SB Acoustics Satori Monitor - Page 10 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Vendor Forums > Vendor's Bazaar

Vendor's Bazaar Commercial Vendors large & small hawking their wares

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 7th October 2012, 03:34 PM   #91
_henry_ is offline _henry_  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Australia
yes i believe its the older version of guarnieri, the newer ones use single baffle with chamfer. it maybe cheaper to do the newer ones
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 04:03 PM   #92
tinitus is offline tinitus  Europe
diyAudio Moderator R.I.P.
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Tinitus, a thin baffle is not a very stable playground for the drivers.
I did not suggest thin either
but considering the very small and close to non existent area you have around a 6" driver on the inside, well.....

as long as the front baffle is sturdy material like plywood, the exstra effort is much better spent on making the rest of the enclosure thick, in my opinion
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 04:43 PM   #93
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Yes, a more rigid material can be use for the baffle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 08:28 PM   #94
tvrgeek is offline tvrgeek  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Md
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Design number 1 can also be modified by putting felt around the staggered elements making the tweeter baffle flat in essence.
Or do the trick all the car stereo guys do. Stable fleece across it and pour on the resin. Back fill with expanding foam.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 08:37 PM   #95
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Plastic is not my material but a clever idea.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 08:44 PM   #96
gornir is offline gornir  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
gornir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
What you call a "ladder delay network" has not only the effect of delaying the tweeter but it also adds an all pass term so you can not build a time coherent speaker with a ladder network. When i go the the Sequence Two measurements the drivers match in phase only over a quite narrow range. With acoustic delay by mechanical means i can do better WHEN i want to make an all pass crossover.
“Ladder Delay Network” filter, “All-pass Network”, “Lattice Network” or “Phase Control Circuit”, different names for the same thing.

I thought one of the design goals was a simple to build enclosure? What could be easier to build than a flat baffle?

If using a flat baffle together with shallow sloped filter the way to go is a tweeter delay circuit or a tweeter waveguide or horn to get a “time coherent” loudspeaker. Another way to do it would be to time delay the tweeter actively.

Time delaying the tweeter mechanically also works fine, but could give other issues like diffraction. The enclosure design 4 and 5 could be problematic regarding diffraction and enclosure build complexity.

My suggestion of a “time delay circuit” was just a humble question if it was something you had consider as an option. Clearly you have decided to go with the “mechanical” way and that’s great and I do like the stepped baffle better than the slanted way.

Most published designs I’ve read never shows the individual drivers phase tracking. I choose to publish mine, but I don’t think it should be over over-interpreted. Some people even argue that phase distortion can’t be heard as long as the frequency response is reasonably flat.

I agree that my phase tracking is only perfect one octave below and above the cross-over frequency and then slowly deteriorates. I realize that you haven’t decided the cross-over topology yet, but considering enclosure design I guess you are going for a shallow sloped topology? You as a very experienced designer, how wide do you consider a good phase tracking should be in the Satori Monitor design?

Unfortunately most published DIY designs I’ve read from loudspeaker driver manufacturer’s only shows impedance and on-axis response. Sometimes they show reverse polarity response and individual driver on-axis frequency response. This is simply not enough to technically evaluate a design. With that said, measurements alone don’t tell if a loudspeaker sounds good or not. Often when doing the final adjustments and voicing of a loudspeaker design, changes are made that measurement wise isn’t perfect, but actually do sounds better.

This could be one of the reasons why many published DIY designs doesn’t show any detailed measurements or just because they doesn’t want scare off people with a less good design. If you look at commercial designs we almost never see any measurements to back up the design, but instead a lot of marketing mumbo jumbo.

I really hope the fully documented design will contain on and off-axis frequency measurements, both horizontally and vertically as well as individual drivers phase tracking, impedance and distortion measurements.

I’ve been interested in the Satori MW16 for some time now and I think this thread is very interesting and I hope you share us your measurements and listening impressions of the Satoris.

I will follow this build thread with great interest.

Regards

/Göran
__________________
Author of the "AudioExcite Loudspeaker Design" website
http://www.audioexcite.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 09:12 PM   #97
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
I decided on mechanical delay compensation because i would like to have as much options as possible and the all pass ladder does simply not allow to make a phase coherent speaker that i would also like to try. You know that of cause. Also it is against my philosophy of using as few components as possible.
If a L/R4 has enough phase distortion to be audible is not so easy to answer. Simply comparing it to a first order design will not work because both version have totally different off axis responses with the first oder lobing but with a flat power response overall whereas the L/R is more symmetrical but with a 3dB hole in the power response around the crossover frequency. Yes, of cause, i measure off axis since ages and will publish all relevant data. If i do the data collection right can be debated though.
In Germany we say " Wer viel misst misst Mist"
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 09:14 PM   #98
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Great website that you host, i went over it some time ago but not in detail. I will do that soon.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 10:19 PM   #99
gornir is offline gornir  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
gornir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
"Wer viel misst misst Mist".
Ja, ich stimme Ihnen völlig zu!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Also it is against my philosophy of using as few components as possible.
Yes, exactly my philosophy also.

This is an example of a very simple cross-over using a true LR2 cross-over, without any delay circuit or sloped/stepped baffle.

Prestigious Two – Monitor DXT

Click the image to open in full size.

Less is more!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Great website that you host, i went over it some time ago but not in detail. I will do that soon.
Thank you!

I just wish I was a better writer. I have so much I want to write about, but it's hard especially when its not in your native language.

Regards

/Göran
Attached Images
File Type: jpg PT-MDXT-cross-over.jpg (54.0 KB, 1251 views)
__________________
Author of the "AudioExcite Loudspeaker Design" website
http://www.audioexcite.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 10:41 PM   #100
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
The SEAS DXT is somewhat set back because of the special waveguide. That helps.
It is a good tweeter when you get the falling response under control. Does not have much issues with edge diffraction too. Commercially it does seem that it is not that successful. Maybe people are just looking at the raw response and that does not look flat.
I did a lot of speakers with a flat baffle that sounded nice and by playing around with non textbook crossovers i got a rather flat response with good radiation pattern.
If that is the wish, i can do that fast and easy. Then we have an entry level design that can be build by virtually everyone that doe snot have two left thumbs.
  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
SB Acoustics 3 ways cosmindaniel12 Multi-Way 39 2nd August 2014 04:30 AM
More T/S specs needed for SB Acoustics mcmahon48 Multi-Way 2 15th August 2010 01:34 PM
All SB Acoustics MTM ?? Andy G Multi-Way 12 26th September 2009 01:35 PM
Anybody familiar with SB Acoustics zimjj Multi-Way 0 13th March 2009 11:30 PM
SB Acoustics... The stuff looks good sardonx Multi-Way 20 16th February 2008 09:15 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:15 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