Your system sure sounds impressive...do you mind posting some pictures to inspire others
Not at all. But I'm afraid you can't hear pictures.
Attachments
True. But - dipoles do trigger the room modes somewhat less, and do result in both smoother frequency response and less ringing at low frequencies - the decay is lower in level than with monopoles.
I believe this is indeed audible.
I have proven it to myself on several occasions, that is good enough for me. I have no intention at all to write an AES paper on this.....
I used to be very much against dipoles, and especially dipole bass... that was until I did some measurements on dipoles vs monopoles. It was an eye-opener to say the least.
Regarding output - I have always used a "house-curve" that rises 10 dB from 200 Hz down to 20 Hz. I still have that curve now, and my dipoles are certainly able to produce significant output at 20 Hz.
I used to be very much against dipoles, and especially dipole bass... that was until I did some measurements on dipoles vs monopoles. It was an eye-opener to say the least.
Regarding output - I have always used a "house-curve" that rises 10 dB from 200 Hz down to 20 Hz. I still have that curve now, and my dipoles are certainly able to produce significant output at 20 Hz.
It's still quite subjectively. There are always manye questions that can be raised. Like for instance: Where both done with the same exact same bass treatment in the room? Where both placed optimally? Do they deliver the same SPL? Was the monopole correctly built?I have proven it to myself on several occasions, that is good enough for me. I have no intention at all to write an AES paper on this.....
I used to be very much against dipoles, and especially dipole bass... that was until I did some measurements on dipoles vs monopoles. It was an eye-opener to say the least.
Regarding output - I have always used a "house-curve" that rises 10 dB from 200 Hz down to 20 Hz. I still have that curve now, and my dipoles are certainly able to produce significant output at 20 Hz.
Others have the opposite experience and we are just as far. I do agree though that there may be indications of experiences of dipoles being somewhat easier on rooms. But the reason may just as much have to do with less output, weakness with the building of monopoles or something else. There's nothing objectively and definity answers out there that I've seen.
What you have is pretty crazy by the way.
It underlines how inefficient dipoles are.Sixteen.
SD is nearly the size of your room's floor
I'd think a double bass array would have been more practical with better performance. Or was "stereo bass" one of the design goals?
sure, if that was to be the only trade off, I would be happy with that.
I also hope we lead this thread to a conclusion this time!
Thank you for posting that.
The response is much more even with the dipoles. Below 50 Hz a shorter decay too, but not much difference and this could change with moving the mic/position some. Above 50 Hz the decay is shorter with the monopoles. Are the subs crossed low?
But here's something that makes me wonder about the measurement with the monopole. You have a resonance at around 5kHz that's about as strong at the one at 50Hz. Considering you have a very dampened room, this shouldn't be so.
The response is much more even with the dipoles. Below 50 Hz a shorter decay too, but not much difference and this could change with moving the mic/position some. Above 50 Hz the decay is shorter with the monopoles. Are the subs crossed low?
But here's something that makes me wonder about the measurement with the monopole. You have a resonance at around 5kHz that's about as strong at the one at 50Hz. Considering you have a very dampened room, this shouldn't be so.
When it comes to decay and resonances I would say the monopoles performs overall better. They are noticeable better between 70-200 Hz. The frequency response is clearly improved with the dipoles. Would be interesting to see what change of placements of both subs and sitting postion would do.
The difference is not what it seems, because the overall response from the monopole is uneven, and this affects the level of the decay as well. It may look like the decay is lower, but this is only because the speaker level is also lower. It would have been easier to compare the two if the monopole was EQ'ed to a flat response.
One other thing is that the dipole room decay starts at a level 15-20 dB below the speaker, while the monopole starts at the same level as the speaker.
One other thing is that the dipole room decay starts at a level 15-20 dB below the speaker, while the monopole starts at the same level as the speaker.
Thanks Wavebourn.
BTW, why do you prefer arrays over single very high efficiency drivers, when comparable SPL can be reached by both in the home environment with no possibility comb filtering with the single driver. Unless you say that you used multiple high efficiency drivers in the array !!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.