dayton rs open baffle -or not? help please - 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 24th October 2005, 02:47 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Default dayton rs open baffle -or not? help please

I love open baffles and ive played around with some hackish simple designs of my own but now I want something better.

I like the idea of the linkwitz pheonix, but its too complicated and expensive for me at the moment. His OB prototype is more appropriate i think, but the distortion measurements for the p21 dont fair so well next to other drivers from peerless and the dayton rs. I hate the idea of investing time and money (to my pocket this isn't a cheap driver even if it isn't expensive compared to the best) on something when I know there are better options available for the same or less coin.

On the otherhand, there is no one who's designs I'd rather follow and I have a feeling that it might be better to worry less about the driver and more about the design.

Should I dive in over my head, try to learn as I go, and try to do something with the dayton rs drivers. I do have basic understanding of filters but i dont know about impedence circuits and various other finer points.

Maybe there is a design out there already that I've missed that will fit the bill. I've looked at the open baffle threads here but the wide baffle speakers everyone seems to be using there aren't for me.

hope someone out there can give me some guidance

thanks
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2005, 03:42 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Francisco
Send a message via AIM to joe carrow
This is the main Dayton RS open baffle project i've seen-

http://mfk-projects.com/rs_dipole.htm

It was done before the RS subs or tweeters were out. If I was doing a similar project, I would look at the RS subs very closely. Also, to save cost I would consider the Seas H1212 tweeter, as it seems to measure quite well and play low enough- for only $30ish.

Linkwitzlab.com is obviously the source for a lot of information regarding Linkwitz's open baffle designs, and from what I've read there, it seems that active crossovers are a good way to go for an open baffle system using drivers that don't absolutely scream for an open baffle (low Qts) on an open baffle that's less than optimal (slim panel).

The new Peerless Exclusive drivers look good, with a fairly open basket compared to the Dayton RS180S, costs less than a Seas Excel, and since it's not a metal cone it doesn't have the nasty breakup problems.

Just my two cents, but I'm an advocate of working your way up to these things. Personally, I'm starting with a small ported 2-way with the Dayton RS180S and the Seas H1212. In the long term, I plan on upgrading these to either an MTM transmission line and a large mono sub, or building stereo bass-bins under the 2-ways to turn it into a 3-way with some muscle.

Even before getting into the RS180 territory, I went for a 1-way with the Aurasound 3" driver to test some crazy ideas I had for cabinet construction. Let's put it this way- I'm glad I'm not out much money after that experiment!

Best of luck to you. Let us know how it goes.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th October 2005, 03:45 AM   #3
DougL is offline DougL  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wheaton IL.
Blog Entries: 30
Quote:
Maybe there is a design out there already that I've missed that will fit the bill. I've looked at the open baffle threads here but the wide baffle speakers everyone seems to be using there aren't for me.
As one of the Wide Baffle speaker designers, I have a few observations:

You can have a very fun speaker with the DCX2496.
Changes can be made quickly and its lower risk than a hardwired crossover.

I also think that the MTM1 would sound great. My experience is that great designers can produce a very satisfying product with lesser drivers.

Best of luck to you. I think you will be happy with either.

Doug
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th October 2005, 04:22 AM   #4
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
As another of the wide baffle (19" does that count as wide?) designers I thought I would chime in.

You need to decide what sort of results you really want. If you're set on dipole bass you'll need lots of xmax or a decent size baffle. 2x long throw woofers will get you to 20hz with a 12" baffle but you'll need 1000watt amplifier, alot of equalization, and you'll be limited to moderate listening levels at best. Also, remember all else being equal the lower the excursion of a given driver to reproduce a given SPL the lower the distortion so overcoming smaller baffles with more EQ and power will increase distortion.

In the world of dipole bass there are 3 key parameters

Bass Extension
Baffle size
Max SPL

In a well thought out design you can optimize 2 of these at the expense of the third. In a mediocre design you'll be lucky to get one of them. The size of the "pool" you have to optimize with is limited by the drivers x-max and the power of the amplifier..

--Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2005, 07:02 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Guelph, Ontario
thanks for your opinions.

the MFK speaker is apealling although I wanted to make a traditional xo for the sake of learning. Maybe Ill buy one of those behringer things and just go for it.

I also found the arvo speaker after I posted this message. It looks like it might be a good choice. The hivi drivers look cool on that speaker.



I have one general technical question regarding xo design. How necessary is impedence correction in a xo. I think the reason its used is that without it the filter varies in effect depending on the frequency due to the varying impedance curve. Is this correct? If so, why are there so many designs that only have a filter?

Thanks
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2005, 12:10 AM   #6
DougL is offline DougL  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wheaton IL.
Blog Entries: 30
Quote:
I have one general technical question regarding xo design. How necessary is impedence correction in a xo. I think the reason its used is that without it the filter varies in effect depending on the frequency due to the varying impedance curve. Is this correct? If so, why are there so many designs that only have a filter?
Impedance correction can be important in passive crossovers. For active crossovers, the driver does not interact with the crossover transfer function.
However, in passive crossovers, sometimes the extra cost / complexity does not justify the additional parts. Just call it designers choice.
Quote:
I also found the arvo speaker after I posted this message. It looks like it might be a good choice. The hivi drivers look cool on that speaker.
[The AVRO is an interesting design. Horses for courses. Itís a fully passive design, which is an interesting design choice.

I also have links to 2 other interesting dipoles:

Daviesís dipole page and Adire Audio DDR

These designs come in at a lower price point, while still using quality drivers.

Doug
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th October 2005, 05:13 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Guelph, Ontario
thanks. I hadn't seen either of those before.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th October 2005, 05:32 PM   #8
mac is offline mac  United States
diyAudio Member
 
mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Puget Sound
http://lowfat.sytes.net/gallery/main...&g2_itemId=304

The MTM RS180/RS28a that I built sounded very good. I would also recommend using a DCX2496 since it provides you the flexibility to experiment.

Click the image to open in full size.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th October 2005, 05:34 PM   #9
reins is offline reins  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bayern
In the following thread could as far as I rembember some discussion about RS drivers be found. Regardless of that it's an interesting dipole thread.

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=7644

stephan
  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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does open baffle suffer from baffle step? 454Casull Multi-Way 15 19th May 2012 03:12 PM
Murphy baffle radios [ open baffle ] keithpeter Full Range 10 11th September 2007 07:59 PM
what effect does baffle have on open-baffle system? kappa546 Multi-Way 6 24th January 2006 10:21 PM
Dayton Reference Open Baffle Project dswiston Multi-Way 43 2nd December 2004 05:18 PM
Australians- what solid timbers for baffle? (open baffle loudspeaker) tktran Multi-Way 13 29th November 2004 11:09 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:03 AM.


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