I don't have a ripole but I do have open baffle. I have two folded open baffle with 4x10 inch woofer in each. For rock, pop and the like with modest output below 40 Hz. They perform really well. For classic organ or electronic music with considerable amount of low freq material, it's not enough for realistic SPL. At the moment I think that OB is best down to 40-60 Hz, and I consider a corner placement for actual subwoofer.
1. Got my minidsp reconfigured and working over the weekend and am using a power amp for the ripole . I haven't messed with serious measurements and placement yet but I'm not satisfied with the performance of the single ripole so...
2. I built another identical one (since I have numerous extra drivers) to see if a pair can perform acceptably.
More to come as I find time to assemble it.
2. I built another identical one (since I have numerous extra drivers) to see if a pair can perform acceptably.
More to come as I find time to assemble it.
Truer words were never spoken. Keep in mind that building these drivers into ripoles actually saves me space compared to finding spare cartons to store them in (so there's a definite benefit there).
After that, it will have to contend with the "little" autotuba .
Last edited:
Hi,
if You do things different to proven recommendations than don´t blame the principle if Your project flops, but Yourself.
jauu
Calvin
Chill,
Our sense of humor is self deprecating . Don't take it personally.
Btw, can explain what I did "wrong" that violates ripole design principles, apart from chose a woofer that may have marginal xmax? After all, that is the point of this thread.Hi,
if You do things different to proven recommendations than don´t blame the principle if Your project flops, but Yourself.
jauu
Calvin
Thanks
Thats cool, and I think reality agrees well with your observations.
From 60 up, reasonable sized OB work fine, always have...
Plenty of open back guitar amps prove that.
Ripole is not like OB in that it filters off much of the good midbass and up.
And of course, its just like OB in that larger waves simply leak around it.
You simply need to follow recommendations, and reality will step aside.
Or maybe it won't...
Though we may completely disagree with other helpful posters weather
this sort of project is the best use of any given driver, nobody on either
side of this debate is lying. We simply have different swept volumes and
different minimum expectations for how much bass that should produce.
Last edited:
If things don't work out, there's always the option of converting the ripoles into a pair of PP slot loaded sonotube TL (or MLTL) - a variant of this Steve's Compounded, Super-Duper Shiva/Sonotube(R) T-line Subwoofers . The drivers T/S specs certainly support this kind of alignment and won't take up any more floor space.
If things still don't work out after that, ... I'm donating the ripoles to you - whether you like it or not.
Last edited:
Hi,
typically there are three main points to care about with Ripoles.
The first point is to use appropriate drivers.
In contrast to SL the Ripoles make use of higher Qts, higher Fs drivers.
The range starts at about 0.35 for large drivers >=12" and rises up to 0.6 for 6.5" drivers (centre values plus minus X).
Depending on the driver parameters and build dimensions the Ripole lowers the Fs between ~5Hz to 15Hz.
Actually, I never quite understood SLs preference for very low Qts drivers in Dipole application, as the amplitude response needs gross amounts of equalizing.
I prefer to let the drivers do what they naturally like to do.
It has shown to be a good feature of the driver when the spider shows a strong progression above the linear excursion range.
The second point is to choose sufficient membrane area for the given room size.
As a rule of thumb choose 3-4 times what You would choose for a BR or CB.
The third point is to use a passive EQ filter.
Again in contrast to SLs Dipoles the filter improves matters and should not be left out, even if it is not absolutely necessary in technical terms.
As for the listening room, it´s best a single closed room.
Two coupled rooms for example present problems for almost all subwoofers, but for Dipoles this architecture is plain poison.
jauu
Calvin
typically there are three main points to care about with Ripoles.
The first point is to use appropriate drivers.
In contrast to SL the Ripoles make use of higher Qts, higher Fs drivers.
The range starts at about 0.35 for large drivers >=12" and rises up to 0.6 for 6.5" drivers (centre values plus minus X).
Depending on the driver parameters and build dimensions the Ripole lowers the Fs between ~5Hz to 15Hz.
Actually, I never quite understood SLs preference for very low Qts drivers in Dipole application, as the amplitude response needs gross amounts of equalizing.
I prefer to let the drivers do what they naturally like to do.
It has shown to be a good feature of the driver when the spider shows a strong progression above the linear excursion range.
The second point is to choose sufficient membrane area for the given room size.
As a rule of thumb choose 3-4 times what You would choose for a BR or CB.
The third point is to use a passive EQ filter.
Again in contrast to SLs Dipoles the filter improves matters and should not be left out, even if it is not absolutely necessary in technical terms.
As for the listening room, it´s best a single closed room.
Two coupled rooms for example present problems for almost all subwoofers, but for Dipoles this architecture is plain poison.
jauu
Calvin
Hi,
typically there are three main points to care about with Ripoles.
The first point is to use appropriate drivers.
In contrast to SL the Ripoles make use of higher Qts, higher Fs drivers.
The range starts at about 0.35 for large drivers >=12" and rises up to 0.6 for 6.5" drivers (centre values plus minus X).
Depending on the driver parameters and build dimensions the Ripole lowers the Fs between ~5Hz to 15Hz.
Actually, I never quite understood SLs preference for very low Qts drivers in Dipole application, as the amplitude response needs gross amounts of equalizing.
I prefer to let the drivers do what they naturally like to do.
It has shown to be a good feature of the driver when the spider shows a strong progression above the linear excursion range.
The second point is to choose sufficient membrane area for the given room size.
As a rule of thumb choose 3-4 times what You would choose for a BR or CB.
The third point is to use a passive EQ filter.
Again in contrast to SLs Dipoles the filter improves matters and should not be left out, even if it is not absolutely necessary in technical terms.
As for the listening room, it´s best a single closed room.
Two coupled rooms for example present problems for almost all subwoofers, but for Dipoles this architecture is plain poison.
jauu
Calvin
Thanks for the useful info.
1. I'll look into the passive filter. My DSP should be able to handle it in the line level domain, but passive filters can have benefits regardless.
2. Re. room size, here in Texas, USA, we tend to have larger, more open homes compared to other parts of the country and certainly the rest of the world. This can have a big impact on the sound of an inefficient Xmax limited design such as a ripole . The best I can do is test this device in my study (which unfortunately is almost cubical
)I should have the second ripole running later this evening, time permitting.
Plan C: mount the ripole in the bathroom as a manifold infinite baffle firing through the drywall into the study.
NOT !! .... though it might actually work
Okay, 2nd ripole completed and set up for measurements.
Mains: a pair of teach H265 mini-monitors
Subs (<80 Hz): a pair of ripoles, each loaded with zalytron PL2101
Pre Amp: NAD C720BEE
CrossOver/ EQ : MiniDSP 2x4
Mains Amp: NAD C720BEE
Sub Amp: Kenwood KM-207 (200 WPC @ 8 ohm)
Mic: MiniDSP uMik
SoundCard: USB DAC
Computer: MacBook Air
Software: REW ( I also have audiotools on my phone with a dayton mike, if needed)
Room Placement: each ripole placed about 5 ft from the sidewall and about 6" from the back wall (subject to change)
I listened to the ripole pair and ran some preliminary measurements last night
More to come
Mains: a pair of teach H265 mini-monitors
Subs (<80 Hz): a pair of ripoles, each loaded with zalytron PL2101
Pre Amp: NAD C720BEE
CrossOver/ EQ : MiniDSP 2x4
Mains Amp: NAD C720BEE
Sub Amp: Kenwood KM-207 (200 WPC @ 8 ohm)
Mic: MiniDSP uMik
SoundCard: USB DAC
Computer: MacBook Air
Software: REW ( I also have audiotools on my phone with a dayton mike, if needed)
Room Placement: each ripole placed about 5 ft from the sidewall and about 6" from the back wall (subject to change)
I listened to the ripole pair and ran some preliminary measurements last night
- Running a pair helps (a lot) compared to a single ripole but it is still fairly easy to bottom them out at higher levels
- Not a lot of boom / room peaks with ripoles (a good thing)
- Lack of subjective slam compared to horns (to be expected with most / all dipole designs)
- awfully inefficient - I had to pad down the mains by 10 - 15 dB to subjectively match with the ripole. Looking at the measurements however, the ripoles are boosted in SPL .
- For my next set of experiments, I might match them in levels (as per measurements) and apply a house curve to get the sound I'm looking for
- I also need to see what minidsp's auto PEQ suggests
More to come
Attachments
Good thing that room is taller than normal!
Only need to stack 16 units per side (+12dB)
to subjectively match bookshelf speakers.
Might even help with the bottoming out?
Why I ever doubted, I do not know...
I'd like to nominate the inventor for an Ig Nobel.
No really, I think this might be totally prizeworthy.
http://www.improbable.com/ig/
Only need to stack 16 units per side (+12dB)
to subjectively match bookshelf speakers.
Might even help with the bottoming out?
Why I ever doubted, I do not know...
I'd like to nominate the inventor for an Ig Nobel.
No really, I think this might be totally prizeworthy.
http://www.improbable.com/ig/
Last edited:
Yes, the efficiency difference is abysmal. But we knew that going in.
As I've stated earlier in this thread, this was an objective experiment to determine when ripples work / dont work . So far, I have managed to make them work, but under a very narrow set of conditions.
After I get some measurements, I plan to extend one of them via a 4 ft length of 8" dia.sonotube ( stuffed) which I purchased this afternoon. totally unscientific (and ideally, I'd use much larger tube but that would involve wrecking / rebuilding the ripole) but stuffed tubes are forgiving. I'd be curious to compare the real life performance.
As I've stated earlier in this thread, this was an objective experiment to determine when ripples work / dont work . So far, I have managed to make them work, but under a very narrow set of conditions.
After I get some measurements, I plan to extend one of them via a 4 ft length of 8" dia.sonotube ( stuffed) which I purchased this afternoon. totally unscientific (and ideally, I'd use much larger tube but that would involve wrecking / rebuilding the ripole) but stuffed tubes are forgiving. I'd be curious to compare the real life performance.
zobsky, when you get fed up with ripoles, try my open baffle sub...
Audio Pages: Dipole subwoofers
Audio Pages: Dipole subwoofers
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.