@Thomsen_build fabulous. You have uncovered the secret reason why we do these crazy projects: It's our inner 13 year old just tryin' to be badass. I'm excited for your project, do keep us informed on your progress.
Great to see you get started @Thomsen_build !
@perrymarshall have you ever used dirac in your work with your minidsps? I have, as I said before a minidsp cdsp 8x12 that I would prefer to use because it makes it a lot easier to integrate in my cinema. However, it does not have fir filters unless in use with dirac. Anyway, I purchased the dirac license to test, it would also free up my 2x4hd for future builds if the tests are successful. I cant say that I'm not curious to build these speakers aswell, I just have to find a place to accommodate them.
Regards Jakob
@perrymarshall have you ever used dirac in your work with your minidsps? I have, as I said before a minidsp cdsp 8x12 that I would prefer to use because it makes it a lot easier to integrate in my cinema. However, it does not have fir filters unless in use with dirac. Anyway, I purchased the dirac license to test, it would also free up my 2x4hd for future builds if the tests are successful. I cant say that I'm not curious to build these speakers aswell, I just have to find a place to accommodate them.
Regards Jakob
@Balthazarp Yes I've used the DIRAC version of the 2x4HD and it works great. You can use that instead of FIR DSP.
Wonderful. Glad I did not spend 325usd on an experiment, although that would have been fine if I learnt something and had fun along the way!
@perrymarshall
I am curious how these live edge open baffle projects compare to you previous project, the BG RD-75 with Titanic subs?
I am curious how these live edge open baffle projects compare to you previous project, the BG RD-75 with Titanic subs?
The Open Baffle projects are much better. The BG RD-75s are great speakers, but:
-If I were to do it over again I would do the BGs with an open back. I built them with closed back. (Did not grasp the significance of dipole back then, that was 2006)
-The RD-75s sound rather "midrangey" and even with EQ they really need tweeters, which fast becomes complicated and expensive and violates the original idea of a simple line source
-I still have those Titanic subs in the corner and occasionally use them as highly EQ'd sub-subwoofers but Open Baffle bass sounds much more natural and less boxy
-If I were to do it over again I would do the BGs with an open back. I built them with closed back. (Did not grasp the significance of dipole back then, that was 2006)
-The RD-75s sound rather "midrangey" and even with EQ they really need tweeters, which fast becomes complicated and expensive and violates the original idea of a simple line source
-I still have those Titanic subs in the corner and occasionally use them as highly EQ'd sub-subwoofers but Open Baffle bass sounds much more natural and less boxy
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply. I wondered when I read the write up why you didn't use the RD-75's in an open baffle...
Anyway, the reason I ask is I am attempting to build a speaker using a Magnepan 60" ribbon tweeter for the highs and a RD-50 for the mids (or possibly an array of BG neo-8's), due to the very reason you mention below- the highs aren't the best with the RD ribbons. I plan to use an array of 8 or 10 8" woofers in a slot loaded array similar to the speaker below for the bass, all on a roughly 16" wide by 70" tall open baffle. All active with hypex NCx amps and a Octo Research 8 channel dac. I wondered about your move to the present open baffles.
Again, thanks for your reply...
Anyway, the reason I ask is I am attempting to build a speaker using a Magnepan 60" ribbon tweeter for the highs and a RD-50 for the mids (or possibly an array of BG neo-8's), due to the very reason you mention below- the highs aren't the best with the RD ribbons. I plan to use an array of 8 or 10 8" woofers in a slot loaded array similar to the speaker below for the bass, all on a roughly 16" wide by 70" tall open baffle. All active with hypex NCx amps and a Octo Research 8 channel dac. I wondered about your move to the present open baffles.
Again, thanks for your reply...
One of the things I like about the large coaxials is the ability to achieve Constant Directivity, and a very well behaved off axis response. The directionality aspect sounds like the thing that could be the biggest challenge with line source ribbons.
Your design sounds like a great system. Would love to hear it.
Your design sounds like a great system. Would love to hear it.
I'm very interested in building a pair of the bitches brew speakers. I'm not new to speaker building or open baffle. My current speakers are the GR Research NX-Treme's, and I'm quite happy with them. However, I'm in the process of building a 2nd home, and I'd like to build some speakers for that space. How many people have built this speaker? For those that have built them, what have you compared them to? A problem I'm finding with a lot of open baffle designs is that almost any open baffle design can sound impressive the first time you hear it. It will have an amazing open and airy quality, huge soundstage, etc. But the coherence is not there, the imaging is awful, and they are just not refined designs. It looks like Perry knows what he's doing, but I'm a little hesitant to rely on DSP. I actually have a MiniDSP SHD that is sitting unused, because while it did improve clarity and detail, it also removed a lot of the fullness to the sound - making the music sound a little thin and less engaging. I'm still very interested in this design, and love the look of both Perry's build as well as balthazarp's sort of curved design. Any input would be very appreciated!
Subsonic1050 what other open baffles have you listened to? Have you listened to the LX521? For what it's worth I don't trust anyones opinion on anything when it comes to hifi, just too many variables.
Totally agree mordikai, especially if those listening impressions come from an audio show or Hifi store. I've never seen a speaker live up to its potential in either of those scenarios, often not even close. I have heard the LX521, but again, it was at a show, not in a properly set up room. That said, I was actually pretty impressed with the Linkwitz design, even in a hotel room. I've also heard Spatial audio products, Treehaus, and a few other OB speakers, but all at shows. As far as OB speakers that I'm very familiar with, I've owned the Magnepan 1.7i and the 3.7i. I've built the GR Research X-statik and 2 pairs each of the NX-Treme's and their triple stack OB servo subs. The NX-Treme's are an unbelievable speaker, and I haven't heard anything less than 100k that I would prefer over them. The one thing I've been disappointed with are the OB subs. Even with (6) 12" servo subs I'm not getting the "punch" that I wanted. I ended up adding 2 rhythmik F15 subs to give a little extra kick.
Last winter I built Perry’s live edge open baffles, and I’m still thrilled with how they turned out. I had built several passive designs, including OB, but this was my first foray into an active design. I have no regrets going down that path at all. I’d be happy to talk to you more about them if you want. Perry was super helpful to me throughout the build, and we were even able to get together in person after they were built, so he has seen and heard them. I’d be happy to pay it forward with help and advice, or to at least answer questions.
Attachments
Thanks very much tlarwa! I definitely won't need help with the actual build itself, but I could very easily see needing help setting up the MiniDSP properly. I have one (as I mentioned before), but I just ran Dirac and did basic room correction. It sounds like this is potentially a lot more involved than what I've done before. Your speakers look beautiful!
Perry, question for you on these fine speakers. I've been chatting with balthazarp and I asked a question regarding the tweeter height. It seems rather high to me at around 6 or 7 inches above my ear at the listening position for the chair that I use. I'm considering converting the design to an MTM, which is something I had considered and balthazarp also suggested I could try when I asked him the question about tweeter height. He doesn't have an issue with it, but I'm fairly sensitive to vertical off axis issues like this and really dislike it when the sound is going over my head. Do you see any issue with making the baffle slightly taller and putting the coax driver in the middle?
I've been messing around with various design ideas and I'm still trying to decide if placing the coaxial driver in the middle is a good idea or not. I have modified balthazarp's idea of the angled drivers with a wooden frame. The front baffle would be a walnut slab which has been glued into one solid piece. I've reduced the space between the drivers as much as I think I can get away with to lower that coaxial driver as much as possible. I've also drawn up some removable wings which could be placed on the sides of the woofers. What do people think of this design?
Attachments
@Subsonic1050: If I may, I think Perry mentioned somewhere that raising the mid-range coax minimizes floor bounce.
Also, with the second woofer on top, the wings do not help its bass output, and I think wings on the mid-range coax affects its sound.
Thus: back to Perry's original BB design.
Your curved design looks interesting. If I were to build it, I do not think I would go to the extra effort since one live slab looks so beautiful the way it is.
Also, with the second woofer on top, the wings do not help its bass output, and I think wings on the mid-range coax affects its sound.
Thus: back to Perry's original BB design.
Your curved design looks interesting. If I were to build it, I do not think I would go to the extra effort since one live slab looks so beautiful the way it is.
Propitious, thanks for your input. Yes, I'm aware that the wings wouldn't help designed such as they are with the coaxial driver in the middle. The design I was working on was completely different in that scenario. The whole baffle is raised off the floor about a foot so that the center of the coaxial driver is at ear height. Also, the top woofer would be tilted forward and the bottom woofer tilted backwards, with the coaxial driver facing straight ahead. The whole frame would be very different. But I was having a difficult time designing some wings for it that would operate as they should and also look decent.
The curved design isn't really mine, but thank you! The frame I've designed is definitely different, but this is a modification of balthazarp's recent build which I really liked the aesthetic of.
The curved design isn't really mine, but thank you! The frame I've designed is definitely different, but this is a modification of balthazarp's recent build which I really liked the aesthetic of.
As long as you don’t use wings, placing the coax in the middle is just fine. If you use wings in the design, the coax should go on top because the resonant frequency of the cavity formed by the u-frame is about 150 Hz. Wings will color the midrange and polar pattern if it’s in the middle.
Very interesting Perry, thanks for your insight! I take it you have not experienced any issues with the height of the tweeter?