We are in the process of producing the final item in finish wood with mounting for a grille to conceal the configuration and mask the fact that it is even a loudspeaker. 
In fact, the video projector for the venue will now have a place behind which to hide. We are incorporating high-wattage Zobels on both the mid/hi drivers and the low/mid drivers as well. Given what we are learning about Behringer Amps the idea of giving them "friendly" loads seemed to make sense...
Originaly we had contemplated experimenting with the Mid/Side concept, but have decided the utility of the array is greater if we treat the difference panel alone and use the center speaker to serve for vocals, speech, and other unrelated signals.
The occasional combination is useful but not the objective.
We fly it once more sans grille and determine if any thing has changed requiring physical modification, put the grille on, fly it once more, and EQ each side.
Pictures to come!
In fact, the video projector for the venue will now have a place behind which to hide. We are incorporating high-wattage Zobels on both the mid/hi drivers and the low/mid drivers as well. Given what we are learning about Behringer Amps the idea of giving them "friendly" loads seemed to make sense...Originaly we had contemplated experimenting with the Mid/Side concept, but have decided the utility of the array is greater if we treat the difference panel alone and use the center speaker to serve for vocals, speech, and other unrelated signals.
The occasional combination is useful but not the objective.
We fly it once more sans grille and determine if any thing has changed requiring physical modification, put the grille on, fly it once more, and EQ each side.
Pictures to come!
still no pic's...
i'm still trying to get a handle on zobel's and how to apply them so i was curious as to your component values and is the difference with and without vary distinct?
i was also curious as to overall system configuration as in what amps are driving what? and just how many speakers and what not's are in this rig?
if you can't give us pic's give us details man, or a vivid description!
i'm still trying to get a handle on zobel's and how to apply them so i was curious as to your component values and is the difference with and without vary distinct?
i was also curious as to overall system configuration as in what amps are driving what? and just how many speakers and what not's are in this rig?
if you can't give us pic's give us details man, or a vivid description!
Turk: Working on it.
The final piece is sitting on the church platform. We learned this morning that an "engineered trainwreck" in scheduling has forced us to take it out of position to accommodate what appears to be the classical physical impossibility - ie. two objects of equal mass, etc.
Pictures are still in the works - delayed by the "trainwreck"!
We'll keep after it.
Re: Zobels: The main utility for me has been to make crossover implementation more predictable. Parts values will do what your calculations say they're supposed to.
Where we have LMS as a charachterizing tool, we bootsrap by wiring the parts together, measuring the electrical result, followed by measurement of the results with the parts in the loudspeaker.
Thus far the Zobel has delivered on that premise reliably.
Our application here is to make the loudspeaker system - which is being electronically crossed-over - a "friendlier" less reactive load for the amplifiers to "see". If you look at some of the papers, the impedance "tail correction" is essentially what it's about.
Some amplifiers in the pro business are fairly tolerant of impedance irregularities above, or below their specified specification. Other amps - being sold as pro equipment - don't give you that tolerance and it's incumbent on the user to "protect himself".
Audibility of a Zobel - not followed by a crossover - is hard to prove.
Audibility of an amp shutting down is very clear!
More later!
Cheers!
The final piece is sitting on the church platform. We learned this morning that an "engineered trainwreck" in scheduling has forced us to take it out of position to accommodate what appears to be the classical physical impossibility - ie. two objects of equal mass, etc.
Pictures are still in the works - delayed by the "trainwreck"!
We'll keep after it.
Re: Zobels: The main utility for me has been to make crossover implementation more predictable. Parts values will do what your calculations say they're supposed to.
Where we have LMS as a charachterizing tool, we bootsrap by wiring the parts together, measuring the electrical result, followed by measurement of the results with the parts in the loudspeaker.
Thus far the Zobel has delivered on that premise reliably.
Our application here is to make the loudspeaker system - which is being electronically crossed-over - a "friendlier" less reactive load for the amplifiers to "see". If you look at some of the papers, the impedance "tail correction" is essentially what it's about.
Some amplifiers in the pro business are fairly tolerant of impedance irregularities above, or below their specified specification. Other amps - being sold as pro equipment - don't give you that tolerance and it's incumbent on the user to "protect himself".
Audibility of a Zobel - not followed by a crossover - is hard to prove.
Audibility of an amp shutting down is very clear!
More later!
Cheers!
OK, guys/gals. I'm in possession of a bunch of pictures - I don't have a website, and I'm not as web-savvy as I'd like to be.
If somebody can steer me through the process, I might have some interesting (if not ground-breaking) things to share.
I have jpegs on a laptop running Win7 Home Premium, and some on a thumbdrive.
A little help here!
Thanks!
Cheers
If somebody can steer me through the process, I might have some interesting (if not ground-breaking) things to share.
I have jpegs on a laptop running Win7 Home Premium, and some on a thumbdrive.
A little help here!
Thanks!
Cheers
1) Start replying in the window below (write a couple words)
2) click [Go Advanced] ... a new window opens
3) ok, now I'm in the new window:
on top , to the right of the white face you'll see a paperclip , click the small down arrow to its right, a "manage attachments" window opens
4) it asks you to browse (find and select) the images you want to upload.
Do it one by one.
When you are done, click [Upload]
Give it a some time to upload (depends on picture file size) , and then click
[close this window]
Important: there are definite size limits per image.
Most common error is to take *huge* pictures (hey!!! I bought a 14 megabyte camera !!!) which will be rejected.
For Forum images, anything larger than , say, 1024 x 768 is a waste (unless it's a black and white schematic, with very small letters) so consider that when setting your camera to take pictures.
And if you already have them, please resize down or downsize using Photoshop or sometuing.
An image 5 times larger than the screen is an absolute waste of bandwidth and server space.
2) click [Go Advanced] ... a new window opens
3) ok, now I'm in the new window:
on top , to the right of the white
face you'll see a paperclip , click the small down arrow to its right, a "manage attachments" window opens4) it asks you to browse (find and select) the images you want to upload.
Do it one by one.
When you are done, click [Upload]
Give it a some time to upload (depends on picture file size) , and then click
[close this window]
Important: there are definite size limits per image.
Most common error is to take *huge* pictures (hey!!! I bought a 14 megabyte camera !!!) which will be rejected.
For Forum images, anything larger than , say, 1024 x 768 is a waste (unless it's a black and white schematic, with very small letters) so consider that when setting your camera to take pictures.
And if you already have them, please resize down or downsize using Photoshop or sometuing.
An image 5 times larger than the screen is an absolute waste of bandwidth and server space.
This panel, done in OSB, is essentially where we went with the two-row idea.
It is 29" wide by 48" long. I tried to center each row of drivers at the "Golden Mean" in each direction. Wiring is the usual "prototype messy" - but worked. This panel was taken into the sanctuary and flown behind the speech optimized loudspeaker. Eventually it was lowered to a point where it interacted with the angled side walls of the platform.
Obviously the best "activity" (stereo" is not an accurate description of the so-called imaging), is along the center of the center aisle. However, even off to the extreme front corners, where a "stereo" pair would only project the one device to which the listener is closest, there is a sensr of a Difference between what each ear perceives.
It is 29" wide by 48" long. I tried to center each row of drivers at the "Golden Mean" in each direction. Wiring is the usual "prototype messy" - but worked. This panel was taken into the sanctuary and flown behind the speech optimized loudspeaker. Eventually it was lowered to a point where it interacted with the angled side walls of the platform.
Obviously the best "activity" (stereo" is not an accurate description of the so-called imaging), is along the center of the center aisle. However, even off to the extreme front corners, where a "stereo" pair would only project the one device to which the listener is closest, there is a sensr of a Difference between what each ear perceives.
Attachments
There will be a question as to why we went with two rows, instead of using the backside of one as the "back wave"...
Measuring the single driver on each respective side we found the expected 180Hz to 15,000 Hz response over about a 130-degree arc from the front side, and about the same low point up to 4K on the backside, rolling off fairly quickly.
Galaxy, by the way, rates each driver at 100 watts RMS, full bandwidth. If you're keeping track, that means the dipole should handle 1 kilowatt from 180 to 15K.
Purists will, no doubt, point out the time domain discrepancy between the front and rear rows. We found that, at a distance of about 20", vertically, and, from 15 to 45' away from the device, we couldn't accurately tell much difference by row location - even when the rows were "traded", front for rear.
Measuring the single driver on each respective side we found the expected 180Hz to 15,000 Hz response over about a 130-degree arc from the front side, and about the same low point up to 4K on the backside, rolling off fairly quickly.
Galaxy, by the way, rates each driver at 100 watts RMS, full bandwidth. If you're keeping track, that means the dipole should handle 1 kilowatt from 180 to 15K.
Purists will, no doubt, point out the time domain discrepancy between the front and rear rows. We found that, at a distance of about 20", vertically, and, from 15 to 45' away from the device, we couldn't accurately tell much difference by row location - even when the rows were "traded", front for rear.
One last image for now.
This is the view of the main loudspeaker over the pulpit in the sanctuary. The space between and behind it, and the projector, further behind it, is where the device will hang.
I am preparing to move from a house where I've been for almost seven years, back to the Northwestern U.S. - where I belong! There will be more images to come...
Cheers!
This is the view of the main loudspeaker over the pulpit in the sanctuary. The space between and behind it, and the projector, further behind it, is where the device will hang.
I am preparing to move from a house where I've been for almost seven years, back to the Northwestern U.S. - where I belong! There will be more images to come...
Cheers!
Attachments
The prototype, with a pair of Eminence Gamma 15s for the low frequency content. There is reasonable response down to 50 Hz, without EQ to force it. We are using an analog electronic crossover with a sub-woofer option. We haven't tested for the optimum location of a pair of 18" boxes - but will likely put them at ground level. More on that, later.
Attachments
Cool.
I thought your open baffle would be *much* larger.
3191 x 2394 px , 990 Kb the first one; 2056 x 2741 px the second one, also 980 kB , both *barely* met the Forum maximum.
What I suggested is this: took the first one and "Resize/Resample" in freeware IrfanView (excellent and easy to use) down to 1024 x 768 px:155kB (1/6 the former file size) and a nice to look at screen image.
I thought your open baffle would be *much* larger.
3191 x 2394 px , 990 Kb the first one; 2056 x 2741 px the second one, also 980 kB , both *barely* met the Forum maximum.
What I suggested is this: took the first one and "Resize/Resample" in freeware IrfanView (excellent and easy to use) down to 1024 x 768 px:155kB (1/6 the former file size) and a nice to look at screen image.
Attachments
JM, I'm over my head with the move and packing. I'm sorry the pictures are as small as they are - I have a lot to take care of on the project and less than three weeks to finish it. I have a mid-level Canon camera and it will have to do - all you guys with Smart Phones can feel superior!Cheers!
An observation, now that the finished item is flying: The main loudspeaker (which I also designed to meet a seating plane geometry that would have forced us into an array (that would have had too many problems - cost, inter-box interference, and more), is now in a position to compare, sonically, to the dipole right behind it. I'm going to have to go back and fight with the DCX2496 and see if I can make the "box" sound more like the "open baffle"! Digital processing can only take parameters that are subject to adjustment and modify them to the point where the phase anomalies are mitigated. This should be interesting! Every body liked the original box. Most that have heard the open baffle, even standing in the null - or anywhere else seem to love its sound!
Go figure
Cheers
Go figure
Cheers
ah pictures!
very interesting indeed and now that i've seen it i have to ask again what inspired you to try this.
i'm curious to know what a face on vertical array of your 10 drivers would behave like in this room.
what is that box that's hanging there again?i believe you stated what it was in a previous post i was wondering about the x-over config it has?
i certainly would love to hear this in person ..hum..i've never been to arizona ..hum
i guess i'll just have to stay tuned.
very interesting indeed and now that i've seen it i have to ask again what inspired you to try this.
i'm curious to know what a face on vertical array of your 10 drivers would behave like in this room.
what is that box that's hanging there again?i believe you stated what it was in a previous post i was wondering about the x-over config it has?
i certainly would love to hear this in person ..hum..i've never been to arizona ..hum
i guess i'll just have to stay tuned.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.