Hi Calvin , It's interesting it is a fair amount of area with a challenging shape but i was hoping they would work because my last speakers worked well in the area they were NHT 3.3's - ( which I just sold ) - and were a design that used a 12 inch woofer in each speaker that they basically corner loaded by using the back wall, the floor, and the side of the speaker - (the speakers were 42 in. high by 32 in. long) - and they had to be within 3 inches of the back wall, but they were able to get almost down to 20hz and they would go very loud with very little distortion.... So I was thinking if one pair of 12's was able to play well in the room , I was pretty sure the dual 18 Ripole subs would too, if not, then I was even considering dual 18's per Ripole. - Maybe a little crazy but I am hoping that the new set up will be a little over kill - and be close to SOTA... ( I know my reach may be exceeding my grasp - LOL)
--- Here are five of the design Ideas I was looking at.... the bottom pair of subs are using single 18 inch woofers., the others are dual drivers .
-
--- Here are five of the design Ideas I was looking at.... the bottom pair of subs are using single 18 inch woofers., the others are dual drivers .
-
Attachments
When I first investigated the Ripole Speaker Design, I also stumbled onto a French Forum/Site that need a Translation.
I had seen a Ripole Sub, that was with a Cabinet Design that enabled it to have the Driver orientated to be laying flat and parallel to the floor.
From recollection the Speaker was referred to as a 'Lay Flat Ripole' and the Base of the Cabinet was a approx' 100mm (4") above the floor.
I can not recollect the driver size used, or if it was an array with a single of double driver used.
Question, does a 'Lay Flat Ripole' impact on the function of the design, I can see the convenience to reduce the noticeable presence of the cabinet, but am not able to determine if the orientation will change the delivery of the produced Bass.
I had seen a Ripole Sub, that was with a Cabinet Design that enabled it to have the Driver orientated to be laying flat and parallel to the floor.
From recollection the Speaker was referred to as a 'Lay Flat Ripole' and the Base of the Cabinet was a approx' 100mm (4") above the floor.
I can not recollect the driver size used, or if it was an array with a single of double driver used.
Question, does a 'Lay Flat Ripole' impact on the function of the design, I can see the convenience to reduce the noticeable presence of the cabinet, but am not able to determine if the orientation will change the delivery of the produced Bass.
Hi,
hallcon83: if You already have made good experiences with dipole subs in your room, then the ripole configuration should work also.
I just reported on a personal experience, where room and sub didn´t match well ... but then every room is different.
I like pic #3, a beautiful implementation of the theme
You might also think about stacking single-driver ripoles to a tower. With sufficient height the beginning vertical directivity reduces vertical room modes.
Ideally the height of the tower equals the room height. Then the vertical as well as one orientation of horizontal room resonances are suppressed fully as the sub-tower distributes a dipolar cylindrical wave.
While 18´s offer considerably more membrane area, I think 15´s might be advantageous not only by the number of useable drivers but also smaller dimensions, weight and handling.
JohnnoG: I once had a couple of SLS8 drivers (the whole Peerless SLS series were very well useable for dipole subs) lying flat in their boxes for quite some time. The suspensions gave in and the drivers could not be recovered
A Flatpole as described should function properly, as long as the drivers keep their 0-point centered.
jauu
Calvin
hallcon83: if You already have made good experiences with dipole subs in your room, then the ripole configuration should work also.
I just reported on a personal experience, where room and sub didn´t match well ... but then every room is different.
I like pic #3, a beautiful implementation of the theme
You might also think about stacking single-driver ripoles to a tower. With sufficient height the beginning vertical directivity reduces vertical room modes.
Ideally the height of the tower equals the room height. Then the vertical as well as one orientation of horizontal room resonances are suppressed fully as the sub-tower distributes a dipolar cylindrical wave.
While 18´s offer considerably more membrane area, I think 15´s might be advantageous not only by the number of useable drivers but also smaller dimensions, weight and handling.
JohnnoG: I once had a couple of SLS8 drivers (the whole Peerless SLS series were very well useable for dipole subs) lying flat in their boxes for quite some time. The suspensions gave in and the drivers could not be recovered
A Flatpole as described should function properly, as long as the drivers keep their 0-point centered.
jauu
Calvin
Hi,
hallcon83: Its not quite as simple as camplo suggests.
You can find several post from me about that theme, though quite some years old by now.
I got and used the original Akabak simulation script from Mr. Ridthaler (sadly I don´t have it anymore).
Quite a number of guys here on DIYaudio used my sims and suggestions successfully in their projects.
jauu
Calvin
hallcon83: Its not quite as simple as camplo suggests.
You can find several post from me about that theme, though quite some years old by now.
I got and used the original Akabak simulation script from Mr. Ridthaler (sadly I don´t have it anymore).
Quite a number of guys here on DIYaudio used my sims and suggestions successfully in their projects.
jauu
Calvin
I have 4 of the highly regarded BMS 18N862 woofers. My intention is to initially try them baffle-less in a clamshell configuration as in the Circles of Doom thread. However if that doesn’t float my boat then I’m wondering whether they would work well in Ripoles. Any comments from those with experience of this type of sub?
<has anyone found a good page or thread that explains the best way to design a Ripole subwoofer?>
I used these instructions, I've cut up the plywood, but haven't assembled them yet.
https://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/ripol_bau_en.htm
I used these instructions, I've cut up the plywood, but haven't assembled them yet.
https://www.lautsprechershop.de/hifi/ripol_bau_en.htm
I think the low QTS (0.34) isn't optimal, in that a lot of EQ would be needed to offset the resulting low end roll off, and a Ripole already suffers from that anyway, so why add to it. That said, that woofer has the excursion and power handling capacity to take a lot of EQ boost so perhaps it would work if you can feed it the power. Personally; I like the QTS to be around 0.5, which is also less than optimal for flat response, but higher QTS (>0.5) usually equates to a floppier suspension and a less clean response, IMO.
Hi team
Just revisited the forum for the first time in ages..... Been thinking about building some ripol bass units with a couple of Emennce Kapp 15C drivers I have laying around.
Are these ok for a ripol build?
Also I see some single driver ripols and most have 2 drivers, Difference (apart from 2 drivers VS 1....)
Lastly, would be great if someone could point me in the right directions for enclosure dimensions for these drivers.
Many thanks in advance.
Dave
Just revisited the forum for the first time in ages..... Been thinking about building some ripol bass units with a couple of Emennce Kapp 15C drivers I have laying around.
Are these ok for a ripol build?
Also I see some single driver ripols and most have 2 drivers, Difference (apart from 2 drivers VS 1....)
Lastly, would be great if someone could point me in the right directions for enclosure dimensions for these drivers.
Many thanks in advance.
Dave
I'm not sure that the Eminence Kappa 15C would be the epitome for a Ripole subwwofer : Fs is fine, Qts is a bit low and Xmax is small, where you would need 8-10mm...
But OK, as usual it is a matter of test : build a cheap Ripole test box and see if it already works as you expect... As you already own the speakers !
For my Omega Ripole (personal design), I used 12" speakers for a matter of available place. The speakers are two BEYMA 12BR70, which offer a Fs at 30Hz, a Qts at 0.5 and a Xmax at 8mm. Plus they are ruggered and very affordable units !
I measured a Fs of the system at 16Hz for a 6WRMS signal delivered to the paralleled speakers, which is quite good for a 400x400x440mm box.
T
A agree with Tubelectron,
I would just add that woofers larger than 12" would not be optimal in my opinion because a larger woofer would need a larger baffle/chamber, and the larger chamber would resonate at significantly lower frequency.
Although it would be possible to create a notch filter to tamp down the chamber resonance without limiting the crossover frequency; most builders would opt to simply avoid exciting it by crossing the woofer in a full octave lower, using a steep filter slope.
With 12" woofers, avoiding the resonance in this way would already limit bandwidth to <100Hz, which is OK.
But with 15" woofers, the crossover frequency would need to be significantly lower, which would further reduce the usable bandwidth-- I'm guessing <50Hz.
BTW; there are some lovely speakers shown in this thread!
I would just add that woofers larger than 12" would not be optimal in my opinion because a larger woofer would need a larger baffle/chamber, and the larger chamber would resonate at significantly lower frequency.
Although it would be possible to create a notch filter to tamp down the chamber resonance without limiting the crossover frequency; most builders would opt to simply avoid exciting it by crossing the woofer in a full octave lower, using a steep filter slope.
With 12" woofers, avoiding the resonance in this way would already limit bandwidth to <100Hz, which is OK.
But with 15" woofers, the crossover frequency would need to be significantly lower, which would further reduce the usable bandwidth-- I'm guessing <50Hz.
BTW; there are some lovely speakers shown in this thread!
Last edited:
Well, yes : I choose the 12" format for place matters... My little auditorium is small and fullfilled of equipement (it has also storage virtues). You see my Omega Ripole in center position, as recommended by Axel Ridtahler (the creator of the Ripole principle). A 2x15" would have been a bit larger (think circa 500x500x550mm instead of 400x400x440mm) but too large :
A friend of mine decided to go Ripole after listening to my Omega Ripole, but in the XXL way, to match his big install... 2 Ripole subs with 2x18" in each ! They are visible on the picture below (unfinished white-ish wooden cabs) - OK, he's crazy, but they nonetheless works so fine that he sold his two Velodyne subs :
My Omega Ripole design (derived from A. Ridtahler's idea) have some advantages - having the goal of "global compactness" in mind :
- it incorporates the subwoofer amp/crossover module (no separate element, unlike on my pal's install above)
- it hides the magnets of the speakers inside the cab (no ugly protruding parts, no sealing needed at the pack panel openings).
- it has internal slanted faces, which is potentially good for taming resonances (and also allow chamber reduction and ports expected sizes).
I use it only in the Infra-Bass range, typically cut at 40 to 60Hz, 12 to 24dB/Oct. , depending on the speakers associated, the idea is to achieve an extension of the low range, not a substitution, the speaker associated having their natural bass cut-off. With my Magnepan SMGb, the Sub module is set at 40Hz / 24dB/Oct.
So yes, even with 12" speakers in my Ripole, I use also very low FC... That's where the Ripole design is perfect : restituing that deep, floating bass atmosphere you can find on EM space ambient music.
T
I dunno, it seems like every loudspeaker that develops a following gets stuck into the buy 100 category.
They are still available in Europe. I bought my last batch of (4) here: https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/speaker-peerless-sls-p830669-8-ohm-12-inch.html
