How would you say that monopole is better at 70-200 HZ. From listening experience, it is this very midbass region ( 40-120 Hz) where dipoles truly excel without any equalization and provide an excellent transient response where the sharp thump of a kickdrum is palpable. Below 40Hz, I agree that dipoles are inefficient.
Last edited:
I was commenting StigErik's measurements. They show less resonances and shorter decay in that area with the monopole.
The decay is not shorter. The length of the room decay is the same. Its the LEVEL of the roomdecay that is different.
No they don't. You have misinterpreted the graphs. It's actually the other way around, although the decay time is the same.
I understood what you said below, but I was simply commenting my comment.
And doesn't it also prove we are back to square one? It's what Gedlee has described many times. We are not comparing correctly and fairly.
I don't think the discussion monopole vs dipole doesn't make much sense right now. Even more so if there's no comparable data.
Truck or car, which one is better? The question is: what is the goal and what are the tradeoffs using one solution over the other?
Truck or car, which one is better? The question is: what is the goal and what are the tradeoffs using one solution over the other?
To make a bullet-proof scientific and well documented comparison between dipole and monopole is a lot of work, and I am not going to do it.
I was just presenting my own view and experience on this, which just happens to be shared by virtually everyone who has any experience with dipoles. But we could be wrong of course.....
The most important thing for me is that my dipole bass is the best bass I've ever had.
I was just presenting my own view and experience on this, which just happens to be shared by virtually everyone who has any experience with dipoles. But we could be wrong of course.....
The most important thing for me is that my dipole bass is the best bass I've ever had.
Take a look at my decay measurements again. The monopole has got one long decay, while the dipole has got at "knee" where the room decay really starts.
I know my data is far from comparable, but it shows an interesting difference between dipole and monopole.
I know my data is far from comparable, but it shows an interesting difference between dipole and monopole.
Attachments
This observation from the graphs by StigErik is the key evidence for the better transient response in a room from a dipole.
The room decay is a function of room acoustics and will be the same independent of the source. However if less sound waves reach the room boundaries, the SPL of the reverberant field is lower to start with for a bidirectional dipole as opposed to a monopole that is omnidirectional. So logically, the ratio of the direct to indirect soundfield higher for a dipole than a monopole. Higher direct sound equals to reduced room coloration...this is true for any speaker. That is why some listeners who prefer uncoloured sound in their rooms go for narrow directivity speakers like horn loaded ones. The only other way to reduce room colourations is to increase wall absorption. While room treatments work well and inexpensively for mid-high frequencies, it is not so for bass frequencies. So the only way to reduce the room colourations in the bass region is to get narrow directivity in the bass region....using a dipole bass unit !
Following the above line of thought, a monopole and a dipole should sound the same in open air or anechoic conditions. Unfortunately even that might not be true...as the backwave from a sealed monopole can never be completely absorbed (unless it is a rare long stuffed sealed TL) the unaccounted and un-simulatable stored energy from a monopole eventually comes out, smearing the sound envelope. In contrast, in a dipole all the energy is accounted for to a greater extent.
And this graph is the "key evidence" for what?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Double Bass Array (DBA) - The modern bass concept!
You can't compare that to StigEriks' room anyway. Rooms are different. It would have to be in the same room, if it's going to have any meaning at all.
What we're seeing for sure are modal issues with both. Just as expected.
If one thinks he will get from here:
To here:
by going from monopole to dipole or with multiple subs, they are wrong. There's no free lunch here.
Attachments
Last edited:
I didn't claim the opposite 😕
What's the difference between the two rooms you've shown? Those plots don't look right.
Last edited:
That's obvious but what IS the difference (room size, source/receiver locations, treatments, etc.).
You're showing a 60dB range without any noise floor visible. That's uncommon.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.