Is this a good or bad idea? From the little i've read on baffle step it seems to me that by doing this i remove the baffle and could ignore the need to compensate for it since its not there? I would like the base the design / filter from what zaph has already done, but was hoping for advice on what changes would be necessary to the filter due to the different enclosure.
Thanks,
John
Thanks,
John
In terms of baffle step diffraction, a cylinder with the driver on one end is the worst possible enclosure, followed by a small square baffle, a small rectangular baffle, a sphere, and then the best, which would be an infinitely large (or at least very big) baffle.
I'd recommend playing around with the Baffle Step Simulator (edge.exe). Its a fairly simple program that lets you play with different baffles, different speaker positions, and then it suggests baffle step compensation filters.
Its not perfect, since many times the theory and the measurements don't line up, and you need to tweak component values, but the simulator is a good way to get started. Try modelling a tiny baffle, and some big ones, and see the difference.
http://www.tolvan.com/edge/
peace,
sam
I'd recommend playing around with the Baffle Step Simulator (edge.exe). Its a fairly simple program that lets you play with different baffles, different speaker positions, and then it suggests baffle step compensation filters.
Its not perfect, since many times the theory and the measurements don't line up, and you need to tweak component values, but the simulator is a good way to get started. Try modelling a tiny baffle, and some big ones, and see the difference.
http://www.tolvan.com/edge/
peace,
sam
- Status
- Not open for further replies.