I'm sure Ted Jordan knows what he is doing. If he recommends a 4 driver array with drivers he designed I bet it will sound good no matter what "theory" sez. Or, stuck in a rut with theory in a Flinstone mobile. ZZZZZzzzz
Check out fullrangedriver.com for an intelligent discussion on"curved array" or "focused array" as Ron described them. Definitely not ill conceived.
Check out fullrangedriver.com for an intelligent discussion on"curved array" or "focused array" as Ron described them. Definitely not ill conceived.
I beg to differ. I'm with Jim Griffin on this one. Curved front baffles are fine providing you don't move from a specific location, but you loose all the other benefits in the process which doesn't strike me as being a particularly bright idea. If you need it to be focused, then give me power tapering any day over curving the baffle. All the benefits, none of the drawbacks, and a sight easier to build as well, which is always nice.
As for Ted Jordan's mini array -well, I respect Ted over any other manufacturer / designer I know. But I still don't like arrays with full-rangers. You try to make a full-length version of that and you'll run into problems PDQ. The laws of physics cannot be suspended. The short version in the far-field might be OK; but I'm not entirely sure why you'd want to in the first place.
As for Ted Jordan's mini array -well, I respect Ted over any other manufacturer / designer I know. But I still don't like arrays with full-rangers. You try to make a full-length version of that and you'll run into problems PDQ. The laws of physics cannot be suspended. The short version in the far-field might be OK; but I'm not entirely sure why you'd want to in the first place.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.