A Audio, hi-fi and car audio  forum. Audio Banter

Go Back   Home » Audio Banter forum » UK Audio Newsgroups » uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi) (uk.rec.audio) Discussion and exchange of hi-fi audio equipment.

Speaker unit to baffle.



 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old April 5th 18, 11:25 PM posted to uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,872
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.

--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old April 6th 18, 02:30 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
~misfit~[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 98
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

Once upon a time on usenet Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me
of the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle,
front, or recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial
designs.


It's all about time alignment with the tweeter. My rule of thumb with my
previous home-made speakers is if it's a flattish cone I rear mount it but
if it's a deep cone I front mount it. I try to keep the respective
voicecoils of the tweeter and squawker as close as possible to the same
plane relative to the front baffle.

But there's not much science behind that, just experience and gut feelings.
Hopefully someone more knowledgeable will chime in.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)


  #3 (permalink)  
Old April 6th 18, 04:51 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Trevor Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 801
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
  #4 (permalink)  
Old April 6th 18, 10:44 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,872
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.


How would diffraction manifest itself? Ie, the audible effect?

--
*WHERE DO FOREST RANGERS GO TO "GET AWAY FROM IT ALL?"

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old April 6th 18, 01:28 PM posted to uk.rec.audio
Don Pearce[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,358
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

On Fri, 06 Apr 2018 10:44:43 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.


How would diffraction manifest itself? Ie, the audible effect?


Tiny changes in frequency response, particularly off-axis if done
right. Symmetry is the enemy. You ideally want every diffracting
surface at a different distance from the cone centre. Off-centre in a
rectangular baffle is pretty good.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #6 (permalink)  
Old April 7th 18, 06:59 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Trevor Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 801
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

On 6/04/2018 7:44 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.


How would diffraction manifest itself? Ie, the audible effect?


**Usually, image quality. Diffraction effects seem to cause a rather
diffuse image. I believe John Dunlavy was the first to deal with the
problem:

https://patents.justia.com/patent/4167985

As a consequence, listening to many of Duntech's speakers resulted in a
surprisingly good ability to recreate the original space. Much like a
well set-up pair of Quad ESLs can manage.

John used absorbent felt, around the drivers on the baffle to achieve this.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
  #7 (permalink)  
Old April 7th 18, 11:02 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Dave Plowman (News)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,872
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 7:44 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.


How would diffraction manifest itself? Ie, the audible effect?


**Usually, image quality. Diffraction effects seem to cause a rather
diffuse image. I believe John Dunlavy was the first to deal with the
problem:


https://patents.justia.com/patent/4167985


As a consequence, listening to many of Duntech's speakers resulted in a
surprisingly good ability to recreate the original space. Much like a
well set-up pair of Quad ESLs can manage.


John used absorbent felt, around the drivers on the baffle to achieve
this.


The LS 3/5a has a rectangle of felt round the tweeter, but not the
bass/midrange.

--
*And don't start a sentence with a conjunction *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old April 8th 18, 01:38 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Trevor Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 801
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

On 7/04/2018 8:02 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 7:44 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
On 6/04/2018 8:25 AM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
A mid range unit - say about 4" - in a suitable sealed box. Remind me of
the difference between mounting it on the rear of the baffle, front, or
recessed flush to it? I've seen all done on commercial designs.


**Flush mount mitigates diffraction effects.

How would diffraction manifest itself? Ie, the audible effect?


**Usually, image quality. Diffraction effects seem to cause a rather
diffuse image. I believe John Dunlavy was the first to deal with the
problem:


https://patents.justia.com/patent/4167985


As a consequence, listening to many of Duntech's speakers resulted in a
surprisingly good ability to recreate the original space. Much like a
well set-up pair of Quad ESLs can manage.


John used absorbent felt, around the drivers on the baffle to achieve
this.


The LS 3/5a has a rectangle of felt round the tweeter, but not the
bass/midrange.


**The LS3/5a is the most over-rated piece of junk ever to be foisted on
the audio industry. It's continued existence is adequate evidence that
most listeners believe what some reviewers say, rather than listening
for themselves.

Don't get me started on LS3/5a speakers. And don't tell me how the BBC
designed them. The idiot who designed them should be shot.

--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
  #9 (permalink)  
Old April 8th 18, 05:55 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Iain[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 121
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

In the days before near-field monitoring became popular, there was a company called Auratone which made small sound cubes that fitted nicely on each end of a recording desk.They were very popular. The first models had the speaker mounted behind the baffle, but later they became flush mounted - most likely for the reason that Don and Trevor mention.

Iain
  #10 (permalink)  
Old April 8th 18, 05:58 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
Iain[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 121
Default Speaker unit to baffle.

Agreed.

Iain
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright 2004-2019 Audio Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.