Well it will definitely cause an effect. I guess the $64,000 question, how big a deal is it?
My guess is close to zero effect; although one could possibly measure it, depending on the resolution of one’s equipment eg. Long gate, or Klippel.
But in the grand scheme of things; it probably makes a imperceptible difference.
In my experience, the crossover makes the most effect. The room makes the second biggest effect. The drivers; third, and cabinets fourth.
when the crossover is wrong the entire speaker is wrong;
nothing can save it; except for a new crossover…
My guess is close to zero effect; although one could possibly measure it, depending on the resolution of one’s equipment eg. Long gate, or Klippel.
But in the grand scheme of things; it probably makes a imperceptible difference.
In my experience, the crossover makes the most effect. The room makes the second biggest effect. The drivers; third, and cabinets fourth.
when the crossover is wrong the entire speaker is wrong;
nothing can save it; except for a new crossover…
Last edited:
It would be easy to measure as a change in the vertical directivity, in a fairly small waveguide the effect is from 2K up and would not need a particularly long gate to see it.
A minor change in the vertical directivity is unlikely to be a real issue. The question is moving the CTC closer by a small amount a real benefit to the overall design. If it is cut the waveguide, if it isn't don't.
I assume any issue, diffraction, would show in horizontal off axis set as well. To me it looks clean. It was measured from 1m, shorter distance would be needed to get more detailed view.
I value esthetics a lot, and it is one of key aspect of all my projects. I would not trade off any esthetics over serious technical or sonic issue, but here the esthetics is clear winner.
As tktran mentioned there are also other design aspects that determine overall sound character....
I value esthetics a lot, and it is one of key aspect of all my projects. I would not trade off any esthetics over serious technical or sonic issue, but here the esthetics is clear winner.
As tktran mentioned there are also other design aspects that determine overall sound character....
For this it only fully shows in the vertical or near vertical diagonal axes. The vertical will be different up and down in any case as the top edge of the cabinet will affect one way and the woofer will affect the other direction.
I agree if something looks bad it annoys me. I have rebuilt more than one project because it didn't look good enough.
Of course, but I don't think it is easy ahead of time to know exactly which effects will cause problems and which won't. I have experienced this myself where something can be difficult to equalise, a compromise can be reached but maybe it isn't as good as it could be.
The point of posting was only to supply data to the question asked not to criticize your choice or determine any audibility.
So far, who is the first one here to raise a hand if I ask "Who has made a perfect loudspeaker?"
I think these beauty marks are the salt an pepper of diy! It just takes some time to accept irrelevant minor imperfections... be it acoustic, esthetic or mechanical. And there will be the next project anyway!
I think these beauty marks are the salt an pepper of diy! It just takes some time to accept irrelevant minor imperfections... be it acoustic, esthetic or mechanical. And there will be the next project anyway!
Fluid, I take it as debate on technical aspects, their audibility and how to quantify them. I am glad you shown the analysis, that is still something I am to learn, though I am afraid I never will. There still will be another project to work on instead.
The data shown in post #105 displays excellent performance. If there is any negative contribution from the lip, it is insignificant in the measured data.
It is my understanding from reading his threads that Pida only measures in the Horizontal plane. This is a reasonable simplification for fully axially symmetric sources but it will not show what is actually happening vertically. In many speakers this may not make much difference but in speakers where the source is asymmetric it is not accurate.
It may seem intuitive that any response anomaly will appear obvious in all curves but that is not actually correct.
The measured data in this case is a simplification and cannot be relied on to accurately show the vertical response.
Even 360 degree two plane measurements are a vast over simplification of the actual radiated sound from a speaker, but in most cases the significant differences are captured by H and V measurements.
Fluid is correct. I measured Horizontals only. Vertical polar map was created via Vituix2+XYZ drivers coordinates+mirroring of horizontals to verticals (this is the feature of Vituix). It is certain simplification. It is definitely better then no vertical data at all, but indeed there is small error, depending on individual drivers symmetry of radiation to H and V planes, placement on the baffle, etc. In my case one element causing asymmetry of H and V radiation is that lip protruding to WG. Detailed, closer range vertical measurements would show the impact of the lip, though such a small FR variations tend to even out each other and in my opinion it would have close to zero effect on overall power response and DI.
Drivers asymmetry on the baffle is different thing and here I would expect ~1dB changes.
Anyway, this all depends on overall design and simplifications are not valid generally.
Drivers asymmetry on the baffle is different thing and here I would expect ~1dB changes.
Anyway, this all depends on overall design and simplifications are not valid generally.
I would agree in principal, the most likely curve to be affected would be the early reflections. The potential for a DI change from the simulation data came from the fact that the waveguide loses some loading in the vertical dimension but as that is also different at different vertical angles and there is always some vertical asymmetry in conventional tower speakers it might be hard to pick out.
A series of vertical measurements would give an answer but I can understand why you would not want to take the time make them.
Its a pain in the *** to polar measure floorstanders vertically. And I agree, while not necessary, they are essential if you are trying to get the forward axis lobe even on 0 degrees for say - a true LR4 XO. If your phase data is slightly out it can make the forward lobe tilt up or down. Some would argue this is easily visible with a driver-reversed measurement on axis, it is a strong sign, but not always correct.