MBK said:
I dont know how I have missed this very informative thread.
Anwyay, even 2 years late, i'm quoting this to confirm the same findings, when adding my 12" woofers to the FRs.
I had high expectations, but they have been overcome.
Greggo said:
Beyma 15LX60.
Great if it works for you too! 😉
For the record I use 18Sound 15ND930 but really as much as I think they're great, I am sure many good pro woofers will give good results just as well. Just make sure you do over-engineer things a little!
For the record I use 18Sound 15ND930 but really as much as I think they're great, I am sure many good pro woofers will give good results just as well. Just make sure you do over-engineer things a little!
Still catching up on this interesting thread...
FYI PNG at 24bit is all bits as good as JPG for pictures. PNG at 8bit is about the same as gif and useful for schemes, plots etc.
I did consider 18Sound woofers, but they were too expensive (and I'm in italy!). Not all pro drivers are of such high quality.
panomaniac said:
FYI PNG at 24bit is all bits as good as JPG for pictures. PNG at 8bit is about the same as gif and useful for schemes, plots etc.
MBK said:
I did consider 18Sound woofers, but they were too expensive (and I'm in italy!). Not all pro drivers are of such high quality.
panomaniac said:
I agree on your impressions on Bastanis CD+waveguide tweeters.
Did you hear the starter or gemini version?
1.25 inch roundover
Paul W,
Back in your post 284 you said you used a 1.25 inch roundover.
Is that the 'biggest bang for the buck' or are larger radii worth the effort?
Paul W,
Back in your post 284 you said you used a 1.25 inch roundover.
Is that the 'biggest bang for the buck' or are larger radii worth the effort?
Member
Joined 2003
dobias,
Depends on what you are trying to accomplish but, generally, larger roundovers yield smoother overall response. Google for a copy of "Baffle Diffraction Simulator" from the frd consortium to model your design & be sure to check both on and off-axis reponse.
For this project, I used an 8"radius.
BTW, I remember Sutton's Bay...once sailed a 32' trimaran from St Joseph to Beaver Island.
Paul
Depends on what you are trying to accomplish but, generally, larger roundovers yield smoother overall response. Google for a copy of "Baffle Diffraction Simulator" from the frd consortium to model your design & be sure to check both on and off-axis reponse.
For this project, I used an 8"radius.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
BTW, I remember Sutton's Bay...once sailed a 32' trimaran from St Joseph to Beaver Island.
Paul
Member
Joined 2003
open baffle edge radius
Paul W,
I had found that thread & enjoyed it, but I can't tell how far the roundover extends to the back. I'm guessing the roundovers are 180 degrees, or more, leaving a foot wide gap in the back. Was that for appearance or to help isolate the rear waves of the woofers from the front?
Paul W,
I had found that thread & enjoyed it, but I can't tell how far the roundover extends to the back. I'm guessing the roundovers are 180 degrees, or more, leaving a foot wide gap in the back. Was that for appearance or to help isolate the rear waves of the woofers from the front?
Member
Joined 2003
The roundovers are a structural part of the cabinet and a little less than a half circle...about 120-150 degrees. They serve several purposes including very low diffraction for the ribbon, front/back support, driver isolation, and appearance.
Boeing patent
Paul W,
I've reread the previous discussions about streamlining the OB cross sectional shape like a plane's wing (you even suggested the baffle would be better served by having the wing's trailing edge by the speaker & the wing's leading edge at the outside edges of the baffle).
I was involved in the last patent lawsuit to go through Federal Court. They now are arbitrated. The plaintiff brought in a U of M aeronautical professor to discredit my claim that my invention utilized turbulance free flow. He ranted for a long time that turbulence was necessary for flight & avoiding turbulence was impossible. A month later Boeing was awarded a patent for turbulence free flight.
The patent described micro-perforated wing surfaces that were pressurized. Airflow was extremely laminar.
I'm reminded of that patent when I read about efforts to smooth the flow of sound across a baffle & around the edges.
Frank
Paul W,
I've reread the previous discussions about streamlining the OB cross sectional shape like a plane's wing (you even suggested the baffle would be better served by having the wing's trailing edge by the speaker & the wing's leading edge at the outside edges of the baffle).
I was involved in the last patent lawsuit to go through Federal Court. They now are arbitrated. The plaintiff brought in a U of M aeronautical professor to discredit my claim that my invention utilized turbulance free flow. He ranted for a long time that turbulence was necessary for flight & avoiding turbulence was impossible. A month later Boeing was awarded a patent for turbulence free flight.
The patent described micro-perforated wing surfaces that were pressurized. Airflow was extremely laminar.
I'm reminded of that patent when I read about efforts to smooth the flow of sound across a baffle & around the edges.
Frank
Member
Joined 2003
For those wondering if there was an "end game" to this thread, here it is.
What I learned from this experimental baffle...
...eventually evolved into this system: The Octagon
"the sound behind the scenes"
It took a long time because of a move to the southern US, building a new home, and then building the system. A long haul, but I can finally enjoy it.
The Web page is a long read, so here is the short version...
-This is an 11.1 multi-channel system with all speakers concealed in-wall (or behind an acoustically transparent screen).
-30" oblate/prolate spheroid waveguides with Eighteen Sound ND1460A compression drivers
-Each LCR uses 12 RS180s in a controlled directivity "phased array" (for lack of a better term).
-Subs are 18 Dayton 15" DVC in 600 cu ft. (recycling the drivers I used in the Gemini dual IB)
-Surrounds are Seas 22TAF/G, Dayton RS52, RS180, and Peerless 830669.
Hope you enjoy the read!
Paul
What I learned from this experimental baffle...
...eventually evolved into this system: The Octagon
"the sound behind the scenes"
It took a long time because of a move to the southern US, building a new home, and then building the system. A long haul, but I can finally enjoy it.
The Web page is a long read, so here is the short version...
-This is an 11.1 multi-channel system with all speakers concealed in-wall (or behind an acoustically transparent screen).
-30" oblate/prolate spheroid waveguides with Eighteen Sound ND1460A compression drivers
-Each LCR uses 12 RS180s in a controlled directivity "phased array" (for lack of a better term).
-Subs are 18 Dayton 15" DVC in 600 cu ft. (recycling the drivers I used in the Gemini dual IB)
-Surrounds are Seas 22TAF/G, Dayton RS52, RS180, and Peerless 830669.
Hope you enjoy the read!
Paul
Baffling! (sorry couldn't resist!)
Paul,
overkill does not even begin to describe this project 😀 ... I salute and congratulate you!
All the while I still haven't finished what I intend to be a smaller speaker than my current measly, meager 24x48" baffles. Ha! Outdone by a mile 😱 .
I think you are now in the 0.01 percentile as far as systems go. Just the thought of the complexity of radiation patterns and crossovers to handle gives me shivers.
Truly amazed!
Paul,
overkill does not even begin to describe this project 😀 ... I salute and congratulate you!
All the while I still haven't finished what I intend to be a smaller speaker than my current measly, meager 24x48" baffles. Ha! Outdone by a mile 😱 .
I think you are now in the 0.01 percentile as far as systems go. Just the thought of the complexity of radiation patterns and crossovers to handle gives me shivers.
Truly amazed!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.