Thanks guys!
Very usefull explanations, graphs and sims!
I'm not a scientist so I'm not able to use matlab but at least I do now understand how to think about this matter of directivity and resulting comb filtering with such configurations of drivers. 😎
Very usefull explanations, graphs and sims!
I'm not a scientist so I'm not able to use matlab but at least I do now understand how to think about this matter of directivity and resulting comb filtering with such configurations of drivers. 😎
The simulation looks good to me.
If you want to take it another direction for higher SPL's then maybe something like this would wake the dead too:
If you want to take it another direction for higher SPL's then maybe something like this would wake the dead too:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
ShinOBIWAN said:
For up-against-the-wall speakers I LIKE IT.
For in-room speakers...When I factor in baffle effects and room effects, and off-access effects, I still come back to the WMTMW like the Rock Port or John K's dipole. My ears think in-room speakers image better than in-wall speakers.
With today's speaker technology, music comes to life with ~95-96db/watt-meter efficiency. Lower efficiency sounds dead. Higher efficiency seems to need compromised drivers or 4-way complexity.
W=15". M=6.5". T=dome or ribbon
- Status
- Not open for further replies.