Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Dipole comparison: Orion/Phoenix vs Nao
Dipole comparison: Orion/Phoenix vs Nao
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 9th June 2004, 04:46 AM   #1
paulspencer is offline paulspencer  Australia
diyAudio Member
paulspencer's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Arrow Dipole comparison: Orion/Phoenix vs Nao

Linkwitz Orion and Phoenix speakers have interested me for quite some time. I'm inclined to think they are hard to beat in terms of fidelity. They are quite expensive to construct, however, considering that they use a considerable number of expensive drivers and require and require at least 6 amp channels. More recently I have come across what appears to be a viable alternative.

The Nao

Click the image to open in full size.

Some notable differences:

1. 6.5" drivers to allow a lower crossover point

2. rear tweeter

3. single open back woofer with a cardiod polar response

4. passive crossover for the top section to reduce the number of amp channels

I'd like to hear some views on the merits of the different aspects of this design when compared to Linkwitz Orion / Phoenix.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2004, 04:53 AM   #2
Magnetar is offline Magnetar  United States
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Portal 2012
Looks to me like a goofey little pipe for the bass. Probably VERY one noteish!
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2004, 04:57 AM   #3
sfdoddsy is offline sfdoddsy  New Zealand
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
It's difficult to say without hearing both speakers, but I suspect that they'd sound more similar than different. The main difference seems to be tht the Nao is a bit simpler to build and operate.

Fortunately, construction of eiither is pretty easy, so you could always do a test baffle for both and see.


  Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2004, 05:03 AM   #4
paulspencer is offline paulspencer  Australia
diyAudio Member
paulspencer's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
The Nao will still be quite expensive, but it seems to demonstrate that simplification and lower cost are possible.

I would perhaps make some more changes for a budget version:

Drivers - Seas 27TFF, 8" Peerless HDS, Peerless 12" XLS

Possibly a second woofer with a passive first order lowpass filter at 250 Hz to compensate for cancellation and use less active filters.

This design would only need to be biamped. The U frame woofer would probably do okay with some simple eq to extend the bass a little, down to say 40 Hz.

Driver cost approx $710 AUD
This is about a third of the cost of the drivers in the Orion!

Now, I don't expect it would sound as good as the Orion,
but at that cost, who would expect it to?
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2004, 05:15 AM   #5
diamdiam is offline diamdiam  United States
diyAudio Member
diamdiam's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chicago
Send a message via AIM to diamdiam
go over to the madisound discussion forum. there's some people who've heard it there. plus, john k frequently posts there.

i don't think there's been a side by side comparision w/SL's designs yet.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th June 2004, 05:33 AM   #6
MBK is offline MBK  Singapore
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Singapore
What to expect:

From my own experience, I have a 6.5" fullrange crossed to two cheap Vifa 10" woofers, active EQ, all run in dipole (with folded baffle probably closer to the Nao, i.e. slightly cardioid, but I have not measured them accurately enough to confirm). And I have heard the Orions.

The cheaper drivers give you less detail, and more distortion in the bass. Subjective slam and bass fullness is higher (due to higher distortion I guess). The smaller mid (or my fullrange) give you better imaging.

No free lunch
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st August 2004, 11:57 PM   #7
PeteMcK is offline PeteMcK
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Western Sydney
Default Another use for the K-Slot???

It strikes me that a U dipole such as the NAO could be de-tuned with a Karlson type slot; of course it would change the rear radiation pattern, so some experimentation would be required....
Pete McK
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2004, 12:21 AM   #8
wingman is offline wingman  Denmark
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: jylland
Default Arvo Part project

what about

Arvo Part project

Click the image to open in full size.
bass is music
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 02:06 AM   #9
john k... is offline john k...  United States
diyAudio Member
john k...'s Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
(JPK) I just joined this forum and was pleased to see that the NaO is being discussed here. FWIW, the NaO was designed to be a simpler system with similar capabilities as the Orion. The hybird approach of acitve eq and woofer/panel crossover combined with a passive mid/tweeter crossover allows the system to driver by only two amplifiers. The panel has similar max SPL capability as the Orion, but the U-frame woofer has significantly higher output capability than the dual 10" XLS woofer of the Orion, on the order of 10 dB greater max SPL. The woofer is not a perfect cardioid but does have reduced rear radiation to the tune of about 10 dB below the on axis response.
John k.... Music and Design NaO dsp Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th August 2004, 10:21 AM   #10
Ian J is offline Ian J  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford, England
John, as an admirer of your work in the field of audio design and measurement I'd like to wish you the warmest of welcomes here. You will find there is much interest in the open baffle/dipole concept generally. Regarding the U-frame section in the NaO, an idea I find particularly interesting, could you give some idea as to how the pseudo-cardiod radiation pattern interacts with the room in comparison to dipoles? This is often mentioned as a large advantage with dipoles as room modes are comparatively unexcited compared to monopole sources. Also, would there be any benefit in 'de-tuning' the U-frame with an exponential (Karlsson- type) slot, as somebody suggested in another thread?

  Reply With Quote


Dipole comparison: Orion/Phoenix vs NaoHide 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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SL Phoenix or other dipole owners +internal wires rick57 Multi-Way 4 18th February 2005 12:32 PM
Was building Phoenix ... Now maybe Orion? ¿GotJazz? Multi-Way 56 15th November 2004 01:14 AM
Phoenix/Orion Boards, CD's and parts Ken L Swap Meet 2 9th August 2004 09:34 PM
Linkwitz Phoenix Dipole Peter Menting Multi-Way 10 21st April 2004 04:19 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:37 PM.

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 16.67%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2018 diyAudio