Seems like it, doesn't it?
Putting them inline like that (rather than as pseudo surround) kind of makes sense. With a signal panned far right, the center and right speakers would play a full positive signal, while the left speaker would play the same signal but out of phase. The acoustic interactions of that will likely give the impression of the sound being far outside the box on the right hand side.
Likewise, a center panned sound would have one speaker on each side playing out of phase, possibly steering the sound towards the middle.
I think the old Zvox 315 sound bar used this method, adjustable with what they called "phase cue".
The transformer-based line level mid/side matrix I made (a temporary contraption with alligator clips) got the essentially the same results. L-R is of course the same as R-L, but phase reversed.
Last edited by a moderator:
There's some argument that with one of these speakers, C-C doesn't matter so much.
I think the idea is that if you have a driver that beams at a certain width at, say, 10kHz, if you can somewhat match that angle by the splaying out angles of the facets, the high frequency beams wouldn't really overlap much in the air, reducing comb filtering.
(that was a tricky one to try to describe, hope it made sense)
Unfortunately there is no front wall.
The way we sit, drinking our tea, doing our puzzles, etc, we face a long corridor-like space (with a kitchen, dining, etc in it). What would constitute a front wall in our case is 45 feet away!
Ok, I had hard time visualizing it and maybe I overlooked a drawing of the situation? I must be a very unusual space.
The closer the C-C the higher the frequency at which the entire speaker works as a sinf=gle unit and not 20 discrett sources. The small driver won’t hurt.
dave
Yeah, I should probably have made some kind of drawing of the place.
It's not a particularly weird home, just a narrow modern townhouse, where the lower level is one big open multi-use space.
What I meant was that compared to a line array, because of all the angles of the baffles, there may not be as many high frequency nulls and as much comb filtering.
It seems like you'd benefit from a rising high frequency response driver though. At high frequencies you would find yourself only listening directly to 2-3 of the drivers (because of the narrower beams), while at low frequencies you'll pretty much hear all of them.
Small driver should help with this, of course, at the expense of low end reach.
There lilely won’t but C-C is still important. If the drivers can get close enuff that they are a single source up into the midrange will not hurt.
dave
dave
This is cool, nandappe, I'm putting it on my tentative list.
I wonder about a 6 driver bipole version too.
Right, Mid/Side is primarily a recording technique using two microphones in a specific configuration, and also used for processing stereo tracks in a multitrack recording scenario. Coming from a recording studio background, I can forget that it's not an often used term in hifi circles.
I should just call it Sum/Difference instead, for clarity.
I should just call it Sum/Difference instead, for clarity.
Sorry, I probably should know what that means, but I don't think I do.
Can you explain the SSS weighted matrix?
It is the matrix used by Elias Pekonen in his single stereo speaker (SSS) - The front speaker uses 0.5 x (L + R), the side speakers R - 0.5 L and L - 0.5 R. It is essentially the same as in post #116 - the speaker side wiring does not work with bridged class D amps. I like the way the SSS works in my room, so I want to build an active version with a bass unit, all in a single floorstander box.