Isobaric driver orientation: which is best? - Page 2 - 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 1st December 2001, 07:07 AM   #11
walker is offline walker  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Perth West Australia
Send a message via ICQ to walker
Saying that an isobaric speaker is 6dB down compared to a single driver can be misleading. Acoustically an isobaric speaker is 3dB down on a single driver, but thatís only half the story, the output will change from that depending on the connections and amp impedance.

Letís say the amp has low output impedance and can deliver twice the power into a 4ohm load than it can into an 8ohm load, a perfect voltage amplifier, (usually not far from the truth). Then the output will be about the same if the drivers are wired in parallel, (the amps output will have doubled to make up for the 3dB loss). If the drivers are wired in series, (16ohm, not common) the amps output will have halved and the output dropped by 6dB. That is if the volume is not altered.

Isobarics are not the first choice for efficiency! They are small, generally high quality, low frequency speakers.

Have I missed something? Iím sure youíll let me know

Regards WALKER
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st December 2001, 01:28 PM   #12
Warp Engineer
On Holiday
 
AudioFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
Thanks walker ..... you are correct .....
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd December 2001, 06:01 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: DC
Quote:
Originally posted by AudioFreak
clamshell is best ..... the others sound worse and will kill your drivers quicker.
i thought the only diff. was that in clamshell, any movement irregularities in a particular model's suspension are canceled since one is going "backwards" while the other is going "forwards" (and vice versa)- and of course, a smaller/tighter air piston in clams provides for less chance of uncoupling (iso = equal, baric = pressure).

Quote:
Originally posted by AudioFreak
in the clamshell config, you will get nothing but bass from the speaker all the rest gets cancelled.
ummm, i'm not sure about this. one would still need a x-over. i think you're thinking of a clamshell isobaric in a 4th order bandpass like this one:

Click the image to open in full size.

Quote:
Originally posted by AudioFreak
also, in the clamshell config, you dont get a higher spl because there is 2 drivers, infact you get less. The output will be -6dB when compared to a single driver so you will need more power.
but if you're using 2 drivers and wire them (or their VC's) in parallel, one can often get more power out of you amp (if it's stable) so the -6db (i thought it was -3db?) would be a worst case.--- [edit] yes, just saw walkers post, it should be 'the same' volume as one driver if your amp can double in ouput with the drivers wired in parallel. so if you amp can hang there is NO loss in output.

Quote:
Originally posted by AudioFreak
dont use a ported box ...... it's just not worth the trouble for an isobarik speaker.
i'd build one if the individual driver(s) would be better suited for a ported enclosure. just think of it as a ported box that is 1/2 the size that needs twice the power.



[Edited by hakalugi on 12-04-2001 at 02:54 PM]
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd December 2001, 06:09 PM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: DC
Default Re: WARNING!

Quote:
Originally posted by BAM
How many watts will you be driving your Isobaric-coupled woofers with? You should either change the design to a sealed box or use fewer watts. My Sledgehammer subwoofer used a ported box with clamshell woofers, back before I knew better. It sounds okay, but I found that it's easy to overdrive the woofers to the point where the voice coil former strikes the backplate, possibly damaging my woofers. Also, please make sure your box is the right size. My Sledgehammer subwoofer (soon to be replaced by the new American Thunder subwoofer) has a box that is 1.5 times the size it should be, and I think I may be sacrificing output and flat frequency response. This is my other reason for building my new subwoofer.

Either sealed box or fewer watts.
i think you're mixing things here.

the damage/bottoming out are not caused by the isobaric configuration. (going isobaric only alters the Vas, Z and Pmax of the sub system).

if your box is too big, it's too big. i'm not sure if it was too big to begin with, but if it was a stock box and you added a second (identical) woofer in clamshell... the box is now definitely too big

anyways, an isobaric design should be HARDER to bottom out than a traditional ported box because:

1) i takes twice the power
2) if it's clamshell, the workings of the spider and surround at it's limits are supported by the nature of the suspension in the 'other' driver at the opposite extreme. (ie: going 'non linear' or out of the gap, a driver might be 'better' going out than 'back'- but if they're face to face, you've always got one driver going 'out')

it the VC was smacking, sounds like you needed a high-pass subsonic filter or need to recalc. your port tuning frequency- you're prob. unloading the sub.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2001, 07:36 PM   #15
Dave is offline Dave  New Zealand
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New Zealand
Won't mounting the drivers face to face (clamshell) provide some degree of distortion cancelation?

Would you guys say that Isobarics would generally give better sound than a standard configuration?
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2001, 07:53 PM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: DC
Quote:
Originally posted by Dave
Won't mounting the drivers face to face (clamshell) provide some degree of distortion cancelation?
if the distortion is caused by suspension induced anomolies at the extremes of it's travel, then yes- which is why i mention the clam being better than the 'in-phase' tunnel type- there, there's no face-2-face suspension canceling.

but understand- when face-2-face, they're wired out of phase, so that act as 1 piston together- so nothing 'acoustically' is cancelled.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2001, 12:20 AM   #17
Warp Engineer
On Holiday
 
AudioFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
in clamshell configuration, it is only half true to say that nothing acoustically is cancelled .... by design clamshell are only capable oh low bass any of the higher frequencies are indeed canceled because there is no driver with its cone facing outward.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2001, 05:45 AM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Thatch_Ear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Dallas,Tx
Default isobaric

Trying to get a picture in my mind on this. It is best to clamshell in a non-ported box of 1/2 the volume that would be used for one driver. OK. Is the magnet and basket of the outside, out of phase to the rest of the system driver just sticking out into the room?
__________________
Thatch
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2001, 07:33 AM   #19
Warp Engineer
On Holiday
 
AudioFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Queensland, Australia
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by AudioFreak
clamshell is best ..... the others sound worse and will kill your drivers quicker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i thought the only diff. was that in clamshell, any movement irregularities in a particular model's suspension are canceled since one is going "backwards" while the other is going "forwards" (and vice versa)- and of course, a smaller/tighter air piston in clams provides for less chance of uncoupling (iso = equal, baric = pressure).

that isn't the only difference .... Read http://www.jlaudio.com/tutorials/isobarik/

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by AudioFreak
in the clamshell config, you will get nothing but bass from the speaker all the rest gets cancelled.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ummm, i'm not sure about this. one would still need a x-over. i think you're thinking of a clamshell isobaric in a 4th order bandpass like this one:

No, I'm not thinking of a bandpass enclosure I was infact thinking about any clamshell isobarik speaker. Yeah, you'll still need an x-over so the sound is cleaner but frequencies higher than bass cannot be reproduced by a speaker system that does not have a driver openly facing outward. The clamshell config has a second driver in the way of the driver which is facing outward and hence cant produce anything above bass.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by AudioFreak
also, in the clamshell config, you dont get a higher spl because there is 2 drivers, infact you get less. The output will be -6dB when compared to a single driver so you will need more power.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but if you're using 2 drivers and wire them (or their VC's) in parallel, one can often get more power out of you amp (if it's stable) so the -6db (i thought it was -3db?) would be a worst case.--- [edit] yes, just saw walkers post, it should be 'the same' volume as one driver if your amp can double in ouput with the drivers wired in parallel. so if you amp can hang there is NO loss in output.

Yep, you got it... I stated above that i got it wrong

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by AudioFreak
dont use a ported box ...... it's just not worth the trouble for an isobarik speaker.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i'd build one if the individual driver(s) would be better suited for a ported enclosure. just think of it as a ported box that is 1/2 the size that needs twice the power.

It aint that easy you'll probably have to do a few simulations to ensure that you get the best combination of SPL for your Xmax and anyway, isobaric does better in a sealed enclosure.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2001, 11:25 AM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Milano, Italy
Some comments about this topic, according to my experience

Sorry, I don't know how to insert pictures in the message, so I've attached a small Excel file with some draft!

Driver Isobaric configuration

- configuring the cones in opposite physical shape (i.e. clamshell) you should have a 'mechanical' reduction of even order distortion, assuming you use identical speakers. Honestly, I never made comparative tests, so I can't say if this theory brings effective 'listening' results!

- clamshell configuration provides the bigger distance between magnets (they could interfer if too close)

- Clamshell is not indicated if you want to deliver freq. above 100-150hz max. (frame and magnet interferences with radiation)

- A rule of thumb in isobarik configuration is to keep the 'shared' air volume as small as possible. In clamshell this air volume is the 'double cone' generated by diaphgram of the 2 drivers.
So if you choose config. like B or C (see file) try to eliminate dead volumes in the isobarik box.

- If you plan high power driving for long time (i.e. PA or disco use) the clamshell configuration allows a better cooling of the coils: both magnet faces a big air volume. In other configurations (i.e. Linn) one of the magnets is in the small isobarik chamber, while the other is in abigger volume. This means their temp will be different.
(VC temperature changes the speaker parameters, i.e voice coil resistance and so Q factors etc. In the worst case your system will work with 2 drivers that are not identical anymore)


Excursion plot behaviour:

Sealed box: increasing with decrease of freq.

Vented box: similar to sealed, but with a minimum at the system resonance frequency

Bandpass 4th order (or coupled cavity) : like vented box, minimum at RS of the reflex box

Bandpass 6th order (i.e Bose's acoustimass) : 2 minimum at RS of the 2 reflex tuning

The real values for excursion must be calculated for the actual system, they depend on several parameters (box volume, speaker, quantity of filler etc.). There are softwares who do nicely the job.
Attached Files
File Type: txt esc.txt (24.5 KB, 54 views)
  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
Question about proper orientation of Q5,Q6 F5 driver board qboneus Pass Labs 3 20th August 2009 07:00 PM
Driver orientation for T/S parameters Buzzy Subwoofers 2 7th May 2008 02:39 PM
Port And Driver Orientation? jpvt68 Subwoofers 7 7th April 2008 10:30 PM
Looking for a copy of Adireaudio's Driver Orientation pdf? TimA Subwoofers 3 2nd August 2007 12:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:53 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