Maybe this can be clustered in a multicell horn 🙂 with an ESP plug to fix the waveshape, and some of the other fixes to a multicell mentioned in Kolbrek's book
I'll order filament to print two waveguides. This looks really good but if you decide to change anything there is still time.
I overlaid the discussed Horn(Red) and the Waveguide(Blue) DI...
Basically anywhere the DI is higher, will measure better, in room, in the sweet spot... Is that the general consensus?
Basically anywhere the DI is higher, will measure better, in room, in the sweet spot... Is that the general consensus?
But it is generally true, regardless, correct? A higher DI will result in a room measurement that is truer to the anechoic measurement, when speaking of the sweet spot.
All things else equal, the lower DI will cause more room reflections, than a situation of higher DI
All things else equal, the lower DI will cause more room reflections, than a situation of higher DI
That doesn't mean it measures better. That's not how should be speakers measured in the first place.
You still completely overlook how flat that reflections are, spectrally (i.e. the slope of the DI). That's just not how it works.
I didn't over look the phase and decay issues reflections cause. The more of the them, the more issues. The lower the DI the more reflective energy
How flat are, room reflections?
All things else equal, I'm pretty sure it does mean it measures better, in a room.
But that's just not true. Come on. Anechoic chamber is really not a target for enjoyable listening environment. It would be if what you said was true.
Yeah but Mabat you are talking preference, I am just talking about looking at measurements objectively. Even at high DI, the results are no where as accurate as the room performance of an Anechoic chamber. Using Room treatment, makes resulting measurements closer to the anechoic measurements as well..... The purpose of a Waveguide is to increase directivity, otherwise, no use of a waveguide.
Not necessarily, there are pretty wide-radiating (lowish DI) waveguides as well. It's mainly to maintain it controlled, so the reflections retain a similar spectral content as the direct sound.
And to measure such device properly, you ideally need an anechoic chamber, or another technique that eliminates reflections. Measuring it in a sweet spot including a room is just dilettantism.
Last edited:
So a flat baffled tweeter.... cannot have as good off axis performance as a waveguided tweeter?
No it can't, not nearly as close to what's possible with a waveguide.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-design-the-easy-way-ath4.338806/post-7354055
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...-design-the-easy-way-ath4.338806/post-7354055
I am curious what the best designed flat baffle polar looks like...compared to a waveguide of the same width.
I would suspect that less interaction at the baffle edge is apart of the reason why.... So basically just increased DI, makes the non flat waveguide better.
No, just look at the example above - the waveguide actually decreases the DI at high frequencies compared to a raw tweeter in a baffle. It doesn't have to do it but it can, keeping the DI flat - that is its main function, to keep DI flat, as with any other good waveguide.
And I'm talking about the whole frequency band radiated by the device, whatever it is. Seems important to me, but that's the preference thing I guess 🙂