Omnipole, monopole, dipole and...nopole?? - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th June 2007, 11:14 AM   #21
el`Ol is offline el`Ol  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bavarian Forest
If you don`t want to be disturbed by the rear wave, make the Baffle BIG.
http://www.phy-hp.com/English/Commun...ffle_Plan.html
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 12:40 PM   #22
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
If you donīt want to be disturbed by secondary sound sources from the baffle edge - make the baffle SMALL.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...43#post1244143

Rudolf
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 12:47 PM   #23
Hartono is offline Hartono  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: currently in China
LOL

I vote for No baffle and anechoic chamber.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 01:55 PM   #24
terry j is offline terry j  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
I vote for being all confused....

we've gone from big, to small, to none.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th June 2007, 02:09 PM   #25
Hartono is offline Hartono  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: currently in China
I guess big box with small baffle will do just fine.....
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st July 2007, 03:28 AM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brisbane, QLD
Quote:
Originally posted by terry j
I vote for being all confused....

we've gone from big, to small, to none.
Well I think I get what you're saying and there's no "one size fits all" solution.

Limiting the box size is all about tuning the bass response, usually so that the Qtc is around 0.5 to 0.707. If you plan on EQing the response with active filters then that issue becomes less important.

However, using an extremely large box/ infinite baffle is all about optimizing the midrange~treble response, which might be a bit counter-intuitive but hey. IMO one important thing to look out for is Accidental horn loading of the back-wave.

Check out the picture. (5" Visaton mid-bass that I might use) The top half has a wide baffle, which gives a smooth and fast expansion rate, whereas the bottom half is a bit wacky because of the tight fit. If you can imagine it in 3d so the speaker is boxed into a corner, it could have some nasty resonances in the 1~5kHz range. Not only that, but the reflections would also be amplified as they travel back towards the speaker.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg back-wave.jpg (21.4 KB, 123 views)
__________________
Lech
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Measured monopole and dipole room responses Elias Multi-Way 582 24th September 2013 11:28 AM
Getting Dipole bass out of a monopole subwoofer Hara Subwoofers 18 14th July 2006 12:55 AM
Dipole vs monopole, balls or not ... ? Jussi Multi-Way 11 4th May 2006 03:38 PM
DBX vs BSS vs 24/96 for Dipole/Monopole combo..... gavinson Multi-Way 0 29th November 2005 12:07 AM
Dipole speaker with monopole rear firing midbass? GuyPanico Multi-Way 4 12th November 2005 02:49 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:09 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2