| Wide Baffles Copyright 2004 © Troels Gravesen |
||||
| "Infinite"
Baffle Loudspeaker 2004-2006
|
||||
| One loudspeaker construction
leads to the next. No revolution, only evolution. We
still employ technology and materials developed decades
ago. Paper pulp, plastic and metal cones, ribbons and
electrostatic panels - ceramic drivers are new in this
context. And we have to surround the drivers with some
kind of enclosure to eliminate rear wave cancellation in
order to produce decent bass response. And we make closed
and vented boxes, transmission lines and horns. Working on dipoles - or semi-dipoles - was a new entry to my hobby and it took my plans into a new direction. Having lived with my semi-dipoles for more than a year, I have a hard time adjusting to any "boxy" sound again. The midrange sounds constrained with limited soundstage and articulation. The obvious next step would be the dipole bass, but I've had my share of electronic crossovers and multiple amps in the past and for the time being I want to keep things fairly simple: One amp and a pair of speakers with passive crossovers. That's all. The launch of the Stradivari by Sonus Faber has created quite a debate and what has been argued against wide baffled speakers is some loss of pinpoint imaging. Here are some different views on the subject. Mr.
José Victor Henriques from his review
of the new Sonus Faber Stradivari speaker: "Live pin-point focus": Has high-end HI-FI forgotten something here? The trend in recent years has been towards speakers with very narrow front baffles, trying to eliminate reflecting surfaces around the drivers, presumably enhancing pinpoint imaging. And with apparent commercial success. What is the trade-off? Because there's always a trade-off in speaker building. Well, by having a very narrow front baffle we will have edge diffraction at a rather high frequency giving delayed response subtracting from the target of pin-point imaging. We all know that a round sphere is the ideal surrounding for a speaker but for large speakers the sphere has to be large, very large and the WAF is close to zero. We never saw a commercial success from a sphere shaped speaker where the very narrow and slim line speakers can be rather deep (to give volume) and still appear smallish = high WAF. Paul
Messenger: Henriques
again: With a 66 cm wide baffle the Stradivari mid-drivers hardly need any baffle step compensation. It will be flat down to 200-300 Hz. Roy
Allison (former Acoustic Research and Allison
Loudspeakers) in Stereophile, Jan/05) on the
development of the Allison Model-1: Calling
a 50-60 cm wide baffle an infinite baffle is a
truth with some modifications. Having an infinite baffle
would mean mounting the drivers on the wall, creating a
true 2pi environment. By making a wide and curved baffle
cabinet, edge diffraction is avoided and a virtual 2pi
radiation pattern is produced. Any driver mounted on a
baffle will have an f3 = 11,600/width of baffle in cm. A
driver mounted on a baffle of 20 cm with will be down 3
dB at 11,600/20 = 580 Hz. Making the baffle 50 cm wide
the f3 is reduced to 232 Hz. Enough for a midrange driver
working from 300-400 Hz to release its full potential
without baffle step compensation. To read more about
baffle step compensation and cabinet edge diffraction,
try the following links: Ken Kessler writes in his report on the Stradivari that it sounds like a dipole, so whether the midrange here will have to work as a true dipole is to be seen. Prototype baffles will have to be flexible to accommodate both vented midrange boxes and dipole arrangements. The sketches shown here are purely made to start thinking in curved, wide baffled constructions. No dimensions or calculations at this stage. A truly curved front panel is not an easy task and will probably require gluing several layers of thin MDF or plywood sheets over curved internal bracing. Download Acapella WB file from here Acapella WB
Getting the Acapella WB test cabinets into the living room from the workshop (at the basement) was quite a problem and a sack barrow was needed! These cabs are heavy! And before I go on with this story I also have to tell that the current cabinet size and colour has a close to zero WAF. So, you are warned. Patricia Barber from her "Paris Live" recording was first on the CD player and I think it's the first time I've heard the French introduction with the acoustic scale the male voice requires and the first time I got a real sense of the size of the room where the concert takes place. These speakers have a phenomenal ability to reveal room ambience. Should you worry about wide baffles having reduced transparency and pinpoint imaging, then you can happily forget about it. You can never really know how a person perceives the acoustic properties of a loudspeaker no matter how many explanations, but I do think I have an idea of what Ken Kessler means when he writes that the Stradivari sounds like a dipole without being a dipole. This is exactly what they do. I have been wondering what he meant by this and thought it was some smart phrasing, but it isn't. The wide curved baffle has a benign way of projecting the sound waves into the room and I'm beginning to think that if you have to choose between reflection and diffraction, then reflection is the way to go. From a wide baffle you really don't have a delayed response of signals - at least not in the frequency domain that counts, upper mid and treble. And the baffle step really doesn't occur until the sound waves have lengths where they are omni-directional anyway. As always, excitement is
high the first time you connect a new pair of speakers.
Will they deliver from all the working hours put into
them - and these are just test cabs! If they are good
I'll have to do it all over..... The very simple series crossover
shown in the pdf file was constructed for the MT and a
ruler flat response was measured from 300 to 22000 Hz -
the upper limit of the CLIO system. My expectations to sensitivity
were very high (Tannoys still fresh in memory) and I was
initially a little disappointed from this until I
realised how high I was playing. This speaker can play
loud without apparent distortion and it takes an act of
will to turn the volume knob down to normal listening
level because the level of transparency is so good that
you have to hear all the details on every piece of music. These speakers handle female vocals very well. They may not be completely neutral, but they can be played loud = lack of distortion. And going from solid state amplification (electronic crossover + 2 solid-state amps) to the Copland CTA 505 improved this somewhat. Sometimes paper cones and valves go hand in hand and this appear to be the case for the Acapella WB. I'm hesitant to coat the middriver. I know it will take some edginess, but also some vividness and well, colouration if you like. It's remarkable that paper cones have survived until this very day despite numerous alternatives with much better physical properties. But well produced paper cones have a "thing" that any other cone material hasn't. In my small workshop the
bass initially seemed a little low in level and
extension, but it is not often you can hear anything from
a 31 Hz warble tone, but this one can tell you it's
there. And getting the speakers into the much larger
living room certainly opened the bass and there was the
level and extension. The transient attach of the bass
could be better (kick drum) and I have to experiment with
a smaller cabinet size and possibly a higher vent tuning
before I look for other drivers.
15-08-2005 Update Acapella WB
Seen above is a range of drivers suggesting quite some confusion. The 15M4531 ScanSpeak mid driver is gone; the 7000 tweeter is gone and in comes an AudioTechnology driver and a crummy looking old SEAS paper cone driver from the early Eighties. And a 12" JBL bass driver! There's always a honeymoon with speakers. You may instantly recognise strengths and weaknesses from a new set-up, but it can take days, sometimes weeks to find out whether you can live with the sound from a driver and the way this particular driver will colour the sound, because all drivers do. The 10" paper cone bass drivers did great and the 7000 tweeter also, but the 15M4531K00 driver will drive you nuts in the long run. Scan-Speak has done a fine job in elimination major break-up patterns usually associated wit paper cones but this does not mean this driver doesn't have some residual "paper" (honky) quality to its sound. This driver is phenomenal in accentuating sh... sounds and every sibilant recording will shred you ears. After some time the 15M driver was coated with a coating material obtained from Speakerbits in Australia: http://www.speakerbits.com/Default.aspx. Actually the glue used for refoaming drivers. This material is well suited for coating paper cones and leaves a nice, non-sticky, flexible surface if done properly. This treatment did not change the frequency response and it improved the sound considerably. For some days I thought this was the cure, but something just kept these drivers from having a neutral presentation. One very noticeable thing is when a high piano note is played and the 15M will smack in your face, but the note doesn't stop fast enough. It's like the 15M is ringing. Does the combination of a high mechanical Q, the kapton voice coil and the paper cone produce this effect? Is a middriver with better damping what's needed? Tweeter attenuation was
tested thoroughly and a new parallel crossover for the MT
was constructed but this didn't perform better than the
former series crossover. Out of frustration I inserted
some old SEAS paper cone drivers (actually from a B&O
speaker, S25) and well, these drivers do not have the
level of transparency compared to the 15Ms, but vocals
just started sounding right, actually very good. Hmm...
Seriously, a 25 year old el-cheapo driver! Next I took a
Monacor SPH 175 driver, actually quite similar to the
SEAS driver. This driver has a coated paper cone and I
removed the terrible plastic dust cap and inserted a
phase plug from an old SEAS driver. Again, some very
enjoyable midrange and good vocal performance. So it was time to reconsider
the whole project.
The midrange driver: Midrange - the ever so troublesome
midrange! I always thought that the Acapella should not
be a "true" clone of the Stradivari with regard
to driver selection - it would be too easy to take 2 x
SEAS W26EX001, a 4" AudioTechnology mid and the 7000
tweeter to get as close as possible to the Stradivari.
But the target is to maintain 8 ohms impedance and so it
will be.
Listening to a wide selection of
recordings, this set-up proved worthy of
constructing passive crossovers targeting these points of
crossover. From the electronic crossover the bas and mid
produce a good frequency response, but the individual
phase response wasn't too good. Something that may be
more easily managed with a passive crossover and produce
an even better bass-mid integration. February 2006: After a long break from
the wide baffle speakers, I finally put together the
crossovers for the JBL 123A + AT 4H52 + Fountek JP3
ribbons, based on the simulations I made half a year ago
and initially the points of crossover were 300 and 4500
Hz. 4500 Hz is really high for the mid but I wanted to
hear how the 4H52 would perform from this. The 4H52 can
manage well up to 5-6000 Hz, but treble produced from a
5" cone isn't my cup of tea. The 4500 Hz p.o.c. went
reasonably well despite minor honkyness, but transparency
was excellent. Actually so good that I decided to go for
this solution. Polypropylene cones may not reveal the
absolute ultimate level of transparency but this is so
close to "it" that I decided to pay Per and
Eivind Skaaning a visit to have them make me two
middrivers with some differences to the 4H52 FlexUnit
here. The drivers will have 52 mm voice coils of 15 mm
length wound on a kapton former in a 6 mm deep magnet
gap, standard convecs domes and finally it will have the
H magnet. With the given choice of polypropylene
thickness, a sensitivity around 91 dB should be the
result. The driver will have the C-Quenze chassis and it
will be named 15H52-15-06-SDK. I very much thought that
underhung voice coils would be the way to go here but the
transient attack is better from overhung voice coils and
the frequency response produced from overhung voice coils
is better suited for midrange. Underhung voice coils may
produce a more flat frequency response well suited if the
driver also has to play bass - despite limitations in
Xmax. March 2006, middrivers have arrived:
May 2006: After testing a wide range of bass
drivers, the JBL 123A still outperformed the
whole lot and for various reasons, I don't want to use
this driver in the final version. My preference would be
two 8" drivers with 10 ohms voice coils, suitable
for a 60 litres cabinet volume, but I don't have these
drivers and for the time being I'm not prepared to have
them made either. Too costly.
|