Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
76.91.168.101
How many people are using Dipole subwoofers with their planars?Show us your rigs and comment on them, good, bad or indifferent, frequency range, output level, mono/stereo, equipment, drivers, EQ, DSP, etc..
What would you do different, what would you do the same?
TIA
Edits: 09/14/14 09/14/14Follow Ups:
Pic attached of a Quad woofer (in center) I built a number of years back. Used 63 "hardware" from QS&D [by the way, where did they go and what became of their stock?]. 4 full range panels driven by a plate amp in a nice base (a friend built for me) that houses the amp, a 24dB/Oct. LP crossover at 100hz and a L/R isolator/combiner circuit so I can take the signal from the preamp.Have it back 19 or so inches behind the plans of the L/R speakers (63's not the 989's in the pic) and it integrates very well. System gets "down into the 20's(Hz)".
Charles
Edits: 09/29/14
... But Ripole...
A similar but different kind of animal. A pair of these boxes (loaded with a single 12" driver) gets down to the mid 20hz range with ease, BUT the tradeoff is output level. Since I don't listen at earth-shattering volumes (even with Rock or Classical) and the mains are only rated into the mid 80dB/1 Watt range, I don't mind the trade off in output vs. extension.
Dman
Analog Junkie
Me likee, Dman! You seem to have dealt well with my own major concern about this approach. I saw the concept a while ago and bookmarked it for the future. However, what I had seen before had 2 drivers. It made them a bit too big to include 2 of these boxes in my apartment.
Like you, I am after more SQ quality rather than more SPL. Hell, I use the MMGs with no subwoofer rather than spoil the faint deep bass they can deliver so sweetly.
Are there any design specifics that can be found for this more compact adaptation on the web, or should we bother you for them?
Still doing a LOT of research on these while enjoying the basic fruits of my labors!
Dman
Analog Junkie
DMan, neither my first one to you via the Asylum's system nor my direct reply to yours weeks ago seem to have reached you...spammed out? LOL!
I actually did reply some time ago and figured you were busy.
Try dropping me another line. I assure you that I DID get your previous email.
Dman
Analog Junkie
Hi
Some years agoe I made these in our old house:
Must say that they where the best woofer system ever!
Read more here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-exotics/192264-line-source-dipole-subwoofer.html
Hi. Dman;
Nice to see your post and your offer to help inmate JBen!
Take care....old guy
I can't show you, but I tried Gradients SW-63 subs with my Quad ESL-63s, and they did improve the bass reach of the speakers. Images of these are found all over Google Images if you are not familiar with how they look. They were well thought out cosmetically. The ESL-63s' bases went into the top of the SW-63 enclosures. The enclosures elevated the ESL-63s to an ideal listening height too.
I think it is something of a misnomer to call them a sub though since, I think most people think of subs as working to develop the 20-40 Hz range and the Gradients did not go that low.
I did not care for the alterations I heard in the Quad's reproduction with the SW-63 in the circuit. However Matts' tweak for this worked well, details for which can be found online.
There are plans and images on the Linkwitz site:
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/woofer.htm
for DIYers.
Cheers,
George
I was considering building this cabinet, but the drivers are no longer available. I emailed Linkwitz and he did not have current drivers to recommend or newer designs for current drivers.
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/woofer.htm
I would like to get something to work from @ 35Hz down as low as possible and have high enough output to work with larger panels.
There are plenty of good woofer drivers that will work. Currently, I think these offer the best performance and at a pretty good price.
http://www.parts-express.com/dayton-audio-rss315hfa-8-12-reference-hf-subwoofer-8-ohm--295-445
Dave.
How low would this driver go (usable) in a Dipole cabinet ?
As low as you want....within reason. :)
Cutoff is based primarily on two things: Cabinet construction (which creates the front/back dipole cancellation distance) and electronic equalization applied.
Driver Xmax and amplifier power are also limiting factors, but primarily to SPL capability and not frequency response extension.
As with all speaker systems, there are trade-offs. Example: A smaller cabinet (baffle) construction reduces the dipole cancellation distance and would necessitate more equalization and driver excursion to achieve the same result......all other things being equal.
The Linkwitz dipole woofer designs are extremely well thought out because they are relatively compact in construction, but don't require huge levels of electronic equalization.
Cheers,
Dave.
Down into the teens ?The W-Frame design and Ripole supposedly puts pressure onto the cone. Is that really a significant issue?
I like the idea of force cancellation of equal number drivers in the W-Frame. Fewer things bouncing around.
Edits: 09/16/14
Davey,
Any more info on the 6 woofer dipole setup you posted?
Thank you,
David.
That's not my woofer setup. I don't know whose it is.
Dave.
Into the teens? Sure, it's all about tradeoffs. Probably you'd need even more excursion and/or more drivers.
The ripole concept doesn't do anything for me. Too many trade-offs in the wrong direction, and one of the main objectives was to lower the cutoff with increased air loading on the cone. However, you can accomplish that with electronic means.
The W-frame concept is superior IMO. A fairly compact footprint and the force-cancellation configuration.
Cheers,
Dave.
Davey, regarding your statement about the ripole config: "Too many trade-offs..", what would they be?
For perspective, this is why I am looking into them:
- thin-nish form factor - one driver in each vertical box would allow me to use one next to each Maggie in my place, or perhaps even under each MMG
- no large SPL numbers needed. The existing subwoofer can do the movies.
- looking for deeper frequency reach but in sync with the Maggies. Boomboxes need not apply...I keep my decent subwoofer off for music as it is.
Ripole would have to keep up with the Maggies in terms of textures, speed and definition. Do you see anything in the numbers that would make this too hard or impractical?
I don't think you're going to find too many. :) This is outside the normal subwoofer paradigm and most folks don't understand the concept and/or how to implement it.
Also, it's not clear how much advantage dipole bass is when you get below the Shroeder frequency of a listening room. There isn't much music down there and I think most folks are just interested in the pressure source to create impact (literally and figuratively) for HT usage. You can achieve that with a conventional subwoofer in less real estate and without all the fancy EQ/electronics required.
Dave.
well I have not built one yet, but I have my eye on the GR research driver with rhythmic amp servo OB subwoofer.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=127533.msg1355206#msg1355206
http://gr-research.com/sw-12-16fr.aspx
http://www.rythmikaudio.com/GR_drivers.html
here you go. have 4 of them stacked. that's exactly what you want. best sounding woofer i've heard. using deqx parametric to blend it with my tympani panels. very loud. very deep. very fast. no "box" sound.
I think rythmik has a new amp that looks interesting. i'm running A370PEQ's. the H600PEQ3 looks interesting or maybe even the HX Series (Hypex module based).
Edits: 09/16/14 09/16/14 09/16/14 09/16/14 09/16/14
Hey Hemholtz good to see you still here and still DEQX'ing.
I don't forum much. Not sure if I'm forum or against 'em. (hehehe)
ANYWAY- I have wanted to build 2 pair of GR Research servo open baffle subs to add to my tri-amped MG 3.6 / DEQX system for a long time. Too many other projects first.
As far as the fellow who said "not much benefit to a dipole subwoofer" I think it's not the dipole radiation pattern that's the advantage- the advantage is NO BOX. It's more or less just the woofer diaphragms moving, you're not putting energy into a bunch of wood of the cabinet, which has to come back out- and some will come back out as sound, in a wrong time relationship with the rest of the music. So the theory of box vs boxless goes.
Too bad Rythmik doesn't make servo that you can use your own amps with.
I have a few channels of ICEPower ASP-1000 amps that could be put into use.
HemHoltz,Would you recommend 2/stereo side, 3/stereo side or mono stack ?
Is 4 sufficient to keep up with 3.X's ?
How low do they go (usable)?
Any vibration issues with all drivers going in the same direction in the H-Frame (e.g. no force cancellations)?
TIA
Edits: 09/16/14
I would use 4, but I guess it depends on the room. I have them stacked 4 high and shoot it down the length of the room behind the panels that are set up on the long wall. A six stack would be interesting as it would be more of a line source. A space between the cabinets would accomplish the same thing I suspect.
They can certainly play subsonic with "feeling."
Seems to work pretty well - the top one hasn't fallen down yet. there are rubber feet on it, but I still need to reposition it occasionally after a high spl set.
"... I still need to reposition it occasionally after a high spl set. ..."
Funny, maybe you need a pair of something like these ?
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: