Thanks. Now I see, sound is going both ways. Some stout construction is needed otherwise.That is sometimes done, but you need a convenient room behind them.
Thanks. Now I see, sound is going both ways. Some stout construction is needed otherwise.That is sometimes done, but you need a convenient room behind them.
Well, or a common old cabinet. My 15" woofers take 3 cubic feet, for example.Thanks. Now I see, sound is going both ways. Some stout construction is needed otherwise.
It can be done as the wall height can be utilised to increase the enclosure volume. I use two of these in-wall subs and they can compete with many freestanding subs.How do you get the requisite box volume? Unless you mean the infinite baffle drivers with 0.707 Qts. That is sometimes done, but you need a convenient room behind them.
OK, now we just need in-wall speakers from about 100Hz up.It can be done as the wall height can be utilised to increase the enclosure volume. I use two of these in-wall subs and they can compete with many freestanding subs.
SSW-3 | Dual 10" (250mm) Passive In-Wall Subwoofer
The SSW-3 is an in-wall subwoofer system designed to deliver powerful and accurate low frequency response while remaining hidden from view. It features dual 10-inch (250mm) cast-frame woofers mounted in a heavily-braced Sonoglass molded baffle and an MDF Enclosure that installs into standard 2x6...www.jblsynthesis.com
OK, now we just need in-wall speakers from about 100Hz up.
Not bad at all.Official KEF Ci5160REF -THX spinorama
I am in the process of replacing my JBL C222HP LCR speakers with KEF Ci5160REF -THX. I asked KEF to send me the spinorama chart. It took them a while but the delay turned out to due to their updating the model to THX spec. I thought the chart will be valuable information for the forum. I have...www.audiosciencereview.com
It's better, but obviously baffle step correction is not that evil.So we come back to where I was trying to go. Is the infinite baffle FAR superior to the diffraction baffle affects found in most speaker or just aesthetics.
@fpitas Beat me to it
What are the common flaws [of in-wall speakers]? I would guess that the room size and geometry would be the biggest impediment, no?
I just wanted to chime in that I may have understated the effectiveness of sims for horns / waveguides. Of course the modeling tools available (irrespective of price) are capable of modeling the behavior of tweeters and then some.if one can model a hypersonic aircraft wing, one should be able to pin down an acoustic lens. The assessment provided suggested it just isn't so,
It was an interesting exchange. We all know the tech has enormous potential. But likely also requires a huge amount of work to get things sorted and productive. Be a great project for a club where one might have access to different sorts of expertise and the time burden shared. In the meantime, maybe companies will follow the led of SB Acoustics who offer their top of the line Be tweeter in 2 flavors--naked and lensed. Only 300 w/o the WG, 500 with. tho I'd like to see that difference shaved.I just wanted to chime in that I may have understated the effectiveness of sims for horns / waveguides. Of course the modeling tools available (irrespective of price) are capable of modeling the behavior of tweeters and then some.
However, I think for the DIYer, the free tools out there (ATH) are 1) not necessarily useful for completely arbitrary sims and 2) getting the exact measurements of every bit of th driver into the sim such that the output is also exactly correct is somewhat difficult.
So, basically, completely possible in theory, but tricky in practice.
It's actually remarkably simple when you understand it, but it does take time and effort to get there. For many people that does make it only possible in theorySo, basically, completely possible in theory, but tricky in practice.
Right, my comments are mainly about the fact that the response tends to fall apart above 10khz, especially when certain details of the geometry of the tweeter are only approximated, not exact.or the right kind of tweeter that is pretty much accurate up until the last octave at least.
There is some truth to this. To model a dome tweeter the dimensions of the dome and surround, the dimensions used need to be quite accurate and small changes can have quite an effect. So you cannot reliably make a generic waveguide if high performance is a goal. Hard domes are much easier to simulate accurately as they more closely resemble the assumption of a pistonic membrane. A soft dome tweeter will not behave in this way and at different frequencies the membrane will radiate differently from different parts and to simulate this, FEM and the multiphysics type approach is necessary to get an accurate answer. For compression drivers it depends on the design of the phase plug as to whether the phase plug is working to produce a flat wavefront or not and up to what frequency. Many compression drivers produce a flat wavefront up to 10K or so, this will change with the size of the driver too, beyond that the assumption of a flat wavefront from a flat driving surface may not hold true and become inaccurate. Then a more complete model of the phase plug and material properties will be needed to have a more accurate simulation. Some drivers don't produce a flat wavefront even at much lower frequencies and so any simulation assuming a flat wavefront will have some error.Right, my comments are mainly about the fact that the response tends to fall apart above 10khz, especially when certain details of the geometry of the tweeter are only approximated, not exact.
I don't know how you came up with these graphic, but but if validated, it is a very convincing argument for spherical loading of drivers. Elipson in the early 50's were the main proponents. Spherical loading will also result in a more even piston back pressure on the driver's. excursion.
I don't know how you came up with these graphic, but but if validated, it is a very convincing argument for spherical loading of drivers. Elipson in the early 50's were the main proponents. Spherical loading will also result in a more even piston back pressure on the driver's. excursion.
My understanding is that Harry Olsen's diffraction behavior graphs were based on assumptions, not actual measurements, and that one of the assumptions was the radiation pattern behavior of a hypothetical 1" fullrange driver.See page 2 and 3. These are theoretical and greatly exaggerated compared to a real life situation. A properly designed rectangular box works perfectly fine without the severe problems these graphics imply.