I’m liking this design, I’ve found 10” tall 7” wide plastic Easter eggs on amazon that might make reusable forms. I could probably find bigger but even these should be about .12cf after woofer displacement. Considering I’m going to be running these active and I could throw a solid 100w power at my Anarchy 554’s or throw a solid 200w to a pair of Dayton Epique 5.5” and be rocking kinda hard. I could do a three egg variation of the ikea salad bowl build but one tall egg is enticingI have always admired Vaessen type enclosure, very sleek. However, such big styrofoam egg is not available.
Attachments
There's a very viable alternative to wooden bowls - the well known kitchen mixing bowls can be any size and easily connected around the perimeter and you can also get a cone shaped one that'll act as a suitable "tapered resistance" back half of the chamber with suitable deflection panels - an example, a 16" dia bowl will enclose about 1.3 cu ft (about 40 litre) and can be fitted with an 8" driver, etc
Those have big distance between the tweeter and mid.I’m liking this design, I’ve found 10” tall 7” wide plastic Easter eggs on amazon that might make reusable forms. I could probably find bigger but even these should be about .12cf after woofer displacement. Considering I’m going to be running these active and I could throw a solid 100w power at my Anarchy 554’s or throw a solid 200w to a pair of Dayton Epique 5.5” and be rocking kinda hard. I could do a three egg variation of the ikea salad bowl build but one tall egg is enticing View attachment 1154190
I never said there is absolutely no diffraction. Nitpicking ha?I don't think you will benefit all that much regarding diffraction with a shape where you have an egg with a flat baffle. There will still be a sharp egde there.
View attachment 1154198
I wouldn’t have a big spacer between each one and the enclosures for the mid and tweeter would be tiny.Those have big distance between the tweeter and mid.
I’m liking this design
I know the guy that did those loves them, but the spacing between drivers is too large, and personally i do not like the cosmetics.
The spheres should merge into each other to reduce centre-to-centre spacing.
dave
Dave, would dsp be the answer to the non ideal spacing? We use dsp as a bandaid in cars regularly.
DSP can only work to fix things where it can influence the physics of the sitution (example, useing multilpe subs to overcome the deficincies of a room), but there is not way to change the physics of 2 drivers spaced “far" apart. Note that as far as mids and tweeters are concerend, they are always “far” apart, even in a coax (this can be fixed with DSP, one just needs a timedelay on the tweeter to move it forward in space).
DSP is most useful at low frequencies, and within the limits of my experience, best used at low frequencies.
dave
DSP is most useful at low frequencies, and within the limits of my experience, best used at low frequencies.
dave
Just for the record, Focal had a diy model named the kit 600 back in the 80's with an egg shaped enclosure for the mid and high driver. It was combined with a woofer in a large Onken type BR. The egg was sold as a ready made item. I never had a change to hear it irl but the system had good reviews back then.


Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be looking at building horns for those corners. The corner line array is an OK idea, but horns will help reduce sidewall reflections.
Sure, but at higher frequencies you will get diffraction from the seam between your baffle and the wall as well as a reflection acting like a second speaker on the wall at the reflection point. Those interactions with the actual speaker are undesirable. Because a horn will limit lateral dispersion of high frequencies, there's less to bounce and less to diffract.
SB Acoustics has a couple 4" coaxial that would be great in a project like this.
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/coaxial/sb-acoustics-sb12pacr25-4-coax-4-round/
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/coaxial/sb-acoustics-sb12pfcr25-4-coax-4-coaxial-4-ohms-round/
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/coaxial/sb-acoustics-sb12pacr25-4-coax-4-round/
https://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/coaxial/sb-acoustics-sb12pfcr25-4-coax-4-coaxial-4-ohms-round/
I’ve looked at those a lot but I’ve been led to believe that doppler distortion can be audible and I think diffraction can occur from the surround and mounting flange. I think I was watching or reading about someSB Acoustics has a couple 4" coaxial that would be great in a project like this.
new-ish andrew jones 8” coaxial pioneer design. Doppler would probably be made inaudible by a sufficiently high midrange crossover limiting excursion. Point source coaxial drivers are something I just don’t understand.
From this point of view the sphere sure looks the best option but what about internal standing waves which in a sphere would be at one frequency in every direction?A sphere (like the Gallo speakers) might be better. Here's Olsons old experiments:
View attachment 1154201
Within an egg-shaped enclosure there would theoretically an infinite number possible above a minimum given by size which should be the better option.
So the 'solution' if it is a real world provlem would be an egg-shaped enclosure with the driver mount in the bottom rather than the long side.
Last edited:
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- Egg shaped enclosures