to keep enclosure depth minimal. how about a split/sideways xrk971 "Nautiloss" arrangement?
live vs recorded perfection over a century ago - or maybe it was good to have a wobbly weak soprano
voice with no overtones
live vs recorded perfection over a century ago - or maybe it was good to have a wobbly weak soprano
voice with no overtones
I've helped install some of the Flare Audio PA (twice I think?) and been around for the soundchecks - a hell of a lot of clean and fast and full range sound for the number and size of the units! Dance music in a relatively small, kind of old warehouse building but with good-ish acoustics (pitched roof with beams, glass walls covered in thick drapes).
At the same venue with traditional line array kit, many times the size and weight (weight the worst bit for me) and it didn't seem as punchy/fast to me.
So for a comparison on two separate occassions months appart with different other gear 😀 , the Flare Audio stuff sounded better, in the way that they claim.
If I were to try something like this out, I'd create a layered box (but with the layers going front to back rather than bottom to top) CNC'd with the sprials cut into these layers.
It doesn't seem like BS to me - I can't see a reason to disbeleive that creating vorteces with the air flow will break up and ruin the compression waves in the air so as to make them so diffuse and mixed up, nothing remains in phase any longer. That would be my instictive take on what is going on.
Perhaps one could think of it as many small transmission lines radiating out from the sides of the driver? but instead of linear flow, the air is encouraged to spiral.
Thinking of it in that perspective, first as multiple linear TLs and then the vortex aspect, could one better imagine this working?
At the same venue with traditional line array kit, many times the size and weight (weight the worst bit for me) and it didn't seem as punchy/fast to me.
So for a comparison on two separate occassions months appart with different other gear 😀 , the Flare Audio stuff sounded better, in the way that they claim.
If I were to try something like this out, I'd create a layered box (but with the layers going front to back rather than bottom to top) CNC'd with the sprials cut into these layers.
It doesn't seem like BS to me - I can't see a reason to disbeleive that creating vorteces with the air flow will break up and ruin the compression waves in the air so as to make them so diffuse and mixed up, nothing remains in phase any longer. That would be my instictive take on what is going on.
Perhaps one could think of it as many small transmission lines radiating out from the sides of the driver? but instead of linear flow, the air is encouraged to spiral.
Thinking of it in that perspective, first as multiple linear TLs and then the vortex aspect, could one better imagine this working?
Imagining for moment a compression wave being forced into a space which then creates a vortex, I can imagine that a compression will eventually go around the circular apperture and meet an expansion and cancel each other out - lots of phase interference.
Depending on the circumference of the circular space and the speed of the compression wave, different ranges of frequencies could be cancelled.
The movement of air wouldn't be that restricted either so I guess closer to movement in free air?
Depending on the circumference of the circular space and the speed of the compression wave, different ranges of frequencies could be cancelled.
The movement of air wouldn't be that restricted either so I guess closer to movement in free air?
Last edited:
If you want proof of flim-flam, try to decode this sentence...
"The SB range of bass enclosures benefits from the attributes of both a sealed and ported design that eliminates pressure and port interference."
"The SB range of bass enclosures benefits from the attributes of both a sealed and ported design that eliminates pressure and port interference."
SB12A 12 inch speaker 900 watts max - 423mmx423mmx180mm 134dB max. 18Hz-2KHz
Hoffman's Iron Law vaporized - what's in the magic box ? there can't be much space behind the woofer.
Hoffman's Iron Law vaporized - what's in the magic box ? there can't be much space behind the woofer.
its in the patent. Someone with patience or machine to cut a few layers of MDF, etc. could get a rough idea - there's hardly a cubic foot of active airspace. Can horresp make a rough estimate? Is there "chuffing" at high cone excursions due to the tunnel cross-section dropping to around 6 square inches of area ? The maker must have adequate simulation tools.
Last edited:
Those small chambers would have acted like expansion chambers and slow down the airspeed quite a lot.
A marketing sentence presumably written by a copywriter for the benefit of non-technical people to understand ... is given as proof of a theory not working???
How unscientific can you get? Sounds more akin to all the ramblings you get around the internet about flat earth etc.. 😀
I'm interested in the potential physics theory and what could be working, or not, if anyone else has heard them besides myself to help assertain if my judgment is misguided - was a long time appart between my comparisons and the Flare stuff looks good too, which could colour my judgement.
its in the patent. Someone with patience or machine to cut a few layers of MDF, etc. could get a rough idea - there's hardly a cubic foot of active airspace. Can horresp make a rough estimate? Is there "chuffing" at high cone excursions due to the tunnel cross-section dropping to around 6 square inches of area ? The maker must have adequate simulation tools.
Yes please someone! Would love to have someone try this out in the DIY community..
Looking at it in a very basic way, those "vortex" chambers probably act like expansion chambers which are acoustic low pass filters.
wonder what type woofer Flare is using ? - a 12 with maybe with 6mm xmax? maybe 9mm? Low qts ? does Flare use 18sound? B&C?, custom? - An Akabak model should tell which parameters best fit the enclosure shown. Which fullranges might make use?
If one sums up the volumes of all the "vortex chambers" as well as the volumes of the tapers leading into and out of the "vortex chambers," might the box be modeled reasonably well as a double-bass reflex?
I crashed hornresp somehow some time ago and forgot how to use DBR - akabak would be better I think for this type with a strong motor BMS C262 woofer.
xrk971 should be able to model this case easy.
here's a long vent, low-tuned, small chamber reflex in hornresp - indicates 6dB/octave LF rolloff (?)
would the good impulse response of such an alignment be part of why Flare's approach is getting good reviews?
2pi
my old coupled cavity friend is not to be beaten in claims - and I choose it vs some front loaded horns
including Klipschorn and La Scala
xrk971 should be able to model this case easy.
here's a long vent, low-tuned, small chamber reflex in hornresp - indicates 6dB/octave LF rolloff (?)
would the good impulse response of such an alignment be part of why Flare's approach is getting good reviews?
2pi
my old coupled cavity friend is not to be beaten in claims - and I choose it vs some front loaded horns
including Klipschorn and La Scala
Last edited:
AFAIK, its Beyma units. The one in the model shown in the previous page is likely the 12P1000Nd, since its in-line with Flare's claimed power handling.
Looks to me like the cabinet is acting as a simple bass-reflex, but maybe the little chambers are acting as an acoustic low-pass as someone mentioned previously.
Anyway, I'd expect serious port chuffing problems from such a narrow area. I don't think they'll maintain the low end at higher levels.
Try this out: https://flareaudio.com/products/sb-series/sb18c/
Claimed 135dB maximum output from a box that'll go around the driver, just, and apparently it'll go down to 25Hz with no EQ needed. Hmmm...
Chris
Looks to me like the cabinet is acting as a simple bass-reflex, but maybe the little chambers are acting as an acoustic low-pass as someone mentioned previously.
Anyway, I'd expect serious port chuffing problems from such a narrow area. I don't think they'll maintain the low end at higher levels.
Try this out: https://flareaudio.com/products/sb-series/sb18c/
Claimed 135dB maximum output from a box that'll go around the driver, just, and apparently it'll go down to 25Hz with no EQ needed. Hmmm...
Chris
I believe you've nailed the woofer - 100g mms 12 class with low-ish qts https://www.beyma.com/products/lowmidfrequency/112P10ND8
regarding their 18" sub-woofer, nice to see 105dB sensitivity, 25Hz low end from an 18" and cabinet less in size than some "H" baffles with 27kg carrying weight. I have a little horn ~198 l in external bulk, maybe 105dB 2pi that might do 70Hz half power (?)
regarding their 18" sub-woofer, nice to see 105dB sensitivity, 25Hz low end from an 18" and cabinet less in size than some "H" baffles with 27kg carrying weight. I have a little horn ~198 l in external bulk, maybe 105dB 2pi that might do 70Hz half power (?)
Remember the chambers aren't straight through - air enters at the edge of a circular chamber, forcing the air to create a spinning vortex - hence the name. Not sure if that kind of thing can be set up for calculation in the usual simulators?
The exits of the chambers seem to be such that movements of air flowing back and forth will create the same direction of spin in the chamber.
Last edited:
I will try to model this. I doubt the vortex swirling in the small chambers do anything significant - other than to serve as small resonance chambers to attenuate peaks in response. To first order - the bulk flow through the chamber, irrespective of vortex will be primary effect.
I will speculate that at low frequencies "vortex flare" design is equal to a small volume vented box, or short TL, maybe with less resonance problems due to chambers.
xrk971, we all are waiting... 🙂
xrk971, we all are waiting... 🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.