Dipole vs monopole, balls or not ... ?

[Jussi]

Hi,

As a charasteristic difference between these two, is there any?

Naturally monopole and dipole need totally different positioning in room since one is a pressure source and another velocity source but in perfect positions, how similar do they sound?

I heard one experimental cardioid bass few days ago. Pretty good but it seemed to lack the "grunt" I'm used to hear and feel in monopole systems. This can be caused by several variables like limited displacement and SPL capacity of the prototype, distorsion, room effects and so on.

But, is dipolebass a good solution for rock'n'roll?

Jussi

[bickeler]

Judging from my ears I'd have to say yes.My setup consists a pair of H baffles using a 15" Eminence woofer up top and a long throw 12" at the bottom.They are in a push-pull alignment and if I crank up some Judas Priest I can't say for I'm not happy with the results.


Before this I had the 12s in an aperiodic enclosure and also a PR system I tried,15s were in an sealed box and niether sounded as satisfying as the drivers combined into Dipoles.I am making a LF sub for HT though as the very lowest frequencies are a little weak.

Actually there also seems to me to be less undesired resonances from the cabinets,as opposed to the pr,sealed or aperiodic enclosure.Playing Heart's Barracuda I was quite astounded by the sound I can't say I'd ever heard it sound or felt it quite that good.Here's a pic (A crappy one yes)of my dipole

[Rudolf]

Originally posted by Jussi
But, is dipolebass a good solution for rock'n'roll?

If you want to hear Tarja Turunens voice standing clearly out from the rolling thunder generated by Marco and Jukka, you can´t do better than dipole bass. It may not kick like those one-note-BR-boxes many kids seem to prefer, but it can produce very precise drum attacks and really BLACK bass.

That´s how I sense it.
Rudolf

[cotdt]

A good box can acheive the same thing if it's very big and well-dampened. it would have much wider dispersion than dipole which sounds better. the room can simply be treated or take the speaker system outdoors.

[Tenson]

Originally posted by Jussi
Hi,

I heard one experimental cardioid bass few days ago

Jussi

I'm interested in knowing more about the implementation of this, what was the design, drivers used etc ?

[Jussi]

Originally posted by Tenson

I'm interested in knowing more about the implementation of this, what was the design, drivers used etc ?

Its a hybrid dipole + monopole system. 10" Peerless XLS in a vented cabinet acting as monopole source and a 12" XXLS Peerless in dipole configuration. System needs a lot of tuning before saying anything definite about it. Crossover is Behringer DCX since it needs EQ and digital delay features.

Jussi

[Jussi]

Intresting comments overall. bickeler also mensioned the setup he is used to. What about rest of you?

And is there a point of displacement / cone area etc that dipole needs to be scary in dynamics and have plenty of old fashion grunt on rock'n'roll? For example is Linkwitz Orion configuration (2x10" XLS in H-baffle) adequate or would it need more?

I have this idea of using single 18" PA woofer in compact baffle but the drivers are pretty expensive and I wouldn't like to shoot in the dark in this mather. I know dipolebass has very good definition with acoustic instruments but I'd also like to have "grunt" for physical feelings.

Jussi

[sqlkev]

Originally posted by cotdt
A good box can acheive the same thing if it's very big and well-dampened. it would have much wider dispersion than dipole which sounds better. the room can simply be treated or take the speaker system outdoors.

I haven't heard bass from any boxes that sound like a good dipole bass

Jussi,
for rock n roll (anything high SPL), you would probably have to go with another larger subwoofer to take care of the bottom octave.
Most dipole systems i know of only plays with authority down to 35hz or so. Below that, you'll need massive excursion.

Keep in mind that you'll probably need massive EQing work to tailor the sound of the dipole set up as well.
I would go with the simple PA set up if it's mainly used for rock n roll and high SPL.

[Jussi]

Originally posted by sqlkev


Jussi,
for rock n roll (anything high SPL), you would probably have to go with another larger subwoofer to take care of the bottom octave.
Most dipole systems i know of only plays with authority down to 35hz or so. Below that, you'll need massive excursion.

Keep in mind that you'll probably need massive EQing work to tailor the sound of the dipole set up as well.
I would go with the simple PA set up if it's mainly used for rock n roll and high SPL.

Yep but that's one of the problems. System also has to be valid for HQ acoustic material reproduction.

I know 35Hz and below are pretty suicidal to get right with dipole so I'm very willing to have "plenty" down to 30-40Hz and then have a compromisse with the bottom. After all below 30Hz frequences are also pretty rare in music, especially in rock'n'roll.

Jussi

[Rudolf]

Jussi,
you know that there is a lower limit for dipole bass that is determined by room size? http://www.musicanddesign.com/roomgain2.html

Crucial is the distance to the back wall too. When placing the dipole 1.5 m from the wall, you will have about 3-4 db gain around 60 Hz (spreading from ~40-90 Hz) and a loss of about 6 dB (but less wide) around 120 Hz from back wall reflection.
Another point is to keep the bass driver(s) as low to the floor as possible.
I once heard these: http://www.bd-design.nl/contents/en-uk/d84.html
and that bass didn´t leave anything to wish for.

Rudolf