Hey, guys
I've recently become fascinated with the idea of a wide baffle style of speaker lately. However, the thing I've been struggling with is how large/wide the baffle should be....Is it dependent on woofer size? Crossover frequency? BSC frequency? Etc?
I've you guys could help me out on determining on an appropriate baffle size would be greatly appreciated (For the sake of this example, let's say a 4" woofer, with a crossover of 1000hz)
Thanks in advance, guys. Much love
I've recently become fascinated with the idea of a wide baffle style of speaker lately. However, the thing I've been struggling with is how large/wide the baffle should be....Is it dependent on woofer size? Crossover frequency? BSC frequency? Etc?
I've you guys could help me out on determining on an appropriate baffle size would be greatly appreciated (For the sake of this example, let's say a 4" woofer, with a crossover of 1000hz)
Thanks in advance, guys. Much love
The wide baffle with sloped back vertical edges, has several benefits over a narrow baffle, though not very often mentioned. It's basically a portable infinite baffle design. Low edge diffraction, and much more even power response as the baffle step has been pushed down into the region of room wall gain. Several listeners have mentioned it sounds similar to a dipole. Commercially, Sonus Faber builds the Stradivari and Elipsa wide baffle speakers. The Pioneer TAD Reference One is essentially a wide baffle loudspeaker also.
Wide Baffles
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/download/IBL.pdf
Poor Man'
http://www.sonusfaber.com/en-us/products/stradivari-homage
http://www.sonusfaber.com/en-us/products/elipsa-red
Sonus Faber Cremona Elipsa loudspeaker | Stereophile.com
Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage loudspeaker | Stereophile.com
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/tad-reference-one-loudspeaker-tas-218-1/
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Home/Speakers/TAD+Speakers/Reference+One
Wide Baffles
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/download/IBL.pdf
Poor Man'
http://www.sonusfaber.com/en-us/products/stradivari-homage
http://www.sonusfaber.com/en-us/products/elipsa-red
Sonus Faber Cremona Elipsa loudspeaker | Stereophile.com
Sonus Faber Stradivari Homage loudspeaker | Stereophile.com
http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/tad-reference-one-loudspeaker-tas-218-1/
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Home/Speakers/TAD+Speakers/Reference+One
Last edited:
You should play around with some of the diffraction programs out there.
The Edge (posted above) is excellent except for the fact that it doesn't allow you to incorporate different edge treatments and see what their effects are.
So, also try: The Baffle Diffraction and Boundary Simulator.
Once you start getting a feel for what baffle width, driver placement and edge treatment do, then what you may want to do is see how those results combine with the FR's of your chosen drivers. In particular, you want to see how the diffraction peaks and nulls work with any of the drivers' peaks and nulls in order to try to produce a smooth and/or flat FR before you even have to start with the xo.
For that, you'll need to use the Frequency Response Modeler in which you can import the driver FR and either import or create the appropriate baffle diffraction curve and then combine the 2 together to see what the results look like. Now you can change up the box parameters until you arrive at the best possible result with your chosen drivers.
But you'll need to be able to trace the driver FR's as well in order to be able to import them into Response Modeler: SplTrace or automatic tracing program.
I think you will also want to consider the width in terms of Vb, or what your box volume for the woofer is going to be. If you only need something like 10L for a 4" woofer, then it's going to result in a very thin cabinet if you want to make it 20" wide...... (although there may be ways to get around that)
And by the same token, I think you're going to want to consider aesthetics as well. Or proportions in other words. Twenty inches wide when the height is only say, 12" is going to look a little strange (unless it's a CC perhaps). But 30" wide and 50" high might look pretty good.
The Edge (posted above) is excellent except for the fact that it doesn't allow you to incorporate different edge treatments and see what their effects are.
So, also try: The Baffle Diffraction and Boundary Simulator.
Once you start getting a feel for what baffle width, driver placement and edge treatment do, then what you may want to do is see how those results combine with the FR's of your chosen drivers. In particular, you want to see how the diffraction peaks and nulls work with any of the drivers' peaks and nulls in order to try to produce a smooth and/or flat FR before you even have to start with the xo.
For that, you'll need to use the Frequency Response Modeler in which you can import the driver FR and either import or create the appropriate baffle diffraction curve and then combine the 2 together to see what the results look like. Now you can change up the box parameters until you arrive at the best possible result with your chosen drivers.
But you'll need to be able to trace the driver FR's as well in order to be able to import them into Response Modeler: SplTrace or automatic tracing program.
I think you will also want to consider the width in terms of Vb, or what your box volume for the woofer is going to be. If you only need something like 10L for a 4" woofer, then it's going to result in a very thin cabinet if you want to make it 20" wide...... (although there may be ways to get around that)
And by the same token, I think you're going to want to consider aesthetics as well. Or proportions in other words. Twenty inches wide when the height is only say, 12" is going to look a little strange (unless it's a CC perhaps). But 30" wide and 50" high might look pretty good.
Baffle size should be at the frequency you choose to hand off radiation to the room., for when a speaker is located away from the walls. As the box is smaller than the room there will be a band of frequencies between those where the baffle is in control, and where the room is dominant, where part of the sound gets to you via wall reflections. There is no right answer to this question other than what issues you can or choose to deal with.
Our wide baffle build.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/269393-p10-hifi-alpair-7-3en-sdx7en-fast.html
Width is such that we can push the baffle step transition low and let the mid-tweeter to handle all the mid & top (XO @ 160 Hz), the curved sides to minimize edge diffraction.
dave
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/269393-p10-hifi-alpair-7-3en-sdx7en-fast.html
Width is such that we can push the baffle step transition low and let the mid-tweeter to handle all the mid & top (XO @ 160 Hz), the curved sides to minimize edge diffraction.
dave
ReDress
-ended with:
"Thanks in advance, guys. Much love"
could be wrong, but I'm going to say: female forum member. And because the population of lesbians is pretty small (as an average), and because marriage among lesbians is a LOT smaller than that,
..I'm going to say that "she" doesn't have a wife.
Answer to original question:
Somewhere between 19 and 24 inches in width for a wide baffle with a 4" midbass driver. Generally the wider the better to reduce the amount of baffle-step compensation that is required, particularly in the middle of the mid-range.
Thought so, nice try Scott 
I see an unmanaged baffle step as an error condition. The region either side being defined and setting the conditions. Nothing I've learned since has changed this in my view.
Baffle step compensation cannot fix this in isolation. You could supplement it by considering the modes, physical separation, absorption.. and then there's higher frequency diffraction from the baffle edges. All until the problem is lessened to acceptable levels.
Or you can visualise where the sound should be below the room frequency, where you choose to put it above the baffle frequency, and how to make the transition in a controlled manner.
I see an unmanaged baffle step as an error condition. The region either side being defined and setting the conditions. Nothing I've learned since has changed this in my view.
Baffle step compensation cannot fix this in isolation. You could supplement it by considering the modes, physical separation, absorption.. and then there's higher frequency diffraction from the baffle edges. All until the problem is lessened to acceptable levels.
Or you can visualise where the sound should be below the room frequency, where you choose to put it above the baffle frequency, and how to make the transition in a controlled manner.
I like the idea of that DeVore Orangutang O96, and I'm sure I've seen those drivers before somewhere or at least the woofer maybe?.. At a selling price of $12,000 though? I don't think so
Thought so, nice try Scott
..seemed reasonable.
-although I should have factored-in that females on this forum are about as frequent as Extraterrestrials.
My guess is that it is purely a visual thing. Backside contour is not even included in any simulation software, as I know.
There is however advantage of asymmetric profile of the speaker cavity - not so severe standing waves inside the box!
No, there is actually an effect.. but I'm not sure how much of one - to the point where it may well be nothing more than a visual thing (..depending on the design differences).
More complex programs with FEA/BEM analysis can show this (..ABEC Pro probably can). Also, importing a full 3d model into LEAP's Enclosure Shop can.
I think the largest effect would be exaggerating the diffraction of the speaker's sides - which in turn could add "ripple" to the upper mid-range in the forward plane. BUT I'd also think that it's the edge(s) themselves that would make by far the most difference.
Juhazi, you're into dipoles. There's a notch off to the sides, but it isn't just to the sides, the notch tapers back to be normal to the cone.
Earl Geddes rounded off the rear corners of one of his boxes a few years back and measured a very slight improvement.
Perhaps the point is found within the standard definition of diffraction whereby diverted energy manifests itself at the point of the disturbance to become a source on its own.
Earl Geddes rounded off the rear corners of one of his boxes a few years back and measured a very slight improvement.
Perhaps the point is found within the standard definition of diffraction whereby diverted energy manifests itself at the point of the disturbance to become a source on its own.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.