Hey guys
I'm just beginning my second dipole speaker project after many years I wanted to share it with you to hear your idea. the plan is to build a perfect symmetrical dipole speaker with m-frame woofers. I'm going to active it with a 2-3way DSP and some Hypex amps. I'm gonna use an Air Motion Transfer tweeter and I'll remove the rear felt pad then I'll hand the tweeter in the air using steel wires. this idea comes from DAudio speaker. I still don't know if Faital Pro 12RS2066 with fs of 41hz will work properly here or not. I have access to all Faital pro and Beyma drivers
this is my crazy sketch for now:
this is Daudio W1 dipole:
I'm just beginning my second dipole speaker project after many years I wanted to share it with you to hear your idea. the plan is to build a perfect symmetrical dipole speaker with m-frame woofers. I'm going to active it with a 2-3way DSP and some Hypex amps. I'm gonna use an Air Motion Transfer tweeter and I'll remove the rear felt pad then I'll hand the tweeter in the air using steel wires. this idea comes from DAudio speaker. I still don't know if Faital Pro 12RS2066 with fs of 41hz will work properly here or not. I have access to all Faital pro and Beyma drivers
this is my crazy sketch for now:
this is Daudio W1 dipole:
Attachments
Last edited:
maybe Faital Pro 8PR200 is a better choice thatn 8PR155 with 8.5mm Xmax and lower resonance frequency
FaitalPRO | LF Loudspeakers | 8PR200
Xbaffle of some drivers on a same 25x30cm baffle
FaitalPRO | LF Loudspeakers | 8PR200
Xbaffle of some drivers on a same 25x30cm baffle
Attachments
Last edited:
I think either TPL-150 or AST2650 are not able to handle frequencies down to 1000hz. I was thinking to cross them around 1.6khz with steep slope and I think that 8" midrange won't have to much beaming problem at 1.6khz or so. any idea?
thanks
8FE200 is also good but as I'm not on a budget I think I will chose a die-cast frame driver
you mean that bridge SL used to isolate the top section from woofers? sure why not
thanks for simulation
actually I not very keen on the baffle size. I have to simulate it to see which size is better
Baffle diameter is very important for dipoles, it largely determines how dipole radiation appears, where dipole loss, peak and null appear. Narrow shifts all to higher Hz, but then you need more eq in low end and the driver's distortion and Xmax are challenged.
This is the reason why 4-way constructions are better, it is very difficult to stretch a dipole driver's passband to 3 octaves without loosing constant directivity or getting high distortion.
This is the reason why 4-way constructions are better, it is very difficult to stretch a dipole driver's passband to 3 octaves without loosing constant directivity or getting high distortion.
that's right
do you think adding a 3-4" driver from around 1khz to 3-4khz will be a good thing to do?
something like this:
12" woofers below 120hz
8" midbass from 120hz to 1khz
5" midrange from 1khz to 3-4khz
AMT tweeter from 3-4khz and upward
in that case I'll run everything with three amps and add a passive LP and HP between midbass and mdrange. any idea?
oh look at this interesting Faital pro driver. 5" 99db efficient!
FaitalPRO | LF Loudspeakers | M5N8-80
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I don't comment exact driver choices. Here are quick Edge simulations in a baffle that looks a bit like Kreskowsky's NaO baffles.
We can see that problems arise abore 2kHz, thing get tricky when max baffle width should be more narrow than the driver's own physical diameter. Tweeter's response will be nicer in reality. Kreskowsky crosses his 4" driver to tweeter at 6kHz.
it is easiest to make passive xo for highM-T
These are excellent resources. Notice the similarity in baffles, laws of physics are same in Northern California, perhaps even globally!
LX521 Description
NaO Note II RS Details
We can see that problems arise abore 2kHz, thing get tricky when max baffle width should be more narrow than the driver's own physical diameter. Tweeter's response will be nicer in reality. Kreskowsky crosses his 4" driver to tweeter at 6kHz.
it is easiest to make passive xo for highM-T
These are excellent resources. Notice the similarity in baffles, laws of physics are same in Northern California, perhaps even globally!
LX521 Description
NaO Note II RS Details
Attachments
Tahnk you Juhazi for your help with good information
you're right having a passive XO between midrange and tweeter is better. these two driver will also draw less current so better to dedicate a separate amp to midbass driver
so here is the list of drivers for now:
2x Faital Pro 12RS1066 as subwoofers
1x Faital Pro 8PR200 as midbass/lower midrange
1x Faital Pro M5N8-80 as midrange
1x Beyma TPL-150 or Aurum Cantus AST2560 as tweeter
I think I prefer to keep the simplicity of three way and try to cross midrange and tweeter as low as possible. I'm starting to think about using a TPL-200 with more headroom and cross it around 1400hz with a steep slope
I also thought about the bridge between bassbin and top section to keep the nasty vibrations out. I'm using 12" subwoofers this will result in a wider speaker. I want to keep it compact so the bridge is not an option. I'm thinking about levitating the top section magnetically just like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74F7odDKL4Y
Attachments
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
you might have to put -5db notch to 1170hz
i cross my own at 2k 180db/oct
those double 12" run out of steam first when played loud
Last edited:
I'll take care of that hump in DSP department
in which way "double 12" run out of steam first when played loud"?
Have you checked the drivers' excursion at their crossover points - vs their Xmax, at your desired maximum SPL, with this spreadsheet of Linkwitz?
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/spl_max1.xls
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/spl_max1.xls
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.