For "well recorded" music in our (650 sq ft) living room we favor the Apogee Full Range ribbon linesource speakers and thousands of Krell amp watts. Stig's B&G750 planar linesource with multiple 21" woofer H-frames could produce a similar audio illusion. We put diffusers behind our Apogee speakers to help create a natural in-room audio illusion from the dipole effect. Stig puts absorption behind his speakers to remove the upper freq dipole effect, plus diffusors behind the listener... different audio illusion. I have built dipoles using standard speakers(daughter took them) but favor linesource dipoles.
For BluRay movie audio while the family sits on one or two couches in the media room we favor a sealed box 3-way(Lambda TD15S + TD10M + SEOS12 with B&C 250 CD) because of the dynamics and controlled directivity. Compression drivers with plastic domes sound "OK".
From what I have read on tinnitus, the most common condition is a continuous high pitch "sine wave" in one ear. The common audio test is to listen for hours to headphones with a Hi-Q notch filter of say +/- 200Hz around the "sine wave" frequency in the bad ear. If this experiment provides some comfort and short term reduction in tinnitus tone amplitude, a similar filter can be applied to both speakers, which also have a narrow polar pattern around the tinnitus frequency to minimize room reflection generated harmonics. Dipoles with absorption behind the speaker(like Stig) could remove tinnitus frequency harmonic reflections from reaching the bad ear. Still need a notch filter. Still need hundreds of watts of dipole equalization.
IF, IF, IF your tinnitus matches my simple guess, then you might look at a 40x40 polar Synergy Horn, or a speaker similar to the Daniel Hertz M1 which has a 40horizontal x 60vertical short horn. Test a compression driver with a plastic dome and at least LR4 Xover slopes to beat down the dome and 12" midbass cone breakup energy. Speaker cone or compression driver dome breakup might generate tinnius frequency energy.
MDF panels + MDF quarter rounds + basic black paint might hide nicks from frequent moves.
Attachments
Nate, I just realized that you are the creator of the dipole disorder.
Yes, the power DACs are Panasonic receivers.
And it is true that with the nanodigi and high EQ, they are not very happy.
I was raising the volume of the larger driver to match the midbass.
Anyway.
OBs are going to be a nightmare to place optimally in London style accommodation. My large boxes will be standing by the wall, which is far more convenient.
Line, I will build the large boxes with the drivers I have. If it does not work very well, I might throw in a 1" CD later on.
Thanks for the advices and please keep them coming.
Here are some pics of the drivers and my baffles.
Yes, the power DACs are Panasonic receivers.
And it is true that with the nanodigi and high EQ, they are not very happy.
I was raising the volume of the larger driver to match the midbass.
Anyway.
OBs are going to be a nightmare to place optimally in London style accommodation. My large boxes will be standing by the wall, which is far more convenient.
Line, I will build the large boxes with the drivers I have. If it does not work very well, I might throw in a 1" CD later on.
Thanks for the advices and please keep them coming.
Here are some pics of the drivers and my baffles.
Attachments
Scott,
Thanks for the links.
I could give it a go for round edges on a smaller built.
My box is 107x79x44cm.
And I don't have a workshop or a garden shed.
It is already proving very difficult to build the boxes.
On top of that, I really want to have sth similar in style to vintage JBL monitors.
As you can see, my drivers will be placed asymmetrically on the baffle.
I also plan to cover the baffle with 5cm thick acoustic foam. That will help with the retro look too
My tweeters are horn loaded, so diffraction won't be an issue at HF (>4-5000Hz).
Thanks for the links.
I could give it a go for round edges on a smaller built.
My box is 107x79x44cm.
And I don't have a workshop or a garden shed.
It is already proving very difficult to build the boxes.
On top of that, I really want to have sth similar in style to vintage JBL monitors.
As you can see, my drivers will be placed asymmetrically on the baffle.
I also plan to cover the baffle with 5cm thick acoustic foam. That will help with the retro look too
My tweeters are horn loaded, so diffraction won't be an issue at HF (>4-5000Hz).
I am going to start gluing my enclosures soon.
In my current baffle set-up, Fountek CD3.5H is placed on top of B&G Neo8S.
I can cross the CD3.5H as low as 2500Hz.
But I would much prefer to have the CO point around 5000Hz.
However, if I CO around 5000Hz, the CTC distance will be over 1 wavelength at the current driver placement.
At 5000Hz CO, I can stay within 1WL if I place the CD3.5H on the side of Neo8s.
Many say this would create very bad horizontal lobing.
So which driver placement and configuration is the best compromise you think?
(while I can still change the baffle design)
In my current baffle set-up, Fountek CD3.5H is placed on top of B&G Neo8S.
I can cross the CD3.5H as low as 2500Hz.
But I would much prefer to have the CO point around 5000Hz.
However, if I CO around 5000Hz, the CTC distance will be over 1 wavelength at the current driver placement.
At 5000Hz CO, I can stay within 1WL if I place the CD3.5H on the side of Neo8s.
Many say this would create very bad horizontal lobing.
So which driver placement and configuration is the best compromise you think?
(while I can still change the baffle design)
Last edited:
Large vintage JBL type enclosure had three drawbacks:
1. sharp edges = diffraction
2. vibration from 18" bass driver affecting other drivers
3. Neo8S had to be in a sealed enclosure (people like it open back)
So a change in plans over here.
18" Faitals will be in two separate BR enclosures (stereo subs).
Main speakers will be 3 way, in a wide and shallow enclosure with round side panels - similar to SF Stradivari/Elipsa.
h95cm x w64cm x d20cm
12" Faital 12PR300, will be sealed in about 30l.
Neo8S will be horizontally placed and open back, and Fountek CD3.5H on top of it vertical: top part of the speaker will be very similar to Martin Logan Mosaic (pic) but on a slightly wider baffle.
Wood and MDF cut and ready. Already started gluing. Photos coming in the weekend.
1. sharp edges = diffraction
2. vibration from 18" bass driver affecting other drivers
3. Neo8S had to be in a sealed enclosure (people like it open back)
So a change in plans over here.
18" Faitals will be in two separate BR enclosures (stereo subs).
Main speakers will be 3 way, in a wide and shallow enclosure with round side panels - similar to SF Stradivari/Elipsa.
h95cm x w64cm x d20cm
12" Faital 12PR300, will be sealed in about 30l.
Neo8S will be horizontally placed and open back, and Fountek CD3.5H on top of it vertical: top part of the speaker will be very similar to Martin Logan Mosaic (pic) but on a slightly wider baffle.
Wood and MDF cut and ready. Already started gluing. Photos coming in the weekend.
Attachments
Hi,
A 18" is difficult to stop and don't come back rapidly in initial position...difficult match with a planar, No ?
Studiotech, I look at your design from sevral weeks now and have a question which think is not OT : with an alone NEO 10 in a normal living room , which should you use for xover in the low ? 500 ? more ? thinking maybe like you with a cover felt à la Dalquyst to have a load behind. Does it need more bafle step to have lower crossover and did you test it ?
A 18" is difficult to stop and don't come back rapidly in initial position...difficult match with a planar, No ?
Studiotech, I look at your design from sevral weeks now and have a question which think is not OT : with an alone NEO 10 in a normal living room , which should you use for xover in the low ? 500 ? more ? thinking maybe like you with a cover felt à la Dalquyst to have a load behind. Does it need more bafle step to have lower crossover and did you test it ?
Thank you Zmyrna,
good project...
what is the best way to match a very light planar diagphram with a more heavy one in a 12" driver ? Progressiv crossover on two octave (First order) ? A high order one more than 4° with active xover ?
Don't understand the choose of professional for the 12" .Do you choose a very low QTS for good electric control and littlier movements ? Most of time professional are heavier cone.
i never understand the way to say a driver is faster than another... but i am interrested because the match between a very fast planar with microdetail and classic drivezr is a hard task in the bass and harder in medium area. that's why i hesitate between B&G 75 (price and waf problem), Neo 10 (DB problem in the low), and bigger DIY ESL (TCO as a first project, high voltage, WAF if higher than one meter).
Your choose interrested me because i hesitate with a standalone Neoplanar 10 with active EQ. Neo 8s seems to be better after 2500 (wich seem a limit for the Neo10 without correction) and a perfect match with the Neo 3 (Raal is too expensive for me) or the tweeter you chose.
If you can make a crossover near 140 hz it can give good results for the main bad bass room mod, but are the two crossovers in a 100 - 800 hz not too near from each others ? (high order here, more than 48 db slope ?)
Thank you for your answers
good project...
what is the best way to match a very light planar diagphram with a more heavy one in a 12" driver ? Progressiv crossover on two octave (First order) ? A high order one more than 4° with active xover ?
Don't understand the choose of professional for the 12" .Do you choose a very low QTS for good electric control and littlier movements ? Most of time professional are heavier cone.
i never understand the way to say a driver is faster than another... but i am interrested because the match between a very fast planar with microdetail and classic drivezr is a hard task in the bass and harder in medium area. that's why i hesitate between B&G 75 (price and waf problem), Neo 10 (DB problem in the low), and bigger DIY ESL (TCO as a first project, high voltage, WAF if higher than one meter).
Your choose interrested me because i hesitate with a standalone Neoplanar 10 with active EQ. Neo 8s seems to be better after 2500 (wich seem a limit for the Neo10 without correction) and a perfect match with the Neo 3 (Raal is too expensive for me) or the tweeter you chose.
If you can make a crossover near 140 hz it can give good results for the main bad bass room mod, but are the two crossovers in a 100 - 800 hz not too near from each others ? (high order here, more than 48 db slope ?)
Thank you for your answers
Last edited:
I will be using DSP active for all channels and experiment with different slope crossovers once the system is up and running.
100-800 covers the fundamental of human voice and is 3 octaves; that is not narrow.
Purpose of a 4 way speaker is to use each driver no more than 2-3 octaves.
I did not choose Neo10 because I do not want a CO at 100-800.
Qts is a trade off: I went for a mid qts driver (0.3ish) because I want the 12" to go as low as 100Hz without much EQ. I am lowpassing it at 800ish so hoping that mid qts will work.
Pro mid-bass drivers have higher Fs and lower mms compared to home audio drivers. I do think they are a better match for planars. People with more experience can chip in on this.
100-800 covers the fundamental of human voice and is 3 octaves; that is not narrow.
Purpose of a 4 way speaker is to use each driver no more than 2-3 octaves.
I did not choose Neo10 because I do not want a CO at 100-800.
Qts is a trade off: I went for a mid qts driver (0.3ish) because I want the 12" to go as low as 100Hz without much EQ. I am lowpassing it at 800ish so hoping that mid qts will work.
Pro mid-bass drivers have higher Fs and lower mms compared to home audio drivers. I do think they are a better match for planars. People with more experience can chip in on this.
Very interesting Zmyrna, I follow your work with the one of Greg (Studiotech) and his cardioid treatment of the mid...
What do you use for active Xover and EQ ? Wanted to use Shark product of MiniDsp, but seem to be only two way for xover with EQ room correction...
I imagine you have to deal with the high Fs of most prof 12"... You need not higher than 50 hz Fs (not a problem) or better two octave below 100 hz with a Fs at 25 hz...
The 22EX magnesium Seas could be a good choice for goods distorsion results in your 100 - 800 range...but only 8" and...expensive. What is a good choice in this aera of the world for a 12" ? (Beyma, Monacor ?)
What do you use for active Xover and EQ ? Wanted to use Shark product of MiniDsp, but seem to be only two way for xover with EQ room correction...
I imagine you have to deal with the high Fs of most prof 12"... You need not higher than 50 hz Fs (not a problem) or better two octave below 100 hz with a Fs at 25 hz...
The 22EX magnesium Seas could be a good choice for goods distorsion results in your 100 - 800 range...but only 8" and...expensive. What is a good choice in this aera of the world for a 12" ? (Beyma, Monacor ?)
Yes look like a missing part of Iron Man or a Irak war 's bullet surplus ! I understand than you can be frighten to receive it between the eyes after a good drum impact !
If I go in such a project I will have a look for myself at a 10" supravox don't remember which one, but the one maid for bass renforcment for horn system (match with your 800 hz croosover)
If I go in such a project I will have a look for myself at a 10" supravox don't remember which one, but the one maid for bass renforcment for horn system (match with your 800 hz croosover)
Supravox ain't got any 10".
They have GMF 215 and a 285mm midbass.
However 215RTF combined with a sub/bass driver would have been my choice.
You can find vintage drivers similar to Supravox for much cheaper.
I like those very light paper cone drivers.
However they suffer a bit if you push them or with complex/high crescendo music.
I chose to go with more robust pro drivers with more headroom.
They have GMF 215 and a 285mm midbass.
However 215RTF combined with a sub/bass driver would have been my choice.
You can find vintage drivers similar to Supravox for much cheaper.
I like those very light paper cone drivers.
However they suffer a bit if you push them or with complex/high crescendo music.
I chose to go with more robust pro drivers with more headroom.
hI ZMYRNA,
yes I was talking about the 215 GMF which is impressive for mid bass and here very used in OB project for both its strengh and fastness. I believe they are a little home company now at Supravox : they maid on demand... a little pricy, but the alnico is hard to find with drivers nowadays... and definitly not the same sound as normal magnet or stronger one like neodynium...(nobodies know why !)
The 285 has a very bad reputation...hard to work with it, we have no problem in france to find it in second hand. The 400 is a gem but very too expensive : prices of another time for hifi !
Did you think about the famous 12" Beyma that a lot of people seem to appreciate here at DIYA and elsewhere ?
Good idea to use U-Frame for your Neo 8s, you loose something like 3 dB ? but good low renforcemnent. I plan after reading the posts of Studiotech and StigErik to go this way with a feld behind the U frame to pade off the energy of rear wave without to much comeback of the rear diagphram... All is theory for the moment cause I work on the active xover aspect, need a multidac too...
yes I was talking about the 215 GMF which is impressive for mid bass and here very used in OB project for both its strengh and fastness. I believe they are a little home company now at Supravox : they maid on demand... a little pricy, but the alnico is hard to find with drivers nowadays... and definitly not the same sound as normal magnet or stronger one like neodynium...(nobodies know why !)
The 285 has a very bad reputation...hard to work with it, we have no problem in france to find it in second hand. The 400 is a gem but very too expensive : prices of another time for hifi !
Did you think about the famous 12" Beyma that a lot of people seem to appreciate here at DIYA and elsewhere ?
Good idea to use U-Frame for your Neo 8s, you loose something like 3 dB ? but good low renforcemnent. I plan after reading the posts of Studiotech and StigErik to go this way with a feld behind the U frame to pade off the energy of rear wave without to much comeback of the rear diagphram... All is theory for the moment cause I work on the active xover aspect, need a multidac too...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.