Oh yes, combination can happen sometimes: they are difficult to determine at first, but once you change one by one variable you could identify them.
Ronald you already done some FIR for correcting phase behavior?!
I might have
Oh dear, I feel some late nights coming on again.....
You bet!
Oh yes, combination can happen sometimes: they are difficult to determine at first, but once you change one by one variable you could identify them.
Ronald you already done some FIR for correcting phase behavior?!
Yes he has! And sent me the REW file simulations to peruse. They are scary!
If I had not gone the line array route, the synergy concept would have been in my future.
I've been following all of the synergy threads on here for a long long while. After seeing the predictions it made perfect sense. There aren't that many concepts I can think of able to pull this off. Synergies make a lot of sense to me for the home environment.
All one's got to do is make it pretty.
Something like this:
or
(Originally found on a Russian forum)
I've been following all of the synergy threads on here for a long long while. After seeing the predictions it made perfect sense. There aren't that many concepts I can think of able to pull this off. Synergies make a lot of sense to me for the home environment.
All one's got to do is make it pretty
.Something like this:
or
(Originally found on a Russian forum)
Attachments
Last edited:
Synergies make a lot of sense to me for the home environment.
All one's got to do is make it pretty
OK, OK, I have plans don't worry (likely solid wood coverings - perhaps with much larger radius edges.......) - but until I have a fixed abode for them - they stay black, functional and ugly!
Why do you dig the Synergy concept at all? It does not work. Basses need much air displacement hence profit of a horn, which transforms acoustical impedance. Yet the Synergy replaces the horn in the basses for direct radiation. All the air to be moved must squeeze thru a few ridiciously small ports. This PA stuff does not work. Yet it is popular. You are cutting off some of that popularity for your home use. Flanging on subwoofers. Quick fixes. Still the concept is quite a mess.
Ok let's resume: point source, multiway, with controlled directivity to a frequency point which is usefull in most room staying not too large or bulky, with ridiculously low amount of distortion and no softdome tweeters or cd used...
What do you have as better design to offer Grasso789? I'm curious...
And find a bit arrogant some of the statements you make. But maybe that's me...
I don't get where you say it doesn't work. Look at the data.
Data summary here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ti-way-point-source-horn-125.html#post4644501
This design achieves low distortion, flat phase, great bass extension, narrow directivity to reduce room interactions, excellent step response, and no direct radiators. This is not a thread where we just say it sounds great. We back it up with quantifiable measurments that confirm why it sounds great. If you think this concept doesn't work - show is measurements of a system with better performance for a similar box size and cost of materials. What do you suggest as better and not as you put it, a "mess". You say pushing air through "ridiculously small holes" doesn't work but it's exactly the nature of the bandpass port injection that gives reduced distortion by preventing the higher frequencies from even coming out. The constriction loads the cone so that less excursion occurs hence less distortion. This is all a balancing act and that is why we use models and simulations to first estimate what size holes and where to put them. Look at the modeling effort that happened in parallel at the early part of this thread. That's how the woofers were chosen and the hole diameters decided upon. Perhaps the biggest reason why the bandpass injection holes were used was to put the two drivers in a virtual point source with the mid/tweet horn. Hence no frequency dependent polar lobing effects.
Last edited:
With a big thank you to Tom Danley for being this clever...
Yep- we should all doff our hats to his enormous brain!
Hi, 971,
Good drivers do not distort much, but an air port too small always does.
Uli
Emphasis is by me. You do use direct radiators, because at least one way of your loudspeaker constructs has its ports too far on the outskirts of the horn, close to the mouth, to still work as a horn.
Good drivers do not distort much, but an air port too small always does.
Not where it counts. The Synergy uses effectively direct radiation in the bass. A port makes no horn. For a horn, the port must be located at the throat.
Any symmetrical arrangement such as D'Apollito would obtain a two-dimensional source position equal to the tweeter's. A smaller horn surrounded by two to eight direct-radiating drivers is all you need for modular scalable PA applications. It can become stacked, if the construction is right. Welcome to working stuff.
Uli
Last edited:
Grasso789, somehow I think you're on the wrong thread. This thread is about a Unity/Synergy concept using a moderate sized horn and a full range driver for the top end.
If you don't like it? Fine... but why make so much noise and claims about your concept on this thread. It seems like false advertising to me. Your measurements are not that convincing, you need to work a little harder, make less noise on this thread.
If you are that convinced about your own little concept, why dismiss other well though out concepts? That just seems wrong to me.
If you don't like it? Fine... but why make so much noise and claims about your concept on this thread. It seems like false advertising to me. Your measurements are not that convincing, you need to work a little harder, make less noise on this thread.
If you are that convinced about your own little concept, why dismiss other well though out concepts? That just seems wrong to me.
I am quite convinced by MTM arrangement and some of the better sounding speakers i've heard used this layout (Kinoshita's RM series for example). But they are not free from vertical behavior issue (unless you use FIR and clever implementation of them). I would not say this kind of design is stackable, even for PA use using IIR filter and i doubt aven FIR could be. You'll still have vertical polar anomaly unless you could satisfy the 1/4 wavelength CTC distance which means low crossover point. There is possible design satisfying this kind of rule but to my knowledge only one 'brand' do it and the loudspeaker is not a two way anymore...
Biro Technology have a nice paper about MTM layout issue:
http://www.birotechnology.com/articles/VSTWLA.html
This is easily simulated using software.
Some recent research have shown you could do a vertical stacked 'mirror' layout/filter to control vertical directivity (Horbach/Keele method of filtering and layout) but this isn't an MTM or D'appolito configuration anymore.
And i don't see the point to stack them in a domestic room anyway... better to go vertical line array in my point of view.
I think you don't get the important point in an home use: having very smooth polar behavior. The point is not to load the driver and have acoustic impedance matching in this implementation more a directivity control.
Sorry but this kind of statement is just impossible for me to take seriously.
You are on a forum where many are highly skilled ones, some do loudspeaker design for a living and one thing they don't do is to put this kind of statements without giving a full explanation including theorical and realworld implementation with graph and all...
What you say is all about opinion and criticism of a theory without backup... blablablabla.
You won't convince myself with this. Maybe it's language barrier i don't know.
Like Wesayso i think you should open a thread and discuss your point of view there: could be funny... maybe Tom Danley could even have an exchange with you. We could have a good laugh, or see the advent of new theory about loudspeakers.
Last edited: