• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Assymetry in Driver Position?

Susurus

Resolution:6.62×10^-34
Okay. How about a new thread instead of my usual total hijack, call it
Intentional Assymetry in Driver Baffle Placement.

Your close, its more to keep the back wave from canceling out the front wave and removing all bass response. I'm sure there are parameters to OB, i do not have them. The bigger the board the better bass response. You also want to slightly offset the hole from center.

Search the web for "open baffle speaker design" or the such, gobs of info out there.

http://members.myactv.net/~je2a3/open.htm

This kind of design seems to work well (that little board center top seems to be important on many designs)...

OBpic1.jpg

Yes, there are some papers with calculations for the ideal open baffle dimensions for specific drivers' specs.

That may explain in part the sound of my DQ-10's.


I do recall that the worst you can do is mount a round driver in the center of a round baffle. The edge reflections [correction- wavelength cancellations, thanks Nakdoc] are at maximum (very bad). :yuck:

Interesting to note which companies resisted the more symmetric look (an easier sell :yes:) and decided on the sonically superior offset or off-center (both axes) for the woofer. True whether OB or closed box, BTW.


Woofer in bass cab offset but not mirrored:

Scott
Magnat (larger ones like 10P all-ribbon, not 6P)
Dahlquist DQ-10, not upright 20 or 12

? Infinity, Rectilinear, ...


And trapezoidal is a good solution to the edge effects!

Carver Amazings, open baffle on a large scale I haven't really got working right but others like them.

Apogee Duettas, love to hear those.

Would some of the placement issues abate if I modified my MG-IIc's to trapezoidal? Some people add little wing-things. But I'm more likely to start hacking away on a perfectly good set of planars... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
It is not edge effects, which are high frequency diffraction distortions, that improves with asymmetrical mounting, but the staggering of 1/2 wavelength cancellations. The idea is all the distances are differen and not multiples of each other. So a 3-5-8 baffle mount would sound flatter than a 3-5-9, because 3 is the 2nd harmonic of 9.
 
Cool, thanks for the clarification. I'll post some pics/measurements of my assym. speakers.
Didn't know if anyone but me cared! :scratch2:

I really don't know how to measure the 3-5-8 baffle mount ratios from raw data here, and how that relates to driver placement. Is it simple h-w-d dimensions? Fibbonacci sequence the way to go here?

Examples:
-----------------------

(1) Dahlquist DQM-9, 3-way. Cab is:

H x W x D
626 x 370 x 318 mm (about 12:7:6 ratio)

So the height of the DQM-9 cab is 2X depth. Seems so wrong for $1800 (orig. MSRP) speakers!

I can add 88 mm to improve them to 6:7:13. Or add curved sides to be currently fashionable.

Center of ~11" Woofer is at 176 from the side, and 176 from bottom.
Horizontal Center would be 185, so it's offset by 9 mm.
(Mids and tweets are vertical with the woofer.)

-------------------

(2) Dahlquist DQM-9c (compact)

578 x 368 x 266 mm (about 11:7:5 ratio)

Center of ~9" Woofer is at 172 from the side, and 152 from bottom.
Horizontal Center would be 184, so it's offset by 12 mm.

-------------------

(3) Dahlquist DQ-20i (upright symmetrical)

about 4:5:9 bass cab

(4) Magnat 6P II (upright symmetrical)

580 x 318 x 270 (about )
 
Back
Top Bottom