if I wanted to add a little mid and high end to p.a. do I have to put a lot of thought into zoebel and baffle step compensation, or baffle width? six sided cabs are getting heavy. it would be easier to go open baffle to add helpers to existing p.a..
Baffle step isn't used in pro sound but you do want to match the output levels of all the drivers in the system so a basic crossover and l-pads will be necessary.. assuming a passive speaker system.
One advantage of mid/high cabs, they don't tend to apply the same pressure as bass frequencies, so you can use a lighter structure, thinner panels, less bracing, which cuts down on the weight.
As you've cut out the lows, your cone will have very little tendency to flap without the control of the cabinet pressure.
But if you're going for cone drivers your open back is going to give you a figure of eight directional response, and rather too much beaming for my personal taste - a slotted back, hypercardiod directionality and a bar in front of the cone to break up the high frequencies, or an array to spread the energy, give an easier to use system, while leaving space to stow the cables. Obviously diaphragm pressure drivers don't give this problem, being totally dependent on the horn shape, but one going down to the bottom of 'mids' will tend to be heavy, and frequently expensive. And more efficient than your main system, so needing stepping down (enough so that biamping becomes very attractive).
How high would you be thinking of crossing over? Changing drivers in the middle of the vocal range can seriously reduce comprehension, but a good passive crossover at 600Hz is heavy in its own right, and quite expensive, and would presumably be mounted in the 'pick them up' lift them over your head and put them on top of the existing system' speakers 😉
As you've cut out the lows, your cone will have very little tendency to flap without the control of the cabinet pressure.
But if you're going for cone drivers your open back is going to give you a figure of eight directional response, and rather too much beaming for my personal taste - a slotted back, hypercardiod directionality and a bar in front of the cone to break up the high frequencies, or an array to spread the energy, give an easier to use system, while leaving space to stow the cables. Obviously diaphragm pressure drivers don't give this problem, being totally dependent on the horn shape, but one going down to the bottom of 'mids' will tend to be heavy, and frequently expensive. And more efficient than your main system, so needing stepping down (enough so that biamping becomes very attractive).
How high would you be thinking of crossing over? Changing drivers in the middle of the vocal range can seriously reduce comprehension, but a good passive crossover at 600Hz is heavy in its own right, and quite expensive, and would presumably be mounted in the 'pick them up' lift them over your head and put them on top of the existing system' speakers 😉
Chris, he's talking about closed-back drivers. I'd be very surprised if they had any dipole radiation.
FWIW, baffle step compensation is just something else built into the EQ of the overall system. If you get a -4dB shelf from 500Hz and down, that gets EQ'd out.
FWIW, baffle step compensation is just something else built into the EQ of the overall system. If you get a -4dB shelf from 500Hz and down, that gets EQ'd out.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.