Rear mounted ambience drivers, opinions? - 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 18th December 2007, 11:14 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: east coast
Default Rear mounted ambience drivers, opinions?

Okay, here goes.

I built a pair of Exodus 2641's and after two years they are the best general purpose loudspeakers I have ever heard - they eat KEF 104’s – and even stand up quite nicely to the Wilsons. I think it's hard to get better sound for anywhere near the build cost x 3.

Anyway.

I messed with a 40" Bohlender ribbon last week and got a taste of that neutral *wide* long ribbon sound. Mark my words, not better than the CSS WR-125 of the 2641's, just way *wider* and a boat-load more detailed and listenable.

I wired the Bohlender thru the port of the 2641 to the band-pass outputs of the xo and clamped it against the 2641 cab - it took the place of the CSS WR-125 in the system (which was disconnected). I know, ruff but functional and valid enuff to get the idea. The XO is no problem (impedence aside), look at the specs.

The widening of the soundstage was subtle but noticeable, over time *really* noticeable. Bear in mind, I only had one 40" Bohlender. My impression is that with two, the soundstage and airiness would be really pleasant (bombastic would be more accurate!).

But, that would ruin Kevin’s absolutely fabulous design - my 2641's are the envy of all my audiophile friends - I don't want to f* them up by redesigning the cab to accomodate the ribbons. Won't - and couldn't - do it. Massive redesign.

However, (OMG, here I go...) that ribbon sound added an aesthetic, namely (warning: subjective term follows!) *space*.

The ribbon opened the soundstage immeasurably. It ruined me and I am all f*'d up now. I loved the speaks before the ribbons, now I am thrashing.

I am thinking about adding (ala VonSchweikert) an *ambience* driver (a Bohlender 3" ribbon tweet) on the rear of the cab with its own LPAD to *open* up the soundstage like the 40” did.

It would be crossed over same as the Usher tweet, out of phase and LPAD'ed.

Am I misguided? Wouldn't a little adjustable, delayed, ribbon-floaty, high end, be pleasant?

Okay, wait, before you start, I know about the time alignment issue, etc…, but, real world, wouldn't it sound nice?

Do you think they'd add the *floatiness* I am looking for, or do you think would they just muddy things up?

You could always turn it off...

Thanks for entertaining my eccentric question.

Regards,
Tom
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2007, 09:00 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
ScottTracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
was there a back plate on the BGs? i.e. what I'm really getting at is were they acting as dipoles? If so, then maybe that's your answer. That is, that adding a small planar driver in phase on the back of your existing speakers probably won't help you achieve anything like the same thing. Also, if you were using it with the back plate on, the dispersion pattern is that of a (pseudo) linesource which, once again isn't IMO going to be replicated with a second driver. If you have the money to spend, however, it wouldn't hurt to try and I'd be interestedt o know the result because it's always possible that what you liked was a result of a better power response.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2007, 12:02 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: east coast
Default Hi Scott

The BG was indeed running "backless" and, for a short window, I actually do have the money to try a pair of the BG planar 3". I'll let you know what happens. Worst case I can return 'em and go back to the drawing board. lol

Thanks,
Tom
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2007, 03:32 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Preston, Idaho
In my experience, in those cases where a rear-firing tweeter improves the power response it is generally beneficial, and in those cases where it degrades the power response it is not.

Distance from the rear wall is also a consideration, as in general reverberant energy arriving within 10 milliseconds of the direct sound is detrimental from either in imaging or a coloration standpoint (or both), while reverberant energy arriving later than 10 milliseconds is usually beneficial (assuming its spectral balance is not drastically different from that of the first-arrival sound).

I'd want to look pretty closely at the radiation patterns when bringing in a rear-firing tweeter. Most speakers with direct-radiator drivers have a relative excess of reverberant field energy in the lower end of the tweeter's range (typically 3-4 kHz - right where the ear is most sensitive), and in my opinion you do not want to add even more reverberant energy in this region.

Duke
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2007, 11:45 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: east coast
Default Hi audiokenesis,

I agree. I am looking to *open* the sound up, not *sharpen* it.

The tweeter in my loudspeakers (Usher 9950-C) is crossed over @ 4Kh off a CSS WR-125 @ 500Hz-4Khz. So I anticipate no problem with a harsh upper telephone band.

I will LPAD he ambience tweeter as well.

Do you think it should be in-phase or 180 out? @ 180 out won't the tweeter pair mimic dipole radiation?

Thanks,
Tom
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2007, 05:41 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Preston, Idaho
Ptwining, note that a direct-radiator that has a flat on-axis response will generally have a power response that falls by 6 dB per octave with increasing frequency. All you will hear of the rear-firing tweeter is its power response, so design your crossover for it with power response rather than on-axis response in mind.

It doesn't matter whether the rear-firing tweeter is in-phase or out-of-phase, as by the time its radiation gets to you subtle timing cues are of no consequence. Also, at those short wavelengths relative to the enclosure size dipoles and bipoles will have the same radiation pattern for all practical purposes.

Duke
  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
Flat cone drivers - opinions? chuck55 Full Range 10 18th November 2013 02:39 PM
Rear firing "ambience" supertweeter? JoshuaTechnomage Full Range 6 24th May 2009 09:00 PM
Adding a rear Ambience tweeter Jamesuk1 Full Range 4 23rd October 2008 06:55 PM
Opinions on Peerless 831510 and Morel MW1075 drivers DeonC Multi-Way 0 16th January 2004 08:31 AM
Looking for unbiased opinions on Davis Acoustics drivers sardonx Multi-Way 0 26th November 2003 07:09 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:21 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