DIY-Forum loses focus? Summer too hot for the average thinkbrain? What do you want to achieve? Best possible localization? Any discussion needs a starting point , a reference!
In yesteryears , America had the Speaker Builder magazine , now audioexpress.com
Does America loose their own culture and traditions? Where are the good old times? I think in that case we all will loose much more than what is visible at first sight!
kind regards
In yesteryears , America had the Speaker Builder magazine , now audioexpress.com
Does America loose their own culture and traditions? Where are the good old times? I think in that case we all will loose much more than what is visible at first sight!
kind regards
What do you think of brands like JM Lab, Sonus Faber, etc, that have cabinet shapes with a relative big distance between the tweeter and the top of the cabinet...often bigger than the distance between it and the sides ?
Vertical lobbing purpose...or ?
@Marvoulaudio, I surmise the first common goal for us to acheive cabinets you can not localizevin the room with the ears. In that regard, one of the best I had was the Kef 104/2 Reference. Bevels of the MTM structure were relativly big and well angled.
Then if it can image well that is glacing on the cake. I have loudspeakers with a relativly better soundstage than the Kef but it is not dissaepering from the room as the Kef did.
Vertical lobbing purpose...or ?
@Marvoulaudio, I surmise the first common goal for us to acheive cabinets you can not localizevin the room with the ears. In that regard, one of the best I had was the Kef 104/2 Reference. Bevels of the MTM structure were relativly big and well angled.
Then if it can image well that is glacing on the cake. I have loudspeakers with a relativly better soundstage than the Kef but it is not dissaepering from the room as the Kef did.
Last edited:
There is still a chance you find a specific reason as a solution to a certain problem , but it can be hidden round the next corner , makes you ANGRY about yourself ... WHY I am not MORE intelligent? Well maybe there are are zillions of possibilities and intelligence alone maybe not the best tool to handle such a wealth of informations ....
So we are diggin' in the dirt and some of us have the luck to find a better solution than others ...
Nice video from 1987 ... (maybe 1986)
So we are diggin' in the dirt and some of us have the luck to find a better solution than others ...
Nice video from 1987 ... (maybe 1986)
Do you remember that clever guy ?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...2-styled-3way-speaker-diy.372873/post-6671009
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...2-styled-3way-speaker-diy.372873/post-6671009
for me I like to use a simple as possible reference with drivers having no dominant resonance ... reverse polarity of the woofer should be allowed for twoways .... if you check music tracks nearly all of the impulses are going positive (more than 90%) and for natural instruments they have significant different peak levels!
so if you follow a typical acoustic jazz track visually in scope mode (freeware-audacity & goldwave) you HEAR the impact of the drum stick changing more prominently , this can be trained to some degree and your brain will recognize such subtleties better in the future to get you "into the swing"
compressed music - terrible! ALL peaks in the music having the same height!
switching back to an uncompressed piece of music you will typically see/hear/feel several dB of peak differences!
THAT gives music a more lively sound! (along with rythm timings)
nowadays I see it to be essential and I check every new CD on a computer for compression before I gave it a listening!
but I don't know how this is handled in digital music instruments like synthesizer/keyboard ....
Don’t you mean limiting instead of compressing when you refer to the peaks? I won’t deny though compression is quite beloved. ‘Cause it sells, eh?
Hi. I will build raindrop 💧 shape speaker with friends 3D printer but my wife tells me vertical raindrop seems better. We usually see horizontal like BW.What will be the difference between vertical and horizontal shape ? Which one will be better?Regards
Last edited by a moderator:
I woud use it the way B&W & FUITSU Ten orients it, b=if you want to orient vertically probably some variation on an ellispoid, and a 2-way probably works better than pointed teardrop. Like this Waveform loudspeaker.
dave
dave
It depends which one you optimise. This shape does have potential (not because it is inherently a correct shape).
It's much worse in theory since we need to visualize the BW moving forward/backward @ the SoS, so a tapered point is to be avoided with a much more organic shape as Dave referenced and preferably with only the drivers being 'flat' and even better, using dome shaped drivers.
Where the tear drop vertically could shine is for omni difusor with the driver firering vertically below !
https://www.audioemotion.co.uk/duevel-sirius-omnidirectional-loudspeaker-26146-p.asp
https://www.audioemotion.co.uk/duevel-venus-loudspeakers-26167-p.asp
https://www.audioemotion.co.uk/duevel-sirius-omnidirectional-loudspeaker-26146-p.asp
https://www.audioemotion.co.uk/duevel-venus-loudspeakers-26167-p.asp
Which shape of cabinet gives a better image?
Amongst many factors,
room shape & damping + the RT-60 of the room. Also width of speaker placement.
Distance from the speaker is also a major aspect of imaging.
Whenever a 'sound radiating panel' is placed at an angle WRT other s.r. panel, an extra aspect 'of position' is created.
I am impressed with photo's seen here 🙂
Amongst many factors,
room shape & damping + the RT-60 of the room. Also width of speaker placement.
Distance from the speaker is also a major aspect of imaging.
Whenever a 'sound radiating panel' is placed at an angle WRT other s.r. panel, an extra aspect 'of position' is created.
I am impressed with photo's seen here 🙂
Last edited by a moderator:
I would like to suggest that "Which shape of cabinet gives a better image?" is not the ideal question to start with. A more fruitful question is, "Which radiation pattern gives a better image?" which leads to "which cabinet shape gives you that radiation pattern?"
I'm currently discussing this here in a thread about achieving Constant Directivity:
I would also add the question: "Which approach to time and phase gives a better image?"
When you combine these questions, you get a set of constraints that lead you away from the average "Stereophile" design philosophy. My own designs have begun to prioritize Constant Directivity, horns, waveguides and dipoles, and I also pay close attention to impulse response, step response and phase response. All of those things have a huge effect on imaging.
I'm currently discussing this here in a thread about achieving Constant Directivity:
I would also add the question: "Which approach to time and phase gives a better image?"
When you combine these questions, you get a set of constraints that lead you away from the average "Stereophile" design philosophy. My own designs have begun to prioritize Constant Directivity, horns, waveguides and dipoles, and I also pay close attention to impulse response, step response and phase response. All of those things have a huge effect on imaging.
" I would like to suggest that "Which shape of cabinet gives a better image?" is not the ideal question to start with. A more fruitful question is, "Which radiation pattern gives a better image?" which leads to "which cabinet shape gives you that radiation pattern?"
It means the same thing with twice the words to arrive to the last question which asks the same ?!
But maybe you wanted to say the radiation patern doesn't come only from the cabinet shape and wants to enlarge the radiation patern as a concept that is larger (no pun) than the cabinet shape only ?
It means the same thing with twice the words to arrive to the last question which asks the same ?!
But maybe you wanted to say the radiation patern doesn't come only from the cabinet shape and wants to enlarge the radiation patern as a concept that is larger (no pun) than the cabinet shape only ?
Yes exactly. Imaging comes from radiation pattern not cabinet shape per se, and radiation pattern is a function of all kinds of things like the polar pattern of the woofer and whether the tweeter has a waveguide etc. Radiation pattern is the primary driver of imaging.