Aino gradient - a collaborative speaker project - Page 25 - 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 9th August 2013, 10:16 AM   #241
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
My AINOs have omnipole bass (on the bottom of the box). Yes, it is very difficult to match it with lowmid dipole driver. Distance to boundaries affects low bass and induces frontwall reflections of the dipole backwave. Distance determines the Fq where summations and nulls come, we can see them in the graph (and easier with no smoothing). These are "heavier" than with boxed monopole speakers, but not as bad as with dipole basses

Widely apart, toed-in 30¤ and 1m from front wall is very good. I must also keep my position (head) at least the same 1m from the back-wall! This makes listening distance 1,5m It gives very good sound, but rest of the family doesn't like it . When I have privacy, I take a glass of wine with me to the sweet pot and enjoy Everyday listening must be done with speakers closer to the wall (60cm to dipoles) which is quite acceptable.

Fortunately having a minidsp I can measure and tune it endlessly! MiniDSP 4x10HD box can have 4 preset configurations and I can change them from the panel wheel (no need to connect to computer and run setup program). Frontwall midrange reflections don't have to be eq'd but floor reflection and boundary boost are more constant and easier to eq. So far I haven't saved any roomeq configs, just learning... My indoors-made configs have some floor reflection correction, at my standard 150cm measuring distance Floor/Ceiling Reflection Calculator gives 279Hz (the low-mid driver at 60cm height)

Outdoor measurements are needed for basic driver eq and crossover configuration, but after that I make some indoors PEQ corrections to individual driver responses (based on several measurements), because I listen to these in a room, not outdoors!
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2013, 10:19 AM   #242
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
Edited my measurements a little,

Distance to front wall

Mic position same, position of speaker moved 100cm vs 60cm to fornt wall. Horizontal angle a bit different but not significantly. In both measurements speaker is roughly at 30¤ angle to wall and 5¤ to mic (left speaker of stereo pair, mic at hot spot). behind the speaker is a window, which presents the WORST possible material.

My analysis. The effect on bass is not shown here but it is as loudness boost below 100Hz. The dipole radiation range of AINOs is 200-3000Hz, but I can't see any really big problems with these positions. Cancellations are more significant at 60cm but I can hardly hear any changes except low bass. Obviously nasties increase exponentially as distance gets even smaller.

60cm to front wall is the everyday position. For solo hi-fi sessions I just drag the top-gymnast 42kg AINOs to 100-110cm off the wall! Dipoles should always be toed-in at least 30¤!
Attached Images
File Type: png ainogice mtm v9 60 vs 100cm.png (355.3 KB, 283 views)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient

Last edited by Juhazi; 10th August 2013 at 10:22 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2013, 10:47 AM   #243
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
MT vs MTM

Previous measurements edited and distortion test.

Previous vertical offset measurements get a closer look here, without smoothing but different IR windows (postprocessing in REW) Only the lower and upper mid(s) and tweeter playing in these measurements. XO frequencies are 1kHz LR4and 3.3kHz LR4.

Analysis: There is a difference but I can't say which is better overall. MT is better around 3kHz but MTM better around 1kHz.

Distortion with only a single or two upper mid playing, sine at 3150Hz. 36 samples. Please disregard 1kHz and its harmonics, they come from the defective sound card.
Analysis: M is significantly better, mainly because of high odd harmonics of MM

Note: I must perform more distortion measurements after changing the soundcard of UMIK-1. Distortion is a known problem in one batch of them and I got a replacement free. I just haven't changed it yet.
Attached Images
File Type: png ainogice v9 mt vs mtm 0 +10 -15 close 5ms 12ms.png (244.9 KB, 269 views)
File Type: png ainogice v9 m vs mm dist 3150hz.png (110.4 KB, 263 views)
File Type: png ainogice mt vs mtmv9 dist in.png (178.7 KB, 255 views)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient

Last edited by Juhazi; 10th August 2013 at 11:07 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 05:07 PM   #244
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
Some thinking processes and distortion tests have guided me to push a little more to the lower limits of NE95 pair and Fountek NeoCD3.5. Middle xo is LR2 again at 800Hz and upper LR4 at 2500hz. Obviously the slopes ease the drivers enogh, There doesn't seem to be a rise in distortion. LR2 between mids gives much better (even) wide angle response than LR4. Lowered tweeter xo should give better vertical off-axis, but I didn't measure it today.

Attachments show present v10 xo (W level to high) and distortion tests of the whole system playing. Individual drivers' distortion plot not shown here.

RT and EDT of my room - the effect of closing the light curtains kills the resonation at 2kHz.

It is now obvious to me that the 2kHz undulation I hear is very much this window resonation. These indoor tests don't tell the real behaviour of the speaker! Windows and furniture are rattling too! I haven't fixed the lower mid driver very well - it has vibrations around 100Hz. But overall the system looks solid. The weather doesn't permit outdoor measurements now.

I have also re-read the thread about dipole tweeters. There are problems. A B&G Neo 3 doesn't go much lower that CD3.5 and Neo8PDR has worse highs. A pair of 25mm tweeters is maybe worth testing... Then I could reduce mid-tweeter ctc from 95 to 80mm and use lower xo. But I very much like the sound now!
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient

Last edited by Juhazi; 14th August 2013 at 05:17 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 05:35 PM   #245
diyAudio Member
 
Greebster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South of the Skyway
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhazi View Post
Some thinking processes and distortion tests have guided me to push a little more to the lower limits of NE95 pair and Fountek NeoCD3.5. Middle xo is LR2 again at 800Hz and upper LR4 at 2500hz. Obviously the slopes ease the drivers enogh, There doesn't seem to be a rise in distortion. LR2 between mids gives much better (even) wide angle response than LR4. Lowered tweeter xo should give better vertical off-axis, but I didn't measure it today.

Attachments show present v10 xo (W level to high) and distortion tests of the whole system playing. Individual drivers' distortion plot not shown here.

RT and EDT of my room - the effect of closing the light curtains kills the resonation at 2kHz.

It is now obvious to me that the 2kHz undulation I hear is very much this window resonation. These indoor tests don't tell the real behaviour of the speaker! Windows and furniture are rattling too! I haven't fixed the lower mid driver very well - it has vibrations around 100Hz. But overall the system looks solid. The weather doesn't permit outdoor measurements now.

I have also re-read the thread about dipole tweeters. There are problems. A B&G Neo 3 doesn't go much lower that CD3.5 and Neo8PDR has worse highs. A pair of 25mm tweeters is maybe worth testing... Then I could reduce mid-tweeter ctc from 95 to 80mm and use lower xo. But I very much like the sound now!
By lowering the crossover point you have better matched the CtC distance of the NE95's improving the acoustic phase angle. LR4 would may have attenuated the off axis too much. Have you nulled the ribbons impedance peak? Also on the NE95's and the low mid? Would help to reduce IMD in their pass bands.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 06:20 PM   #246
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greebster View Post
Have you nulled the ribbons impedance peak? Also on the NE95's and the low mid? Would help to reduce IMD in their pass bands.
No passive parts except the protective 6.8uF cap in series with the tweeter. Impedance peaks are way out of passbands (except the woofer)!

Beyma 12" peak at 40Hz (xo 150 LR4)
Peerless/Vifa NE95 peak at 95Hz (xo 800 LR2)
Fountek 3.5H peak around 800Hz? (xo 2500 LR4)

I haven't done similar distortion test of any other speaker so far - I must get some control samples at same level! SPL level is not calibrated except the UMIK-1 cal file. Must be checked with another meter. The sweep sounded horrible and I just can't listen to music at same level (-20dB in receiver/preamp) for a long time.

Thank you Greebster for advice and PMs!
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th August 2013, 08:02 AM   #247
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
Fountek datasheet says that Neo3.5H has an impedance flattening circuit built-in
http://www.fountek.net/uploadfile/1011/25100645.PDF

Ih has a special off-axis that made me to choose it!
Attached Images
File Type: png 35h offaxis datasheet.png (44.3 KB, 36 views)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2013, 10:47 AM   #248
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
Better photos of the finished AINOgradient!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg aino high ref s.JPG (91.0 KB, 274 views)
File Type: jpg aino pole vino s.JPG (83.8 KB, 467 views)
File Type: jpg aino pole back s.JPG (95.1 KB, 126 views)
File Type: jpg aino pohja s.JPG (113.5 KB, 128 views)
File Type: png AINOgradient logo.png (3.7 KB, 105 views)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th August 2013, 01:07 PM   #249
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
A very eccentric design but i like it
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2013, 04:52 PM   #250
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Juhazi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä
I have prepared a 15-page powerpoint presentation of this project. If someone is interested, please send me PM and tell your email adress, and I will send a pdf copy to you!

About bass performance, I took some nearfield measurements and here you can see the options of LR2 and LR4 at 130Hz. -6dB in nearfiel is at 25Hz. 300ms room response start at 15Hz if we believe UMIK and REW! The bass channel of minidsp has Linkwitz Transform type peq at 40Hz, Q=1, -6dB (to avoid digital clipping) Driver is SEAS L26ROY in 25 liter sealed cabinet.
Attached Images
File Type: png aino summary.png (432.4 KB, 69 views)
File Type: png ainogice vx2 spl vs invert and bass nearfield.png (198.2 KB, 73 views)
File Type: png ainogice vx2 room response rt decay.png (520.3 KB, 50 views)
__________________
AES Associate Member / My DIY speaker history: -74 Philips 3-way, -82 Hifi 85B, -07 Zaph L18, XLS10+PR/Hypex, -08 CSS125FR, -08 Hifitalo AW-7, -08 TangBand FR, -09 MarkK ER18DXT, -13 PPSL470, -13 AINOgradient

Last edited by Juhazi; 19th August 2013 at 04:59 PM.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:21 PM.


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