's something entirely different if you have like an entire octave of noise above.

That's also a good explanation on why I absolutely disagree with equal loudness contours. IMO it's exactly the opposite. I also disabled the DEQ feature in my Marantz amp. Studies have proven that people subjected to band-passed noise would come up with completely different "equal loudness contours" as those subjected to pure sine waves.

It's the same with distortion. Yes I hear 0.2% THD of a 100Hz sine wave at 70db. Now listen to music and all the fancy analog studio gear already introduced 5% THD or more. Good luck trying to notice the 1% THD of your speaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2019 at 10:23 AM, menace said:

This is what I have come up with so far. Was thinking of fixing the mesh at the end of the mesh that's easy to get at with screws and washers and the other end will kind of grip into the wood by the sharp ends it has from being snipped to size. The mesh is about 1.6mm strand size, its easy enough to bend by hand but will still have a bid of tension on it from being pulled into position by the screws.

What do you guys think? Could it vibrate perhaps?

 

 

IMG_20191018_095150.jpg

IMG_20191018_095302.jpg

I need to report back on how this solution turned out.

Some vibration! So until I play around some more it should be noted that this didn't work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, menace said:

I need to report back on how this solution turned out.

Some vibration! So until I play around some more it should be noted that this didn't work.

Thanks for letting us know. 

At least you tried. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2020 at 11:55 AM, menace said:

I need to report back on how this solution turned out.

Some vibration! So until I play around some more it should be noted that this didn't work.

I need to comment on this again! I threw a wee birthday celebration party for my self over the weekend and ran the subs right up until the limit at times. I didn't go out of my way to take extra observations but i cant say i ever heard the vibrations this time around( and i was very close to them at times). I defiantly did hear noises from them another time though. So I am guessing this solution can work, perhaps with a heavier gauge wire mesh and/or a better fixing technique.

 

mesh.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting... Maybe more fasteners? Maybe some speaker seal/tape where the mesh meets the wood? Thanks for sharing the results. Good luck with your experimentation. 

And of course, Happy Belated Birthday 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, klipsch said:

 Maybe some speaker seal/tape where the mesh meets the wood? 

 

This...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw that the Eminence driver is also available in Europe now. I'd get three 21DS115 for its price here and even the 21IPAL is still cheaper ūüėź

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I finished my first skram some months ago, which was only a prototype and reference built for us.

The next 2 skrams shall be absolutely high end- not only in terms of it¬īs fantastic bass, but also in manufacturing. They will not be made of 18mm birch, but poplar. Due to the lower density and stiffness, we will overlay all the panels with carbon fabric and Epoxy. To get the side panels even stiffer, we will pre stress them (seen in the first picture) and overlay the stressed panel with carbon, when we press it flat again, the carbon on the outside of the skram should have enorm pre-tension. Due to this¬† this pre-stress, we hope to reduce enclosure resonances to a minimum. (our tests look good so far, I will post them, if we have final results if one is interested.)¬† We should be able to save 15-20kg+ and hopefully still have a resonance-dead Enclosure.

There will be also other crazy features like a transparent 25mm acryl glass front or detachables handles. As the brazings behind the front will be seeable, we want to re-design them, seen in the second picture. We removed material from the corners, as they should be stiff enough through. See you any problems concerning those brazings?

 main question is about the enclosure size. I read somewhere in this Thread that it should be possible to make the skram a slimmer, but this would reduce the Output... Is it also possible to increase the witdh to gain some more output, but to hold all the other dimensions the same? How much gain could we expect (i.e. with +10cm), and would have the same tight bass?

//edit:

I forgott to say hello to all, and to thank you, Josh, for all the work you have put into your designs and the all the work around them...

A friend I'm doing this project together with, posted some months ago ... We still don't know much about sound, but we learned a lot since summer haha

photo_2020-04-19_16-04-06.jpg 

Unbenannt.PNG

Unbenannt2.PNG

Edited by MomoTon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MomoTon,

The bracing should be fine. 

You can't reduce the width of the cabinet really. The 21.5" frame diameter of the drivers plus the wall thickness doesn't leave much to gain there. The depth could be reduced as well as the enclosure height but you will be reducing volume for the ported chamber and the ports. You will have to change the port size/length in order to maintain the same tunings and low bass efficiency will be reduced and vent velocity would go up most likely due to smaller vent area. 

I look forward to seeing your finished project with the CF. This sounds like an adventurous build. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ricci said:

MomoTon,

The bracing should be fine. 

You can't reduce the width of the cabinet really. The 21.5" frame diameter of the drivers plus the wall thickness doesn't leave much to gain there. The depth could be reduced as well as the enclosure height but you will be reducing volume for the ported chamber and the ports. You will have to change the port size/length in order to maintain the same tunings and low bass efficiency will be reduced and vent velocity would go up most likely due to smaller vent area. 

I look forward to seeing your finished project with the CF. This sounds like an adventurous build. 

Hi again,

I'm working with MomoTon on the project. Our plan is not reducing the width but increasing it for more output. I think we made the parts +5cm in width for now. The question is if its worth it to let it 5cm broader to get more output. If its just +1dB that we'll gain, I wouldn't think it's necessary and we would make the skram with the original width..

We are also very excited about the build! There will be a few challenges... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You would be looking at just 1dB or so. It won't be a huge amount. Also it would slightly change the tuning and relationship of the back chamber to the front expansion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wellif we would change tuning and the relationship, I think we will stick to the original design and re-cut all the internals to 574mm...
 

Yesterday we started with the cf layer on the side panel... with a massive cross and a frame on one side (later the inside), and a recessed drive-in nut on the other side, we pull the panel vie a m12 bolt towards the cross. After the cf layer, this nut should be hidden in the panel.

The same way we will also insert more drive-in nuts on the bottom of the side panels, as well as in top and bottom panels... Instead of the cross, we are then easy able to screw Handles in and out, attach stands and even a easy detachable metal frame is planed for transportation. Instead of handles or feet, we are also able to use Pins to stack two skrams precisely, and to fix them together, without lashing straps.

I¬īm not sure if this level of details is ok in this thread, i don¬īt want to overload it, but i think this way of making detatchable handles may be interesting for some others too.

photo_2020-04-23_23-26-26_2.jpgphoto_2020-04-23_23-26-38.jpg

photo_2020-04-24_10-56-14.jpgphoto_2020-04-23_23-26-53.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, really enjoyed reading through this thread, We have a home built rig in Scotland consisting of some Turbosound floods, USB kicks and Super bass horns loaded with Void v1000's. We love the SBH when we can stack them in a lump of 6 but when we have smaller gigs or run them in stereo with 2 a side they lack the low end we're after for bass music. I'd always wanted to build OT's but the Skram has very much caught my eye, the tuneability sounds great as we do a lot of different gigs from larger outdoor stuff where we need to volume to smaller gigs where we have plenty headroom and could use the extra lows. 

I wanted to ask, if i wanted to change the dimensions to make them stack better with our rig could i take a couple of inches off the depth and add it to the height as long as the volume remains the same?

In the UK we can get the B&C stuff no problem but there's a couple of cheaper RCF drivers available, namely the LF21X451 and LF21N451, I wondered if anyone has any experience with these drivers and if they'd recommend one over the other? They're not a whole lot cheaper than the B&C SW's but can get them for <£400.

Thanks for the help and of course for putting out these amazing designs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after 4.5 months of preperation and four 12h days for assembly, we finished our second skram, the first one world wide with an acryl glass front? 

We didnt measure the weight yet, but although the front has about 12kg, it feels a lot lighter than our prototype made of birch, as we used popplar instead. It also feels rock solid due to the carbon-epox enhancement on all surfaces and edges, but the measurements will show if the light material has any disadvantages...

Screenshot_20200817_140139.jpg

Screenshot_20200817_140153.jpg

Screenshot_20200817_140209.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2020 at 7:19 AM, EuanB said:

Hi everyone, really enjoyed reading through this thread, We have a home built rig in Scotland consisting of some Turbosound floods, USB kicks and Super bass horns loaded with Void v1000's. We love the SBH when we can stack them in a lump of 6 but when we have smaller gigs or run them in stereo with 2 a side they lack the low end we're after for bass music. I'd always wanted to build OT's but the Skram has very much caught my eye, the tuneability sounds great as we do a lot of different gigs from larger outdoor stuff where we need to volume to smaller gigs where we have plenty headroom and could use the extra lows. 

I wanted to ask, if i wanted to change the dimensions to make them stack better with our rig could i take a couple of inches off the depth and add it to the height as long as the volume remains the same?

In the UK we can get the B&C stuff no problem but there's a couple of cheaper RCF drivers available, namely the LF21X451 and LF21N451, I wondered if anyone has any experience with these drivers and if they'd recommend one over the other? They're not a whole lot cheaper than the B&C SW's but can get them for <£400.

Thanks for the help and of course for putting out these amazing designs!

As long as the volume of the ported section and horn section stay the same. Also the port area and length must stay the same. The horn length also must stay the same. 

The Beyma drivers are supposed to be good but they are a bit light on motor force for these cabs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/17/2020 at 8:46 AM, MomoTon said:

after 4.5 months of preperation and four 12h days for assembly, we finished our second skram, the first one world wide with an acryl glass front? 

We didnt measure the weight yet, but although the front has about 12kg, it feels a lot lighter than our prototype made of birch, as we used popplar instead. It also feels rock solid due to the carbon-epox enhancement on all surfaces and edges, but the measurements will show if the light material has any disadvantages...

Screenshot_20200817_140139.jpg

Screenshot_20200817_140153.jpg

Screenshot_20200817_140209.jpg

Cool!!!

How thick is the acrylic? How is it going to be fastened to the wood? I don't see any screws? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the acrylic is 25mm (and about 10kg haha) and has a tongue on its 3 sides. the side panels and the top plate were slotted, there you can also see the epoxy edges we had to cast, as popplar is really soft. 

to fix the brazings on the front we made external 5mm acrylic tongues and slotted the brazings as well as the acrylic front

Screenshot_20200824_095439.jpg

Screenshot_20200824_095400.jpg

Screenshot_20200824_095423.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see. Very cool. Have you had a chance to fire them up yet? Any issues with vibration? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...