Unbaffled Dipole - Page 2 - 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 10th February 2010, 11:56 AM   #11
keyser is offline keyser  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
keyser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Netherlands
At the moment I'm using a combination of EQ on individual drivers and global EQ. I have done this all manually, but doing it from the computer seems a much easier way.

Tuning mainly by ear can lead to good results, but the combination of listening and measurements gets you there a lot quicker!
__________________
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" - Friedrich Nietzsche
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 12:06 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
StigErik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Ok, you seem to be knowing what you're doing here! I usually do a combination of individual and global EQ as well. I dial it all flat and nice by measurement, and then adjust the global EQ to taste, mainly by listening. Sometimes I assist with measurements just to check if I'm not too far off, or if there's something wrong I dont quite catch only by adjusting EQ based on listening.
__________________
dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 03:23 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon, USA
It's interesting to see these designs that are somewhat similar in concept Here's what mine currently looks like:

Click the image to open in full size.

Click the image to open in full size.

I don't have saved measurements of the full system yet, and I'm still playing with the crossover. Drivers are B&G Neo3PDRW, Audax PR170M0, AE OB12, crossover is a DCX. The bare PDR has a diffraction null around 7kHz that I need to try and address with foam, and I also need to think about how to move the tweeter back to better align it with the midrange acoustic center.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 12.jpg (77.7 KB, 2028 views)
File Type: jpg 13.jpg (86.8 KB, 2008 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2010, 03:31 PM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon, USA
Actually, I have some measurements I can share:

'Nude' Neo3PDRW:

Click the image to open in full size.

The full system polars from an earlier version. The bass drops off due to the gating. I didn't try to boost the 7kHz null, since that'll make the off-axis worse. I'll play with foam / felt and see what I can do. I think I ended up dropping the tweeter level 1-2dB after listening to this for a while.

Click the image to open in full size.

And the power average of the previous measurements:

Click the image to open in full size.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg bare neo3.jpg (72.2 KB, 1167 views)
File Type: jpg full system.jpg (76.9 KB, 1141 views)
File Type: jpg power average.jpg (63.3 KB, 1144 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 06:25 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Valentino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Nice work, keyser. I like the looks too.
And StigErik, if you have some measurements of my concoctions lying somewhere, please post.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 11:04 AM   #16
keyser is offline keyser  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
keyser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Saurav,

Looking good! Your plots show a small off-axis bump between 1 and 2 khz. The tweeter seems to be at blame. All in all you've been able to maintain CD from midrange to tweeter very well, though! Counting the number of curves in each plot I haven't been able to make sure which curve represents which angle. Would you please clarify?

Saturday I'll probably be in the opportunity to compare the Neo3W to the Neo3PDR. The Neo3W was chosen for this project because simulations indicated there would be less diffraction at high frequencies due to beaming of the tweeter. I reckoned I'd sacrifice top-octave response for smoother dispersion below 10 khz. In your plots the diffraction starting around 6 khz looks not much worse than the diffraction I'm measuring with the Neo3W. It's probably worth to investigate.
__________________
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" - Friedrich Nietzsche
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 12:36 PM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Excellent polar response! Please let us know which Neo is "best" after the experiments!

Having back-to-back dome tweeters is a love & hate relationship, and they couldn't produce something like your plots
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 02:12 PM   #18
keyser is offline keyser  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
keyser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Netherlands
I can understand the 'hate'-part when it comes to tot back-to-back dome tweeters, but I honestly don't understand why so many people still persist in using dual domes. Going that route was never seriously considered for my project, as there are too many complications without any apparent advantage over a dipole tweeter. Especially when a wonderful tweeter such as the Neo's can be had for only $40.

By the way, if there are more people now finding unbaffled dipoles to be the next step in the dipole evolution, why are people like Siegfried Linkwitz and John Kreskovsky not picking up the concept?
__________________
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies" - Friedrich Nietzsche
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 02:26 PM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
From what I read in linkwitzlab forum, it seems to have something to do with target SPL of 120db. Even with domes only few qualifies such as the millenium.

But I don't listen that loud.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 02:28 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
StigErik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
I agree that unbaffled dipoles is the "next step" compared to the traditional wide baffles, but an other step from unbaffled is to fully suspend the drivers. The means no small baffles, no mouting brackets, just hang the drivers in wire. Believe me - there is a lot to gain in sound quality by suspending the drivers this way.
__________________
dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles dipoles and dipoles
  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
Dipole Ribbon tweeter isolation from dipole mid-woofer array Bent Planars & Exotics 5 21st May 2009 01:10 PM
What about a dipole? 95Honda Subwoofers 4 12th April 2008 03:43 PM
(WW) MMTMM dipole 4 vs 3 way / dipole benefit frequencies? charliemouse Multi-Way 25 8th July 2007 12:19 AM
To dipole or not to dipole? Glowbug Multi-Way 3 17th August 2006 09:10 PM
When is a dipole not a dipole anymore? Bas Horneman Multi-Way 5 5th December 2003 04:02 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:06 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