Listening to three of them in a cardboard box was rather entertaining, My forecast is for weirdness at 2 to 6KHz but that is fine, the mid lines will have more output than the tweeter/woofer lines so caps/coils/resistor filters can smooth it out without killing off the output too much. The forums mention the dark art of passive crossovers--that is where I'm heading.
Those little 3" full ranges put out a surprising amount of bass--considering I've seen larger cone tweeters--they do OK. Still going to cross them at 400Hz to keep the distortion very, very low but they won't have any issue no matter how high the loudness dial spins.
As far as EQ is concerned, what bands have the most ripple that need the most attention? At this point, I know that the Aurasounds will solve my depressed midrange sound from the 5 inch woofer line--getting closer. Get as close as possible with passive filters is the plan since they will be used in a garage, outside for BBQs and hauled to various places and run off car amps for party speakers. Setting up a parametric EQ is not an option.
In the future, I'll use EQ when the garage receiver gets swapped with a receiver that has one--give it a few years.
Any comments on the Anthony Gallo Line Arrays from you guys?
Came across these today and like their sleek design.
Quite a different approach on the tweeter placement between the mids....
comb filtering would be about the same as the 25 driver from Owen and the one I am planning to build. Who knows, maybe one of you will visit CES and give these a listen (if they are there, they were in 2008).
Came across these today and like their sleek design.
Quite a different approach on the tweeter placement between the mids....
comb filtering would be about the same as the 25 driver from Owen and the one I am planning to build. Who knows, maybe one of you will visit CES and give these a listen (if they are there, they were in 2008).
Attachments
They sound horrible, I would stay away. Comb filtering is plainly evident, plus the interposition of the mids and tweeters make it worse if anything.
And there is no low end to speak of. I had heard them in a showroom that was about 300 square feet (should have been enough).
Finally, that grille in front is made of thin, and weak steel rods. They jangle (no kidding).
And there is no low end to speak of. I had heard them in a showroom that was about 300 square feet (should have been enough).
Finally, that grille in front is made of thin, and weak steel rods. They jangle (no kidding).
Hi Guys and Gals (if any?)
Have a couple of questions:
I got myself a bunch of Vifa TC9FD18-08 drivers, as I plan to make a line array like the IDS-25 or the one OPC have described in post #37.
The IDS-25 uses an enclousure were the side panels are not parallel.
What about yours OPC?
There is another commercial line array speaker, aparently using the same dirver, the Adyton Imagic (2.0 and 1.6) form Norway.
Their enclosure are about the same dimensions (width and depth) , but appparently with parallel sides.
The reason for the above is, I have been looking at a rectangular aluminium tube 100x200 mm and 5mm wall thikness, and was wandering if this could be used as enclousure.
With a wall (shelf?) for every 5 drivers and a rod behind each driver from sidewall to sidewall, I think there will be no ringing in the aluminium, but what about standing waves from the parallel walls?
Another thing concerning the Adyton Imagic puzzles me:
All the comments I have read on the net, from people that have actually heard these , have been very positive. Without exeption they have been blown away by the sound of them.
Adyton uses NO equalizer and claims no filters on the Vifas! They do use a ribbon tweeter to overcome the C-C spacing loss in the high frequencies.
They also use a little odd number of Vifa drivers: 18 in the Imagic 2.0 and 12 in the 1.6.
Maybe they are using some sort of power tapping?
They might also use 16 Ohm drivers and then parallal 9 of them in the Imagic 2.0 resulting in 3.555.... Ohm impedance. Adyton claim 4 Ohm for the 2.0.
In the 1.6 , paralleling 6 results in 5.33.... Ohm and Adyton claims 5 Ohm.
Close enough?
Still how can they avoid the equalizer?
Comments anybody?
Koldby
Have a couple of questions:
I got myself a bunch of Vifa TC9FD18-08 drivers, as I plan to make a line array like the IDS-25 or the one OPC have described in post #37.
The IDS-25 uses an enclousure were the side panels are not parallel.
What about yours OPC?
There is another commercial line array speaker, aparently using the same dirver, the Adyton Imagic (2.0 and 1.6) form Norway.
Their enclosure are about the same dimensions (width and depth) , but appparently with parallel sides.
The reason for the above is, I have been looking at a rectangular aluminium tube 100x200 mm and 5mm wall thikness, and was wandering if this could be used as enclousure.
With a wall (shelf?) for every 5 drivers and a rod behind each driver from sidewall to sidewall, I think there will be no ringing in the aluminium, but what about standing waves from the parallel walls?
Another thing concerning the Adyton Imagic puzzles me:
All the comments I have read on the net, from people that have actually heard these , have been very positive. Without exeption they have been blown away by the sound of them.
Adyton uses NO equalizer and claims no filters on the Vifas! They do use a ribbon tweeter to overcome the C-C spacing loss in the high frequencies.
They also use a little odd number of Vifa drivers: 18 in the Imagic 2.0 and 12 in the 1.6.
Maybe they are using some sort of power tapping?
They might also use 16 Ohm drivers and then parallal 9 of them in the Imagic 2.0 resulting in 3.555.... Ohm impedance. Adyton claim 4 Ohm for the 2.0.
In the 1.6 , paralleling 6 results in 5.33.... Ohm and Adyton claims 5 Ohm.
Close enough?
Still how can they avoid the equalizer?
Comments anybody?
Koldby
The answer is on their web page: Imagic 2.0 must be supported by a pair of high quality subwoofers as the main system does not go lower than 80Hz
Imagic 2.0 Loudspeakers
Imagic 2.0 Loudspeakers
No the answer is not there. It is not just compensating from 80 Hz down that is used in the IDS-25 and OPC´s line array. There is a downward tilting of the freq.response when dealing with a line source and also a baffle step.
IDS-25 and OPC´s have a significant compensation.
Look at the response OPC gave to you in post #61. There he says
"My arrays sound like absolute junk without any eq, and I knew full well that they would going into it. I've attached some pictures of the EQ I have implemented for my "Sounds best everywhere" EQ setting which is basically aiming for a flat anechoic response. If you look closely you'll see that they needed almost 10dB of cut through the lower midbass (around 160-800Hz) and about 15dB of boost from about 80Hz down. They're relatively flat through the midband until you get into destructive interference territory above about 8kHz where you need between 6dB and 8dB of boost depending on how you like the top end to sound."
And he has pictures of his compensation.
My question remains: How do Aditon avoid the eq. in the midrange???
Koldby
IDS-25 and OPC´s have a significant compensation.
Look at the response OPC gave to you in post #61. There he says
"My arrays sound like absolute junk without any eq, and I knew full well that they would going into it. I've attached some pictures of the EQ I have implemented for my "Sounds best everywhere" EQ setting which is basically aiming for a flat anechoic response. If you look closely you'll see that they needed almost 10dB of cut through the lower midbass (around 160-800Hz) and about 15dB of boost from about 80Hz down. They're relatively flat through the midband until you get into destructive interference territory above about 8kHz where you need between 6dB and 8dB of boost depending on how you like the top end to sound."
And he has pictures of his compensation.
My question remains: How do Aditon avoid the eq. in the midrange???
Koldby
I am well aware of that. More can be found on:
The Murphy Corner-Line-Array Home Page
He has some nice graphs on there to show the responce without filtering. Not the same speakers or shape but similar enough.
But I also saw a picture of the back of those Adyton Imagic speakers with 2 turn knobs. One with the title "presence" and one with "air".
That should tell you there's some passive filtering going on. The highs are partly compensated for by the single tweeter (level of that tweeter is probably the air knob). So you have the 160-800 left to figure out.
I had planned to use the Behringer EQ from the start, even before I found Owen on this thread. It was fun to see and read my ideas could really work.
Love your idea using the aluminium tube as the enclosure. I have seen a thread on Parts express with HiFi drivers I think it was using a square tube as enclosure. That one should be documented there.
I chose my enclosure shape to do 2 or 3 things,
- limit diffracion
- controll/break up backwave
- uneven enclosure wall to battle resonances (not sure it helps)
But lot's of speakers have rectangular shapes so I see no reason it couldn't work for you. You could try and email Mr. Russell about the reason for his trapesium shape. I've corresponded with him about my ideas and he was very kind and helpfull.
His first arrays had a rectangular shape. He published that in AudioXpress 2005 November issue. That one used budget speakers. The IDS was published in july 2006 and had the trapesium shape. I have found both magazines online after a good search. PM me your email addy if you want me to send them to you.
The Murphy Corner-Line-Array Home Page
He has some nice graphs on there to show the responce without filtering. Not the same speakers or shape but similar enough.
But I also saw a picture of the back of those Adyton Imagic speakers with 2 turn knobs. One with the title "presence" and one with "air".
That should tell you there's some passive filtering going on. The highs are partly compensated for by the single tweeter (level of that tweeter is probably the air knob). So you have the 160-800 left to figure out.
I had planned to use the Behringer EQ from the start, even before I found Owen on this thread. It was fun to see and read my ideas could really work.
Love your idea using the aluminium tube as the enclosure. I have seen a thread on Parts express with HiFi drivers I think it was using a square tube as enclosure. That one should be documented there.
I chose my enclosure shape to do 2 or 3 things,
- limit diffracion
- controll/break up backwave
- uneven enclosure wall to battle resonances (not sure it helps)
But lot's of speakers have rectangular shapes so I see no reason it couldn't work for you. You could try and email Mr. Russell about the reason for his trapesium shape. I've corresponded with him about my ideas and he was very kind and helpfull.
His first arrays had a rectangular shape. He published that in AudioXpress 2005 November issue. That one used budget speakers. The IDS was published in july 2006 and had the trapesium shape. I have found both magazines online after a good search. PM me your email addy if you want me to send them to you.
Extra info, the driver on the parts express line array was a tangband. The tube he used was round:
Parts Express DIY Project
There must be another thread somewhere with square tubing and oval speakers.
Parts Express DIY Project
There must be another thread somewhere with square tubing and oval speakers.
Found it: My Line Array Project - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video, and Electronics Customer Discussion Forum From Parts-Express.com
(as you can see I studied arrays for a while on the web)
(as you can see I studied arrays for a while on the web
)
Last edited:
Thanks wesayso.
Me too.
And I appriciate any comments and suggestions.
If I choose to make a wood enclousure, I would follow the same guidelines as you suggest.
I have already made a couple of OB arrays with RIPOL subs and with the Behringer as EQ, and now I would like to make something a liitle more like a finished speaker.
I like very much the idea to have one driver covering all or allmost all of the frequencies.
The phasebehavior is so much better than a system with x-over.
I have not, however, come across someone who used alu as enclousure.
And to be honest, I do not feel using cheap plastic , be it a fence pole or a drainpipe, is good enough alternative to a wodden enclousure.
The Murphy case is special as he is cornerloading it (besides the fact he is not using the same drivers as IDS-25, OPC and Adyton)
The thing about Adyton that still puzzles me, is they claim no series filter components at the Vifas. If they regulate the midbass/midrange bump (is that the right word?) they would have to make a parallel circuit. That would say either a series resistor or some serious problems with impedance...
The precense knob, I think, is just a tweeter level control.
Me too.
And I appriciate any comments and suggestions.
If I choose to make a wood enclousure, I would follow the same guidelines as you suggest.
I have already made a couple of OB arrays with RIPOL subs and with the Behringer as EQ, and now I would like to make something a liitle more like a finished speaker.
I like very much the idea to have one driver covering all or allmost all of the frequencies.
The phasebehavior is so much better than a system with x-over.
I have not, however, come across someone who used alu as enclousure.
And to be honest, I do not feel using cheap plastic , be it a fence pole or a drainpipe, is good enough alternative to a wodden enclousure.
The Murphy case is special as he is cornerloading it (besides the fact he is not using the same drivers as IDS-25, OPC and Adyton)
The thing about Adyton that still puzzles me, is they claim no series filter components at the Vifas. If they regulate the midbass/midrange bump (is that the right word?) they would have to make a parallel circuit. That would say either a series resistor or some serious problems with impedance...
The precense knob, I think, is just a tweeter level control.
Infinity used aluminum as an enclosure
My 1999 Infinity Overture 1 speakers are made out of an aluminum chassis so if it works for them.... I have not taken the speakers apart but I'm assuming they used some form of damping material on the inside--maybe a rubber coating?
The trick with arrays is to use a driver that has a natural rise through the mid range frequencies and cross it to tweeters when it runs out of steam. Those Vifas have a rise so I'm assuming that is what Adyton performed, passive notch and smoothing filters with the requirement for ribbon tweeters and subwoofers to take up the slack in the problem areas for full ranges--the two octaves on either side of the chart.
My 1999 Infinity Overture 1 speakers are made out of an aluminum chassis so if it works for them.... I have not taken the speakers apart but I'm assuming they used some form of damping material on the inside--maybe a rubber coating?
The trick with arrays is to use a driver that has a natural rise through the mid range frequencies and cross it to tweeters when it runs out of steam. Those Vifas have a rise so I'm assuming that is what Adyton performed, passive notch and smoothing filters with the requirement for ribbon tweeters and subwoofers to take up the slack in the problem areas for full ranges--the two octaves on either side of the chart.
I just read this whole thread and I have already ordered the NS25s and the NS3 since they are so cheap... I plan on using these to DJ Weddings hopefully getting them high enough SPL to sound good... I have 4 tapped horns, Jbells SS15. So far I've liked the idea of having stacks of the 3.0 0r 3.5" and crossing them over at 100hz.. I would like to be able to stack them, but to still get the most even dispersion across the higher bands, so for that I have the driverack PA so I was wondering if it would be a good idea to use the pink noise generator for that? Also, what, if any, is lost by splitting up the long tower into 2 smaller towers? I have not seen any max spl numbers or projected max spl numbers on these, what would be the estimated or projected max spl on one of these at their full capacity? again I am going with 25x NS3s per side.
How about welding some half round pieces to the sides of that alu tube, something like this: ([]) and stuffing that with isolation foam. You could even drill a few holes in the sides of the tube and scrape off excess foam later...
If I could weld alu I'd do something like that. Maybe even a MDF baffle stacked on the front and smaller alu half round for the back side, same as the sides. You can create enough airflow in the MDF baffle for the speakers and thread the alu for mounting them if you leave some lips behind the speaker holes. It gets complicated fast though...
Wesayso:
Cant weld alu either and I would like to keep the sides and front without any other holes than required. Another problem with putting structures inside the tube is that the space inside is already on the small side (about 1.5 liters pr. driver) . I believe that I can get rid of the side to side standing wave, merely by lining the sides with damping material and stuff the rest of the space with Acustilux or similar, as the freq. of that wave is quite high (around 3 kHz).
On the back I plan to insert a rod of a kind going from top to bottom and this along with the drivers fysical shape could take out the worst reflexions here.
I have a thought of mounting the drivers from the inside!!!
So in the front only 25 holes 79mm Ø with rounded edges and in the backplate (and in the rod , if that is nessesary ) I will make a 6-8 mm threaded hole for a bolt that presses the drivers (on the magnet) against the front.
So apparence will be 25 holes on the front and 25 bolts plus some terminals on the back!!
18Hurts:
But that is just the case...!
How can Adyton, with the SAME drivers avoid eq. when neither Roger Russel nor OPC can, and they both use pretty heavy eq. in their arrays.
Same dimensions same drivers - different response---- Still puzzles me.
But maybe Adytons claim of using no filters on the Vifas must be taken with a grane of salt. Could also be a OEM version of the Vifa with a tailored freq. response??
The problem with a notch filter is that if you dont have a series component, how can you realize it
You must either have a series notch filter that blocks the freq. you want to attenuate or a series resistor in connection with a parallel notch filter.
Koldby
Cant weld alu either and I would like to keep the sides and front without any other holes than required. Another problem with putting structures inside the tube is that the space inside is already on the small side (about 1.5 liters pr. driver) . I believe that I can get rid of the side to side standing wave, merely by lining the sides with damping material and stuff the rest of the space with Acustilux or similar, as the freq. of that wave is quite high (around 3 kHz).
On the back I plan to insert a rod of a kind going from top to bottom and this along with the drivers fysical shape could take out the worst reflexions here.
I have a thought of mounting the drivers from the inside!!!
So in the front only 25 holes 79mm Ø with rounded edges and in the backplate (and in the rod , if that is nessesary ) I will make a 6-8 mm threaded hole for a bolt that presses the drivers (on the magnet) against the front.
So apparence will be 25 holes on the front and 25 bolts plus some terminals on the back!!
18Hurts:
But that is just the case...!
How can Adyton, with the SAME drivers avoid eq. when neither Roger Russel nor OPC can, and they both use pretty heavy eq. in their arrays.
Same dimensions same drivers - different response---
- Still puzzles me.But maybe Adytons claim of using no filters on the Vifas must be taken with a grane of salt. Could also be a OEM version of the Vifa with a tailored freq. response??
The problem with a notch filter is that if you dont have a series component, how can you realize it
You must either have a series notch filter that blocks the freq. you want to attenuate or a series resistor in connection with a parallel notch filter.
Koldby
But that is just the case...!
How can Adyton, with the SAME drivers avoid eq. when neither Roger Russel nor OPC can, and they both use pretty heavy eq. in their arrays.
Same dimensions same drivers - different response---
But maybe Adytons claim of using no filters on the Vifas must be taken with a grane of salt. Could also be a OEM version of the Vifa with a tailored freq. response??
The problem with a notch filter is that if you dont have a series component, how can you realize it
You must either have a series notch filter that blocks the freq. you want to attenuate or a series resistor in connection with a parallel notch filter.
Koldby
How can you run a passive speaker with a presence knob on the back and not use a filter? The only thing I can think of is a resistor to change the filter frequency on the Vifa higher or lower to cause a increase/decrease at the crossover point?
I'm sure Adyton built the enclose specifically to have baffle step tame the rising bass response and the enclosure volume to increase or decrease the mid bass. The high and low octaves are ribbons and subs so that left the critical mid range. The rising response of the Vifas really helped there, they might of done something creative with coatings on the cones? If they painted something on the back of the cone, that would make it heavier but might damp one of the peaks in response? It would also lower sensitivity which the speakers at 94dB at 2.83V into 4 ohms is 91dB at one watt. They are pretty efficient but I'd expect more from 18 drivers.
Maybe Adyton's claim of no filters on the Vifas actually means besides the crossover filter. When notch filters are used near the crossover point, would it be a filter or part of the crossover? If the notch filter helps the crossover in any way--it is part of the crossover function. It really does not matter, there is a passive crossover for the ribbon tweeter so it is a game of definitions.
A fiberglass white cone would have the advantage of hiding any coating that is applied to the backside of the cone--maybe they played around with that trick until the Vifas were smooth enough from 80Hz to 4KHz?
If you buy me a pair--I'll take it apart to find out.
Another type of line array,
The Bill Fitzmaurice TLAH, stumbled acros a youtube clip of it, this would be the pro version:
Bill Fitzmaurice TLAH - YouTube
The Bill Fitzmaurice TLAH, stumbled acros a youtube clip of it, this would be the pro version:
Bill Fitzmaurice TLAH - YouTube