Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
206.255.200.146
In Reply to: RE: Curious posted by josh358 on October 27, 2015 at 16:20:10
is the way the TIIIs were designed to be placed: bass panels centered next together (who needs bass separation?) with mid/tweeter panels in optimum positions.
Follow Ups:
I was thinking of trying that today, it's definitely on the list. There are a couple of drawbacks I can think of -- one is that it would tend to trap the backwave, reducing image depth -- and the other is that I'm trying to find a setup that accommodates a projection screen, which this won't do since I don't have enough throw length to use an acoustically transparent screen in front of the speakers.
Another three driver possibilty would be low bass - mid-tweeter - mid bass, with an XO between the low and mid bass panels. That would put the tweeters where I want them and the low bass panels would be against the wall so would be at the center of a virtual six-baffle speaker (12, if you include the floor reflection), partly compensating for the reduction in bass surface area. Power response would be better too. But it would it would interfere with the projection screen.
A modification of that is just to remove the low bass panels, cross them over at 80, and put them together against a wall. So:
WALL -- MIDBASS -- MID-TWEETER................MID-TWEETER - MIDBAS -- WALL
ANOTHER WALL OR SIDE OF ARCH -- LOW BASS -- LOW BASS
I'd lose some bass and midbass SPL capability, but not I think serious in that small a room. The midbass panels could be angled so that dipole are at the first sidewall reflection, reducing lobing and time smear but perhaps exciting more room modes.
...one is that it would tend to trap the backwave
While the T-IIIs I heard years ago were in a fairly large room and away from the front wall, they used the typical "W" pattern for the bass panels to minimize that effect as seen in these diagrams for both the TIII and TIV. I can see how a flat arrangement would do as you suggested.
Clearly, experimentation will yield the optimum arrangement. Good luck!
Thanks, I'll definitely be experimenting!
It's kind of humbling to hear so many major changes with even minor changes in configuration. But I worked it out with my 1-D's and will work it out with these! Doing that is half the fun. :-)
BTW, my understanding of the zig-zag arrangement of the woofers is that it improves power response in the bass panels. And then you swing the tweeter in to keep it on axis and equidistant so the crossovers work correctly.
Interestingly, I didn't have a manual for my 1-D's, which were a year old when I bought them, but after much experimentation ended up with exactly that zig zag arrangement.
The problem with Tympani's is there are too many configurations. The later models take this experimentation option away from you....which is probably a good thing. :)
I farted around with a friend's set of IV's many years ago and ended up with all the panels arranged in a straight line. Sounded excellent.
Good luck.
Dave.
Do you recall whether you had tweeters in or out and whether the entire linear arrangement was angled to any degree of toe in?
The tweeters were inside. No toe-in.
IIRC, an equilateral triangle of about 13' between the listener and the two T/M panels.
It was a good friend of mines system. He ultimately sold them and purchased a pair of Scintillas.
Dave.
: )
Heh, yes. "With great power comes great responsibility." :-)
OTOH, it also makes the Tympanis very versatile. I couldn't fit a 3.6 in my small room with a projection screen in the middle.
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: