This is golden. It's not easy to get someone to explain such technical and precise concepts in a really simple way. I wish this was the case when I was at university. Brilliant.
It’s awesome to hear and understand all this as well as surprising you’re sharing all your secrets with us. I dont know of anyone else that does this as most inventors want to make a product and sell it to make money - but you’re dedicated to the DIY / Hobbyist… much Qudos to you
Wow! Great explanation of your empirical development process. I had no clue about the details of aligning of the voice coils for proper phasing (front baffle thickness). Also the cutout on the short side to unload the high frequency driver and the non-orthogonal angle for the long side of the enclosure. I'm watching part 4 next. Thanks!
That is literally priceless! As long as I'm in the process of designing my first open baffle speakers I'd be grateful if someone could answer a couple of questions: 1. SPL diagrams that was shown start from 200 Hz. What's going on below that frequency? I assume it slopes further down? 2. You explain how L-frame works. I'm curious if the T-frame works the same (i.e. if we put the long wing vertically to the center of the baffle back). I observe some open baffles are made this way 3. what's your advice on speaker mounting? Flush mount is the best isn't it? What if I decide to mount woofers to the back of the baffle, making the hole wider outwards like a short horn? (and keeping the phase issues in mind of course)
1. To measure accurately below 200Hz, outside of an anechoic chamber, requires being further away without reflections. That is not possible indoors. The low end roll off can be calculated and then confirmed with impedance and nearfield measurements. 2. A T shaped baffle does nothing to separate the front and back waves. It is nothing more than a brace. 3. Flush mounting is best.
Great video. Really there is no magic involved just measure change, measure change until you get the best response. Provided you have the equipment to measure there is nothing stopping us doing this at home. And it keeps the cost of the crossover down as well. Really helpful tips.
Can you recommend decent affordable measurement equipment, software etc? I have a blue blueberry studio condenser mic not sure if it works for this application
I built an open-baffle subwoofer a year or so ago and I like it so much more than any of the ported subwoofers that I've heard and owned. I'd love to get ahold of some open-baffle monitors! Thanks for the great video!
Used this info in my alnico/ neodymium build with stellar results, mine ended with 14” outer wing and 2” inner wing with upward facing rear mounted tweeters ♥
hope you can also discuss how to measure the response; software, type of mic, the distance of mic to measure driver/s... thx in advance Danny. Great topic and explanation.
Measurements are the most difficult aspect of speaker design. To do the topic justice would be hours and hours long. Then the software that takes raw calibrated microphone response and allows a person to make meaningful engineering decisions is another set of tasks that need to be completed. If you're serious about acoustic measurements the best way to get up to speed quickly is to have a competent engineer measure some devices in your presence and explain why he/she is doing something in a certain manner and/or sequence. The parts-express forum has lots of engineers that visit, but because they are aware of the issues with measuring, they may not be of much assistance. I happened to have learned from Dr. Joe D'Appolito as he lives only a few miles from me. There is a shortcut but it costs thousands of dollars and still requires knowledge of acoustics and attendant engineering principles. That would be a Klippel analyzer. Another engineer (I am an EE) that I know once said it takes a decade to learn the engineering required to self-validate results. I think that horribly pessimistic, but there are learning curves. I learned enough in two years of study to make good measurements. If you simply want a speaker design tested there are a few acoustic labs that do this in the US, and I personally know one company that provides Klippel analysis at low cost, and professionally another that would almost certainly provide free analyses for non-commercial use. This is not intended to dissuade anyone from performing what are, essentially, formulaic tasks. I just want people to make good measurements is all.
Quick question on how to position these speakers: long back edge on the inside or the outside edge as seen from the listening position? Love your work!
Are these being demonstrated as the proper left/right channels? In other words, the full-height wing always sits to the '"outside"? So that when you toe them in, you are looking at the front and the full-height wing? Just like the video here?
You should be a presenter at the Burning Amp Festival in San Francisco every October! During the summer Nelson Pass supplied open baffle kits for a speaker camp that was a lot of fun. I think there would be a lot of interest among diyers in what you offer.
That is a great result that can be achieved. In a two channel stereo, would the large wing be to the inside or to the outside? and what can be expected by swapping that over?
A note about KEF “Meta” LS-50: “Meta” is solving a problem unique to coaxial dome tweeters. Every good quality separate dome tweeter I’ve seen lately has a rear damped resonance chamber incorporated in the design.
Danny, I know this is an old series for you. Your design philosophy is marketedly different from what Clayton Shaw does with Caledon and his previous works, yet you both reach compelling results. Can you explain how he balances the baffle diffraction issues and baffle “awareness” issues you described?
Great as always! After years of diyaudio forum I started grativating around openbaffles. This video give so much theory in a clear and condensed manner it's just great! Would be interesting an episode discussing power dispersion response around the speaker in relation to the wings. Also your thoughts about the Linkwitz mini as I was thinking to build a pair :) Great work! Thanks, hope I'll be buying those servo subs soon...
Thank you for educating us. Please do some audiovisual clips from your sound room with your speakers without your servo subs.....I belive tin pan alley from the great SRV is a very good choice to play on your speakers....
I love my x-statiks; they put out a HUGE sound-stage. I do wish they were a little more transparent though for 2-channel listening. NX-Oxtica build is on my wishlist.
I guess the room and placement in the room changes the response too. How far from the back wall is optimal vs possible placement to still get the most out of an open baffle design like yours?
I really really appreciate you taking the time to make these vids. What would be really interesting to me is off-axis response on these speakers. I'm not a fan of MTM in general because of the narrow vertical axis, I wonder how the asymmetric wings behave with the horizontal axis I have almost convinced myself to buy a pair of your sub-kits, looking forward to the next installment.
Actually not all MTM designs have a narrow vertical window. We have quite a few with a really wide window and even vertical off axis that is better than most two driver designs. And the asymmetrical wings will also help maintain a smooth off axis response.
Thank you, sir for your great videos ! I am curious about the horizontal axis frequency and acoustic lobe effected by the non-symmetric baffle. Hopefully you can do some videos on that too.
Sir the 12 inch - 2 inch - 110 degrees works for all size drivers? Or as the driver size gets bigger needs bigger side asymmetrical drivers? And if yes have u figured a ratio between driver size and side baffle size? Thank u for your work and greetings from Greece. Have u ever shipped your speakers to Greece 🇬🇷 ???
For a first try, go to a thrift store an buy some cheap 2 or 3 way speakers. Take them apart and mount all drivers in a baffle. You will be amazed. I did the same and listen to rhem for months right now. Sounds so much better. Gonna make a second set soon. Philips drivers from the 1970's are great.
I've always wanted to design my own speskers, so it's really interesting to see how these particular style and desgin works and how simple changes can effect things dynamically. So of course like all of the people who've watched this and the other videos, i'm my own theory; there is packaging you can get sometimes with products where cardboard is cut in a specific way so that when pulled apart, it creates a dimond pattern. If this was high strength material, like say Aluminium, and the negative spaces created had been filled with a sheet of say acoustic material, like Oasis, that material you can stick flowers in. and this sat behind the baffle (created by the Aluminium structure) with the Oasis filling the negative space; could you then mount a driver and tweeter, with possibe sides of similar construction, could this work, less structural mass to reflect but with some accoustic properties? Hope you don't mind me asking. Thanks.
Now. What would happen if you have a U-shape baffle and use heavy lining of NoRez material inside that cavity to control those frequencies that stay within that area and cause that megaphone effect?
Actually they just made a diffuser for cancelling out the back wave. It's not at all new. And it is nothing compared to a tweeter that is completely open to the room.
@@dannyrichie9743 It doesn't diffuse anything, it absorbs the backwave by an array of 30 Helmholtz resonators and matching impedances from the tweeter to the metamaterial via a conical horn. You should read the AES paper to understand the design. But it only works on the tweeter so only above the crossover point. The rest of the critical midrange is not absorbed. It is for monopole speakers of course. Open baffles have a whole different sound being dipoles and not every person or application is desires that kind of sound.
Stewart Markley - “Meta” is solving a problem unique to coaxial dome tweeters. Every good quality separate dome tweeter I’ve seen lately has a rear damped resonance chamber incorporated in the design.
The two speaker open baffle that you did the crossover for setting on top of a servo sub sounds like a nice package. Any plans to offer a kit like that?
On the application of the L frame, I wonder: aren't you changing the plane in which the back wave and the front wave cancel out? If the L side baffles would on the most extreme outsides of the speakers from the listening position, the zero pole plane would toe out, This phenomenon would be relevant for toe-in/toe-out positioning speakers to avoid first side reflections from the side walls. It might also influence the imaging between the speakers. What do you think?
@@dannyrichie9743 In a planar open baffle (no side wings), front and back waves are separated in the virtual plane where these meet in equidistance due to their opposite phase. For a planar open baffle, this virtual plane is obviously the plane of the baffle. By setting the toe-in exactly as indicated by Linkwitz (using his mirror approach), the first reflection side waves that bounce off the side walls of the room can be minimised. By placing a rear wing, the virtual plane in which these front and back waves meet in equidistance no longer coincide with front baffle plane. So, to get the same minimisation of side wave reflections, the toe-in of the speakers must be altered accordingly with this change of virtual plane. That was the point I was trying to make.
So is the optimal set up of a pair of these open baffle speakers 2 units that are identical, or are they mirror images of each other? Also, if mirror images, does the short sidewall go in the middle or to the outside?
Roughly, What size side wings would be recommended for a 15” bass driver only, driver mounted center horizon. and 2” higher than center vertical, in a 21” x 27” Baffle?
The final design was the result of a lot of trial and error. I wonder if it would be possible to model the system to better understand the sound wave interactions so that an understanding of why the various baffle lengths impact the response. If only sound waves could be doped with ink like fluids can to track their vectors, diffractions and even interactions. In any event, it seems evident there is a lot of complicated interactions that these simple baffles are hiding.
Great presentation. I follow the theory and one can not seem to contests the results as measured. This seems so different then the spatial audio designs. If I am understanding what Danny is saying then the Spatial Audio open baffle design should produce a radically different result. I would love to have Danny and Clayton Shaw discuss there respective approaches. Clearly, both are getting great results but with seemingly opposite approaches in the baffle design. Can they both be right?
Maybe Clayton and I will do something like that one of these days. And I wouldn't say that there is necessarily a right and a wrong. Objectives can be different and the highest performance or highest attained results based objectives might not have the value of a more marketable and commercially successful design.
Hi Danny, Thanks for the sharing knowledge and experience! I have a question. How looks the off axis response (left and right)? I'm expecting a non-symmetrical response... In case that the truth is, does it mean that for that kind of design, you get really a small sweet spot? Thank you in advance, Djordje
hi. i can see you use the bg tweeter whuch is shooting from both sides....uf i use a tweeter with a back cup does the open baffle idea steel stands or is it loosing the whole effect...and if so do i steel need the cut in the 2 inch side ? bc the tweeter is shooting only forwerd.....thx a lot man🤔
Would putting No Rez on the front of the baffle help make the baffle disappear? I've never seen that done, but often wondered how it would affect reflections off the baffle.
I’m new to your channel, so this may have been asked many times before but... I’m curious what you think about magnepan style quasi ribbons vs the cone drivers you’re using for mids, as well as the neo tweeter. It seems the planar nature reduces interference between the front and back waves, though I’m guessing imperfectly. I wonder what wings might do on something like the LRS.
@@dannyrichie9743 I guess the short of what I'm asking is why you choose cone drivers instead. Apples and oranges are still dipole open baffle fruit, so I'm trying to understand the choices made.
That said, I've seen your line source vids with new record day, and that's all neo drivers for highs and mids, so it seems you do use those. I'm a new Magnepan user and audiophile newb. Thinking about building my own bookshelf planar magnetic speakers for fun.
@@aweidenhammer The line of woofers will move more air and play down a lot lower. It makes drums hits and such sound very real. The all planar magnetic drivers keep a narrow baffle width and offer high sensitivity. So imaging is much greater than a Maggie and the sweet spot is much larger. Plus you can drive them with low wattage amplifiers.
Hi Danny I have a question a little off topic, I am interested in the X-Voce and how it would be affected if it is placed right under a flat screen TV with the front flush with the screen?
Do you have any computer models to predict response for the various shapes/angles/dimensions? How much do you let your ears drive the design vs the frequency plot?
I don't try to model this stuff. I have done a LOT of this stuff and measured and tested it enough that I know what the results are going to be and where my starting points have to be. So it doesn't take me long to have a working prototype. It is the same for crossover design. I do it all the time. So I don't need to model something to know what will happen. I already know what will happen. I just have to put it together, test it, and fine tune it. Verses what we hear is a different discussion. I have to design based on accuracy. And that means on and off axis and what it is going to do in the room. The how it sounds is altered immensely by a whole different group of variables. But the fundamentals have to be correct to avoid errors and problems.
Danny Richie thanks for the response. Would love a video explaining more of that knowledge but understand if it part of the secret sauce you don’t want to share.
Are you going to make some sound tests for us? Because I think when people see these "incomplete" baffles they really don't trust your words. And I know, UA-cam is able to show a clear difference between $400 loudspeakers and $4k ones (I think your system sounds like at least $4k loudspeakers -).
Height is not a problem it's the size and width of the baffle that is a problem. Surface reflections and edge diffractions are significant problems with those.
This is golden. It's not easy to get someone to explain such technical and precise concepts in a really simple way. I wish this was the case when I was at university. Brilliant.
Holy cow! This is awesome. The open baffle stuff is like hearing the answer to a dozen questions or problems I’ve been carrying around for decades.
Great info Danny. You said hours of testing, more like 100s and 100s of hours so its amazing how open you are sharing this with the hifi community.
Great series. I learned more about OB in these 3 videos than I every understood reading 100's of articles.
I read 100 s of articles and got partway, but he manages to srick everything together. One video left to go. woohoo
It’s awesome to hear and understand all this as well as surprising you’re sharing all your secrets with us. I dont know of anyone else that does this as most inventors want to make a product and sell it to make money - but you’re dedicated to the DIY / Hobbyist… much Qudos to you
Simply love the determination, passion and technical know-how that goes into these builds.
Fantastic content, WOW!
Your giving out more alpha then about any other video i have watched on allmost any topic!
Wow! Great explanation of your empirical development process. I had no clue about the details of aligning of the voice coils for proper phasing (front baffle thickness). Also the cutout on the short side to unload the high frequency driver and the non-orthogonal angle for the long side of the enclosure. I'm watching part 4 next. Thanks!
That is literally priceless! As long as I'm in the process of designing my first open baffle speakers I'd be grateful if someone could answer a couple of questions:
1. SPL diagrams that was shown start from 200 Hz. What's going on below that frequency? I assume it slopes further down?
2. You explain how L-frame works. I'm curious if the T-frame works the same (i.e. if we put the long wing vertically to the center of the baffle back). I observe some open baffles are made this way
3. what's your advice on speaker mounting? Flush mount is the best isn't it? What if I decide to mount woofers to the back of the baffle, making the hole wider outwards like a short horn? (and keeping the phase issues in mind of course)
1. To measure accurately below 200Hz, outside of an anechoic chamber, requires being further away without reflections. That is not possible indoors. The low end roll off can be calculated and then confirmed with impedance and nearfield measurements.
2. A T shaped baffle does nothing to separate the front and back waves. It is nothing more than a brace.
3. Flush mounting is best.
@@dannyrichie9743 thank you!
Great video. Really there is no magic involved just measure change, measure change until you get the best response. Provided you have the equipment to measure there is nothing stopping us doing this at home. And it keeps the cost of the crossover down as well. Really helpful tips.
Can you recommend decent affordable measurement equipment, software etc? I have a blue blueberry studio condenser mic not sure if it works for this application
I built an open-baffle subwoofer a year or so ago and I like it so much more than any of the ported subwoofers that I've heard and owned. I'd love to get ahold of some open-baffle monitors! Thanks for the great video!
Your 4 videos on OBs cleared so many doubts than reading too many articles online !!!! Thanks a ton !!!!! 🙏🙏
Stellar information, Danny.
Used this info in my alnico/ neodymium build with stellar results, mine ended with 14” outer wing and 2” inner wing with upward facing rear mounted tweeters ♥
hope you can also discuss how to measure the response; software, type of mic, the distance of mic to measure driver/s... thx in advance Danny. Great topic and explanation.
Measurements are the most difficult aspect of speaker design. To do the topic justice would be hours and hours long. Then the software that takes raw calibrated microphone response and allows a person to make meaningful engineering decisions is another set of tasks that need to be completed.
If you're serious about acoustic measurements the best way to get up to speed quickly is to have a competent engineer measure some devices in your presence and explain why he/she is doing something in a certain manner and/or sequence.
The parts-express forum has lots of engineers that visit, but because they are aware of the issues with measuring, they may not be of much assistance. I happened to have learned from Dr. Joe D'Appolito as he lives only a few miles from me.
There is a shortcut but it costs thousands of dollars and still requires knowledge of acoustics and attendant engineering principles. That would be a Klippel analyzer.
Another engineer (I am an EE) that I know once said it takes a decade to learn the engineering required to self-validate results. I think that horribly pessimistic, but there are learning curves. I learned enough in two years of study to make good measurements. If you simply want a speaker design tested there are a few acoustic labs that do this in the US, and I personally know one company that provides Klippel analysis at low cost, and professionally another that would almost certainly provide free analyses for non-commercial use.
This is not intended to dissuade anyone from performing what are, essentially, formulaic tasks. I just want people to make good measurements is all.
I’d like to see a full video of the black painted speakers. That would sound good to me!
Great work, thank you for the ride, that's a lot of work explained in minutes!
это самое полезное видео которое я видел! спасибо Дэнни
Quick question on how to position these speakers: long back edge on the inside or the outside edge as seen from the listening position? Love your work!
Superb analysis thru systematic measurements. Thanks for the open sharing. I wish you would offer a kit for an 8 inch coaxial full range driver!
Are these being demonstrated as the proper left/right channels? In other words, the full-height wing always sits to the '"outside"? So that when you toe them in, you are looking at the front and the full-height wing? Just like the video here?
You should be a presenter at the Burning Amp Festival in San Francisco every October! During the summer Nelson Pass supplied open baffle kits for a speaker camp that was a lot of fun. I think there would be a lot of interest among diyers in what you offer.
BEST VIDEO SO FAR/ KEEP up the great teaching
Fantastic Video! Thanks so much! A lot of questions I had finaly answered in a clear and informative way.
That is a great result that can be achieved. In a two channel stereo, would the large wing be to the inside or to the outside? and what can be expected by swapping that over?
Hugo Bloemers I imagine these best with the large wings on the outside and toed in to something like 45 degrees. But I admit I’m unsure.
We typically put the long wings to the inside. This minimizes congestion in the front wall reflection and opens up the sound stage width.
@@vessk000 The wings don't cause or create forward or rear reflections. So no problems.
@@dannyrichie9743 Superb. Solves the problem I had with an 8 inch full range drive. Thank you.
Really enjoying and thankful for you sharing so much experience.
A note about KEF “Meta” LS-50: “Meta” is solving a problem unique to coaxial dome tweeters. Every good quality separate dome tweeter I’ve seen lately has a rear damped resonance chamber incorporated in the design.
Correct
Thank you for your tests and measurements. I have built a top as in your description and I am thrilled.
Danny, I know this is an old series for you. Your design philosophy is marketedly different from what Clayton Shaw does with Caledon and his previous works, yet you both reach compelling results. Can you explain how he balances the baffle diffraction issues and baffle “awareness” issues you described?
Thanks for the series. Looks like I might have to grab some foam core and measure a few configuration with drivers I have on hand.
GReat video (I had to capitalize the GR). So helpful and interesting. Please keep them coming.
Open baffle have enjoyed so much more popularity. In part because of GR research in my opinion.
Danny
I never heard u talk much about this black LGK (in this video) open baffle- can u do a review of it?
Do you have any left for sale?
Ok, I'm sold (solid engineering BTW). How do I get one a pair? I built the X-LS Encore's - needless to say, enjoy them immensely.
This is so good! I love it!
Great as always! After years of diyaudio forum I started grativating around openbaffles. This video give so much theory in a clear and condensed manner it's just great! Would be interesting an episode discussing power dispersion response around the speaker in relation to the wings. Also your thoughts about the Linkwitz mini as I was thinking to build a pair :) Great work! Thanks, hope I'll be buying those servo subs soon...
Awesome! Styrofoam very inspiring. Feel like I can reay try a bunch of things now.
Thank you
Thank you for educating us. Please do some audiovisual clips from your sound room with your speakers without your servo subs.....I belive tin pan alley from the great SRV is a very good choice to play on your speakers....
I like the wedgie design, I've got a bunch of HiVi B3S drivers, thinking of creating something similar - might give it go :)
Thanks Danny. Looking forward to the next episodes.
Thank you very much. Awesome video.
I love my x-statiks; they put out a HUGE sound-stage. I do wish they were a little more transparent though for 2-channel listening. NX-Oxtica build is on my wishlist.
I guess the room and placement in the room changes the response too. How far from the back wall is optimal vs possible placement to still get the most out of an open baffle design like yours?
Another great informative video. Thank you Danny.
This might be a bit of an ask, but could you refresh this with a 2024 update? Possibly considering Li audio fast 8 or better.
I really really appreciate you taking the time to make these vids.
What would be really interesting to me is off-axis response on these speakers. I'm not a fan of MTM in general because of the narrow vertical axis, I wonder how the asymmetric wings behave with the horizontal axis
I have almost convinced myself to buy a pair of your sub-kits, looking forward to the next installment.
Actually not all MTM designs have a narrow vertical window. We have quite a few with a really wide window and even vertical off axis that is better than most two driver designs.
And the asymmetrical wings will also help maintain a smooth off axis response.
Yeah, an MTM done well sounds great
Thank you, sir for your great videos ! I am curious about the horizontal axis frequency and acoustic lobe effected by the non-symmetric baffle. Hopefully you can do some videos on that too.
The U-frame can be used as long as you stay both under the cavity resonance and the D/lambda
I have a pair of Jamo R907 speakers which I understand much better after this set of videos. Thank you.
Did you get to experiment with unequal wings (14” and 2”) on the SEAS L16RN-SL used by Siegfried Linkwitz?
I love the testing
Sir the 12 inch - 2 inch - 110 degrees works for all size drivers? Or as the driver size gets bigger needs bigger side asymmetrical drivers? And if yes have u figured a ratio between driver size and side baffle size? Thank u for your work and greetings from Greece. Have u ever shipped your speakers to Greece 🇬🇷 ???
Another fantastic video Danny! Thanks for all the info!
fantastic info. thanks Danny
Did you think about side drivers to reflect/bounce the frontal low frequency waves so they are not reflected from the back wall?
Thank you so much for this information Danny. Greetings from Argentina!. I´m really gonna try this.!!
For a first try, go to a thrift store an buy some cheap 2 or 3 way speakers. Take them apart and mount all drivers in a baffle. You will be amazed. I did the same and listen to rhem for months right now. Sounds so much better. Gonna make a second set soon. Philips drivers from the 1970's are great.
Did you try a 2” short wing with a 16” long wing with Daniel Hawthorne’s driver?
awesome info. thanks for giving away the farm
Absolutely fascinating thank you soo much for doing this explanation :)
Wow that´s an excellent series, thanks!
Any benefits to be gained in adding wings to the X-Statiks or would that mess with the crossover design? interesting stuff, thankyou.
That would alter the response and require a crossover change. Right now the crossover is handling what the baffle size is doing.
How groovy to see measurements confirming what my 'by ear' experiments concluded. Wings rule.
Nonsense, Linkwtiz rules!
This is amazing thanks so much brilliant explanation!
As a question,why do you never cover speaker stands or distancing. The acoustic environment?
I've always wanted to design my own speskers, so it's really interesting to see how these particular style and desgin works and how simple changes can effect things dynamically. So of course like all of the people who've watched this and the other videos, i'm my own theory; there is packaging you can get sometimes with products where cardboard is cut in a specific way so that when pulled apart, it creates a dimond pattern. If this was high strength material, like say Aluminium, and the negative spaces created had been filled with a sheet of say acoustic material, like Oasis, that material you can stick flowers in. and this sat behind the baffle (created by the Aluminium structure) with the Oasis filling the negative space; could you then mount a driver and tweeter, with possibe sides of similar construction, could this work, less structural mass to reflect but with some accoustic properties? Hope you don't mind me asking. Thanks.
great tutorial this series 👌
Now. What would happen if you have a U-shape baffle and use heavy lining of NoRez material inside that cavity to control those frequencies that stay within that area and cause that megaphone effect?
it seems a combination of kef’s new metamaterial at the back of tweeter would be great in open baffle designs
Actually they just made a diffuser for cancelling out the back wave. It's not at all new. And it is nothing compared to a tweeter that is completely open to the room.
For a minimalist ( like me)this design is ideal.... Just wondering how to order the wedgie parts?
@@dilbyjones The LGK drivers were sold out. I am trying to have more made though.
@@dannyrichie9743 It doesn't diffuse anything, it absorbs the backwave by an array of 30 Helmholtz resonators and matching impedances from the tweeter to the metamaterial via a conical horn. You should read the AES paper to understand the design. But it only works on the tweeter so only above the crossover point. The rest of the critical midrange is not absorbed. It is for monopole speakers of course. Open baffles have a whole different sound being dipoles and not every person or application is desires that kind of sound.
Stewart Markley - “Meta” is solving a problem unique to coaxial dome tweeters. Every good quality separate dome tweeter I’ve seen lately has a rear damped resonance chamber incorporated in the design.
The two speaker open baffle that you did the crossover for setting on top of a servo sub sounds like a nice package. Any plans to offer a kit like that?
Great video. Might be nice to demonstrate proper measurement techniques for folks.
I’m sold!
On the application of the L frame, I wonder: aren't you changing the plane in which the back wave and the front wave cancel out? If the L side baffles would on the most extreme outsides of the speakers from the listening position, the zero pole plane would toe out, This phenomenon would be relevant for toe-in/toe-out positioning speakers to avoid first side reflections from the side walls. It might also influence the imaging between the speakers. What do you think?
It absolutely does separate front and back waves, but it has nothing to do with toe in or toe out.
@@dannyrichie9743 In a planar open baffle (no side wings), front and back waves are separated in the virtual plane where these meet in equidistance due to their opposite phase. For a planar open baffle, this virtual plane is obviously the plane of the baffle.
By setting the toe-in exactly as indicated by Linkwitz (using his mirror approach), the first reflection side waves that bounce off the side walls of the room can be minimised.
By placing a rear wing, the virtual plane in which these front and back waves meet in equidistance no longer coincide with front baffle plane. So, to get the same minimisation of side wave reflections, the toe-in of the speakers must be altered accordingly with this change of virtual plane.
That was the point I was trying to make.
Another lecture which contains useful info, thks. 20min is just about right cos you don't repeat what you said previously.
So is the optimal set up of a pair of these open baffle speakers 2 units that are identical, or are they mirror images of each other? Also, if mirror images, does the short sidewall go in the middle or to the outside?
They are mirror imaged, and the long wing goes to the inside.
Mr. Danny, why cant a box be made with an open back and simply stuffed with fiber fill???
Roughly, What size side wings would be recommended for a 15” bass driver only, driver mounted center horizon. and 2” higher than center vertical, in a 21” x 27” Baffle?
The final design was the result of a lot of trial and error. I wonder if it would be possible to model the system to better understand the sound wave interactions so that an understanding of why the various baffle lengths impact the response. If only sound waves could be doped with ink like fluids can to track their vectors, diffractions and even interactions. In any event, it seems evident there is a lot of complicated interactions that these simple baffles are hiding.
Great video !!
Will those short version of the nx oticas be a kit some day? Don't see em on your site
Great presentation. I follow the theory and one can not seem to contests the results as measured. This seems so different then the spatial audio designs. If I am understanding what Danny is saying then the Spatial Audio open baffle design should produce a radically different result. I would love to have Danny and Clayton Shaw discuss there respective approaches. Clearly, both are getting great results but with seemingly opposite approaches in the baffle design. Can they both be right?
Maybe Clayton and I will do something like that one of these days. And I wouldn't say that there is necessarily a right and a wrong. Objectives can be different and the highest performance or highest attained results based objectives might not have the value of a more marketable and commercially successful design.
Do we put the long wing on the outer side of the stereo pair or the inner side?
Hi Danny,
Thanks for the sharing knowledge and experience!
I have a question. How looks the off axis response (left and right)? I'm expecting a non-symmetrical response... In case that the truth is, does it mean that for that kind of design, you get really a small sweet spot? Thank you in advance,
Djordje
Left and right off axis responses look great. And the sweet spot is really large.
Question: Does the notch work with a single, full-range driver?
Thanks for your shared info. 👍
The measurement graphs you showed in this video are near field measurements right ???
Awesome vid.
Danny... does the size and shape not matter as much for lower freq? (200-400 down to 20hz)
hi. i can see you use the bg tweeter whuch is shooting from both sides....uf i use a tweeter with a back cup does the open baffle idea steel stands or is it loosing the whole effect...and if so do i steel need the cut in the 2 inch side ? bc the tweeter is shooting only forwerd.....thx a lot man🤔
Would putting No Rez on the front of the baffle help make the baffle disappear? I've never seen that done, but often wondered how it would affect reflections off the baffle.
It will make it more transparent and remove reflections within a certain range. It won't effect lower wavelengths too much.
does the larger wing go on the inside or outside?
I’m new to your channel, so this may have been asked many times before but...
I’m curious what you think about magnepan style quasi ribbons vs the cone drivers you’re using for mids, as well as the neo tweeter. It seems the planar nature reduces interference between the front and back waves, though I’m guessing imperfectly. I wonder what wings might do on something like the LRS.
Wings would extend the low end cutoff and improve the output capability. But some EQ would be possibly needed to cut a resulting peak.
Apples and oranges comparisons. There are lots of advantages and disadvantages.
@@dannyrichie9743 I guess the short of what I'm asking is why you choose cone drivers instead. Apples and oranges are still dipole open baffle fruit, so I'm trying to understand the choices made.
That said, I've seen your line source vids with new record day, and that's all neo drivers for highs and mids, so it seems you do use those. I'm a new Magnepan user and audiophile newb. Thinking about building my own bookshelf planar magnetic speakers for fun.
@@aweidenhammer The line of woofers will move more air and play down a lot lower. It makes drums hits and such sound very real.
The all planar magnetic drivers keep a narrow baffle width and offer high sensitivity. So imaging is much greater than a Maggie and the sweet spot is much larger. Plus you can drive them with low wattage amplifiers.
Hi Danny I have a question a little off topic, I am interested in the X-Voce and how it would be affected if it is placed right under a flat screen TV with the front flush with the screen?
So long as it is open to the top (not boxed in) and has some space behind it (not boxed in on the back) then it will be fine.
Do you have any computer models to predict response for the various shapes/angles/dimensions? How much do you let your ears drive the design vs the frequency plot?
I don't try to model this stuff. I have done a LOT of this stuff and measured and tested it enough that I know what the results are going to be and where my starting points have to be. So it doesn't take me long to have a working prototype. It is the same for crossover design. I do it all the time. So I don't need to model something to know what will happen. I already know what will happen. I just have to put it together, test it, and fine tune it.
Verses what we hear is a different discussion. I have to design based on accuracy. And that means on and off axis and what it is going to do in the room. The how it sounds is altered immensely by a whole different group of variables. But the fundamentals have to be correct to avoid errors and problems.
Danny Richie thanks for the response. Would love a video explaining more of that knowledge but understand if it part of the secret sauce you don’t want to share.
Great infos....thanks a lot dear
Are you going to make some sound tests for us? Because I think when people see these "incomplete" baffles they really don't trust your words. And I know, UA-cam is able to show a clear difference between $400 loudspeakers and $4k ones (I think your system sounds like at least $4k loudspeakers -).
Brilliant!!
Would love to see the wedgies offered as a kit for those of us that already have subwoofers and dont want big floostanders.
How does the height of the baffle affect the sound? Like with the pure audio project’s that have bass drivers above and below the wide bander/tweeter?
Height is not a problem it's the size and width of the baffle that is a problem. Surface reflections and edge diffractions are significant problems with those.
Thank youuuu
I trust Dan with my life lol