Recently my first DIY full range project took a drastic turn when i discovered that I had inadvertently destroyed half of the drivers i bought. (I decided to grind off the 1/4'' tabs sticking out of the front of some cheap parts express 2'' drives so i could rear mount them. Well, when you grind metal down on a grinding wheel, lots of metal filings are created.....and they like to go into the insides of the drivers.... ) ANYWAY
Now instead of having two line arrays that are each 7ft tall, with corresponding arrays of 10'' subs, i am down to 16 2'' drives per side. None of the 10'' drivers where damaged bc they didnt need to have pieces ground down.
My current design is to have the 16 2'' drives positioned in the center (vertical line array) with two 10'' drives on the top and 2 10'' drives on the bottom (listening position will be about half way in between the top two and bottom two 10'' drivers so i dont think this will be too much of a problem. Since these speakers will end up being about 7ft tall, I was thinking it mighnt be a good idea to make the 10'' drives into a dual transmission line type of design. Would this even be possible, and is it a good idea. The other option is just to make them all into sealed enclosures. I'm really a novice, so im not quite sure. Any thoughts, comments, suggestions? Negative ones are welcome too.
the woofers I'm refering to are thesehttp://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=299-721 and since the enclosure for the 2'' array is only about 2.5'' deep, I was planning on making a large narrow C shape for the subs with the 2'' array being in the gap a squared, narrow C would make (side view)
btw i am planning on bi-amping with an active XO
Now instead of having two line arrays that are each 7ft tall, with corresponding arrays of 10'' subs, i am down to 16 2'' drives per side. None of the 10'' drivers where damaged bc they didnt need to have pieces ground down.
My current design is to have the 16 2'' drives positioned in the center (vertical line array) with two 10'' drives on the top and 2 10'' drives on the bottom (listening position will be about half way in between the top two and bottom two 10'' drivers so i dont think this will be too much of a problem. Since these speakers will end up being about 7ft tall, I was thinking it mighnt be a good idea to make the 10'' drives into a dual transmission line type of design. Would this even be possible, and is it a good idea. The other option is just to make them all into sealed enclosures. I'm really a novice, so im not quite sure. Any thoughts, comments, suggestions? Negative ones are welcome too.
the woofers I'm refering to are thesehttp://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=299-721 and since the enclosure for the 2'' array is only about 2.5'' deep, I was planning on making a large narrow C shape for the subs with the 2'' array being in the gap a squared, narrow C would make (side view)
btw i am planning on bi-amping with an active XO
preliminary TL design
here is something I drew up. Its not to scale, and i havent figured out how im going to have it tapered (should I) yet. But here is the basic premise im thinking about constructing.
full range tl preliminary design Do you think something like this would work well?
here is something I drew up. Its not to scale, and i havent figured out how im going to have it tapered (should I) yet. But here is the basic premise im thinking about constructing.
full range tl preliminary design Do you think something like this would work well?
I recently came across this
on this site I was wondering if anybody else had an opinion about this topology as opposed to the two drivers facing oposite directions. Another thing ive read is thisA variation I almost didn't try was mounting one of the woofers backwards (with the magnet facing out) and then wire the drivers out of phase. The theory is that woofer cone movement is not perfectly linear. In response to a symetrical sine wave the outward motion of the cone does not match the inward movement. By mounting the drivers face to back and wiring out of phase the non-linearities cancel out. I figured that with a high quality driver and limited excursion that the cancelation effects would not be audible. Boy was I ever wrong! The bass was notably cleaner and controlled with lots of slam. Subjectively there seemed to be a little less bass which is a clear indication of less distortion. After hearing the difference I would never consider any other topology than out-of-phase push-pull. It is more than a little odd looking but it fits with my non-conventional theme.
from a very knowledgable person. I was also wondering if anybody else had any different opinions on this matter. I'm still tossing around ideas and nothing is set in stone yet.I have seen this done and measured one speaker system that used a device like that, it did not work very well. At high volumes the driver moved enough to loose contact with the bar and a rattle resulted. It could be seen in the measurements and clearly heard. It is very hard to get enough pre-compression of the bar to keep everything in contact during operation.
A push-pull situation -- particularily if some attempt is made to couple the drivers -- gives much of the benefit of push-push, tends to average out any non-linearities vis-s-vis the driver moving in vrs out, but also tends to be noisier.
The 2nd comment i'm guessing is about the coupling structure between the drivers... if this is just a dowel wedged inbetween the drivers then i could see that it might come loose on a high excursion sub since it is truly only effective during compression (in an extreme case the connector would just fall out). There are a number of ways of minimizing this, the most thorough scheme is shown in the attached picture.
dave
A larger picture can be seen from this page.
dave
The 2nd comment i'm guessing is about the coupling structure between the drivers... if this is just a dowel wedged inbetween the drivers then i could see that it might come loose on a high excursion sub since it is truly only effective during compression (in an extreme case the connector would just fall out). There are a number of ways of minimizing this, the most thorough scheme is shown in the attached picture.
dave
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
A larger picture can be seen from this page.
dave
Mounting one woofer backwards should be smart. At least as long as the wavelength is much larger than the magnet. The web page is right in that some of the distortion will cancel, however odd harmonics (3rd, 5th, 7th etc) will not cancel, but remain the same. Still an improvement, since the second partial is often strong.
Audio Pro's early subwoofers more or less *required* such a mounting, the active design was very sensitive to a non-linear voice coil inductance. This was taken care of by having two drivers in push-pull.
The only downside of the arrangement is some effects towards higher frequencies (1kHz+) and the looks of it.
The isobarik mounting has the same distortion canceling benefits.
Audio Pro's early subwoofers more or less *required* such a mounting, the active design was very sensitive to a non-linear voice coil inductance. This was taken care of by having two drivers in push-pull.
The only downside of the arrangement is some effects towards higher frequencies (1kHz+) and the looks of it.
The isobarik mounting has the same distortion canceling benefits.
Svante said:The isobarik mounting has the same distortion canceling benefits.
Which leads to the idea of the push-pull-push-push isobaric design
dave
Attachments
Chris8sirhC said:I'm assuming that the phase alignment would look something like this: (in phase = A, out of phase = B)
A B B A
Yes that would work....
and the TL version of that would look like this http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/chris8sirhc/detail?.dir=/open+baffle+line+array&.dnm=d82f.jpg ?
oh yeah, one more idea, would a configuration like that be beneficial in an infinite baffle situation? (ie the TL part of my diagram would go into the room and the rest of it would be sent to the attic or whatever other large (infinite) room you are using for the backwave.)
planet10 said:
Which leads to the idea of the push-pull-push-push isobaric design
dave
Yes, this should have the benefits of distortion cancelling and cabinet vibration cancelling. The "driver" (seen as one) would have the same efficiency, and four times the maximum allowed power (both electric input power and acoustic output power).
It would have the same Vas, fs and Qts as the single driver. Twice the Ss. And four times the price.
Chris8sirhC said:oh yeah, one more idea, would a configuration like that be beneficial in an infinite baffle situation? (ie the TL part of my diagram would go into the room and the rest of it would be sent to the attic or whatever other large (infinite) room you are using for the backwave.)
Errh... For frequencies *below* the first tube resonance it would act as an infinite baffle. In both rooms. At the tube resonaces there would be peaks in the TL end and dips in the not TL end. These peaks and dips would be attenuated by the damping material inside the TL though.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- TL or sealed...