S12 OB - Returning to true OB - Page 4 - 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 5th December 2009, 06:32 AM   #31
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Default Wing vs no wing

This is the measurement of baffle with no structural wing (my reason for wing is not for bass extension but physical support). It's somewhat similiar to the Phoenix, just a bit narrower.

No structural wing:

Click the image to open in full size.


With wing:

Click the image to open in full size.


Immediately we can see the typical smooth response of narrow open baffle. 6db drop is also clearly formed as well as the dipole peak. The smoothness ends between 1khz-2khz (first null) where the response widens, shown as bunched up lines.

With no wings, this occurence occurs a bit higher, perhaps 100 or 200hz or so. This is expected because the wings created some extra path length.

More interesting is the difference in directivity. The wings actually made the response wider. The no-wings have more directivity. It is also very important to observe here that both have smooth response up to the first null. Also the wing provided a somewhat smoother response after 1khz.

I think I'm quite happy to find that the difference between having structural wing and no wing is quite negligible.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com

Last edited by gainphile; 5th December 2009 at 06:36 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2009, 06:46 AM   #32
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Default Back-to-back dipole tweeter response

I also took some measurement on back-to-back tweeter setup which is a common approach for a typical orion-ish setup. I haven't done careful measurements before knowing that it would be bad anyway and is the achilles heel of such setup.

Click the image to open in full size.

It's pretty bad and the response is all over the place.

When walking around the speakers with the tweeters playing pink noise I hear null from the sides. But it's different. The null is abrupt as shown in the last line. I'm not sure whether the null is due to dipole cancellation or simply the directivity of the tweeters.

I hope one day to replicate mige0's dipole tweeter setup and see.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2009, 10:20 AM   #33
Rudolf is online now Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by gainphile View Post
This is the measurement of baffle with no structural wing
Very interesting results, indeed.
Could you give us a picture of the back of the baffle too? Just to have a better idea how those 4 cm strips are placed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gainphile View Post
I also took some measurement on back-to-back tweeter setup ...
I hope one day to replicate mige0's dipole tweeter setup and see.
I know that this is mainly semantics, but mige0's dipole tweeter is no tweeter dipole. If the distance of the two dipole sources is much longer than the wavelength, both sources get de-correlated. In fact it would not make a real difference whether they would be dipole or bipole. There will be directivity because of the waveguide, but hardly any dipole loss IMHO.

If you want tweeters with real dipole characteristics, they have to get as small as ever possible.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2009, 12:09 PM   #34
JandG is offline JandG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Washington State
Have you tried running that mid driver free-air on top or on side with tweeter below & measure that..? maybe you could just remove & mock it up with existing baffle ..?
Joe
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2009, 09:36 AM   #35
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
Very interesting results, indeed.
Could you give us a picture of the back of the baffle too? Just to have a better idea how those 4 cm strips are placed.


I know that this is mainly semantics, but mige0's dipole tweeter is no tweeter dipole. If the distance of the two dipole sources is much longer than the wavelength, both sources get de-correlated. In fact it would not make a real difference whether they would be dipole or bipole. There will be directivity because of the waveguide, but hardly any dipole loss IMHO.

If you want tweeters with real dipole characteristics, they have to get as small as ever possible.
No worries. This is what they look like from the back, and there's nothing special about the wings. One potential problem is resonance. I tapped on them using small mallet and I thought I can hear them radiate sounds. Perhaps some bracing will be needed (a triangular stuff every 20cm or so).

Click the image to open in full size.


About the tweeter region, I'm not too fussed whether the ideal tweeters are operating as dipole or not, as long as the polar response is smooth. Something like Geddes' plots, only front to back. Am I thinking correctly?
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2009, 03:12 PM   #36
Rudolf is online now Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by gainphile View Post
No worries.
Certainly not.
I was just curious, because your first picture did not show any evidence of wings whatsoever.

Quote:
About the tweeter region, I'm not too fussed whether the ideal tweeters are operating as dipole or not, as long as the polar response is smooth. Something like Geddes' plots, only front to back. Am I thinking correctly?
As I said - just semantics. Of course you are 'thinking correctly' if you go for best CD, regardless of dipole or not.
Indeed I´m not sure whether the other aspects of dipoles would be compelling enough for me, if there would be no built-in CD.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2009, 03:47 PM   #37
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Zürich
just a small question: what does CD stand for? (I don't think it is compact disc...)
__________________
my surname is indeed 'de Best': neither misspelling nor snobbism! Ask SY!
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2009, 06:22 PM   #38
Davey is offline Davey  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Bremerton, WA.
Constant Directivity.

Dave.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2010, 09:37 AM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Post Conclusion ...!

Dipole Active Crossover

Click the image to open in full size.

Much of the functions are clearly explained at Linkwitzlab website. What is unique is the need to compensate early rolloff of the Seas L21RNXP. The midrange exhibit some coloration due metal cone breakup harmonics and this would be the same even if the more expensive W22EX is used. It is not always audible and only appears in certain recording material.

Seas L21RNXP is an excellent unit aside from the normal metal resonance, however they have been discontinued. Seas L22RNXP is the drop-in replacement. Forget exotic drivers such as the W22, I may as well build the Orion. Why use metal cones then? Well the audible transparency of those drivers is unmatched. They are pistonic until that breakup arrives.

Hivi K1 tweeters exhibited very low distortion and excellent dispersion when crossed at 2.2khz or above with LR4. The tweeters could easily be substituted with something else, as long as the units have excellent distortion and dispersion. With those criteria it's hard to beat the cost of K1 ($12). Better tweeters would have allowed me to cross lower and help reduce midrange breakup coloration, but not much. Ideally 8" metal cones like L21/22 or W22 should only be used below 800hz.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2010, 10:03 AM   #40
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Post Construction

Click the image to open in full size.

The side panels are not to increase acoustic path length as normally done by dipoles with "wings". They are for structural reasons, and generally the narrower the better. Although they are very narrow indeed (4.2cm) the midrange section should not be obstructed. I have observed audible midrange coloration if the side panels are simply extended through the midrange height, although I do not see it in the measurement. This could be a very high Q resonance which are hidden by diffraction effects in measurements.

The cavity for rear tweeter must be blocked, otherwise it forms a resonator. Stuffing the cavity using polyfill only helped marginally. It has to be angled to minimise diffraction issues with the midrange.

Click the image to open in full size.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  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
Our webmaster Dan (Audiofreak) is retiring, returning later as a moderator Jason Site Announcements 53 26th July 2011 04:01 PM
True-RMS? star882 Parts 8 1st June 2007 02:35 AM
Returning member TubeHound Introductions 4 20th May 2007 08:04 PM
Is it true? rick57 Digital Source 4 31st October 2006 08:50 AM
Returning fanatic LawWolf Introductions 4 14th July 2006 01:43 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:31 AM.


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