DIY Speaker Using Paper 

Yes, just integrate the wiring in the cardboard at the beginning.

Me too. Car to home audio. After having a few sound systems stolen...I keep my car audio deck factory, and I don't do anything to draw attention to myself. Home...I put in my favorite movie and shake the pictures on my walls and get full spectrum of eargasims.

These are transmission line speakers .... What you've said doesn't apply to this type of design

@@edwardbalboa5528 Original speaker started out as a ported design. The new speaker is in no way near a transmission line design, just an elongated slot port with a a flare on one of the ends. Did you watch the video or do you spend your time commenting on yt vids attempting to discredit others? My above suggestions are to encourage people to get into the hobby of speaker building.

Just looking at the dimensions of the old and new boxes, and the dimensions of the old and new port, I expect the new boxes have a similar enough internal volume and tuning frequency to not matter a hill of beans once put in a real world room. The new port design is superior for minimizing compression and noise (more cross section, nice flared exit). The biggest problem with the new box design is not that they weren't made large enough, it's that there will be some pronounced dips and peaks in response where midrange is allowed to escape the port and couple or cancel with direct radiated response from the driver. The rear port design is better when midrange is playing from the same driver as the bass, as it reduces midrange cancellations/nulls in response. Your advise to put stuffing in the box is useful here to help solve some of these midrange problems, as well as simply cleaning up the bass response (reducing unwanted reflections and box resonances). Making the box "sound bigger" is perhaps the least useful aspect of stuffing and isn't a useful design goal unless the modification to the transfer function from the stuffing happens to take things in the right direction for the application (it may or may not depending on many factors). A passive radiator and a port both work the same way. The slug of air in the port has a particular resonance characteristic that is excited by the driver same as a PR. It's the most basic of acoustic impedance modifications for low frequency coupling available that trades some group delay/distortion for increased maximum system output around and above the tuning frequency. PR's can allow lower tuning frequencies in a small box than are practicable with ports, but this comes with its own set of tradeoffs. There's no free lunch hidden in that tech. Simply making a box larger does not guarantee any improvement in "natural smooth response," nor does making a box smaller guarantee a cold/dark sound. A properly made and damped box should not color the sound either way. The range of usable box size varies by driver characteristics and design goals. Excessively large boxes will allow the driver to achieve very high output levels at tuning frequency with very low power input (a narrow peak in response), but also sacrifices excursion protection below tuning frequency and does nothing useful for the frequency range above tuning. An appropriately sized vented box is sized and tuned to NOT have any excessively excited peaks in response. A very well designed vented box will take into consideration room response, sub crossover friendliness, driver excursion protection, and driver thermal power handling available that can be used instead of box size.

@@mdocod Wouldnt the lack of any acoustic dampening materials contribute to massive amounts of standing waves ?

@@juslitor I would expect this box design to have a lot of sound coming out of the port and reflecting back through the driver that shouldn't. The lack of damping materials is a concern.

For dead people singing with bucket drums, this should be ok.

@@subramaniamchandrasekar1397 I wasn't thinking of ruining a good speaker for a silly project, but I sound like Andy Devine trying to sing like George Burns, they're both dead so one of these may work for me.

Read the comments. There are lots of apparently knowledgeable people pointing out possible problems

in this case it's not YT the problem, but the microphone. YT uses OPUS compression, fairly good.

ing them with smoke would be pretty cool

holy crap thats a good start ,,,,

Amazing work. Congrats sir

I hear it sounds better. ))

not to mention that the cheap original box was also made of 'paper'.. lol ..

No, it's not a relfex tunnel, this is called transmission line. Its length has to be calculated, so that the waves have the same phase when the emit the speaker and the TL

@@JohnDoe-zr6bk Not a t-line. Far too short and the chamber is too big. It's just a rectangular port. If it's properly tuned? I don't know.

I very much doubt that those Plexi side panels form any kind of seal. Probably flapping all over the place with the bass. I like the laminated cardboard idea though. Could come in handy.

Eso mismo!!!!

check out the old JBL speakers that uses a incondecint light bulb as a tweeter protection. the speakers would light up as the volume peaks. but this is a full range set up.

In plain English, just because you can doesn't mean you should.

с вами полностью согласен. Делают а бы просмотров на хомячках собрать

Hi, Great content... Can I find your e-mail for contact?

Agreed. But those drivers were very cheap parts, and not even worth the effort. All that work, and he got a little bit lower and louder bass. But, still...out of a 3 inch woofer. Gimme a break.

Looks like some Edifier model.

It's Microlab B77 speaker I believed

ruin? those chinese speaker?

@@manuelmoscardi6606 i mean its doubtful that the new speaker built from them sounded better...

a semicircle box is better than a parallelpiped one

How is it the Bowers and Wilkins Nautilus sounds so good, I wonder? 🙃