I have just the glimpse of an idea we could benefit more than expectating from making a special stand (primitive prototype) where for instance the diagonal lines running from the corners are now horizontal or vertical located . (a square baffle is then a special solution with 45 deg angled lines)
The effect on the freq resp is probably quite dramatic , onaxis/offaxis!
It is like shifting the tweeter position but not to the edges , to the corners!
I see your brain compz are getting hot now 🙂
I see a new speaker age coming up full of braintist with fresh ideas ...
Nothing new under the sun, really?
ps .. where to order those nice blinky ones? And the cool metal plate for the AMT? (Dayton?)
https://diy.midwestaudio.club/discussion/2246/how-does-this-look/p1
https://diy.midwestaudio.club/discussion/2246/how-does-this-look/p2
kind regards
The effect on the freq resp is probably quite dramatic , onaxis/offaxis!
It is like shifting the tweeter position but not to the edges , to the corners!
I see your brain compz are getting hot now 🙂
I see a new speaker age coming up full of braintist with fresh ideas ...
Nothing new under the sun, really?
ps .. where to order those nice blinky ones? And the cool metal plate for the AMT? (Dayton?)
https://diy.midwestaudio.club/discussion/2246/how-does-this-look/p1
https://diy.midwestaudio.club/discussion/2246/how-does-this-look/p2
kind regards
I think you should spin the middle side topwise . . . topwise.
Seriously, I have no idea what you are trying to describe. Perhaps a picture is in order.
Seriously, I have no idea what you are trying to describe. Perhaps a picture is in order.
Olson primitives are outdated , Sir Linkwitz has much more to offer :
https://www.linkwitzlab.com/diffraction.htm
The 45 deg cab/baffle is a good starting point .. I would not excluded it until some more hard evidence/facts?
There is more to the whole story , the whole idea behind STEREO is to get the best imagination of a pseudo 3D-panorama! (width/height/debth ..)
Any judgement about what is the better solution cannot seperated without knowing as much as possible about the 2-channel recording itself! (mono as a further source of information)
Burn your own reference material to CD , SQAM & PEQS :
https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/sqamcd
https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/PEQS_FLAC
Then - need to listen to your speakers outdoors in a quiet space!
And your listening setup in-room should be appropriate , medium sized room around 25m2 are to be preferred , speakers along the longest room side is much better! (REW has room/speaker simulator in-build, easy to use)
Speaker to speaker distance should be 150-250cm , standard room height in Europe is 260cm .
Because of the excellent results I would like to suggest using the Q350 from KEF as a reference (440 Euro the pair at amazon europe) , to proceed to possibly find a better one regarding stereo panorama presentation!
More info about KEF Q350 : https://www-hifialex-de.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Hard to beat freq resp of the tweeter without any filter network :
https://www-hifialex-de.translate.g..._sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
And here the results of the Klippel NFS measurements makes 99% of other junk speakers pale in the face :
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-q350-speaker-review.13484/
Isn't life really wonderfull? SO many surprises from time to time! And no end in sight!
Some month ago we had on YT a video demonstrating the impact of the comparision between outdoor and in-room listening of the original Q350 by KEF , using a good quality field recorder , but sorry the video was deleted in between , I forgot to keep a copy and waybackmachine.org does not store it either , what a tragic loss ... original link , maybe someone has stored a copy elsewhere :
Sorry for the long/complex post , we can go on to proceed anytime later , time is on my side 🙂
At the end , time for some uplifting stuff , here is a good one , if you are religious or not , Bob's intentions were good and that's all that counts :
(the original sounds much better than this YT soundjunk)
https://www.linkwitzlab.com/diffraction.htm
The 45 deg cab/baffle is a good starting point .. I would not excluded it until some more hard evidence/facts?
There is more to the whole story , the whole idea behind STEREO is to get the best imagination of a pseudo 3D-panorama! (width/height/debth ..)
Any judgement about what is the better solution cannot seperated without knowing as much as possible about the 2-channel recording itself! (mono as a further source of information)
Burn your own reference material to CD , SQAM & PEQS :
https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/sqamcd
https://tech.ebu.ch/publications/PEQS_FLAC
Then - need to listen to your speakers outdoors in a quiet space!
And your listening setup in-room should be appropriate , medium sized room around 25m2 are to be preferred , speakers along the longest room side is much better! (REW has room/speaker simulator in-build, easy to use)
Speaker to speaker distance should be 150-250cm , standard room height in Europe is 260cm .
Because of the excellent results I would like to suggest using the Q350 from KEF as a reference (440 Euro the pair at amazon europe) , to proceed to possibly find a better one regarding stereo panorama presentation!
More info about KEF Q350 : https://www-hifialex-de.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Hard to beat freq resp of the tweeter without any filter network :
https://www-hifialex-de.translate.g..._sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
And here the results of the Klippel NFS measurements makes 99% of other junk speakers pale in the face :
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-q350-speaker-review.13484/
Isn't life really wonderfull? SO many surprises from time to time! And no end in sight!
Some month ago we had on YT a video demonstrating the impact of the comparision between outdoor and in-room listening of the original Q350 by KEF , using a good quality field recorder , but sorry the video was deleted in between , I forgot to keep a copy and waybackmachine.org does not store it either , what a tragic loss ... original link , maybe someone has stored a copy elsewhere :
Sorry for the long/complex post , we can go on to proceed anytime later , time is on my side 🙂
At the end , time for some uplifting stuff , here is a good one , if you are religious or not , Bob's intentions were good and that's all that counts :
(the original sounds much better than this YT soundjunk)
Sorry forgot to summarize - it is unclear how much influence cab/baffle diffraction has on your stereo panorama perceiption asumming the first wavefront is still linear until the first reflection arrives !!!
Of course under the assumption of using artificial recordings , means very low content of reflections in the recording itself ...
It is more a scientific approach to get a clearer picture of what is going on in our hearing and why better is better!
To extrapolate - it could well be that in a "dense" recording our ears lose oversight and all sounds smeared to the point where you shut down your stereo being frustated ... while better "speakers" or/and less room interaction still satisfacts you!
The Cab/Baffle interaction (distance to floor/ceiling/side walls still critical) questions are not solved yet!
More need for better brain food than ever 🙂
The shiniest speakers needs the shiniest environment!
Of course under the assumption of using artificial recordings , means very low content of reflections in the recording itself ...
It is more a scientific approach to get a clearer picture of what is going on in our hearing and why better is better!
To extrapolate - it could well be that in a "dense" recording our ears lose oversight and all sounds smeared to the point where you shut down your stereo being frustated ... while better "speakers" or/and less room interaction still satisfacts you!
The Cab/Baffle interaction (distance to floor/ceiling/side walls still critical) questions are not solved yet!
More need for better brain food than ever 🙂
The shiniest speakers needs the shiniest environment!
Last edited:
For all those who refuse to use their brain beyond horizons of doubts :
Rotating the square baffle(cab) 45deg , which off-axis freq responses are to be expected and which influence comes especially from floor and ceiling reflections?
Thrilling questions of the future , more DIY - scientists please!
Nothing better than a thrilling future - you can be part of it or maybe you like to fell to dust never wanting to know the answers 🙂
AND WE WANT TO KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS NOT JUST SOME OF THEM
Rotating the square baffle(cab) 45deg , which off-axis freq responses are to be expected and which influence comes especially from floor and ceiling reflections?
Thrilling questions of the future , more DIY - scientists please!
Nothing better than a thrilling future - you can be part of it or maybe you like to fell to dust never wanting to know the answers 🙂
AND WE WANT TO KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS NOT JUST SOME OF THEM
FYI : just updated my last postings in several places to clarify things ... sorry my old school english isn't the very best!
A re-read of my posts could improve the understanding ....
A re-read of my posts could improve the understanding ....
A "cabaffle" isn't any special thing , it is a cabinet having a baffle where the driver is mounted! I combined both words to give a hint that the full d
iffraction effect is not only coming from a baffle without any thickness! There is no correct solution in 2D for 3D objects in a physical world , acoustic impedances reacting in all directions simultaneously depending on wavelengths and physical size (cabinet) ....
Again - the question is : Has the rotation of the "cabaffle" any significant effect on the stereo perceiption by the different orientation of the diffraction signature?
Floor/Ceiling reflections could be the worst offenders here , but front wall reflection from behind the speakers could be a negative factor too!
Because of the rotational stable sound radiation of the KEF 150 & 350 coaxial speakers they are ideal to use them in a research project!
In a complex world full of unknowns it may be wise to start where at least some unknowns can be excluded , right?
I am not here to answer questions , just thought this board is full of experts having answers a ton every day ready to serve the world 🙂
Still diggin' in the dirt that ole habit of mine ...
here some stuff to relax :
and a nice floating groove remix :
iffraction effect is not only coming from a baffle without any thickness! There is no correct solution in 2D for 3D objects in a physical world , acoustic impedances reacting in all directions simultaneously depending on wavelengths and physical size (cabinet) ....
Again - the question is : Has the rotation of the "cabaffle" any significant effect on the stereo perceiption by the different orientation of the diffraction signature?
Floor/Ceiling reflections could be the worst offenders here , but front wall reflection from behind the speakers could be a negative factor too!
Because of the rotational stable sound radiation of the KEF 150 & 350 coaxial speakers they are ideal to use them in a research project!
In a complex world full of unknowns it may be wise to start where at least some unknowns can be excluded , right?
I am not here to answer questions , just thought this board is full of experts having answers a ton every day ready to serve the world 🙂
Still diggin' in the dirt that ole habit of mine ...
here some stuff to relax :
and a nice floating groove remix :
If the cabinet isn't creating a problem to begin with then rotating it won't have much effect.. at least in some cases.
Hmm, if I'm following, then as the baffle's aspect ratio moves away from square the polar response can become audibly different.
Linkwitz is a reliable technical source. Some of the work was done in the context of dipoles and I'd add that roundovers change the situation we're talking about today.
That is for sure. Radiation analysis of loudspeaker enclosures isn’t anything new though, we have quite a few honorable members using FEM and showing results here around here as we all know. And OTOH knowledge of perception is discussed quite often here too. So I wondered what is new here.
The ultimate target is to get "pin-point" imaging for "all" frequencies!
With 2-channel stereo , you get off-center localizations for different level-ratios between both channels L/R .
While the in-room impulse response shows all reflections in level and distribution over window length , it is not clear what influence for instance the ceiling reflection has! Image smearing? Colouring the sound? Bringing the phantom source forward? (and so on ...)
Some kind of scientic investigation/documentation seems to be appropriate!
This post not ready yet but here as it is so you have something to chew on with your brain muscles 🙂
With 2-channel stereo , you get off-center localizations for different level-ratios between both channels L/R .
While the in-room impulse response shows all reflections in level and distribution over window length , it is not clear what influence for instance the ceiling reflection has! Image smearing? Colouring the sound? Bringing the phantom source forward? (and so on ...)
Some kind of scientic investigation/documentation seems to be appropriate!
This post not ready yet but here as it is so you have something to chew on with your brain muscles 🙂