..more than a claim (..at least for myself). 😉
BTW, I'm not an adherent of this design (or really any design I've seen/heard) - but I do feel it has merit in several respects. (..and a LOT of limitations.)
Perhaps like Graaf though, I do tend to *prefer* designs with wide-dispersion and specifically radial-type "upward firing" implementation in the midrange up to about 2 kHz. Still, the pressure loss is significant (for any particular frontal horizontal axis) - and that is a serious limitation. It also changes vertically, another serious limitation.
oh yes, we know that
anyway, c'mon Markus! How is the stereosphere™? is it still up and running? tell us more! 😀
Of course it's still up and running! We're working very hard to "make the dream come true™".
By the way, how are the Flodders? Is there anything you could show?
Flodders? I really appreciate Your sense of humour Marcus 😀
at Your service, here they are:
Attachments
In an effort to get a little closer to "make the dream come true":
What's the diameter of the drivers you are using?
Do they have a rising response just above the area where they become directional?
What is the separation distance you are using between the drivers?
What is the size of the baffle in relation to the drivers?
Scotty, why would you want the response to rise above the area where the drivers become directional? Are you looking for a specific DI at certain angles?
It's needed to (at least partially) compensate for the rather massive loss in pressure at and near 90 degrees off-axis in the range where the driver is directive.
The bandwidth where it is non-directive should average close to -9 db (at 90 degrees), but once it's directional you'll loose an additional increasing amount of pressure as freq.s go higher.
I'd personally like to see something approaching flat at 90 degrees up to 2 kHz, with a "shallow" low-pass character above this. I'm not sure just how "shallow" that character should be however (..perhaps -3db around 3.5 kHz?).
This driver looks reasonably well suited to this task:
http://www.tb-speaker.com/detail/1208_03/w4-927sd.htm
Of course you can always eq. the response for any driver, but personally I'd rather have something that gets a little closer to the "mark" acoustically (..perhaps like this tangband driver). I'd also prefer something that is *less* directive (smaller diameter) up to near 2 kHz (..again, perhaps like this tangband driver).
As far as baffle/enclosure - I'd probably be perusing "housewares" in IKEA for a set of wooden bowls. 😉
Honeycomb with 2 side firing drivers 0°-90°:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It *looks* good, but it's difficult to tell at that range.
When I look really closely however I'd say that there should not be that much non-uniform variation below 2 kHz. Also, the response above 2 kHz looks elevated and the polars look to uniform in that range.
BTW, is this just one driver/channel in operation? (I'm assuming it is considering that I don't see any combing artifacts.)
Last edited:
Hi Markus,
Scott already gave you a lot of very relevant indications.
One of them was the width of the baffle, or better said, the inter acoustic center distance.
It's here that the original stereolith gets very special:
inter acoustic center distance = inter aural distance
This seems to be a detail but is the core of the design and has unexpected consequences when you analyze it, both drivers running and both ears listening.
Then, it was a good idea to use Swiss originated cardboard, but your width is far excessive.
Or this would be correct only if you had a very big head 😀😀😀. Normally 17 cm is the average value.
OTOH, maybe you don't want to mimic the stereolith.🙄
Scott already gave you a lot of very relevant indications.
One of them was the width of the baffle, or better said, the inter acoustic center distance.
It's here that the original stereolith gets very special:
inter acoustic center distance = inter aural distance
This seems to be a detail but is the core of the design and has unexpected consequences when you analyze it, both drivers running and both ears listening.
Then, it was a good idea to use Swiss originated cardboard, but your width is far excessive.
Or this would be correct only if you had a very big head 😀😀😀. Normally 17 cm is the average value.
OTOH, maybe you don't want to mimic the stereolith.🙄
average value? I say f$%&ck average values!
it is an extreme sport with extreme values! for real men having everything above average by a wide margin! 😛
it is called stereosphere™ and it is much better than stereolith
don't listen to them! go Markus! go! go! go!!! make the dream come true™! 😀