I'm trying to run woofers with the full range driver setup.
But not many 12-15's have a flat Impedance that will play well with a simple inductor.
I run my avatar wide open with the receiver rolling my 15's at 200hz at unknown steepness. My midbass needs needs a higher rollover point for the woofers.
But not many 12-15's have a flat Impedance that will play well with a simple inductor.
I run my avatar wide open with the receiver rolling my 15's at 200hz at unknown steepness. My midbass needs needs a higher rollover point for the woofers.
Chrisb, Planet10 I've done a castle too with some 3" tang bands but without an angled top. What are the benefits to the angle?
To answer the original question, which seemed to be 2 full range drivers run full range. The following figures should be fairly self explanatory. Using the Monacor sph 135 AD midbass speaker which I know.
If the box is 4.9 litres with a single speaker the system Q would be 0.9, the box resonance would be 100Hz and the bass -3dB would be at 82Hz.
For 2 speakers in the same box the system Q would be 1.25, the box resonance 135Hz and the -3dB 98Hz
So you get LESS low bass with 2 drivers, and a bigger hump in output centred at the box resonance.
The sp 205 has a high 100Hz resonance, and allegedly a very high Q to start with. This means that this affect will be very pronounced.
If the box is 4.9 litres with a single speaker the system Q would be 0.9, the box resonance would be 100Hz and the bass -3dB would be at 82Hz.
For 2 speakers in the same box the system Q would be 1.25, the box resonance 135Hz and the -3dB 98Hz
So you get LESS low bass with 2 drivers, and a bigger hump in output centred at the box resonance.
The sp 205 has a high 100Hz resonance, and allegedly a very high Q to start with. This means that this affect will be very pronounced.
My response No 43 is talking about a closed box. Other types of box will be different. For instance with an open baffle, a 2nd driver would not have a lot of affect on the bass response (both run full range).
Hello,
no problem, but the driver has a Qts ~ 2,7, so if you get selected matched driver and 18 dB under 200 Hz, you might get a cheap solution with an aktiv sub below 130 Hz.
But an 8" for over 200 Hz is imho to large, take a good 5"FR and extra bass.
no problem, but the driver has a Qts ~ 2,7, so if you get selected matched driver and 18 dB under 200 Hz, you might get a cheap solution with an aktiv sub below 130 Hz.
But an 8" for over 200 Hz is imho to large, take a good 5"FR and extra bass.
Am I misunderstanding you? Multiple woofers are used in open baffle to get more bass output
The question was 2 Monacor sp 205 with an Fs of 100Hz. I think with both run FULLRANGE on the same size baffle as one, the bass is not increased in relation to the midband+treble.
I waited awhile to see if chrisb or planet10 would answer but I guess they missed your question so my thought is that it lengthens the distance to the ceiling delaying the reflection a bit. Front or back tilt may depend on your room size, ceiling height and listening distance. For me with my small room and ~8ft listening distance a back tilt worked best with the speakers about 2ft from the Front wall. I built 4 small sealed boxes for chr70's and tried several different orientations.
Last edited:
Thanks for that Jimbro, very interesting.
Chrisb did get back to me with somewhat similar notes.
A tilt would angle the ceiling reflection, therefore it would be more dependant on listening position than rear firing
This is what Jordan has to say about it:
"Are there any advantages in using more than one Eikona per enclosure?
Assuming the drivers are identical and have a nominally flat frequency response, then due to the characteristics of the radiation curve, the use of two or more such drivers will increase the efficiency of the bass and mid-band frequencies relative to the upper frequencies. The transition frequency and distribution pattern will depend upon the layout geometry of the drivers. A full analysis of this can be found in Chapter 4 of The Jordan Manual."
FWIW, regarding the Castles with angled tops, as I mentioned in my PM to ewollowe, the room /system in which my several iterations of these have been used would probably not past most audiophiles' sniff test in terms of imaging precision or bass extension. While I'd not exactly describe it as "muzak", I'd have to admit it is more for background / ambience than critical focused listening, so this configuration may well not work for all folks, and I'm far past the point of feeling the need to apologize for my compromises.
As I said to you Chris I was pleasantly surprised at how "normal" my castles sounded and my rough build could warrant a higher quality 2nd attempt.
I certainly wouldn't be apologizing for compromises, just consider them design choices 😉
There are audiophile proponents of "late ceiling splash". Granted the implementation is much more involved than the castle but the idea is still basically the same.
That's something I've looked into myself and had one speaker half finished using a couple of 8" wide rangers before I got sidetracked by other things (again 🙄 )
Then of course this latest rung on the stairway to AV-haven 😀 - i.e. Atmos - gives us the opportunity to play with upfiring speakers to splash some of those sound objects off the ceiling. The other option being ceiling mounted downfiring units. I hate to say it, but having been to a few films in the past year or so at cinemas with the full meal deal, when mixed well, the effect is quite impressive.
A dedicated Atmos room would be a delight 🙂
Getting back to the original question a thought has occurred to me. If we mounted one of the drivers inversely but on the back of the speaker and close to the floor we might not just improve power handling/dynamics etc but also get a wee bit of extension because of boundary reinforcement?
So basically an offset bipole?
Getting back to the original question a thought has occurred to me. If we mounted one of the drivers inversely but on the back of the speaker and close to the floor we might not just improve power handling/dynamics etc but also get a wee bit of extension because of boundary reinforcement?
So basically an offset bipole?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.