The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers

Ex-Moderator R.I.P.
Joined 2005
It doesn't matter what exactly tinitus had said over there.

I hope not :umbrella:

and it is kind of difficult to describe a 'speaker' having all its drivers scattered over the floor :p
even bumping around, occationally :D
but dammit, it works
if only it didnt, and I could just 'throw it away'

fortunately there's someone who wants it
and my task is to put it in a more practical construction
now, the interesting part is whether it looses or gains from this
well, each 'speaker' holds a 15" and a 10", as well as a 2" 'tweeter
15" on the back
the job is to make it look like nothing
or in other words, something discrete
they dont want it
and hate it even more if doesnt sound good :rolleyes:

obviously this is not a highend thing
is just something that spreads nice music in a living room, all day long, if needed
hell, a tiny 2way placed close to the ceiling could that too
but not with bass like this one
I hope to reveal the details later, if worth it
 

Attachments

  • DIPOL omni.JPG
    DIPOL omni.JPG
    20.9 KB · Views: 373
  • Dipole Jesper.JPG
    Dipole Jesper.JPG
    71.6 KB · Views: 379
Yes I'm aware of white paper white_paper but I cannot see any figures there, they are blank.

- Elias

basically the following is the whole "theory", easy to comprehend even without the missing pictures (I have seen them couple of years ago before they disappeared, nothing special):

In stereo, an exact and precise "image" of the orchestra is desired: violins on the left, cello and bass on the right, and so on. Such an image is best produced when at least 10 milliseconds of the first-arrival energy is delivered to the listener with no overlap of sound from image speakers to produce confusion.

180 degree cylindrical wave speakers meet this criterion. No near reflection paths are present and no near image speakers appear. All four image speakers are far enough away from the primary speakers for a clear and unencumbered packet of first-arrival energy to be perceived. A precise stereo image is formed.

sounds pretty standard - the aim is "first 10 ms free from reflected sound", a conclusion that even Dr Geddes would approve :D
 
Hi tinitus,

Are you reinventing the wheel, like me? :D

Innerworld Audio - Whaferdale SFB3

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.



- Elias


I hope not :umbrella:

and it is kind of difficult to describe a 'speaker' having all its drivers scattered over the floor :p
even bumping around, occationally :D
but dammit, it works
if only it didnt, and I could just 'throw it away'

fortunately there's someone who wants it
and my task is to put it in a more practical construction
now, the interesting part is whether it looses or gains from this
well, each 'speaker' holds a 15" and a 10", as well as a 2" 'tweeter
15" on the back
the job is to make it look like nothing
or in other words, something discrete
they dont want it
and hate it even more if doesnt sound good :rolleyes:

obviously this is not a highend thing
is just something that spreads nice music in a living room, all day long, if needed
hell, a tiny 2way placed close to the ceiling could that too
but not with bass like this one
I hope to reveal the details later, if worth it
 
It appers to me that Beveridge has the same faults as stereo triangle in inconsistent pinna cues with the intended phantom which destroys the imaging when turning the head sideways. To me this is not acceptable.

Ok, flooder then, how does it fit in the 10ms camp? :)

As I measured my floor placed 2-way speaker facing the ceiling I get multiple reflections before 10ms. See posts 1484 - 1485.

I understand Beveridge was extensively to eliminate the reflections.

- Elias

basically the following is the whole "theory", easy to comprehend even without the missing pictures (I have seen them couple of years ago before they disappeared, nothing special):



sounds pretty standard - the aim is "first 10 ms free from reflected sound", a conclusion that even Dr Geddes would approve :D
 
It appers to me that Beveridge has the same faults as stereo triangle in inconsistent pinna cues with the intended phantom which destroys the imaging when turning the head sideways. To me this is not acceptable.

well, frankly speaking, the only thing I consider myself unacceptable is bad sound
I say break all the rules! keep just this one - what sucks is out

theoretical positions of Beveridge interest me as much as theoretical positions of Schupbach - that is not at all :D

Ok, flooder then, how does it fit in the 10ms camp? :)
(...)
See posts 1484 - 1485.

well, that totally depends on room size and the overall geometry of the arrangement
for calculation of reflection delays achievable in a rather small room (350 cm wide and 550 cm long) see post 1 ;)


The positioning would give very early reflections (VER) <1 ms from adjacent wall. (...)
Apart from those (...)
- significant reflections off the adjacent wall would not reach the listener
- floor reflection would not reach the listener
- first reflections off the front wall and off the back wall would reach the listener 9.3 ms after the first wavefront
- first reflections off opposite walls would reach the listener 8.3 ms after the first wavefront
- first reflections off the ceiling would reach the listener 8.8 ms after the first wavefront (ear at height of 90 cm, ceiling at height of 300 cm)

of course in bigger room, different setup arrangement, higher delays are achievable

but I don't think it is at all needed because just as in case of back-to-back with flooders I can walk around the room, so reflection patterns constantly changing, and the sound images remain stable just there

so I don't know what is the operating principle, what about HRTF, pinna functions and so on

but it works
 
here is Bremen - a Swedish flooder :
Bremen

a request to Swedish users - can anyone check this Bremen thing?

here is an enthusiastic review of a presentation at Swedish Hi End 2011 Show:
| NOMONO

google translated excerpt:
And did you miss this room - shame on you, we had an experience that I did not think possible with a sound stage where you just go straight into the music walls, rooms and ceilings disappear simply and you find yourself directly in the middle of the events. I do not know how it worked when the room was full of people, but when we were there it was sensational, simply.

and two pictures - close-up and sidewall placement, similar in that to Beveridge, although the company doesn't recommend any specific placement
 

Attachments

  • Bremen flooder close-up.jpg
    Bremen flooder close-up.jpg
    29.1 KB · Views: 257
  • Bremen flooder side placement.jpg
    Bremen flooder side placement.jpg
    78.4 KB · Views: 1,091
Last edited:
Beautiful and elegant as it is, I still see there's something to improve. I think there're chances to choose smaller tweeters to free up the space around the midbass unit (to reduce nearby reflections). As to all those sharp edges near the drivers, I'm not sure how diffractions would affect such design -- Or, is it built like this on purpose? Like a diffraction slot in a CD horn? (wow! )

In their web site I see the grile (the perforated frame) seems to be another source of diffraction. Maybe it has to be that way to maintain the overall shape, or the diffraction is built-in on purpose?
 
Beautiful and elegant as it is, I still see there's something to improve. I think there're chances to choose smaller tweeters to free up the space around the midbass unit (to reduce nearby reflections). As to all those sharp edges near the drivers, I'm not sure how diffractions would affect such design -- Or, is it built like this on purpose? Like a diffraction slot in a CD horn? (wow! )

In their web site I see the grile (the perforated frame) seems to be another source of diffraction. Maybe it has to be that way to maintain the overall shape, or the diffraction is built-in on purpose?

I believe that all those characteristic features are deliberate design choices but I also believe that a sidewall flooder can be made to work without them
 
I have just encountered a dipole 'flooder'
http://classicaudio.ru/articles/assystem.pdf

looks like there is a kind of theory of asymmetric stereo and the system is a deliberate implementation if it
but obviously the reviewer didn't like it

proponent of the theory on russian forums is a guy Mikhail Urakoff ( my free transcitpion)
I don't know what to think, Urakoff is clearly a vintage nut and also a technical advisor of Kogerer company: Kogerer - HI-END

He builds his own giantic speakers (quite Hartleyan, ~50 in diameter) with wooden cones - woodmonitor - and apparently likes to play them unbaffled just lying on the floor

I attach two picture taken in his apartment
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0220.jpg
    DSC_0220.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 409
  • DSC_0240.jpg
    DSC_0240.jpg
    109.8 KB · Views: 408
Wow!

In this highly anarchic state (of listening room...), it's the evidence that the theory of stereo asymmetry is the only way to compensate the ambient disorganization.

very funny :rolleyes:

well, it is clear that on the second picture we can see Gospodin Urakoff's glue-and-solder-area, not His listening room, isn't it quite obvious?

don't You think Mr forget-systematically-never-seen-and-never-done-So-no-valuable-opinion? ;)

OTOH when one stops laughing and looks carefully at the picture instead one can see some legendary and $$$ speakers inside like Klangfilm Bionor for example, Urakoff is not a hoaxter unlike some others, among them certain Mr haven't-seen-anything-tangible...
 
Last edited:
the idea looks great! how did it in practice?

The bass of the little HX135 rather sounded like 15" than like 5" and the tonal balance was really good (not measured, just subjective impression). Two drawbacks:
1) The bass is so directional that the floor position is only OK when you stand up
1) In the ceiling position the WAF is not high because the minimum size (l also tested smaller "enclosures") is 50 cm.