Shallow Speaker

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oops! I obviously forgot about that first reflection.

Okay then, doesn't a passive radiator remove that first reflection by deflecting in response. Could you then use a PR in a "thin" box?

🙂ensen
 

Attachments

  • thinsub.jpg
    thinsub.jpg
    6.5 KB · Views: 503
pedroskova said:
Boston Acoustics' first designs were quite shallow. The A100 was aprox. 20" wide x 30" high x 8" deep. Tthe A700(?) was about 50% larger while retaining the 8" depth.

Even more radical was an early Duntech design, the PCL-somethingorother. It was ~ 12H x 24W x 3D, and was designed to be hung on a wall...great sounding little speaker.

In both cases, the designers pointed out the elimination of early reflections as one of the main design goals.

The early Bostons (A200, A150, & A100) are still considered excellent sounding speakers too. The wide & shallow baffle was unique at the time but was moved away from early on to more conventional designs. WAF was one reason. It wasn't because of how they performed.
 
I wonder OP actually did this experiment: build a proven closed box, and then convert it to a shallow & wide version maintaining same volume. How much the sound would be affected? It would be great if anyone actually measured it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.