I'm currently working on a diy project of mine with bipolar speakers.
The system is three-way (Woofer, Mid-Ranger, Tweeter), all drivers except the tweeter are Bipolo.
The drivers will be mounted on the front and rear deflector, Thus being able to direct the speaker to the listening point.
I read a lot about them and many said that they are better in terms of sound stage size, but when installed on the side baffles the sound becomes too diffused without a central point so if Making it bad for mid and high frequencies.
I want to know if people who have made bi-polar loudspeakers for hi-fi systems think they are better for stereo systems.
The system is three-way (Woofer, Mid-Ranger, Tweeter), all drivers except the tweeter are Bipolo.
The drivers will be mounted on the front and rear deflector, Thus being able to direct the speaker to the listening point.
I read a lot about them and many said that they are better in terms of sound stage size, but when installed on the side baffles the sound becomes too diffused without a central point so if Making it bad for mid and high frequencies.
I want to know if people who have made bi-polar loudspeakers for hi-fi systems think they are better for stereo systems.
Not sure if you are referring to a dipole or a bipole? Are the multiple drivers moving together making the radiation pattern wider (if the drivers are close) or are they out of phase causing cancellation and a narrowing of the radiation pattern?
Please do a drawing of your speakers seen from the top inc box/baffle + show how wiring is done.
//
//
Shouldn't omnidirectional be the opposite of dipolar here? In other words, are we talking about a low DI or are we talking about the deficiencies of actual bipolar?
That’s an interesting question. I imagine that one significant factor, although there are, no doubt others, is that bipolar doubles the number of tweeter and midrange drivers, so doubles their cost. Whereas, a bipole can be made with a single set of such drivers.
I already tried omnidirectional, but I didn't like it very much.
The soundstage is good, if not better than Bipolo, but the main problem for me is that it faces upwards, Thus giving a feeling that the sound comes from above.
To me, the difference is the phase of the rear facing radiation. My personal preference seems to be rear facing radiation is 180 out of phase from the front. As one would get with an ordinary speaker mounted on an Open Baffle. Of course, the frequency response off the back of the cone isnt quite the same, but it perhaps sufficient for the Sound Quality effect.
I tried an upwards firing driver design, using a bit of "Bose Technology" in the form of a vane to reflect some of the sound directly forward. Still, whatever sound managed its way toward the back wall was pretty much in phase with what was coming towards me at my listening position - and I didnt like it as much as an OB orientation.
Having two upwards facing speakers - one in phase and one out of phase - with the vanes didnt make much sense, as that would spoil the mass loaded transmission line they'd both sit on top of. I stopped short of a crossover that somehow flipped the phase above bass frequencies for the one driver.
For what it's worth, to each their own - I like my rear radiation out of phase from the front.
I tried an upwards firing driver design, using a bit of "Bose Technology" in the form of a vane to reflect some of the sound directly forward. Still, whatever sound managed its way toward the back wall was pretty much in phase with what was coming towards me at my listening position - and I didnt like it as much as an OB orientation.
Having two upwards facing speakers - one in phase and one out of phase - with the vanes didnt make much sense, as that would spoil the mass loaded transmission line they'd both sit on top of. I stopped short of a crossover that somehow flipped the phase above bass frequencies for the one driver.
For what it's worth, to each their own - I like my rear radiation out of phase from the front.
Also read: https://www.linkwitzlab.com/
I built his Phoenix many years ago and enjoyed the resuls but needs a large room as did my Martin Logan Aeon electrostatic dipole hybrids.
I find the sound detaches from the speakers compared to box speakers giving much better depth and surprisingly, good positioning and of course, there is a complete lack of any boxy resonances.
https://www.martinlogan.com/en/product/aeon
read the reviews...
I built his Phoenix many years ago and enjoyed the resuls but needs a large room as did my Martin Logan Aeon electrostatic dipole hybrids.
I find the sound detaches from the speakers compared to box speakers giving much better depth and surprisingly, good positioning and of course, there is a complete lack of any boxy resonances.
https://www.martinlogan.com/en/product/aeon
read the reviews...
There is no rear midrange or tweeter in your picture only woofers? In this case it will modify the transition from omni to forward radiation a bit relative to a conventional arrangement but otherwise likely won't do much.
A rear tweeter will raise the high frequency content in the reflected sound relative to the direct sound which can add to a sense of spaciousness but at the cost of some imaging and timbre. It is often beneficial to pull the on axis high frequency response down a bit to compensate. It is significantly room dependent but some like what it does.
A rear midrange will have a stronger effect and it is likely to be difficult to get the positives to outweigh the negatives. Assuming there are positives for mains (none spring to mind - anyone?) rather than side speakers where dipoles can work. The main negative is likely to be due to the wavelength and the distance between drivers leading to significant perceivable lobing. If you don't like the pros vs cons of omnidirectional speakers it seems unlikely that you are going to like the results of the configuration you posted but it might fun finding out.
For people who didn't understand my 3d models.
My speaker is made up of 6.5'' drivers, whereas the tweeter is a compression driver loaded in the horn, hence the similarities.
The tweeter is monopole because I want it to be more directional.
My speaker is made up of 6.5'' drivers, whereas the tweeter is a compression driver loaded in the horn, hence the similarities.
The tweeter is monopole because I want it to be more directional.
Last edited:
At what frequency would you be crossing the tweeter over to the other speakers? And are all 4 of the other drivers running the same frequency profile? Sometimes only one of a pair carries more than the bass frequency range.
Because they are very hard to put in the average room. They have to be the priority and that usually doesn’t make for a harmonious marriage! The average person put the speaker where the room allows and bipolar speakers don’t play that game. Now if you have a dedicated room or understanding spouse it’s different!