|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
|
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 |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norlane; Geelong: Victoria: Australia
|
I've seen one or two comments on this subject but nothing substantive.
Before I go ahead with the next set of speakers I'm asking for opinions. If building a bass box and using front and rear firing drivers there is a null at each side where wave-fronts meet, what happens when drivers are mounted in other ways?? If using two drivers facing forwards and at 45degrees to each other is this better or worse?? and what about a triangular box with a driver on each vertical face??
__________________
QUOTE" The more I know, the more I know, I know (insert maniacal laugh >here<) NOTHING" |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
|
Hi Moondog,
when operated as subwoofer the enclosure depth is normally small compared to wavelength. From my gut feeling depth of lambda/8 should not cause serious change in radiation pattern. This would be a depth of 40cm at 100Hz ... If the polar diagramm gets a little egg shaped, would that be a problem ? One could use that behaviour to compensate room problems in upper bass by rotating the sub as you like ... With one front and one backfiring driver you get impulse compensation, the cabinet will stay very quiet if built stiff enough ... So maybe think about leaving the sub as it is. Cheers |
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Custom Title
diyAudio Member
|
if they're subs, and not an attempt at dipole subwoofering, then you should be fine with mounting them any way you please- opposite each other allows you to do force cancellation though.
__________________
I write for www.enjoythemusic.com in the DIY section. You may find yourself getting a preview of a project in-progress. Be warned! |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norlane; Geelong: Victoria: Australia
|
Actually I was imagining Tri-pole if such a beast exists.
Still thought experiments, but the woofer side of things will be Di-poles, I was thinking of subwoofers here and wondering if the mythical perfect box exists. Sreten, Hi; the drivers will be in phase
__________________
QUOTE" The more I know, the more I know, I know (insert maniacal laugh >here<) NOTHING" |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
|
Hi,
FWIW for a subwoofer monopole, bipole, tripole, quadpole .... are all the same. Except the lack of force cancellling in a monopole. |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norlane; Geelong: Victoria: Australia
|
Thanx Sreten, that makes it easy
__________________
QUOTE" The more I know, the more I know, I know (insert maniacal laugh >here<) NOTHING" |
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Acceptable transition freq between dipole panel and boxed sub ? | ashok | Subwoofers | 19 | 5th June 2009 05:58 PM |
| Zero Voltage Transition Problem | kaosad | Power Supplies | 9 | 8th June 2008 06:58 AM |
| Horn throat geometry: round to rectangular transition | MaVo | Multi-Way | 20 | 26th November 2007 04:32 PM |
| how do you overcome low frequency radiation transition of line arrays? | thadman | Multi-Way | 32 | 26th December 2006 03:19 AM |
| Box shape | alex_g | Multi-Way | 7 | 21st February 2004 03:43 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 3.99665 seconds (-7.04% PHP - 107.04% MySQL) with 10 queries |