I would like you to tell me what do you think about my design, I will try to describe as exhaustly as I can all the decisions taken.
Loudspeaker system
These are a 3 way loudspeakers.
Tweeters (2 by cabinet) mounted in panel, in both front and rear directions. The one which points to the back of the loudspeaker is designed for make the high frequency sound less directivity through the reflexiones of the waves with the walls of the room. Connected in parallel and out of phase ( as Linkwitz did )
Woofers mounted in panel, also to get less directional sound .
Subwoofers(2 by cabinet) mounted in push pull configuration. Connected in parallel and out of phase.
Simulations:
64liters box for the subwoofers. Acceptable cone displacement. fs= 40Hz ( I will correct electronically the SPL so I will be able to play music till 20Hz). Simulations pictures are taken for 100 l internal box, but results doesnt change so much...
Simulations
Mechanical
I will use 3/4 inches ( 19mm ) DMF wood for building the cabinets. Each cabinet will weight about 30 or 40 kg ( without drivers!! )
External sizes of the cabinet 400mmx400mmx1250mm.
I will use 1/2 inches ( 12mm) DMF wood for internal structure to give the structure mechanical resistance.
In the following picture internal structure is not shown.
Pictures
I will use carpinter glue ( no screws in the cabinet ) . I will just use screws when attaching drivers to the cabinet.
Electronics
I will use DSP to make SPL as flat as possible. This will let me go frequencies lower than 40hz.
DSP
I will use 3 power amplifiers. One for each way.
Power Amplifier
Thank you all for your suggestions and advices!
Loudspeaker system
These are a 3 way loudspeakers.
Tweeters (2 by cabinet) mounted in panel, in both front and rear directions. The one which points to the back of the loudspeaker is designed for make the high frequency sound less directivity through the reflexiones of the waves with the walls of the room. Connected in parallel and out of phase ( as Linkwitz did )
Woofers mounted in panel, also to get less directional sound .
Subwoofers(2 by cabinet) mounted in push pull configuration. Connected in parallel and out of phase.
Simulations:
64liters box for the subwoofers. Acceptable cone displacement. fs= 40Hz ( I will correct electronically the SPL so I will be able to play music till 20Hz). Simulations pictures are taken for 100 l internal box, but results doesnt change so much...
Simulations
Mechanical
I will use 3/4 inches ( 19mm ) DMF wood for building the cabinets. Each cabinet will weight about 30 or 40 kg ( without drivers!! )
External sizes of the cabinet 400mmx400mmx1250mm.
I will use 1/2 inches ( 12mm) DMF wood for internal structure to give the structure mechanical resistance.
In the following picture internal structure is not shown.
Pictures
I will use carpinter glue ( no screws in the cabinet ) . I will just use screws when attaching drivers to the cabinet.
Electronics
I will use DSP to make SPL as flat as possible. This will let me go frequencies lower than 40hz.
DSP
I will use 3 power amplifiers. One for each way.
Power Amplifier
Thank you all for your suggestions and advices!
Mmmhh
push pull is not done that way, as the air is elastic and ....
Also tweeter mounting ... it depends on the project and it may give that extra 'sizzle'
or it might do nothing .
The idea of keeping the woofer free is good - free means not interfering with the natural
movement of the cone by putting boundaries near it- but I would still control the back emission , by putting some stuffing / sound absorber behind it.
push pull is not done that way, as the air is elastic and ....
Also tweeter mounting ... it depends on the project and it may give that extra 'sizzle'
or it might do nothing .
The idea of keeping the woofer free is good - free means not interfering with the natural
movement of the cone by putting boundaries near it- but I would still control the back emission , by putting some stuffing / sound absorber behind it.
push pull speakers
One of the goals of the project is research about how mounting two tweeters aftects to the sound.
No sound absorber is needed because the back emission will be use in order to get better sound in the front...
One of the goals of the project is research about how mounting two tweeters aftects to the sound.
No sound absorber is needed because the back emission will be use in order to get better sound in the front...
Most people don't have any clue of how music has to be reproduced, so I wouldn't spend money just to verify if a Java app works in reality ...
In most cases the magic rule is : keep it simple -which is already a big problem !
If you are going to experiment in dipole diffusion- I guess that's the goal of the design-
you may mount everything...well,not everything, just the two subwoofers- on a baffle .
The rest , I'd follow Stig Erik's way of suspending them with rubber bands .
In most cases the magic rule is : keep it simple -which is already a big problem !
If you are going to experiment in dipole diffusion- I guess that's the goal of the design-
you may mount everything...well,not everything, just the two subwoofers- on a baffle .
The rest , I'd follow Stig Erik's way of suspending them with rubber bands .
If the goal is to see what the rear facing tweeter does, take a simple well known conventional small box speaker with an electronic crossover and switching to add in or kill a rear tweeter. When experimenting, change one thing at a time. You have described a very complex project. Another approach would be to use a pair of full range speakers, electronic crossovers and eq, see what effect different corners and eq have on the imaging.
You may not want to hear it, but the secret to fantastic imaging is not more drivers, it is room treatments.
You may not want to hear it, but the secret to fantastic imaging is not more drivers, it is room treatments.
AVR? what is that? The only AVR im familiar with is Automatic Voltage Regulator.
As for the design, id agree that one element should be changed, to maintain controls.
SL and a few others here have done quite extensive experimentation, which would aid your design process considerably.
Im all in favour of experimentation, but the direction must be clearly defined, and the execution fastidious. I too would simplify the task, to preserve clarity of the result.
As for the design, id agree that one element should be changed, to maintain controls.
SL and a few others here have done quite extensive experimentation, which would aid your design process considerably.
Im all in favour of experimentation, but the direction must be clearly defined, and the execution fastidious. I too would simplify the task, to preserve clarity of the result.
My suggestion is to make the M-H section a separate module (or 2 individual modules) for further experiments.
For midrange, there're a lot to play with size, shape, positioning and securement means of the baffle or driver. For tweeter, do a search with keyword "flooder". Heretic, fun, easy, and great sound.
For midrange, there're a lot to play with size, shape, positioning and securement means of the baffle or driver. For tweeter, do a search with keyword "flooder". Heretic, fun, easy, and great sound.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.