Open baffle horns? - 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 4th December 2007, 11:14 AM   #21
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portal 2012
Quote:
Originally posted by Tom Brennan


I've run JBL 2420s and Altec 288s sans the caps but hearing no big difference (if any) I put them back on. There was some discussion of this on the Lansing Heritage site, evidently some early WE compression drivers had no back cap but an open protective screen.
If you turn them around and use them without a horn you end up with a Super Dome, I have used/ measured a few drivers this way. The sensitivity goes down like 10 db but they really get linear, extended and open - to me they still sound like a dome though. - compressed and fake
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2007, 12:13 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
This has turned into quite an interesting thread, I'm enjoying the discussion. I know now that while horns can be mounted on an open baffle, if used by themselves they probably aren't capable of the sonic characteristics I was looking for.
I've also been corresponding with Darrel Hawthorne and he's been excellent explaining the whole dipole/bipole concept(not that I completely understand it yet ). I'm going to eventually build a set of OBs using his Silver Iris drivers.
BTW, anyone interested in a set of Mageplanar SMGa's? They sound lovely and have the soundstage I'm looking for but not the punch I want-
Thanks for the great discussion!
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2007, 09:31 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
rcavictim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Next to an open wormhole NW of Toronto
Quote:
Originally posted by chops

Here's My Usher/Altec Horn Loaded Open Baffles...

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.
There are probably counties where you`d have to bribe the planning commission by buying a building permit to build a set of speakers like that!
__________________
"There are more worlds than the one you can hold in your hand." Albert Hosteen, Navajo spiritual elder and code-breaker, X-Files TV Series.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 12:34 AM   #24
AJinFLA is offline AJinFLA  United States
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tampa
Quote:
Originally posted by Tom Brennan


I've run JBL 2420s and Altec 288s sans the caps but hearing no big difference (if any) I put them back on. There was some discussion of this on the Lansing Heritage site, evidently some early WE compression drivers had no back cap but an open protective screen.
Hi Tom,

What I was really asking was, were these part of an overall dipole design? An attempt to lessen the imbalance in the power response? Or basically just to see how it sounded in an existing design?
One of the issues that I looked at from my previous dipole/horn design was the power response shift between dipolar to directional monopole in the crossover region. Rear radiation from the tweeter helps to offset this, although there may be a penalty in the polar response. I need to do a ton of measuring with these yet (bottom pics)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1366614#post1366614
I will search the Lansing forum to see how they were being used.

cheers,

AJ
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 12:50 AM   #25
ScottG is offline ScottG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
Quote:
Originally posted by critterxl
They sound lovely and have the soundstage I'm looking for but not the punch I want-
Thanks for the great discussion!

You can get that easily enough by integrating a sealed "subwoofer" with the panels.

(Note that it isn't really a subwoofer, more like an active bass "augmenter").

Most open baffle solutions don't have a lot of punch either (though yes, better than the maggies).
__________________
perspective is everything
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 01:00 AM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by ScottG



You can get that easily enough by integrating a sealed "subwoofer" with the panels.

(Note that it isn't really a subwoofer, more like an active bass "augmenter").

Most open baffle solutions don't have a lot of punch either (though yes, better than the maggies).

Well when I use them now I use them in conjunction with a Klipsch passive sub which balances out the sound nicely all off the way thru and gives the low end punch. What I'm missing is a little more "up front" sound and dynamic in the midrange- Thanks!
Lee
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 01:47 AM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Lexington Ky
Quote:
Originally posted by AJinFLA


Hi Tom,

What I was really asking was, were these part of an overall dipole design? An attempt to lessen the imbalance in the power response? Or basically just to see how it sounded in an existing design?
I was just screwing around to see how it would sound.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 03:51 AM   #28
chops is offline chops  United States
diyAudio Member
 
chops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Quote:
Originally posted by ScottG
Most open baffle solutions don't have a lot of punch either.

Adding some EQ or building larger baffles can overcome that issue.
__________________
Charles
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 09:42 AM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
My crude understanding is that there is a trade-off on efficiency and sound stage on the baffle design.The narrower the baffles, the better the sound stage but the response suffers some. Wider baffles in general provide more punch and response but narrow the sound stage somewhat. Is this off base?
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2007, 06:07 PM   #30
chops is offline chops  United States
diyAudio Member
 
chops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Quote:
Originally posted by critterxl
My crude understanding is that there is a trade-off on efficiency and sound stage on the baffle design.The narrower the baffles, the better the sound stage but the response suffers some. Wider baffles in general provide more punch and response but narrow the sound stage somewhat. Is this off base?

I'm not too sure really. My baffles are 24" wide and they image and soundstage like good bookshelf speakers.
__________________
Charles
  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
Does open baffle suffer from baffle step? 454Casull Multi-Way 15 19th May 2012 03:12 PM
Open-baffle baffle length matejS Multi-Way 2 21st September 2010 04:49 PM
Murphy baffle radios [ open baffle ] keithpeter Full Range 10 11th September 2007 07:59 PM
what effect does baffle have on open-baffle system? kappa546 Multi-Way 6 24th January 2006 10:21 PM
Australians- what solid timbers for baffle? (open baffle loudspeaker) tktran Multi-Way 13 29th November 2004 11:09 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:26 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2