Are you sure it is the baffle design that is the Problem here ? At least theoretically either very wide or very narrow baffles should imnage well. The worst are the ones that are as wide as an average head.
Regards
Charles
Then you will have diffraction, there's simply no way around it.
Round shapes, or Avalon type shapes, do spread the diffraction over a wider frequency range, making it less obvious.
The other solution is Juhazi's in post 29, where you choose your baffle width and crossover points very carefully, but diffraction will be there.
On a side note: You can use diffraction/acoustic impedance changes to make very shallow but still wide frequency range diffusers that also work as wide band absorbers.
Yes. But only up to the point where they stop working, then you have to crossover to a lower frequency speaker thus diffraction will happen. And because the acoustic impedance change is about as big as it can get, you'll get lots of it. Using large waveguides will shift the diffraction to lower frequencies where they will be less audible.
That looks like they've used an old TV cabinetI've heard minimum baffle designs and wide body speakers. I have to say I prefer the latter by a fair margin.
Other minimum baffle designs include designs from Linkwitz as well as Vandersteen.
Thiels (old designs) seemed to be normal width, but big rounded edges.
Here is a pic I dug up of the Snell A/III with the top removed:
i am not sure..
since the moment the wave is formed by the membrane driver,
the wave must be free of propagate without interferences.
Everything that will obstruct the dispersion will create some type of sound distortion.
what is happening in the inside of the mouth of the waveguide?
waveguide is like a baffle, like a frame H or another shape that constrain the wave to follow a route obbligated.
That sounds a bit vague and audiophiley. In the worst case it can have significant impacts on high end frequency response of 6dB or more.
Diffraction from baffle edges
It seems to me that people are chasing rainbows. the only way to measure the out put of a loudspeaker is through the application of scientific measurement equipment. I'm no expert - but I doubt any you human could distinguish an indicated diffraction within the confines of , if you're lucky, a reasonable sized music room.
And, in comparison to what? a symphony hall? how does one measure the diffraction of a venue and does the perception of a critique spoil the experience of attending a concert, ballet or opera?
Lets take the example of a recording studio, the engineers desk, where audio is mixed and produce for our consumption. There is simply no emphasis placed on monitor diffraction. Sound engineers mix and produce product and it's their ear that is the arbiter of what we listen to.
I'm all for innovation but if a baffles diffraction criteria influences the design with no definable , objective conclusion; then I consider the subject of baffle diffusion a spurious argument in the context of man V scientific instrumentation.
And, in comparison to what? a symphony hall? how does one measure the diffraction of a venue and does the perception of a critique spoil the experience of attending a concert, ballet or opera?
Lets take the example of a recording studio, the engineers desk, where audio is mixed and produce for our consumption. There is simply no emphasis placed on monitor diffraction. Sound engineers mix and produce product and it's their ear that is the arbiter of what we listen to.
I'm all for innovation but if a baffles diffraction criteria influences the design with no definable , objective conclusion; then I consider the subject of baffle diffusion a spurious argument in the context of man V scientific instrumentation.
I think they are more of an acoustic transformer to aid coupling and dispersion
As I understand it, diffraction is from going from a 2*pi (hemisphere off a flat surface) space to a 4*pi space (3D sphere). If you mount in a wall, you're always in a 2*pi space so you avoid diffraction. Otherwise you have some degree of diffraction.
The diffraction can be easily measured as it causes constructive (peaks) and destruction interference (nulls) on top of the normal response. So it looks like more ripple or bumps.
You may (or not) be able to hear it depending on the amplitude and frequency. I think most people want a flat freq response so they try to minimize diffraction.
The diffraction can be easily measured as it causes constructive (peaks) and destruction interference (nulls) on top of the normal response. So it looks like more ripple or bumps.
You may (or not) be able to hear it depending on the amplitude and frequency. I think most people want a flat freq response so they try to minimize diffraction.
Because of HRTF, I suppose? Interesting you should say this because reading thru this I kept thinking "Wide or Narrow? I can't decide because I've heard both do well - very narrow and very wide. But in between? Nothing stands out to me.