Against the wall loudspeakers, pro's and con's? - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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
Old 4th March 2013, 11:31 AM   #1
markusA is offline markusA  Sweden
diyAudio Member
markusA's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gothenburg
Blog Entries: 1
Default Against the wall loudspeakers, pro's and con's?

I just had an idea and I'm sure I'm not the first.
Carlsson OAxx's were designed for placement against the wall with a pre-chosen toe-in built into the design.

A close to the wall placement will give some bass boost so much is well known to me. What are the pro's and con's of building a speaker with a built in toe-in for flush against the wall placement?

What difficulties will I have to resolve to make a good sounding speaker?
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 12:05 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Enschede
The big issue is the depth of the cabinet and the destructive interference in the midrange caused by the strong wall reflection. Even a strongly rounded cabinet will have this problem. So a completely flush mounted baffle or a very wide, slightly sloped baffle (like the Stage Accompany S27) is what you need.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 01:06 PM   #3
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
markusA, take a look at Wall behind the Loudspeaker Cancellation
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 02:31 PM   #4
markusA is offline markusA  Sweden
diyAudio Member
markusA's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Gothenburg
Blog Entries: 1
ok, so basically it's just cancellation from the reflective surfaces?
Try to avoid having the same distances from driver | floor | ceiling | rear wall | side wall.
This should make the dip wider but not quite as pronounced and hopefully the rest is fixable with dsp and room correction?

Am I getting the gist of it?
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 03:45 PM   #5
el`Ol is offline el`Ol  Germany
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Bavarian Forest
The advantage of the Carlsson design is that the speakers completely disappear (even one speaker disappears when playing mono) without producing omni soup. I've been happy with such a design for years. The bass is rather a problem (standing wave, reduced frequency range towards the low end).
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 04:00 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New England
It's always been my understanding that imaging is best when speakers are located out, away from wall boundries. So, I guess your proposal to locate them against a wall would be counter to good imaging placement.
The trade off is bass enhancement against imaging.

The Audio Note AN-E speakers are supposed to be placed near a wall at a slight angle so the low placed, rear firing vent has some space to breath. They compensate for the imaging issue with a very wide baffle board configuration which has the drivers almost essentially operating in 2 pi space.
"It's all about the music!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 09:32 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
kipman725's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London/N.lincs
Send a message via MSN to kipman725
I have often toyed with the idea of a super flat speaker that is designed for against wall usage. In wall speakers are the logical extreme. If the design is very careful you could ensure that the drivers are directional at the frequency at which the discontinuity between the box sides and the wall becomes a problem.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 10:11 PM   #8
tinitus is offline tinitus  Europe
diyAudio Moderator R.I.P.
Join Date: Nov 2005
free standing speakers and listening direct on axis is optimal if you want the most precise reproduction

everything else tend to be more 'diffuse', and with less 'attack'
might be more forgiving and pleasing

I wouldnt say one is more right than the other
only depends on what kind of sound you want

try to hang a small 2way from the ceiling, in the corners
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 10:43 PM   #9
jamikl is offline jamikl  Australia
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Melbourne
How would the "Poor Man's Stradivarius" perform in the sort of location. It is wide, slightly curved and quite shallow?

After reading the short paper referred to by Markus76 I then wonder about the PMS shape referred to above with a
wave guide on the mid and the tweeter. Is there any merit in this. I know the quite a few significant othder halfs would
accept a larger enclosure if it does not have the appearance of being half way out into the room. This is a problem for
some of us with open baffles! I like good sound but I,m not in a position to alter my house as well as build speakers and
I am sure that quite a few others would be in this position also.

Toe in if required could be built into the PMS shape by angling the centre panel also and not having it parallel with the rear
of the enclosure

Last edited by jamikl; 5th March 2013 at 10:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 11:19 PM   #10
diyAudio Member
Overkill Audio's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default On Wall can be great.

After years of massive floor standers, sealed, open baffle, two way, three way, fully active, DSP ( DEQX) etc I have finally arrived at a great sounding, great looking High WAF, no hassle solution.
On Wall, line array BMR, full range ( no Xover at all for music) with Eq using the fab JRiver 18 media host with the even fabber(!) Jplay plugin.

On wall gives you "natural" low mid and bass extension ie no extra amp power input and no extra cone excursion.
Using the BMR's gives you almost 180 degrees even power response ie on and off axis is all very even and balanced.
Line Array ( 8, 12 or 16 drivers per speaker) gives you a massive reduction in cone excursion and therefore a corresponding massive drop in all " traditional " distortions that the objectivists love to measure.
Far more important ( IMO), time domain distortions ie mass on a spring / cone on a suspension are greatly reduced as the cones are not pumping in and out 5mm or 10mm but only 0.5mm or 1mm instead.
I encourage you to try on wall or in wall line arrays, esp with BMR drivers, the results are really great!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Christmas Eve 2012 ..Hogworts! 096.jpg (291.5 KB, 432 views)
File Type: jpg Christmas Eve 2012 ..Hogworts! 033.jpg (348.9 KB, 408 views)
File Type: jpg Christmas Eve 2012 ..Hogworts! 101.jpg (251.6 KB, 404 views)
  Reply With Quote


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
Audio analyzer software pro's/con's XEAGLEKEEPER Everything Else 1 10th January 2007 01:16 AM
help from pro's wanted. kmj Solid State 20 28th October 2004 04:54 AM
Pro's and con's of CCS circuit. G Solid State 6 30th September 2002 09:05 AM
Pro's&con's of PCB's Petman Tubes / Valves 4 5th July 2002 03:34 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:36 AM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2