برق. قدرت. کنترل. الکترونیک. مخابرات. تاسیسات.

دایره المعارف تاسیسات برق (اطلاعات عمومی برق)

Frequently Asked Questions

For a better understanding of what I had in mind when I designed the PHOENIX loudspeaker system, you should read the <Concepts ...> pages, which give you general observations that influenced this unconventional speaker project. The reasons behind specific design solutions are addressed on the | Design Models | page and in Ref.2. Measured frequency response curves for the PHOENIX are shown on the | System Test | page. 
The project documents the evolution from a previous active speaker system in which I used two small satellites and a closed box woofer with a novel equalizer to extend its low frequency response
. You will find helpful information about many issues in speaker design in the description of that earlier project, Ref.12. Take a look at page 1 or the full article.

In general, I tried to give specific meaning to every sentence on this web site. If you do not find your answer or are confused after reading what I said, then do not hesitate to send me your question. And, for my benefit, let me know what you did with my response. I always appreciate your recommendation for a well recorded piece of music to listen to. 

Should you have built the PHOENIX or parts thereof and made interesting observations or found ways to improve the design, then send me a note. I am always interested in new insight on how to move sound reproduction closer to the original. But please, don't ask me what changes are necessary to accommodate your favorite driver. I think I have outlined in detail how you can determine that for yourself. If not, then stick exactly to the PHOENIX project.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Q1 - Why do you use 8" drivers for the midrange when 6.5" or 5" drivers would give better off-axis response?

Q2 - My room size is less than 250 ft2 (22m2) and I need a smaller speaker. How can I modify the PHOENIX design?

Q3 - How do I upgrade the system for rooms larger than 600 ft2 (55m2), or because I like to play it larger than live?

Q4 - I want to use woofer XYZ which has larger Xmax than the 1252DVC. Which other parameters are important?

Q5 - How much sound output can you get from the open baffle woofer?

Q6 - How much power will it take to drive the woofers?

Q7 - The price of the Scan-Speak drivers is a problem. Is there any valid substitute without changing the design?

Q8 - Diffraction. Would a narrower (<12.5") main panel give sharper stereo imaging, due to reduced delay of edge diffraction?

Q9 - Could the length of the main panel be extended so that separate stands are not required?

Q10 - Could the woofer be adapted to work with existing panel speakers - e.g. Quad ESL63?

Q11 - What is the total cost of all the hardware for building a pair of PHOENIX loudspeakers?

Q12 - What happens to the parameters Vas, Qms, Qes and Qts when you connect the two voice coils of the 1252DVC in series?

Q13 - Is a printed circuit board for the crossover/eq available?

Q14 - What is the low frequency sound pressure level from an open baffle speaker with a given effective piston area and excursion?

Q15 - How would you modify the crossover/eq circuit to work with a "regular" small monitor, instead of the main panel, and use the dipole woofer?

Q16 - Could you drive the main panel with a tube amplifier?

Q17 - Why do you not show waterfall response plots for the PHOENIX when your test equipment is capable of producing them?

Q18 - Which types of distortion do you measure?

Q19 - Why do you use a 12 dB/oct crossover between woofer and midrange when the crossover to the tweeter is at 24 dB/oct ?

Q20 - What is the sound pressure level at 1 m for 1 W of power under anechoic conditions?

Q21 - Why does SPL increase 6 dB for two drivers in parallel when the electrical power consumed only increases by 3 dB?

Q22 - How would you describe the sound of the PHOENIX?

Q23 - Can you point me towards people who have built the PHOENIX?

Q24 - What is your process for designing an open baffle speaker?

Q25 - Why do you not use a rear firing tweeter or a dipole ribbon tweeter?

Q26 - Why use active crossovers when passive crossovers require fewer components and amplifiers?

Q27 - How do I test the PHOENIX crossover/equalizer circuit board?

Q28 - How high in frequency can you push the dipole woofer?

Q29 - How do you measure cone excursion of a driver?

Q30 - Can a dipole woofer be placed in a room corner?

Q31 - Is there an optimum room placement for a dipole?

Q32 - How would you increase the output capability of the Phoenix?

Q33 - Is a pre-assembled crossover/equalizer available?

Q34 - What is the optimum Qts for the drivers of a dipole woofer?

Q35 - How does the new ORION compare to the PHOENIX?

Q36 - Are there better drivers for the PHOENIX?

Q37 - What cables and interconnects do you recommend?

Q38 - How do diffraction effects show up?

Q39 - How much power does it take to drive a dipole woofer?

Q40 - Can the PHOENIX be build with passive crossovers?

 

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Q1 - Why do you use 8" drivers for the midrange when 6.5" or 5" drivers would give better off-axis response?

A1 - I am using 8" drivers because the crossover to the woofer will be around 100 Hz and because an open baffle speaker has to move more air than a box speaker due to the progressive acoustic short circuit between front and back. The open baffle gives significantly wider dispersion at high frequencies than a box speaker with the same 8" driver on the same baffle, see Ref. 2, Design Models F. This is caused by the radiation from the rear of the baffle, having undergone enough phase shift as it comes around to the front, so that it adds to the total sound at off-axis angles. See Dipole Models
    For almost all drivers, as you go down in driver size, the excursion
capability drops. Thus, the linear volume displacement - which makes SPL - goes down even faster than diameter squared. What is gained in wider dispersion, which is inversely proportional to diameter, is more than lost in increased distortion. Low distortion is higher on my priority list than dispersion. Since dispersion is widened with a properly sized open baffle, there is no good reason for using a smaller diameter driver other than if the 8" driver had poor behavior in its cone breakup frequency region. 
    A 8" driver will typically have twice the useable volume displacement of a 6.5" driver, but the effective diameter increase is only 30%. Thus, when used in an infinite baffle or in a box, the 8" driver will have the same dispersion at 1.5 kHz as the 6.5" driver has at 1.95 kHz. The smaller drivers are so popular in commercial products because narrow loudspeaker cabinets are much more acceptable in the home for visual reasons, a trend that is conveniently supported by theories about the detrimental effects of edge diffraction. Note also how many of these speakers use two drivers in MTM or MMT layouts to obtain adequate output. 
    Check out my distortion test results for midrange drivers.  Top

 

Q2 - My room size is less than 250 ft2 (22m2) and I need a smaller speaker. How can I modify the PHOENIX design?

A2 - You could eliminate one of the 8" drivers and make the main panel only 16" tall. This will sacrifice 6 dB in acoustic output capability for the same non-linear distortion level. The gain of the midrange channel in the crossover/eq needs to be increased 6 dB. I would not recommend to also go to a single woofer, i.e. 6 dB less bass output, because subjectively this is a much more significant reduction in output capability (observe the close spacing of the equal loudness contours at low frequencies, Fletcher-Munson). The reduced height main panel would also make for a high performance center or surround speaker with very uniform and smooth off-axis response, but for distortion should not be pushed below 100 Hz. 
    A second alternative is to eliminate the woofers all together and to extend the main panel response from the present 100 Hz down to 50 Hz. To maintain the same SPL down to 50 Hz, the 8" drivers must move with 4x the excursion of 100 Hz. Thus, for the same distortion, output is reduced by 12 dB, but probably more like 20 dB, because distortion increases much more rapidly with increasing excursion. For the crossover/eq circuit you would need to change the midrange high-pass filter 90HP to 50 Hz  and the 90-500LP to a 50 Hz to 500 Hz low-pass of appropriate gain.   Top

 

Q3 - How do I upgrade the system for rooms larger than 600 ft2 (55m2), or because I like to play it larger than live?

A3 - Now you are into a 4-way system. You could add two 10" drivers (e.g. Scan-Speak 25W8565) in the space below the main panel as was done in the Audio Artistry Beethoven and double up on the woofers. If that is not enough capability, then you might add two more 10" drivers on top of the main panel and use eight 12" drivers for each woofer as in the Audio Artistry Beethoven-Grand loudspeaker system. Extreme as these designs may seem, the goal here is to keep non-linear distortion low at high volume levels or, conversely, have very low distortion at normal levels. 
    I think it is important to be able to play back at live like levels. If the system has low distortion it will not sound loud, just natural. The level needs to be realistically high, so that the ear produces the same distortion and timbre as it would at a live event. Then you can experience maximum involvement and enjoyment. 
    The crossover/eq for a 4-way system is considerably more complex than the 3-way circuit for the PHOENIX. But, if you like a serious challenge, then you might follow my  4-way  functional block diagram and use circuit topologies from the PHOENIX for the individual blocks. You can use two printed circuit boards to realize all functions. Be sure to perform free-field and ground plane acoustic measurements of the mounted drivers before, during and after designing the circuits to ensure proper polarity and addition of all driver outputs and flat frequency response. Design Models F1
    CAUTION: Such 4-way open-baffle speaker project will lead to endless questions and frustration unless you have good electrical and acoustic measurement capability and a solid understanding of what each element in the system is supposed to do. You cannot adjust relative channel levels by ear and expect to obtain a speaker that is true to the original. Unless you have these resources your chances of improving on the PHOENIX are slim and you might even end up with lower performance than if you had followed the PHOENIX design.
    I consider the 3-way PHOENIX speaker system described here as more practical and useful for a wider range of audio enthusiasts, particularly since its output capability can be increased comparatively easily.   Top

 

Q4 - I want to use woofer XYZ which has larger Xmax than the 1252DVC. Which other parameters are important?

A4 - I use two drivers to double volume displacement and to reduce even order harmonic distortion by running them with opposite cone motion. The requirements for an open baffle driver are quite different from those for a closed or vented box design.
-  Fs < 20 Hz 
Qts = 0.5 - 0.8   
Smaller values of Qts increase roll-off towards the low frequency end and require more equalization than the 6 dB/octave boost for dipole cancellation that I used in the 10-300LP stage of the Crossover/EQ. Most drivers have too strong a motor for dipole applications and are over-damped in an open baffle cabinet. When the driver is mounted into the woofer cabinet, air mass is added to the free-space moving mass of the driver. This lowers the mechanical resonance frequency Fs and increases Qts by approximately the same percentage. The amount of change is difficult to predict accurately and best measured using f0Q0.gif from Ref.12
I do not recommend the use of drivers with very small magnets and Qts >> 0.8 in an attempt to compensate for the 6 dB/oct open-baffle roll-off with a rising driver response. Such equalization is crude at best. I prefer active 6 dB/oct low-pass filter equalization. The filter cut-off frequency should be set in conjunction with Qts and Fs to avoid a peak in the group delay of the resulting 3rd order acoustic high-pass filter. See FAQ19 for acoustic effects.
-  Sensitivity: <10 W for Xmax at Fs
-  Power handling >50 W
-  Frequency range 15 -100 Hz
-  Xmax > 6 mm
Note that   Xmax = 0.5 [(voice coil height) - (air gap height)]   is merely proportional to the linear excursion. Different drivers with the same Xmax do not necessarily have the same linear excursion range! The design and construction of the spider, surround, and magnet gap region have strong influence on the actually useable excursion range before distortion becomes excessive. 
A driver with Xmax = 12 mm will generate quite a bit of aerodynamic noise, i.e. distortion, at such high excursions. The space behind the spider needs to be open to the outside to minimize noise. The pole piece should have a large vent, or the cone should have no dust cap, so that air trapped behind the dust cap does not contribute noise.
    For a qualitative evaluation of a new woofer perform a simple test. Put a dot of white paint on the cone or dust cap to monitor excursion. Connect the driver to a power amplifier and drive it from a signal generator set to 35 Hz. Hold the unbaffled driver in your hands. Increase the generator output and observe how quiet the driver remains and how much excursion it can handle before sounding obnoxious. Remember that an open baffle cabinet will not attenuate this noise. Lower the frequency and repeat the test. Be careful not to overheat the voice coil or to destroy the driver mechanically!! The burst capability of the Agilent 33120A Arbitrary Waveform Generator is wonderful for this work. Unfortunately, the majority of drivers that I have evaluated required no further investigation after this test. 
    The Gefco X6100 and especially an Eminence Speaker Corporation 12-6676 proto type performed well and are very applicable. The Gefco X6100 driver is available from Madisound
    The Eminence 12" proto type was built on a similar platform as the Adire Audio "Shiva" driver, but specifically optimized for open baffle application. It would require a slightly wider cabinet, but should give 3 to 5 dB more SPL for the same distortion level as the Gefco X6100.  Cost, though, is at least twice that of the X6100. If you listen to a lot of organ music and woofer cabinet size is very important to you, then instead of stacking two PHOENIX woofers with four X6100, you could have nearly the same SPL output from a pair of theses drivers in a smaller cabinet.    For an update and somewhat disappointing conclusion of this project see Woofer2 and for a real, higher output alternative see Woofer3
    There are possibly other 12" or 10" drivers on the market with equal or larger useable, linear volume displacement than the 1252DVC and X6100 . These two drivers, though, have proven themselves for open baffle application and provide a sensible tradeoff between cabinet size, distortion performance and cost. 
    I measured the following parameters for these two drivers:
1252DVC:  Re = 5.5+5.5 ohm, Fs = 17.4 Hz, Qts = 0.5, Xmax = 0.5"p-p.
X6100:  Re = 11.4 ohm, Fs = 12.7 Hz, Qts = 0.43, Xmax = 0.5"p-p, voltage sensitivity when mounted in woofer baffle is about 1 dB lower than for the 1252DVC.  Top

 

Q5 - How much sound output can you get from the open baffle woofer?

A5 - I give a formula in Ref. 2 and in Design Models A1 that relates the sound pressure level from a driver on an open baffle to the SPL from the same driver in an acoustically small closed box, assuming that both have the same cone excursion.

        Fequal = 0.17 v / D

At frequency Fequal the SPL is the same for either driver arrangement. The open baffle driver output decreases at 6 dB/oct below this frequency relative to the closed box. Above this frequency it increases to an on-axis peak that is 6 dB higher than the SPL from the box. The peak occurs when the distance D between front and rear equals 1/2 wavelength, i.e. when the rear wave is phase shifted 180 degrees and in phase with the front wave.
For the PHOENIX woofer D = 19" (0.48 m). With v = 343 m/s

        Fequal = 120 Hz

Thus, for on-axis SPL at 120 Hz, one 12" driver in the open baffle cabinet is equivalent to the same 12" driver in a closed box. At 30 Hz, though, the open baffle SPL has dropped to 1/4, i.e. it would take four 12" drivers to maintain the same SPL as the single 12"  driver in a box, when all of them are driven to the same excursion. (See also FAQ14)
At 30 Hz the two woofer cabinets of the PHOENIX are equivalent to a single 12" in a closed box, assuming that the box speaker is flat to 13 Hz (-3 dB). Above this frequency, of course, the two open baffles generate considerably more SPL than the single 12" driver in a box. At 60 Hz the dipoles would be equivalent to two of those 12" box woofers and at 120 Hz equivalent to four in terms of maximum SPL. You can add 6 dB to this capability by doubling the dipole woofers and stacking them on top of each other for a height of 28", but this might negatively affect the WAF. The primary benefit of the stacked woofer arrangement would be reduced non-linear distortion when listening at the same SPL as before.
    A lot of air is shuffled back and forth between the two sides of the open cabinet. This sets up a strong sound velocity field but our ears only respond to sound pressure and we do not hear it. This is wasteful of cone excursion but the price to pay for natural bass reproduction. You can see why the open baffle woofer will never be a popular commercial item, when a majority of consumers loves excessive bass, and when a dipole woofer will just not get the room going in all its resonant modes for additional boom.   Top

 

Q6 - How much power will it take to drive the woofers?

A6 - Not much. At Fs it takes maybe around 5 W to drive a 12" unit to full excursion in free air. It takes just a little bit more in the open baffle cabinet because of the air mass loading. More power is needed as frequency goes up. I have found - by monitoring the p-p voltage across the woofer terminals - that each woofer channel is easily served by a 50 W amplifier.   Top

 

Q7 - The price of the Scan-Speak drivers is a problem. Is there any valid substitute without changing the design?

A7 - The Vifa D27TG-45-06 (also the reliable D26TG-35-06) fabric dome or D25AG-35-06 aluminum dome tweeter and P21WO-20-08 woofer could be alternate drivers for the main panel. The mounting hole dimensions need to be changed and some of the component values in the crossover/eq. While this will give you an excellent, natural sounding speaker, it has not quite the same clarity and dynamics as the PHOENIX.  See FAQ22
    Many other drivers could be used with the same crossover/xo circuit topology. If you leave the crossover frequencies and the main panel dimensions unchanged, then only the woofer and tweeter gain levels, the 1440PH phase shifting networks, and the 400NF notch filter might have to be readjusted. If you change the main panel dimensions, then you are in your own ball game, but the circuit topology should still give you all the necessary functionality.   Top

 

Q8 - Diffraction. Would a narrower (<12.5") main panel give sharper stereo imaging, due to reduced delay of edge diffraction?

A8 - Diffraction is a difficult subject. I will try to give a simplified explanation of how diffraction works for an open baffle speaker after looking  first at diffraction in general, and then for a closed box speaker. See FAQ 38 for actual measurements of diffraction.

    Fundamentally, diffraction is about the transition between an acoustic wave propagating from one space first into another space of different volume. The effect, at an observation point at large distance from the source of the wave, is a change in sound pressure and, correspondingly, a change in the frequency response. The effect will be different whether the point is on-axis or off-axis. Take, for example, a small source on a flat baffle. At low frequencies, where the wavelength is much larger than the distance from the source to the baffle edge, the source radiates essentially unimpeded into full space (4pi). At higher frequencies and shorter wavelengths, the baffle begins to look more like a large plane because it takes increasing numbers of wavelengths to reach the edge of the baffle. The source now radiates essentially into half-space (2pi), but with delayed reflections from the baffle edge that cause ripples in the frequency response, and which become weaker as the edge recedes in terms of wavelengths. On average, the pressure at a distant on-axis point in space will be 6 dB higher at high frequencies, than at low frequencies. 
    If the baffle is not flat, but tapered 30 degrees such that the source is located at the tip of a 120 degree circular cone of finite extension, then at short wavelengths radiation will be into 3pi-space. At long wavelengths radiation is again into 4pi-space and on-axis pressure increases only 20log(4/3) = 2.5 dB on average and with ripples in the frequency response from the edge of the cone. 

    Let's now look in more detail at diffraction at the front panel edges of a closed box speaker with rectangular baffle. Assume the driver cone moves abruptly outward and causes a  local air pressure increase. The pressure increase propagates at the speed of sound (343 m/s) away from the cone into an environment that is bounded on one side by the front panel. Until the pressure wave front reaches the edge of the panel, it looks as if the driver was radiating into half-space. When the wave encounters the edge it suddenly sees an expanded space and the pressure drops. This pressure drop occurs all around the front panel edge, though at slightly different time, depending upon the distance from a particular point on the edge to the cone. All together, the pressure is reduced to 1/2, i.e. it drops 6 dB, because the volume of space encountered by the wave has doubled. We can think of this phenomenon as if a delayed wave of half the strength of the original wave and with opposite polarity was propagating out from the circumference of the front panel.
    When we monitor this behavior from a point in front of the box (e.g. 1 m), then we observe first the arrival of the original pressure increase and a little time later a pressure decrease when the wave from the cabinet edge arrives. Note, that our conceptual model assumed that the pressure increase occurred in such a short time interval, that we can resolve the ensuing pressure decrease, which is no longer abrupt, but smeared because of the unequal distance from the panel edge points to the cone. If the panel had an effective width of 8" (0.2 m), and the cone was centered on the baffle, then the pressure decrease would occur 0.1m / 343m/s = 292 microseconds after the increase. To resolve the two events as separate from each other, the pressure must reach its final value in an interval shorter than 292 us, which means the driver must have a bandwidth greater than 1 / 292us = 3430 Hz. A slower pressure increase as produced, for example, by a 300 Hz tone would almost immediately be decreased by edge diffraction to 1/2 its starting value. 
    Thus, if we look in the frequency domain, the pressure response from an idealized point source on a finite size baffle will start at low frequencies with a value that is 6 dB lower than the value around which the response oscillates at high frequencies. The oscillation occurs due to the phasing between initial sound and edge diffraction, adding and subtracting from each other. By making the baffle narrower the transition to the oscillatory region moves higher in frequency, e.g. to above 2000 Hz in the above example. As the driver itself, due to its piston diameter, becomes more directional with increasing frequency, it also illuminates the panel edge with less strength, which then reduces response irregularities caused by diffraction. This comes into play when the effective piston diameter becomes larger than 1/3 of a wavelength. A smaller diameter driver, 6" versus 8", illuminates the the panel edge stronger than the larger driver for a given frequency and panel width, because it is less directional of itself. This effect is offset to some extend by making the cabinet proportionally narrower, which moves the response irregularities up in frequency. I think the popularity of 6" drivers is mainly driven by greater consumer market acceptance of visually less obtrusive narrower cabinets. 
    In general, the effect of cabinet diffraction can be observed and measured in the frequency domain as on-axis and off-axis frequency response irregularity. It shows especially strong in the on-axis response of symmetrical driver layouts. Diffraction effects can be seen most easily in the time and amplitude response to shaped tone bursts.
    References: H. F. Olson, Acoustical Engineering, 1957, pages 21-23. Anyone attempting to come up with a simple calculation of diffraction should first read: G. G. Muller, R. Black, T. E. Davis (all from Bell Labs), The Diffraction Produced by Cylindrical and Cubical Obstacles and by Circular and Square Plates, JASA, Vol.10, 1938.

    If I have not lost you by now, then let's talk about open baffle diffraction effects with the above in mind. Assume a small unenclosed piston source in the center of a circular, flat baffle. The source radiates towards the front and with opposite polarity towards the back. A pressure increase in front is associated with a pressure decrease in back of the baffle. Observing again the response to a stepwise increase in pressure at some on-axis distance in front of the baffle, we see the initial pressure increase, which drops to 1/2 when the edge diffracted front side wave arrives. At the same time we also receive from the backside of the baffle that 1/2 portion of the wave, which was diffracted around the baffle edge into the frontal hemisphere.  The 1/2 of the backside wave is of opposite polarity to the front wave and together with the front edge diffraction cancels the front wave completely(!). If the baffle had a 12" (0.3 m) diameter, then we would observe a  0.15m / 343m/s = 437 us  duration pulse in response to the pressure step from the point source.
    You might say this is a much stronger diffraction effect than for the closed box - and you are correct - but it is also the characteristic response of an open baffle, dipole source - after equalization. Modeling the response with a stepwise pressure increase and decrease implies an integration of the systems impulse response. Integration in the time domain is equivalent to boosting the low frequencies at 6 dB/oct in the frequency domain. The 437 us duration pulse is described by a sin(f)/f  frequency response function, which exhibits a flat response up to the frequency where the diffracted wave is delayed by 1/2 wavelength, i.e. where it adds in phase to the initial wave. For the 12" baffle this frequency is at 343m/s / 0.3m = 1143 Hz. At higher frequencies the response rolls off at 6 dB/oct with periodic dips and peaks unless the equalizing 6 dB/oct boost is leveled out. See Design Models A
    In practice you would not use a circular baffle to avoid the strong, comb filter like oscillations in response at high frequencies. A rectangular baffle smoothes out diffraction irregularities. In addition, as the driver itself becomes more directional with increasing frequency, the shape of the baffle becomes less critical because its edges are less illuminated. 
    Ultimately, it is the on-axis and off-axis frequency response of the equalized speaker that tells how well diffraction effects have been integrated into the design, regardless of the speaker type, cabinet shape, baffle width or drivers used. Narrower cabinets are just easier to work with for box speakers. A real feature of the PHOENIX is the smooth off-axis response that mimics the on-axis response, but with decreased amplitude as the angle is increased. You can see various frequency response data on the | System Test | page and in  Ref. 2 .
    There is more to sharp stereo imaging than a narrow baffle.   Top

 

Q9 - Could the length of the main panel be extended so that separate stands are not required?

A9 - Extending the main panel to the floor would create a large, potentially radiating surface area, if excited into vibration. I would recommend to extend the back spine and side panels, instead. The three legs would need to be cross-braced and solidly tied into a base.
    Suspending the panels from the ceiling is probably the optimum solution if hooks can be safely fastened to carry the panel weight. Rope and panel mass form a mechanical low-pass filter between driver cone movement and ceiling. The speaker is operating above the pendulum resonance and in the filter cutoff frequency range. 
    The problem with standing speakers on the floor is the potential transmission of structure borne vibrations into the floor. Spikes should not be used on suspended wood floors, because the speaker might excite the large floor area into spurious panel vibrations and subsequent re-radiation of sound. It is better to place a mechanically lossy medium, such as a thick, heavy felt mat, between the speaker base and the floor.   Top

 

Q10 - Could the woofer be adapted to work with existing panel speakers - e.g. Quad ESL63?

A10 - A PHOENIX like open baffle, dipole woofer would be the ideal complement to a variety of planar, open baffle, dipole speakers ( e.g. photos at  Audio Page ).
    The woofer channel of the crossover/eq circuit could remain unchanged for the 100 Hz, 12 dB/oct, L-R low-pass filter section of the crossover between woofer and existing speaker. The gain setting resistor ladder values (8.25k & 5.62k) would have to be modified to account for differences in  sensitivity between woofer and existing speaker.
    Assuming that the existing speaker has low frequency extension to at least 50 Hz, but is limited in SPL capability, then the high-pass filter section of the crossover, to drive the existing speaker, could be simply formed by a second order HP with two real axis poles at 100 Hz. The filter response could be realized with two cascaded 1st order Butterworth filters or the 12 dB/oct circuit topology of  xo12-24.gif, which is also used on the crossover/eq printed circuit board
    Thus, you could modify the second 1440HP filter section in the tweeter channel to realize the 100 Hz high-pass. Simply replace the 2.37k and 4.64k resistors with 51.1k resistors. The two 33 nF capacitors remain. None of the other components in the tweeter and midrange channel are loaded onto the circuit board. Add a jumper wire from the buffer output to the 33 nF input capacitor of the new high-pass and use the tweeter output to drive the power amplifier of your existing open baffle speaker. Alternatively, you could use my general topology printed circuit boards to define your own filter layout and configuration
    The woofer cones and the existing speaker's vibrating panel must be wired to move in opposite direction at dc - or at extremely low frequencies - for the acoustic outputs to sum correctly around 100 Hz. (See the main panel and dipole woofer sections of the System Test page for checking woofer level and phase.)
    If the existing speaker has its own roll-off in the 100 Hz region, then the crossover high-pass filter design would become more difficult and depend on the speaker's measured performance. This might be a situation where full equalization of the midrange highpass behavior becomes necessary. An active circuit (biquad) allows to shift the poles in the midrange response to the desired crossover frequency. A circuit with this type of response can be constructed using one of my general topology printed circuit boards.  
See also FAQ15.   Top

 

Q11 - What is the total cost of all the hardware for building a pair of PHOENIX loudspeakers?

A11 - The material cost depends, of course, very much on your supply sources. Here, in the USA, I would estimate the material cost as follows, but please do not hold me to those numbers:
        4x 1252DVC    $200
        4x  21W/8554    $600
        2x  D2905/9700   $400    (2x   D2904/9800   $400)
        Electronic parts & 2 pcb    $400
        Power supply    $100
        XO/EQ chassis    $100
        Cabinet material    $250 
This totals to $2050. Add to this the time and cost of your labor building it, and the cost of tools and equipment, unless you own those already. In addition you need 6 power amplifiers which might cost you $2000 or more for a 6-channel, 150 W per channel, amplifier. You can save considerably on amplifier cost by building your own using the LM3886 power op-amp integrated circuit. 3886amp.gif
    You could sacrifice some performance and save about $700 by using the Vifa P21WO-20 and D26TG-35 drivers instead of the Scan-Speak drivers. The PHOENIX project, though, is not about building an inexpensive speaker. My goal was a loudspeaker that gives you  true-to-the-original reproduction in common size, normally furnished rooms. If this is what you want, then go for it.   Top

 

Q12 - What happens to the parameters Vas, Qms, Qes and Qts when you connect the two voice coils of the 1252DVC in series?

A12 - The answer is not immediately obvious, so let's look at a single voice coil first. I will ignore the voice coil inductance which has little influence at low frequencies.
    Using the force-current analogy we can transform the mechanical driver parameters to appear as electrical components between the voice coil terminals. The driver moving mass becomes a capacitor C that is inversely proportional to (B*l)2. The suspension compliance becomes an inductor L proportional to (B*l)2, and the viscous losses are represented by a resistor R proportional to (B*l)2. The equivalent electrical circuit between the voice coil terminals consists of R, L and C in parallel and then connected in series to the voice coil resistance Re.
    Series connection of the two voice coils doubles the wire length inside the magnetic flux, thus (B*l)2 increases fourfold. Therefore, C decreases to 1/4th,  and L and R increase by a factor of four. Voice coil resistance Re doubles. As a result, the purely mechanical Qms, which is the ratio of resistance R to inductive reactance
wsL, stays the same. The purely electrical Qes, which is the ratio of net voice coil resistance Re to inductive reactance wsL, becomes 1/2 of the single coil value. Qts, which is the parallel combination of Qes and Qms, is also approximately halved, provided that Qms>>Qes. 
    Parallel connection of the two voice coils, however, will not increase the wire length inside the magnetic flux, thus, R, L, and C are the same as for the single voice coil. Only the voice coil resistance Re is reduced to 1/2. Again, Qms stays unchanged, but Qes and Qts are 1/2 of the single voice coil value. This is completely identical to the series connection of the voice coils. 
    In summary, series or parallel connection of the two voice coils will not change the mechanical parameters, only how they appear electrically in terms of equivalent R, L and C values. Thus Vas, i.e. compliance, is unchanged as are mass, mechanical losses, and resonance frequency Fs. For series or parallel connection of the two voice coils Qms, Qes and Qts are the same. 
    If only a single voice coil is connected and the other is left open, then Qes doubles and Qms remains unchanged. Thus Qts increases to almost twice the value of the dual voice coil case.
    In the mass controlled frequency range of the driver its SPL output versus drive voltage will be the same for series connection of the voice coils as for a single coil. For parallel connection, however, the SPL doubles (+6 dB) compared to the single coil connection.   Top

 

Q13 - Is a printed circuit board for the crossover/eq available?

A13 - Circuit boards are in stock and available. See | Circuit Board | for further details and ordering information.
    Each board contains the circuitry for one channel, i.e. for one input and the three outputs for woofer, mid and tweeter. In addition, the board has circuitry for a -3 dB/dec tilt control, and three notch filters for low frequency room equalization, in case it is desired. Use of the notch filters, though, presumes that you have accurate room response measurement capability to determine resonance center frequency, Q and attenuation required. You will need to calculate the necessary circuit component values and verify the equalizer response by yourself. I provide the formulas and a spreadsheet..
    The circuit board is silk screened with component designators and component values. It comes with schematic, material list, loading list, frequency response curves and notch filter design information. You will need to provide the electrical components yourself, load them onto the board, solder them and test the completed board. 
    The circuit board is also suitable for providing crossover and equalization when adding the PHOENIX dipole woofer to an existing panel speaker (FAQ10) or a small monitor (FAQ15).
    You probably want to house multiple boards in a chassis with input, output and power connectors. The board is 8" wide, by 7" deep, and two of them fit next to each other in a 17" wide chassis. An external +/-12 V power supply is recommended. 
    Alternatively, you might use my general topology printed circuit boards WM1 and MT1 to define your own circuit layout and construction.   Top

 

Q14 - What is the low frequency sound pressure level from an open baffle speaker with a given effective piston area and excursion?

A14 - The output depends on the path length difference D for sound reaching the listener from the front and the rear of the piston. For a flat circular baffle of diameter d, with the piston at its center, that path length difference is D = d/2, when measured on-axis and at sufficient distance. For the PHOENIX dipole woofer D = 19" (483 mm) between front and rear cabinet openings. For the PHOENIX main panel, which is folded back and rectangular, the effective path difference is more difficult to determine and approximately D = 12.5"/2 + 3.5" = 9.75" (248 mm). See Design Models A.
    Using these values for D you can calculate the frequency Fequal at which the dipole output is the same as that of a monopole, closed box speaker, with the same volume displacement (see FAQ5). The dipole output has a slope of 18 dB/oct and the monopole increases at 12 dB/oct for constant piston excursion with frequency.
    Conversely, you can use the MS Excel 4.0 spreadsheet  spl_max1.xls  to determine the absolute SPL at 1 m in free space. The excursion limited frequency response for box and open baffle speaker are shown as graphs and you can readily compare two different drivers and baffle sizes. For radiation into half-space add 6 dB to the calculated SPL value. The spreadsheet is based on Ref. 4.    Top

 

Q15 - How would you modify the crossover/eq circuit to work with a "regular" small monitor, instead of the main panel, and use the dipole woofer?

A15 - My answer to FAQ10 also applies to this case. I would imagine that a pair of dipole woofers added, for example, to a pair of B&W DM302 would make for a very natural sounding system. The dipole woofer would add bass output capability to the small monitor with minimal excitation of room modes and boom.
    It is very likely that the low frequen cy roll-off of the small speaker occurs around 100 Hz or somewhere close to the intended 100 Hz crossover to the dipole woofer. In such case the proposed high-pass filter solution of FAQ10 will not result in the desired 12 dB/oct crossover, because the monitor contributes phase shift and roll-off. This problem can be solved by using the circuit of Fig.9 from Ref.12, which allows correction of the monitor's frequency response in addition to providing the required high-pass function. The circuit can be constructed using my general topology WM1 printed circuit board
    The design for the equalizer proceeds as follows:
    a - Seal off any ports on the monitor to convert it into a closed box speaker with 2nd order, 12 dB/oct roll-off, which is easier to equalize. 
    b - Measure the frequency response of the speaker's impedance between its cable binding posts (including built-in tweeter crossover), as in Fig. 19, to determine closed box resonance frequency f0 and damping Q0 from the data as shown in Fig.18 of Ref.12. The free-space low frequency response of a closed box speaker is completely determined by these two parameters, Fig.17.  
Should you measure f0 close to 100 Hz and Q0 close to 0.5, then it is your lucky day and you need no further crossover high-pass filter to drive the monitor. 
    c - Assuming no such luck, insert the found values for f0 an Q0 into the design formulas of Fig.25, with fp = 100 Hz and Qp = 0.5 for the crossover high-pass filter. Note that not all combinations of Q and f are realizable (k>0) and that you may have to juggle values a little bit.  See Active Filter #9f0Q0fpQp.gif,  pz-eql.xlsTrue Audio.
    d - Find the closest matching standard R and C values to the ones you calculated in c. Scale the values to keep the impedance levels high enough (>1k) to avoid difficulties driving them. Analyze the circuit for the chosen standard values and readjust if necessary.
    e - Connect the buffer output of the crossover/eq to the input of the new circuit and from its output drive the power amplifier for your monitor. See the main panel and dipole woofer sections of the System Test page for checking woofer level and phase. The woofer gain setting resistor ladder values (8.25k & 5.62k) probably have to be modified to account for differences in  sensitivity between woofer and monitor.   Top

 

Q16 - Could you drive the main panel with a tube amplifier?

A16 - The objective for the PHOENIX was to design a speaker that is true to the original. The original, unfortunately, is not always sonically pleasing, given various recording studio practices. I even include an optional 3 dB/dec response correction for tonal balance on the crossover/eq pcb for such cases. Tube amplifiers often add their own sonic signature and many listeners like their "warm" tone. If you use a tube amplifier which has such signature (probably the majority of commercial products), it will leave its imprint on all material you play through it and remove you a step further from the original. Thus, you will miss out on the truly good recordings.
    Supposedly, there exist a few triode amplifier designs of exceptional transparency. Usually their power output is below 20 W  and insufficient to drive most speakers. A speaker with active crossovers, though, eliminates the waste of power that usually results from circuit losses and matching of driver sensitivities through passive R, L, C, crossover networks. The PHOENIX main panel should work really well with low power tube amplifiers, because of its high sensitivity over the midrange and the generally low power requirements on most program material for the tweeter (see FAQ20). The drivers represent an easy, low reactance load to the amplifier output transformer due to the restricted frequency range used. The output impedance should be low (<0.4 ohm) to maintain tight control over the voice coil motion. 
    Solid-state power amplifiers are, by no means, automatically superior to tube amplifiers. Some of the early designs had notoriously high distortion levels of a character unknown from tubes. I also contend that design and construction of a highly transparent solid-state amplifier is far more difficult than that of an an acceptably sounding tube power amplifier. The difficulties of controlling the inherent non-linearities, wide bandwidth, thermal coupling and stability under all conditions of voltage and current swing, and load, are a real challenge even to an experienced analog design engineer, and require not only a solid understanding of devices, feedback control theory, radio frequency electronics and thermal design, but also extensive measurement capability. This is why I recommend to the DIYer power op amps like the LM3886, where all these aspects have been resolved and integrated at the chip level, thus greatly simplifying the remaining external circuitry (3886amp.gif,
Crossover/EQ).  
    As a starting point, tube or solid-state amplifiers should have low harmonic distortion (<0.1%) and low output impedance (<0.4 ohm) throughout the mid and tweeter frequency range to minimize amplifier contributed alteration of the main panel sound.   Top

 

Q17 - Why do you not show waterfall response plots for the PHOENIX when your test equipment is capable of producing them?

A17 - My reason for a measurement is to glean relevant information from the data presentation. The waterfall plot (cumulative spectral decay or amplitude-time-frequency presentation) is full of processing artifacts due to the necessary windowing operation performed on the impulse response. This masks information and makes it difficult to interpret what you see. The time axis is usually too short (3 ms) due to lack of anechoic measurement conditions to present anything of relevance below a few kHz. Add to this dilemma the auto-ranging of amplitude relative to the highest peak in the initial frequency response. This has the effect that a tweeter with a 22 kHz resonant peak of 10 dB pushes the whole presentation 10 dB closer to its floor so that the spectrum appears to decay very rapidly. The plots have limited usefulness and must be read with considerable understanding of how they are generated, but they provide attractive advertising and magazine graphics.
    The concept of observing signal decay, though, is very relevant for finding stored energy phenomena. The impulse response contains all this information, but is difficult to interpret in most cases, because of its broad spectral coverage. I prefer to use a shaped tone-burst, 1kblkman4.wav, which concentrates the energy into a narrow frequency band, and observe its decay for different frequencies. The presentation is similar to the energy time curve, except that the ETC is dominated by high frequency (>1 kHz) spectral content, while I can probe any part of the spectrum with constant 1/3 octave resolution.  
A CD with recorded burst signals for room and speaker tests is available.
    A project to redesign my original burst generator is underway at http://www.sound.au.com/project58.htm.    Top

 

Q18 - Which types of distortion do you measure?

A18 - There are two forms of distortion: linear and non-linear distortion. 
    For linear distortion I measure the dB magnitude deviation of the frequency response from my performance target that I have set for on-axis and off-axis response of the speaker, utilizing the data that you can see on the System Test page. I measure phase response for summation of driver outputs in the crossover region. In the time domain I look at stored energy using shaped tone-bursts (FAQ17) to characterize drivers and cabinets. 
    Non-linear distortion is characterized by the generation of new spectral components that were not part of the excitation signal. I measure distortion of drivers using a single tone and multiple tones (2 to 5) as input. The inter-modulation  products generated by multiple tones are strong indicators of relative performance. Typically, IM products are of larger amplitude than the associated harmonic distortion products. I also check the excursion limits of woofer, mid and tweeter drivers vs. my requirements.
    According to my observations, inter-modulation of the different spectral components in program material, and storage of energy, are the major limiting factors for transparency in a loudspeaker.   Top

 

Q19 - Why do you use a 12 dB/oct crossover between woofer and midrange when the crossover to the tweeter is at 24 dB/oct ?

A19 - The crossover to the tweeter is at a steep slope to prevent lower frequency signals from pushing the dome into large excursions. For constant SPL the dome excursion increases at 12 dB/oct as you go down in frequency. Thus, a 12 dB/oct crossover would merely keep the tweeter's low frequency excursions constant, not reduce them. Since program material usually has larger low frequency than high frequency amplitudes, this could lead to inter-modulation distortion in the driver. In my work on crossovers (Ref. 17) I observed that the phase distortion, i.e. the all-pass behavior, of the 24 dB/oct crossover has no audible side effects in this frequency range. See Design Models F.
    I also noticed then that the very low frequency part of the spectrum is audibly affected by the system's phase response (further observations in: L. R. Fincham, "The subjective importance of uniform group delay at low frequencies", JAES, Vol. 33, No. 6, p. 436, 1985). This is the reason for keeping the dc blocking high-pass filter in the woofer channel to a low 2 Hz cut-off, even though it provides less protection for over-excursion of the drivers. 
    At a 100 Hz crossover frequency the reduced phase distortion of the 12 dB/oct crossover gives more realism to the bass. The two 8" drivers, which roll off on their own around 40 Hz in the open baffle, can handle the extra excursion demands. 
   
I have recently investigated my phase distortion assumption which was based on observations with some earlier speaker designs. The differences that I had noticed then, must not have been due to phase distortion, because new tests give no indication of audibility. I invite anyone interested to test for themselves the validity of my observation.
    Contrary to what is frequently assumed, the low end of the spectrum appears to be the frequency range for audibility of phase distortion. Phase linear systems could be build using digital equalization. Unfortunately it is much more difficult to realize phase linear digital equalization and crossovers at low frequencies than at high ones, because the data blocks that must be processed become exceedingly long.
    Phase distortion is also the reason why I have not used vented or band-passed woofers in any of my designs. The steep cut-off rates, the associated stored energy and the non-uniform group-delay audibly falsify reproduction of acoustic sounds.    Top

 

Q20 - What is the sound pressure level at 1 m for 1 W of power under anechoic conditions?

A20 - Conventionally the sensitivity of a speaker is defined as the sound pressure level SPL that would be obtained at 1 m if driven with 2.83 Vrms at its terminals. This corresponds to 1 W input power if the terminal impedance is 8 ohm. 
    The voltage sensitivity has been estimated (Design Models - I) for the PHOENIX as 90 dB SPL for the tweeter, 103 dB for the midrange above 250 Hz which drops to 96 dB at 100 Hz, and for the woofer as 95 dB at 100 Hz decreasing to 85 dB SPL at 30 Hz for a constant 2.83 V across the driver terminals.
    Since the actual terminal impedances are not 8 ohm, and since each driver is only used over part of its frequency range, because the active crossover limits the range that each amplifier has to cover, the effective load impedances become approximately  4.5 ohm for the tweeter, 3.5 ohm for the midrange and 6.5 ohm for the woofer. Thus in each case it takes more than 1 W to obtain the 1 m SPL given above. 
    The SPL at 1 m for 1 W of power into the effective terminal impedances becomes for the 
Tweeter:  87.5 dB, 
Midrange:  99 dB above 250 Hz, decreasing to 92 dB at 100 Hz,
Woofer:  94 dB at 100 Hz, decreasing to 84 dB at 30 Hz.
    These numbers indicate that even modest amounts of amplifier power would result in very acceptable maximum sound pressure levels. Amplifiers that can deliver 10 W into the above impedances would allow 97.5 dB tweeter output, 109 dB over most of the midrange and 94 dB woofer output at 30 Hz. 
    See Room acoustics for estimating the SPL under reverberant conditions and spl_max1.xls for the volume displacement required from a driver to obtain a specified SPL.  Top


صفحات جانبی

نظرسنجی

    لطفاً نظرات خود را درمورد وبلاگ با اینجانب در میان بگذارید.(iman.sariri@yahoo.com)نتایج تاکنون15000مفید و 125غیرمفید. با سپاس


  • آخرین پستها

آمار وبلاگ

  • کل بازدید :
  • تعداد نویسندگان :
  • تعداد کل پست ها :
  • آخرین بازدید :
  • آخرین بروز رسانی :