WD25T build

[Riggers]

Hi all
I am about to start a build of a pair of floor standing WD25T's. I have the original HIFI World article (including plans) and the last "sequel" article with the updated tweeter and Xover details. The thing is I was wanting to do a build with a copy of the "Arcena" type material, which Peter describes in the articles as either 18mm (12mm particleboard and 6mm veneered MDF) or 24mm(18mm particleboard and 6mm veneered MDF). Does anyone know which thicknesses were employed for which wall/baffle?

I noticed in the last pictures of the final version of the speaker that they seemed to have dispensed with the earlier design which inset of the front baffle into the side/top/bottom pieces so that the box had perfect sharp edges. Are there any plans in existence for the final version of the WD25T using Arcena?

Regards

Phil.

[Greg.]

To take your last question first, the reason for the change of front baffle appearance is that the earlier kit cabinets were constructed from self assembly flat pack modules. These were found to be problematic because moisture absorbed by the MDF caused the panels in the kits to be ill fitting. The later cabinets were professionally constructed and sold as a finished item apart from final surface treatment.

Peter believed the best sonic material for speaker cabinets is chip (particle) board. Arcena was developed as a compromised material to overcome the problem of ragged edges on the cut chipboard panels that would hinder construction and air tightness. The original flat pack panels were all made from 18mm. There was no 24mm used. I don't know if later finished cabinets had different panel thicknesses, although I doubt it. I no longer own these speakers so a current owner would have to check. My personal view is that Arcena does not bring any significantly better sound and if I was building now, I'd simply use 18 or 24mm Baltic Birch Ply which is known to be a good speaker material. Thereafter, finish with veneer or whatever suits your preference.

[pre65]

I would prefer to use BBP if it were me.

[Riggers]

Thanks for the input gents. BBP certainly looks as though it would involve a whole lot less stuffing around.
Regards
Phil.