Not quite X! This is the neo10 version, so more like £150!
But still a remarkable achievement!
Hi bushmeister,
I would be interested to know how the framework is made. Looks like metal
Thanks also for pointing out the Deltalite. I need a dipole driver to cover 100 to 600hz. Planned to use one from AE but very spendy. The Deltalite may just work for me.
I would be interested to know how the framework is made. Looks like metal
Thanks also for pointing out the Deltalite. I need a dipole driver to cover 100 to 600hz. Planned to use one from AE but very spendy. The Deltalite may just work for me.
Hi PP - see post 80.
22mm Baltic birch ply.
I used a granite worktop spray finish to get that look.
I must say I got a bit fed up of routing after finishing the second baffle😀
22mm Baltic birch ply.
I used a granite worktop spray finish to get that look.
I must say I got a bit fed up of routing after finishing the second baffle😀
Hi guys.
Here are some 1m.measurements taken at 10 degree increments. There is clearly some bunching at 8000Hz and presumably from defraction, but given this is right out to 90 degrees off axis, this seems to be reasonable controlled dipole directivity and nicely down to nearly 40 Hz.
Need to play with the DSP and crossovers to see if I can make things smoother, but not bad for a first try.
Any suggestions to improve gratefully received!
Here are some 1m.measurements taken at 10 degree increments. There is clearly some bunching at 8000Hz and presumably from defraction, but given this is right out to 90 degrees off axis, this seems to be reasonable controlled dipole directivity and nicely down to nearly 40 Hz.
Need to play with the DSP and crossovers to see if I can make things smoother, but not bad for a first try.
Any suggestions to improve gratefully received!
Attachments
Front versus rear output. Very close as you would expect with these drivers.
The higher rear bass output is because the Mike was in the corner of the room to get the 1m measurement, this is actually much closely to listening position bass output.
Next some MMM with Pink noise over the listening couch🙂
The higher rear bass output is because the Mike was in the corner of the room to get the 1m measurement, this is actually much closely to listening position bass output.
Next some MMM with Pink noise over the listening couch🙂
Attachments
Clearly some room issues to sort and this is where DSP becomes so powerful, but given I have done zero room correction so far, I am very pleased with the 400hz up listening averages.
To me this shows how open baffle definitely interacts differently with the room
To me this shows how open baffle definitely interacts differently with the room
Attachments
As X and I have suggested, give the Harsch XO a try for the second shot.
You will hear a difference.
You will hear a difference.
Will do - have used it before in other builds though and it requires very wideband drivers otherwise distortion and power handling is compromised. Not sure how it would lend itself to these planars?
Also I found the off axis performance was worse with Harsch versus LR.
What would your suggestion be with these drivers to achieve a 4 way Harsch crossover?
Also I found the off axis performance was worse with Harsch versus LR.
What would your suggestion be with these drivers to achieve a 4 way Harsch crossover?
I'd keep the same XO points you have right now for a direct comparison, 100hz, 600hz, 3500hz.
You are on LR2 everywhere, right? So, it should work as is. Just changing the slopes and adjusting delay frequency wise
You are on LR2 everywhere, right? So, it should work as is. Just changing the slopes and adjusting delay frequency wise
LR4 at present.
The trouble with both planars is they don't like to play too low so I would probably have to move both crossovers up if going for shallower slopes.
I will have a play and report back🙂
The trouble with both planars is they don't like to play too low so I would probably have to move both crossovers up if going for shallower slopes.
I will have a play and report back🙂
Ah... yes. Sorry, I thought I read LR2 everywhere.
So, yep, moving the planars up a bit to compensate.
Have fun! 🙂
So, yep, moving the planars up a bit to compensate.
Have fun! 🙂
I forgot to add the importance of this rear versus front measurement...
Many open baffle speakers have different rearward outputs to the front - either due to going monopole in the top end, baffle shape, driver design etc.
This means the delayed reflections from the rear lobe that make open baffles so magic will have a different tone/timbre to the forward lobe. Ideally you therefore want the forward and rear lobes to be identical so both direct and indirect sound signatures are consistent.
This is one of the features that makes this type of design different to most open baffle designs. I also think this might be where some of the magic sauce comes from.
Many open baffle speakers have different rearward outputs to the front - either due to going monopole in the top end, baffle shape, driver design etc.
This means the delayed reflections from the rear lobe that make open baffles so magic will have a different tone/timbre to the forward lobe. Ideally you therefore want the forward and rear lobes to be identical so both direct and indirect sound signatures are consistent.
This is one of the features that makes this type of design different to most open baffle designs. I also think this might be where some of the magic sauce comes from.
Attachments
Exactly, and surpisingly tolerant to positioning! I think best location in along the longer wall in the room, away from corners.
Hi bushmeister! Congrat's on a really nice build!🙂
When looking at your direcitvity measurements I noticed the slight bundling of lines around 2.7 kHz. Have you seen Gerrit Boers measurements of the B&G Neo10 with baffle extensions (https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/att...woofer-neo10-baffle-directivity-compare-jpg)? I would guess that the decreased directivity in this range comes from the small baffle that you mounted your "GRS-clones" in. No idea if this is audible or not - I have both the Neo10 and the GRS-version but haven't yet tried them - but it might be worthwhile to make the extensions even smaller...
here is what i am listening to these days...
LR48db XO at 175 and 700hz.
the thing on top is a neo8s with 5" wide wool felt baffle (felt also covers the upper 1/3 of the radiating surface for better vertical dispersion).
I did not like the 15" above 200hz (cone breakup), hence the 4x5" mids.
I liked the aesthetics of your first prototype more.
If you believe no XO 300-3000hz, then use neo10.
For no XO 700-7000hz as GedLee advocates, neo8 is your friend.
And if I had your set of drivers, I would put the subwoofers on separate ripole frames.
LR48db XO at 175 and 700hz.
the thing on top is a neo8s with 5" wide wool felt baffle (felt also covers the upper 1/3 of the radiating surface for better vertical dispersion).
I did not like the 15" above 200hz (cone breakup), hence the 4x5" mids.
I liked the aesthetics of your first prototype more.
If you believe no XO 300-3000hz, then use neo10.
For no XO 700-7000hz as GedLee advocates, neo8 is your friend.
And if I had your set of drivers, I would put the subwoofers on separate ripole frames.
Attachments
Last edited:
You are right I am sure. I may try that later. At present they sound so insanely good I can't believe that slight bunching is audible.
Honestly I have spent yesterday and most of today in audible nirvana. The open baffle bass is just sublime on some of my classical recordings with bowed double bass. The articulation down to 30Hz produces goosebumbs😀