No Baffle no DSP
Hello there, newbie here. I have seen some examples of no baffle designs out there. Just raw drivers 'suspended in space'. They make use of DSP and are very expensive... But if I want to try the no baffle approach with the Manzanita (no DSP) what components are needed? Would the x-over be too complex to be practical? Thanks.
Hello there, newbie here. I have seen some examples of no baffle designs out there. Just raw drivers 'suspended in space'. They make use of DSP and are very expensive... But if I want to try the no baffle approach with the Manzanita (no DSP) what components are needed? Would the x-over be too complex to be practical? Thanks.
A couple of comments based on a past design
SRG You have asked an interesting question. I did some experimentation loosely similar to your posted description.
Yes, one can cobble together a passive baffle-less system that can work surprisingly well up to a point. It comes down to money, effort and mechanical - cosmetic compromises.
On the cheap, and after rummaging around my parts bin(s) I combined a pair of Goldwood 1852 18” woofers, an Eminence Beta 12 CX and JBL TI-220. The biggest challenge for me was how to physically hold these components together with out a baffle plate. Ended up rigging (literally) the components to a mast of sorts. Working around the T!-220 compression driver took a bit of trial and error.
As I have designed and built umpteen OB designs, the crossover was a breeze. The overall system efficiency, when set up to play flat down to roughly 50 HZ ended up around 86 db/watt. Max clean output at 50 Hz is limited to around 100 db @ 1 meter or so due to the limited Xmax available from the Goldwood 18’s. The system had usable bass into the upper 30’s.
Crossed over to the Emi Beta 12 around 200 Hz and from the Beta 12 to TI-220 around 1,500 Hz. The crossover component values and layout are other worldly as one would expect. Nothing like a traditional 3 way found in a enclosure type of design.
This system, while very impractical and about as non WAF as one could imagine, worked very well. IIRC it required around 12 crossover components. Nice open sound with excellent sound stage. Nice tonal balance and dynamics. Having a 12” midrange was nice as it can play quite loud and dynamically due to the large displacement capabilities. The TI-220 loafs along never seeing much over a watt or two on a peak basis.
SRG You have asked an interesting question. I did some experimentation loosely similar to your posted description.
Yes, one can cobble together a passive baffle-less system that can work surprisingly well up to a point. It comes down to money, effort and mechanical - cosmetic compromises.
On the cheap, and after rummaging around my parts bin(s) I combined a pair of Goldwood 1852 18” woofers, an Eminence Beta 12 CX and JBL TI-220. The biggest challenge for me was how to physically hold these components together with out a baffle plate. Ended up rigging (literally) the components to a mast of sorts. Working around the T!-220 compression driver took a bit of trial and error.
As I have designed and built umpteen OB designs, the crossover was a breeze. The overall system efficiency, when set up to play flat down to roughly 50 HZ ended up around 86 db/watt. Max clean output at 50 Hz is limited to around 100 db @ 1 meter or so due to the limited Xmax available from the Goldwood 18’s. The system had usable bass into the upper 30’s.
Crossed over to the Emi Beta 12 around 200 Hz and from the Beta 12 to TI-220 around 1,500 Hz. The crossover component values and layout are other worldly as one would expect. Nothing like a traditional 3 way found in a enclosure type of design.
This system, while very impractical and about as non WAF as one could imagine, worked very well. IIRC it required around 12 crossover components. Nice open sound with excellent sound stage. Nice tonal balance and dynamics. Having a 12” midrange was nice as it can play quite loud and dynamically due to the large displacement capabilities. The TI-220 loafs along never seeing much over a watt or two on a peak basis.
Hi John,
I’ve recently become interested in trying OB and have read through a lot of this thread, particularly since the updated designs appeared in post #1601. I have a few questions if you could kindly help.
1. My listening room is small, 11’x12’ with an 8’ ceiling and thick carpet on the floor. Is it just too small to even consider OB?
2. There is frequent reference to having speakers at least 3’ from side walls. Is that measurement to the outer edge of the baffle or to the center of it? If to the outer edge, then it would leave only 30” between the inside edges of the two baffles across the 11’ side.
3. What is the consequence of placing the speakers closer to the side walls? Does it really matter that much?
Thanks for your help and all that you have contributed to this discussion over a long time.
I’ve recently become interested in trying OB and have read through a lot of this thread, particularly since the updated designs appeared in post #1601. I have a few questions if you could kindly help.
1. My listening room is small, 11’x12’ with an 8’ ceiling and thick carpet on the floor. Is it just too small to even consider OB?
2. There is frequent reference to having speakers at least 3’ from side walls. Is that measurement to the outer edge of the baffle or to the center of it? If to the outer edge, then it would leave only 30” between the inside edges of the two baffles across the 11’ side.
3. What is the consequence of placing the speakers closer to the side walls? Does it really matter that much?
Thanks for your help and all that you have contributed to this discussion over a long time.
I'm not really sure that happens when you get too close to the side walls as I've been lucky enough never to do it. 
John will know, tho.
For sure getting them too close to the wall behind them will kill the upper bass - lower midrange. That is probably caused by the bass reflecting strongly off the wall and coming back around out of phase - thus cancelling the front wave. If you pull them off the wall then the path is longer and the reflection much less likely to have a phase that will cancel the front wave.
Off the sides of an OB should be a null, so the acoustics are going to be different.
John will know, tho.For sure getting them too close to the wall behind them will kill the upper bass - lower midrange. That is probably caused by the bass reflecting strongly off the wall and coming back around out of phase - thus cancelling the front wave. If you pull them off the wall then the path is longer and the reflection much less likely to have a phase that will cancel the front wave.
Off the sides of an OB should be a null, so the acoustics are going to be different.
In my somewhat small dining room, the Ultras seem to do better with a tad more distance between them and that puts them within a few feet of the side walls.
They had been setup with more distance from the sides and less in the middle and that really didn't sound as good.
Don't know if this is a universal rule but it's worth playing around to see what works in your space.
Like most open baffle speakers, they sound best with 4 or so feet from the back wall.
They had been setup with more distance from the sides and less in the middle and that really didn't sound as good.
Don't know if this is a universal rule but it's worth playing around to see what works in your space.
Like most open baffle speakers, they sound best with 4 or so feet from the back wall.
Side wall interaction with OB designs
As Barry and Pano allude to, minimum distance from a rear wall is more critical than minimum distance from a side wall. In a small room you are likely to be in near field listening environment at the listening position. This situation is a bit more forgiving on the side wall distance minimums. You may find it may take a bit of experimentation relative to finding an optimum toe in for best imaging performance. Long and short of things, yes a small to medium OB can work well in a small room. Have been demonstrating that fact in many a hotel room for many years!
As Barry and Pano allude to, minimum distance from a rear wall is more critical than minimum distance from a side wall. In a small room you are likely to be in near field listening environment at the listening position. This situation is a bit more forgiving on the side wall distance minimums. You may find it may take a bit of experimentation relative to finding an optimum toe in for best imaging performance. Long and short of things, yes a small to medium OB can work well in a small room. Have been demonstrating that fact in many a hotel room for many years!
Is there an interest in a high performance floor standing Manzanita II
OK, time to take a survey of the many who watch this thread... Have a larger cost effective Manzanita inspired speaker with the following advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages:
Similar design goals of simplicity brought forward from from the original Manzanita. Bang for buck, easy to build with simple tools and use of common off the shelf materials and components.
4 db of added net efficiency. Solid 8 ohm easy to drive load.
Bass extension to 32 Hz.
Improved over all performance over the entire usable frequency range. (32-18.5K)
Off the shelf name brand drivers available nearly everywhere in the world.
Simple wood working skills to fabricate.
Simple fabrication and construction with basic wood working tools.
Higher power handling and way more acoustic output.
Disadvantages:
Larger system in terms of dimensions & weight.
Higher material costs... estimated at $280 - $300 each.
Floor standing configuration that requires a bit more floor space. Kind of an Ultra but with major upgrades.
Baffle dimensions are around 19" wide, 12" deep and 40" high. About 45 pounds net. Two way using an 18" and 4.5" (world class Neo).
10 element crossover.
Look forward to hearing back from all who care to reply. J
OK, time to take a survey of the many who watch this thread... Have a larger cost effective Manzanita inspired speaker with the following advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages:
Similar design goals of simplicity brought forward from from the original Manzanita. Bang for buck, easy to build with simple tools and use of common off the shelf materials and components.
4 db of added net efficiency. Solid 8 ohm easy to drive load.
Bass extension to 32 Hz.
Improved over all performance over the entire usable frequency range. (32-18.5K)
Off the shelf name brand drivers available nearly everywhere in the world.
Simple wood working skills to fabricate.
Simple fabrication and construction with basic wood working tools.
Higher power handling and way more acoustic output.
Disadvantages:
Larger system in terms of dimensions & weight.
Higher material costs... estimated at $280 - $300 each.
Floor standing configuration that requires a bit more floor space. Kind of an Ultra but with major upgrades.
Baffle dimensions are around 19" wide, 12" deep and 40" high. About 45 pounds net. Two way using an 18" and 4.5" (world class Neo).
10 element crossover.
Look forward to hearing back from all who care to reply. J
John,
This would be an exciting and most welcome addition to the Manzanitas family. I’ve been trying to decide what to build for my new listening room and this could be the ideal answer. I would be very interested and would likely want to build it right away.
There is a variation, however, that I would prefer if it makes sense to you. The 19” width makes it somewhat overpowering visually in a small or even medium size room. A 15” woofer would allow the width to be kept down to about 16” similar to the arrangement in your Manzanita CV. The tradeoff, of course, would be slightly less extension of the bottom end. I don’t know about others, but that’s a tradeoff I would be willing to accept.
Better yet, although this may be asking for too much, how about a dual woofer arrangement with a pair of 10” or 12” drivers. That would allow for a narrower and probably slightly taller baffle. The extra cost of the additional woofers, probably about $50 to $75, would be fine with me for this highly desirable configuration.
Thanks again for what you do here.
This would be an exciting and most welcome addition to the Manzanitas family. I’ve been trying to decide what to build for my new listening room and this could be the ideal answer. I would be very interested and would likely want to build it right away.
There is a variation, however, that I would prefer if it makes sense to you. The 19” width makes it somewhat overpowering visually in a small or even medium size room. A 15” woofer would allow the width to be kept down to about 16” similar to the arrangement in your Manzanita CV. The tradeoff, of course, would be slightly less extension of the bottom end. I don’t know about others, but that’s a tradeoff I would be willing to accept.
Better yet, although this may be asking for too much, how about a dual woofer arrangement with a pair of 10” or 12” drivers. That would allow for a narrower and probably slightly taller baffle. The extra cost of the additional woofers, probably about $50 to $75, would be fine with me for this highly desirable configuration.
Thanks again for what you do here.
Last edited:
Thanks. I've watched a lot of Danny's Tech Talks, including the one you mentioned.
In fact, one of my other considerations instead of Manzanitas is his X-Statik. That's a hybrid OB with dual sealed woofers, however, so it's not quite the same.
I might want to eventually build both in order to determine the difference, but think I'll start the Manzanitas. Particularly if John brings out the new version just now being discussed.
BTW are you in Northern or Southern California? I'm in SoCal and have been trying get a DIY audio group organized.
Last edited:
