|
Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | diyAudio Store | Blogs | Gallery | Wiki | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
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 |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#21 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: ny
|
![]()
Very nice test. I would also be interested in seeing the difference between dipole and sealed mids at 1k.
Can box effects explain some of what you are seeing?
__________________
Scott |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
Does it seem reasonable to assume that room pressurization is causing a different phenomenon other than the excitation of room modes? I would assume that monopole pressurization causes more structural borne resonance. (EG: Drywall resonating.)
|
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
|
Quote:
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
|
Quote:
Dr. Geddes has some extensive knowledge in this area, maybe he can address this concern? -David |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#25 | |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
|
Quote:
I've also heard and "cobbled together" both very good AND bad multi-subs configurations, where both results (good and bad) were *irrespective* of how much or little the freq. uniformity was ("flat") at lower freq.s. On the best monopoles be it, single "subs", "non-uniform" multiple "subs", or a stereo pair, I often come away with this impression: "I notice modal problems, especially when entering/exiting a high/low amplitude deviation area, and yet despite this the sound is fantastic." (..or something like that.) Of course a *good* multi-sub setup can give you both uniformity AND excellent sound (that is not specifically accredited to uniformity). The one thing that I've found where a Dipole can be superior is with respect to apparent channel separation at lower freq.s. Those side-nulls between sources seem to make a difference in the mid-bass region, providing a marginal yet distinct enhancement in clarity with respect to lateral image placement.
__________________
perspective is everything |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
|
I'll present this link for those interested. http://www.musicanddesign.com/Dipole_modesA.html
We have been through all this before so i don't care to enter the discussion again. However, I will say, as shown in the analysis, that the major difference between dipoles, monopoles and cardioids are that dipoles will not excite the 0,0,0 mode (not room pressurization). Monopoles and cardioids will. With regard to excitation of modes, dipoles may excite fewer, depending on position, but dipoles are also the most sensitive to placement and orientation in that regard. Cardioids are least sensitive to position. Lastly, cardioids and dipoles radiate less power into the room assuming they have the same on axis free field response. At this time I find that the major differences between the sound of different woofer systems is due the radiated power and the the room pressurization effects, and room pressurization may be the biggest issue, positive or negative, as the case may be. Also consider: http://www.musicanddesign.com/DP_woofer_room.html
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO dsp Dipole Loudspeakers. |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
|
Hi John
No disagreement, I don't think, but I am confused with what you mean by "room pressurization" - especially when you say that the 0,0,0 mode is NOT room pressurization. Then, when we clear up that deffinition, what do you mean by "room pressurization effects"?
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
|
"(not room pressurization)." was a typo. No "not". Room pressurization is the same old same old. Monopoles and cardioids have a finite volume displacement. Dipoles have a net volume displacement of zero. I know, rooms leak, but put a dipole in a small room and the bass will not be over loaded below the room's first non-zero mode, or room fundamental, what every you want to call it.
Frankly I think this is one of the basic reasons people find dipole bass so "different". I have been in a lot of rooms where the woofers are just overloading the room below the fundamental and the bass is mud. Put a dipole woofer in there with the same free field on axis response and things sound immediately better, cleaner, better defined. But correct the overloading with a monopole and there isn't a lot of difference. That's why I said room pressurization can be a plus or minus.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO dsp Dipole Loudspeakers. |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: City of Angles
|
Thanks to the OP for the measurements - I think they are very telling of typical low frequency driver implementations. I recently been doing in room measurements, and have been pretty shocked to see what happens in the bass. I'm going to do a little write up soon, but my opinion now is that in room measurements are very necessary.
Quote:
Thanks John for this series of articles - reading them was my impetus for doing measurements - one of the things I found was that, measured at my listening position of about 3m, my h-frame woofers response changed little with substantial rotation about its center (+/- 30deg), and I had to move things many feet to get largely different interference patterns at the listening position (I might add my 'room' is not rectangular and relatively large). But more to follow later...
__________________
double complete rainbow all the way!! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#30 | |
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
|
Quote:
__________________
www.dipolplus.de |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Getting Dipole bass out of a monopole subwoofer | Hara | Subwoofers | 19 | 3rd January 2016 10:00 PM |
Omnipole, monopole, dipole and...nopole?? | terry j | Multi-Way | 25 | 1st July 2007 03:28 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? |