Do you have an example, and is it frequency dependent? There are a number of factors that can make a larger baffle potentially better and potentially worse, but they aren't simply 50/50.
With respect ...for some of you, I am NOT talking about recessing or flush mounting drivers at all. None. This was only about baffle edges, and recessed speaker grills.
I would never recess a grill, or make an edge for sound to have to hit. I just wondered why in hell it was ever done .... and I found out. Looks only. Now the math and science behind it which you're discussing, I am appreciating a lot!
But for drivers, I only flush mount drivers. Always.
I would never recess a grill, or make an edge for sound to have to hit. I just wondered why in hell it was ever done .... and I found out. Looks only. Now the math and science behind it which you're discussing, I am appreciating a lot!
But for drivers, I only flush mount drivers. Always.
I find it really interesting someone asking innocent and ignorant questions, can create a thread so long with so many opinions on technical stuff. I'm sure the really accomplished and learned builders think this thread should be burned. But I have learned amazing amounts from it.
It’s like panning for gold…….gotta slough through a lot of gravel sometimes before finding what your looking for. I find the off topic tangents educational as well. 😛
I knew it from the beginning, that's why my post about the dog that bites its tail ...
I think it's not a good attitude anyway ......
The highlighted paragraph I do not believe it.
For no good reason other than the wealth of helpful hints on his website, and his quick and friendly response to emails. I’m going to build Troels SEAS CNO-MkII. It’s going to cost me around $4000CAN.
CNO-25-mkII
Regards,
Dan
CNO-25-mkII
Regards,
Dan
Good choice, I hope the OP follows your example and terminates this thread.
I will tell you that for those who are just starting out, I think the thread has not been very useful, it is rather confusing, but it is just my opinion ...
And how much does that kit cost ?
I will tell you that for those who are just starting out, I think the thread has not been very useful, it is rather confusing, but it is just my opinion ...
And how much does that kit cost ?
Nope. I just learned something from what you just said! I learned you have free will to believe anything you want.
Like I hope you find another thread more to your liking to pollute. If you have nothing positive to add, then you are a troll.
You are not special, because you are you. And you do NOT determine what is helpful to me or not. Get over yourself, with your high opinions ...
I am not a troll, my activity in the forum clearly demonstrates it.
I think you looked in the mirror. In psychology it is called "projection."
Now, finish.
I think you looked in the mirror. In psychology it is called "projection."
Now, finish.
You are not going to get the argument you desire from me. You have been asked to find another thread where you can add something positive instead. I am learning here, NO MATTER what you think. I refused to take down the productive thread. You are dismissed, not wanted. Go play somewhere else. "Finished"
for sure, enclosure shape seems to affect a lot and can be taken advantage off with tools like BEM. Flat baffle minimization is easy rule of thumb though, which seems to minimize problem of diffraction.
Hi, yes the roundovers will reduce diffraction on the upper frequencies radiating along the baffle. But the width of the baffle will drag the diffracting waves lower in frequency I'd imagine and the diffraction is now just lower in frequency (compared to narrower baffle). This is good example of speaker the diffraction is accounted for in the design but to me it still is counterproductive and looks like a marketing trick. It probably sounds good, but less diffraction could be made with smaller front. Let me dig out the VituixCAD and try to demonstrate.
I couldn't find Grimm LS1 measurements with Googling but this I found: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/grimm-audio-ls1-design-pdf.125208/ , somebody made simulations on the front and drew some conclusions about it. It says the baffle width is to compensate the narrowing directivity of the woofer due to crossover point being too high. This is a "problem" that a waveguide or 3-way design would solve. There might be more in the LS1 that I can't see, I'm not pro on the field and it seems well engineered product. Maybe they don't consider the diffraction a problem and dig the better directivity at some frequency to some direction due to baffle width. Measurements would be nice to see but it is typical they are not available by manufacturer other than the on axis response.
Last edited:
That is interesting. I thought I saw measurements with smooth of axis response but I must be confused with another speaker. The fact that they show a DSP flattened frequency response in only one plane now makes me a bit wary.
Regarding the wide baffle solving the beaming problem, I don't see anything wrong with that. There are actually quite a few benefits but I haven't seen your simulations yet, so if you can post them it would be interesting to see.
The white paper has a pretty good run down of their thoughts.
Speakers white paper | Grimm Audio
Vituix is great but it does not account for depth which will have an impact on the overall directivity.