Hi Simon
yes you did that was in reference to a dipole subwoofer I believe but absolutely no reason why i cannot implement it in this configuartion.
Thought about it before ....type of enclosure/ material???building it???
Have already used pieces of cloth, wool and the such to simply cover the rear chassis of the speakers but it led to a veiling of that wonderful clarity, but i guess i could try again. Stuffing the inside of the chassis with wool is extremeley beneficial with no veiling of the sound whatsoever, just reduced shouting and more focus. I even placed pieces of flat mdf board directly behind the speaker drivers and a few inches away (???semi-open enclosure) and again it was a very dissapointing sound, but i need to try it on one speaker only next time. Will update after the hols
Luke
yes you did that was in reference to a dipole subwoofer I believe but absolutely no reason why i cannot implement it in this configuartion.
Thought about it before ....type of enclosure/ material???building it???
Have already used pieces of cloth, wool and the such to simply cover the rear chassis of the speakers but it led to a veiling of that wonderful clarity, but i guess i could try again. Stuffing the inside of the chassis with wool is extremeley beneficial with no veiling of the sound whatsoever, just reduced shouting and more focus. I even placed pieces of flat mdf board directly behind the speaker drivers and a few inches away (???semi-open enclosure) and again it was a very dissapointing sound, but i need to try it on one speaker only next time. Will update after the hols
Luke
Probably another old hat, but related to cancellation of front and rear waves, simply turning the speakers outwards facing towards the side walls has a tremendous impact on tone. Ideal for my room and equipment is a 10 degree turn outwards to the horizontal line. Yes focus goes a little, not much but voices in particular sound so much more tonally correct and hence more real.
BINGO?? BINGO??? BINGO???
Mad rush of thought............ electrostatics are the bees knees when it comes to microdynamics and harmonics...... thin membrane that vibrates...enclosures do the harmonics thing but enclosed in an air bubble. Combine the two and you have BUBBLEWRAP........... Zap it with sound waves and you have an enclosure vibrating................... but thin enough not to effect the dipole effect in an open baffle.
Tried it with small bubble single layer front of speakers only....emotion from voices and instruments was once more to my hearts delight restored with an obvious increase in harmonic texture. Could not believe Harry Belafontes voice, I had forgot how he used his voice to pass an emotional message across with the intonations of his singing. Tried double layer ...no good....tried back and front....echoed.....tried large bubble wrap worse...tried thin cloth covers as placebo....worse much worse!!!
This is my patent for the idea if it gains any credibility and if I remain convinced after more listening.
Imagine ultra thin bubble wrap material we have a genuine mad cross breed.
Mad rush of thought............ electrostatics are the bees knees when it comes to microdynamics and harmonics...... thin membrane that vibrates...enclosures do the harmonics thing but enclosed in an air bubble. Combine the two and you have BUBBLEWRAP........... Zap it with sound waves and you have an enclosure vibrating................... but thin enough not to effect the dipole effect in an open baffle.
Tried it with small bubble single layer front of speakers only....emotion from voices and instruments was once more to my hearts delight restored with an obvious increase in harmonic texture. Could not believe Harry Belafontes voice, I had forgot how he used his voice to pass an emotional message across with the intonations of his singing. Tried double layer ...no good....tried back and front....echoed.....tried large bubble wrap worse...tried thin cloth covers as placebo....worse much worse!!!
This is my patent for the idea if it gains any credibility and if I remain convinced after more listening.
Imagine ultra thin bubble wrap material we have a genuine mad cross breed.
Attachments
obviously need lot more experiments i have only just tested this, the obvious one that comes to mind as a placebo is having just thin plastic to cover the front of the speakers without the bubble.
what about on the dipole woofers??
What about how firmly the membrane is attached to the speaker cone and/or the baffle??? Distance from mebrane to speaker 1cm or 5cm, and what is the optimal bubble size/volume and what about the space between them. So many possibilities
what about on the dipole woofers??
What about how firmly the membrane is attached to the speaker cone and/or the baffle??? Distance from mebrane to speaker 1cm or 5cm, and what is the optimal bubble size/volume and what about the space between them. So many possibilities
You sir, are bonkers 
However, you're not alone. I'm trying it too... not much to say yet as I'm not hearing a big difference and am confused because I've just run off a million changes on my speaker (right channel only for testing) today. I reckon it must be doing something, and I think it does perhaps sound a bit more full-bodied. I expect it will be attenuating high frequencies and doing gosh knows what else.
Thank you for sharing your ideas!
However, you're not alone. I'm trying it too... not much to say yet as I'm not hearing a big difference and am confused because I've just run off a million changes on my speaker (right channel only for testing) today. I reckon it must be doing something, and I think it does perhaps sound a bit more full-bodied. I expect it will be attenuating high frequencies and doing gosh knows what else.
Thank you for sharing your ideas!
Attachments
Thanks Simon for that
I am no expert but that graph indicates the sound changes heard are not due to an attentuation of frequency effect. The measurements obviously do not show harmonics therefore that adds strength to what i am hearing. I think your graph has gone a long way towards proving what I am hearing. No loss at any frequency but a gain in perceived harmonics.
You should be hearing more expressive emotion from the music you are hearing now???
I am no expert but that graph indicates the sound changes heard are not due to an attentuation of frequency effect. The measurements obviously do not show harmonics therefore that adds strength to what i am hearing. I think your graph has gone a long way towards proving what I am hearing. No loss at any frequency but a gain in perceived harmonics.
You should be hearing more expressive emotion from the music you are hearing now???
I don't really know. That graph shows changes that could be audible, but I suspect there's much more to it than simple frequency response. I only did a fairly quick test because I'm still ironing out my basic crossover design. When I've got the 2nd speaker wired as the first I may try the bubble wrap for a longer audition.
I don't want to comment on the sound because at the minute I'm overwhelmed by the other changes I've made over the course of the day (gone from nasal and shut-in to rather excellent!!)
Simon
I don't want to comment on the sound because at the minute I'm overwhelmed by the other changes I've made over the course of the day (gone from nasal and shut-in to rather excellent!!)
Simon
FYI a large part of bringing up the body in voices etc on mine came from using a baffle step correction type filter (coil and resistor in parallel in line to mid driver) and from changing the mid to woofer polarity. That was the final piece of the puzzle for my speaker/room/system. I'll know more with fresh ears tomorrow how great it really is... or isn't!
The baffle step correction i too have experimented with over quite extensive resistor inductor values. Yes overall perceived tonal warmth increases, by bringing up the lower-mid/upper bass, and restricitng the upper frequencies. With the emphasis on the lower end of the drivers the solidity/body of the images also improve. However, it does not seem to effect the overall emotional content of the music coming through - the most important bit. This needs much finer gradations of tonal/harmonic variation to achieve.
Listen to a great voice with great tecnique. Listen with and without the tweak, just see if you can hear more detailed characterisation to the voice and with that more expression. Achieving this in my opinion is far far more important than simply shifting tonal balance, although i am sure without the latter the tweak would be probably less effective.
Will not be able to further assess the tweak until Saturday will report back then if it is worth remaining excited over it.
Listen to a great voice with great tecnique. Listen with and without the tweak, just see if you can hear more detailed characterisation to the voice and with that more expression. Achieving this in my opinion is far far more important than simply shifting tonal balance, although i am sure without the latter the tweak would be probably less effective.
Will not be able to further assess the tweak until Saturday will report back then if it is worth remaining excited over it.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I love this kind of innovation ! - gotta laugh though, all these years of effort in the industry to 'remove the veil' covering the sound and here you are adding one back in.
I wonder if there is any connection between your experiments and this:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/diyaudio-com-articles/170305-midwest-audio-fest.html
"Those that caught my ear did not necessarily win though. For me the most interesting speaker there was a Planarsonics homemade flat panel speaker brought by L.E. Heavener. Their membranes were cardboard!"
Cardboard has a kind of hollow cell structure like bubble wrap.
Done a little bit more experimentation.
Having the bubble wrap on the front of the speaker baffle clearly reduced spl and reduced the tweeters output most severely. Yes there was still that improved emotion and tonal warmth to the midrange, but the high output loss was too restrictive for continued listening. I am surprised that such a strongly audible anomaly was not clearly demonstratd by Simon's measurements. The veil was certainly there and this was somewhat contrary to my original findings, where I clearly had not tested a range of CD's and simply got excited by my midrange vocal findings.
Tonight I replaced the bubble wrap and let it cover only the rear of the speakers. Tweeter was once more unrestricted but to my surprise the apparent microdynamics had clearly improved further. I was extremely pleased by the detail and tonal realism that was coming from the speakers. Furthermore soundstaging and clarity had improved. The instruments seemed more locked in their positions and had clearer focus. Certain instruments were producing that startling factor when they suddenly came into a mix with such clairty and presence. Voices now had even great tonal depth with more air and detail also apparent.
I next repeated the experiment using the larger sized bubble wrap and once again there clearly further improved microdynamics and focus with an overall very much more refined soundfield. There was no obvious attenuation of any frequency or veil apparent. This was clearly a big step forward.
I suspect a lot of the imrpovements may be related to the way the soundwaves travel and how they are controlled by the bubble wrap rather than due to some half baked idea regarding resonance within bubbles!! but i leave those theories to those that are in the know.
Have I at long last successfully married open and closed box sounds without affecting that tremendous clarity and mega dynamic range that we so dearly love open baffles for?? I believe I am getting very close.
Will report back after more listening, but this is, for me at least, at long lasting becoming a truely exciting project. I hope more of you can try this very simple experiment and report back.
Having the bubble wrap on the front of the speaker baffle clearly reduced spl and reduced the tweeters output most severely. Yes there was still that improved emotion and tonal warmth to the midrange, but the high output loss was too restrictive for continued listening. I am surprised that such a strongly audible anomaly was not clearly demonstratd by Simon's measurements. The veil was certainly there and this was somewhat contrary to my original findings, where I clearly had not tested a range of CD's and simply got excited by my midrange vocal findings.
Tonight I replaced the bubble wrap and let it cover only the rear of the speakers. Tweeter was once more unrestricted but to my surprise the apparent microdynamics had clearly improved further. I was extremely pleased by the detail and tonal realism that was coming from the speakers. Furthermore soundstaging and clarity had improved. The instruments seemed more locked in their positions and had clearer focus. Certain instruments were producing that startling factor when they suddenly came into a mix with such clairty and presence. Voices now had even great tonal depth with more air and detail also apparent.
I next repeated the experiment using the larger sized bubble wrap and once again there clearly further improved microdynamics and focus with an overall very much more refined soundfield. There was no obvious attenuation of any frequency or veil apparent. This was clearly a big step forward.
I suspect a lot of the imrpovements may be related to the way the soundwaves travel and how they are controlled by the bubble wrap rather than due to some half baked idea regarding resonance within bubbles!! but i leave those theories to those that are in the know.
Have I at long last successfully married open and closed box sounds without affecting that tremendous clarity and mega dynamic range that we so dearly love open baffles for?? I believe I am getting very close.
Will report back after more listening, but this is, for me at least, at long lasting becoming a truely exciting project. I hope more of you can try this very simple experiment and report back.
Thanks Simon for clarifying that.
More extended listening is reminding me of other missing attributes that may or may not be speaker related, but improtantly are disturbing my ultimate enjoyment of the speakers tonight. Musicality, timimg and rhythm, cohesiveness,some airiness and sound stage definition are areas that seem to be lacking. These are all the more apparent now that i have improved the all improtant area of tone. These may never have been present but i am now focussing my attention on them. My ancillaires may be at fault here, or the inductor resistor combination needs to be re tweaked. Too many drivers??
Not sure but for life like presence nothing else I have heard beats what i have at the moment with a much improved tonal and microdynamic range.
I remember my Avantgarde duos having more air and soundstage definition,my quad esl's were extremely cohesive sounding with great airiness and soundstage definition. Most of my boxed speakers had palpable soundstages.
More extended listening is reminding me of other missing attributes that may or may not be speaker related, but improtantly are disturbing my ultimate enjoyment of the speakers tonight. Musicality, timimg and rhythm, cohesiveness,some airiness and sound stage definition are areas that seem to be lacking. These are all the more apparent now that i have improved the all improtant area of tone. These may never have been present but i am now focussing my attention on them. My ancillaires may be at fault here, or the inductor resistor combination needs to be re tweaked. Too many drivers??
Not sure but for life like presence nothing else I have heard beats what i have at the moment with a much improved tonal and microdynamic range.
I remember my Avantgarde duos having more air and soundstage definition,my quad esl's were extremely cohesive sounding with great airiness and soundstage definition. Most of my boxed speakers had palpable soundstages.
My first open baffle speaker
This probably constitutes an ancient thread, but it's the first one I've found that is directly related to my own project. So, I write for those who may be on a similar journey and will find this thread.
The lean presentation of the two Eminence Beta 12 LTAs is well documented in the previous posts, as are the attempts at bringing some harmonic body to the sound. Since I also use these drivers, I understand the nature of the issue.
A simple twist of a bass knob on any preamp that still has these controls will deliver a thicker, fuller presentation that also seems to dampen the highs. Too much and the bass becomes bloated; going the other way results in a more dynamic presentation but the mids become too lean and the highs more prominent. Usually you'd fiddle with the tone controls to achieve the best balance. In my view a lean presentation seems to lack the harmonics that provide the full body of sound, especially noted when listening to a grand piano. Of course, tone controls are probably not fashionable any more but I'm not 100% sure since I've been out of the audio game for around 20 years.
Nontheless, there are always ways and means, it's just a matter of discovering them. In my case I have found three ways to bring life to my music. At this time I am still in prototype mode so nothing is conclusive, but current results are very encouraging.
After so many years out of audiophile-land I am making my way back with my first speaker build and, as it turned out, it's an open baffle design. Actually no-baffle or naked/nude baffle, whatever. At the moment the drivers are solidly mounted to a frame (not a baffle board) but will soon enough find themselves suspended from the frame. Right now, though, the task is to get the drivers to work together and give me the tone I'm looking for.
Where I think I got lucky was finding Trans-Fi Audio and the coupled dipole - two woofers firing face to face and in push pull. Pretty much the Celestion SL6000 configuration. I found Vic at Trans-Fi while looking at building a Bastanis Mandala clone - hence the Eminence drivers. I'm using twin 18 inch drivers that are currently running full range. The dipole coupling reduces the higher frequencies giving it a natural acoustic rolloff. Already I have a full bodied sound to complement the Betas (I'm aware of the dipole peak etc and will tackle all of that later).
The second part of the solution is bi-amping, where I'm able to manipulate the balance between the big woofers and the Betas. The final trick is the use of an old Sumo Electra preamp and it's tone controls. Of course, whether this stays in the system or not has still to be decided. But I must say that I have achieved a milestone. This system, as it stands, is neither an audiophile product with the requisite neutral and accurate presentation nor is it a bottom of the pile sonic mess. Rather, it is a system that provides incredible dynamics, plays ludicrously loud, sounds like it has a turbocharger attached, has intricately detailed vocals, richly resonant piano (my reference) and, most surprisingly of all, plays any type of music you'd care to throw at it.
Synergy is everything. The Betas by themselves suffer in open baffle guise. Even the Bastanis Sagamartha Duos came in for some stick over their lean midrange. Ok, they don't use Eminence drivers, I believe, but the design hasn't changed. Godzilla loved the Betas, but he bolstered the bottom with Alpha 15s crossing over higher than 100Hz, which is where Bastanis cross over. I'm suggesting the Alphas put more harmonic body into the music.
That's it, for what it's worth.
This probably constitutes an ancient thread, but it's the first one I've found that is directly related to my own project. So, I write for those who may be on a similar journey and will find this thread.
The lean presentation of the two Eminence Beta 12 LTAs is well documented in the previous posts, as are the attempts at bringing some harmonic body to the sound. Since I also use these drivers, I understand the nature of the issue.
A simple twist of a bass knob on any preamp that still has these controls will deliver a thicker, fuller presentation that also seems to dampen the highs. Too much and the bass becomes bloated; going the other way results in a more dynamic presentation but the mids become too lean and the highs more prominent. Usually you'd fiddle with the tone controls to achieve the best balance. In my view a lean presentation seems to lack the harmonics that provide the full body of sound, especially noted when listening to a grand piano. Of course, tone controls are probably not fashionable any more but I'm not 100% sure since I've been out of the audio game for around 20 years.
Nontheless, there are always ways and means, it's just a matter of discovering them. In my case I have found three ways to bring life to my music. At this time I am still in prototype mode so nothing is conclusive, but current results are very encouraging.
After so many years out of audiophile-land I am making my way back with my first speaker build and, as it turned out, it's an open baffle design. Actually no-baffle or naked/nude baffle, whatever. At the moment the drivers are solidly mounted to a frame (not a baffle board) but will soon enough find themselves suspended from the frame. Right now, though, the task is to get the drivers to work together and give me the tone I'm looking for.
Where I think I got lucky was finding Trans-Fi Audio and the coupled dipole - two woofers firing face to face and in push pull. Pretty much the Celestion SL6000 configuration. I found Vic at Trans-Fi while looking at building a Bastanis Mandala clone - hence the Eminence drivers. I'm using twin 18 inch drivers that are currently running full range. The dipole coupling reduces the higher frequencies giving it a natural acoustic rolloff. Already I have a full bodied sound to complement the Betas (I'm aware of the dipole peak etc and will tackle all of that later).
The second part of the solution is bi-amping, where I'm able to manipulate the balance between the big woofers and the Betas. The final trick is the use of an old Sumo Electra preamp and it's tone controls. Of course, whether this stays in the system or not has still to be decided. But I must say that I have achieved a milestone. This system, as it stands, is neither an audiophile product with the requisite neutral and accurate presentation nor is it a bottom of the pile sonic mess. Rather, it is a system that provides incredible dynamics, plays ludicrously loud, sounds like it has a turbocharger attached, has intricately detailed vocals, richly resonant piano (my reference) and, most surprisingly of all, plays any type of music you'd care to throw at it.
Synergy is everything. The Betas by themselves suffer in open baffle guise. Even the Bastanis Sagamartha Duos came in for some stick over their lean midrange. Ok, they don't use Eminence drivers, I believe, but the design hasn't changed. Godzilla loved the Betas, but he bolstered the bottom with Alpha 15s crossing over higher than 100Hz, which is where Bastanis cross over. I'm suggesting the Alphas put more harmonic body into the music.
That's it, for what it's worth.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.