|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | 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 |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Anonymityville
|
What things need to be considered when crossing a bipole with a dipole?
I will be using a 6.5" midrange/midbass (bipole setup) with dipole highs.The XO point will be ~2k.
__________________
"If you don't like funerals don't kick sand in Ninja's face." - Ninja |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
|
A bipole is a monopole without baffle step issues, IMHO.
Combining a monopole with a dipole results in a cardioid behaviour. JohnK provides some diagrams which show how the transition from xpole to ypole happens. Things get complicated for a crossover of 2 kHz, corresponding to a wavelength of 17 cm. Your bipole sources will be wider apart than that, so you need to keep the front and back time delay between the dipole source and the two bipole sources in mind. Rudolf
__________________
www.dipolplus.de |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Anonymityville
|
I will be using DSP software with time correction (allocator), so that shouldn't be too much of an issue.
Without knowing anything else about the drivers, would it be possible to recommend a xover slope? Would I be better off not using a bipole configuration and adjust for baffle step instead?
__________________
"If you don't like funerals don't kick sand in Ninja's face." - Ninja |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
|
It's not the same problem, but should give you the idea:
Offsetting a dipole driver is something which can not be corrected with time delay. Your dipole tweeter should be equidistant from both bipole drivers. Those location issues would not occur if you combine bipole woofers with dipole mids (talking about 200 Hz = 1.7 m wavelength). Since you are using DSP already: How about implementing your double 6.5" as a dipole midrange from 200 Hz to 2 kHz in an MTM config?
__________________
www.dipolplus.de |
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Anonymityville
|
Quote:
I would like to keep the mid drivers in a sealed box so they integrate better with the subs I will be using. Plus, the drivers have a very low Q. MTM won't work because of how large the "tweeter" is. Thank you for you input Rudolf.
__________________
"If you don't like funerals don't kick sand in Ninja's face." - Ninja |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Bipole, Dipole, and Chilliapedes | charliemouse | Multi-Way | 5 | 5th July 2007 05:39 PM |
| TB w4-1052SA bipole/dipole | kscharf | Multi-Way | 0 | 9th April 2007 04:12 PM |
| Bipole into Dipole? | Howard | Multi-Way | 1 | 30th January 2005 05:31 PM |
| which is better for rears in H/T dipole -bipole | busterno1 | Multi-Way | 0 | 16th January 2004 11:33 AM |
| Dipole/Bipole Designs? | Marcus | Multi-Way | 3 | 24th October 2002 03:15 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.08858 seconds (71.95% PHP - 28.05% MySQL) with 10 queries |