Open Baffle Speakers

Hi Manek,

If you are serious about open baffle speakers, check out this thread at the forum "diyAudio.com/Loudspeakers/Beyond The Ariel". Lynn Olson is leading a discussion on full-range dipole open-baffle speakers. Some of the most insightful thinking on speaker design is on. Will leave the conventional, mainstream manufacturers wallowing in the dark ages!

Viren.

96dB/W/M sensitivity?? SET fans rejoice!!

yeah...thats what grabbed me and prices for a pair or drivers !

manek.

Seas too has a good sounding co-axial driver 7" bot meant for a box(sealed or ported or Open as per the website)....costing 120 USD per piece.

Manek.

viren schrieb:

Hi Manek, If you are serious about open baffle speakers, check out this thread at the forum "diyAudio.com/Loudspeakers/Beyond The Ariel". Lynn Olson is leading a discussion on full-range dipole open-baffle speakers. Some of the most insightful thinking on speaker design is on.

yes, it seems to be a very insightful discussion. Thanx for providing the link to all of us.

viren schrieb:

Will leave the conventional, mainstream manufacturers wallowing in the dark ages! Viren.

not so fast, viren!
several classes of speakers such as electrostatics, horns, dual-concentric, full-range single driver of the Altec variety & the Lowther/Jordan variety to name a few have been available for quite some time now. Not everybody has congregated to 1 type of loudspeaker because there is no single be-all, end-all type of loudspeaker. Each loudspeaker has its own pluses & minuses. It takes time to ascertain & understand these attributes.
For example, from whatever little I read on that forum, open-baffle speakers are so efficient that it requires a totally different power amplifier paradigm i.e. a tendency towards flea-watt amps. I also read that these speakers need to be adjusted for the room they will be in to minimize room interaction (this is a hard one! we all have dealt with this w/ the usual cone driver speakers & very people area actually skilled in the art of speaker placememnt!)
I'm sure that open-baffle loudspeakers do many things better than most other loudspeakers but to think that they will wipe out all other speaker manuf is a bit to much to think, no?

Very honestly I have played with this concept about 4-5 years ago.One needs extremely powerful LF drivers with huge efficiency to get respectable bass out of them.To get the necessary LF the baffle has to be at least 24" wide.There goes the wife.Additionally you need at least 36"-42" from the rear wall,your wife just castrated you dude.The advantages are great though.Figure of 8 radiation for the LF completely minimises sidewall interaction in the bass, giving a fast taut bass coupled with the fact there is no cabinet to slow things down.If properly executed, the lack of cabinet colouration is a revelation but takes time to get used to, I love it.In the end one ends up fighting the room though, as getting the thing to sound correct is easier said than done, also not forgetting the size of the damn thing.What most people do not realise is that, the greatest advantage of the open baffle is not the boxless sound or fast sound, it is the radiation character which is its greatest advantage.The out of phase front to back cancellation minimises off axis response, hence controlling sidewall reflections which are detrimental to many aspects of audio reproduction.Due to this controlled off axis response, one gets a sense of being there as the recorded acoustic is better potrayed as early reflections that smear primary wave launch are minimised.However the back wall is still there, and it takes a herculean effort to make this boundary work for you rather than against you, the biggest pitfall being that the exagerrated depth perspective will draw your attention away from tonal distortions and colourations.
The latest effort is therefore in a loudspeaker with a cordiod radiation pattern, the idea being, to tranport you to the concert hall or to the recorded acoustic. To get a drift, check out www.kef.com/products/muon ,that however deserves another thread altogether.
Deaf.

Hi Bombaywalla,

Sorry, maybe I was a little too quick on the draw!

My intention was different. Of course, there are many approaches to good speaker systems - all equally valid. Open baffle systems, single driver systems are just two of them. But all require drivers with good properties, with different optimums for different designs, that point to good reproduced sound. That's where the discussion on "Beyond The Ariel" has been so illuminating. It applies to all drivers, whatever systems they may be used in.

And that's where the mainstream manufacturers have been found lacking. Their systems promote drivers using the latest developed materials - kevlar, carbon fibre - that are just not natural good-sounding drivers. And with lower sensitivities than before. I call that a regression in technology! Brute force engineering can do only so much to correct faults. You lose too much in the bargain.

As before, true innovations come from commited, dedicated designers who question convention. They have to prove things only to themselves - and, thanks to the internet, are able to propound their thoughts. And have no pressures to be led by the marketeers.

Viren.

deaf schrieb:

Very honestly I have played with this concept about 4-5 years ago.One needs extremely powerful LF drivers with huge efficiency to get respectable bass out of them.To get the necessary LF the baffle has to be at least 24" wide.There goes the wife.Additionally you need at least 36"-42" from the rear wall,your wife just castrated you dude.The advantages are great though.Figure of 8 radiation for the LF completely minimises sidewall interaction in the bass, giving a fast taut bass coupled with the fact there is no cabinet to slow things down.If properly executed, the lack of cabinet colouration is a revelation but takes time to get used to, I love it.In the end one ends up fighting the room though, as getting the thing to sound correct is easier said than done, also not forgetting the size of the damn thing.What most people do not realise is that, the greatest advantage of the open baffle is not the boxless sound or fast sound, it is the radiation character which is its greatest advantage.The out of phase front to back cancellation minimises off axis response, hence controlling sidewall reflections which are detrimental to many aspects of audio reproduction.Due to this controlled off axis response, one gets a sense of being there as the recorded acoustic is better potrayed as early reflections that smear primary wave launch are minimised.However the back wall is still there, and it takes a herculean effort to make this boundary work for you rather than against you, the biggest pitfall being that the exagerrated depth perspective will draw your attention away from tonal distortions and colourations. The latest effort is therefore in a loudspeaker with a cordiod radiation pattern, the idea being, to tranport you to the concert hall or to the recorded acoustic. To get a drift, check out www.kef.com/products/muon ,that however deserves another thread altogether. Deaf.

Very Very Well put - professor.
Except for the 'wife' part. The information was very correct and informative. Such posts would do good for our fellow forum members. Well done, keep them coming. !!

The latest effort is therefore in a loudspeaker with a cordiod radiation pattern, the idea being, to tranport you to the concert hall or to the recorded acoustic.

Deaf,
Is this the principle of the Legacy Helix?

Well I am not quite sure about the cardiod pattern for the helix in the subwoofer range, but surely in the upper bass range it is cardiod.The speaker depended on being active and used a professional active x-over for the duties. The professional active unit allowed the speaker to beam steer its power response too, from what little I remember.Now I believe they use DEQX.
Regards Deaf.

Actually (Deaf correct me if I am wrong) the concept of open baffle was first implemented by Ray Dahlquist in his Dahlquist DQ-10 loudspeaker whrein he had open mounted the low & high midrange cones and the piezo tweeter. The 10" bass driver was mounted below in a sealed enclosure ( do not know why, probably cone strength issues or tighter bass issues??). The drivers were time aligned (mounted in diff. planes). The sound was very airy very 'open' (pun intended) very very good (I owned one) but very different from enclosed speakers. Takes a while getting used to if you switch either way but very clean in the mid & highs due to absense of the box. The speakers were 2 feet wide & stand mounted.

Well actually the fisrt dynamic speakers were open baffle only, a cone mounted on a plank of wood.The DQ-10 were good speakers infact so good that they achieved cult status.Work of a genius who unfortunately lost interest in audio and ended up in a mental asylum.
Deaf.

deaf schrieb:

Now I believe they use DEQX.

That's a 2000$+ piece of equipment but might be the best DSP tool out there(in that price range that i know of) to sort out room acoustics.

null

i schrieb:

deaf schrieb: Now I believe they use DEQX. That's a 2000$+ piece of equipment but might be the best DSP tool out there(in that price range that i know of) to sort out room acoustics.

Dear Savyasaachi,
There is no way one can sort out the room.You can only sort out the loudpeaker response to an extent in relation to the room.
Regards Deaf.

deaf schrieb:

null i schrieb: deaf schrieb: Now I believe they use DEQX. That's a 2000$+ piece of equipment but might be the best DSP tool out there(in that price range that i know of) to sort out room acoustics. Dear Savyasaachi, There is no way one can sort out the room.You can only sort out the loudpeaker response to an extent in relation to the room. Regards Deaf.

oh...yeah...that's what i meant. even the Behringer 2496-DEQX(i think) is pretty good and is known to work very well , especially in an active setup but at a 10th of the price of the DEQX.

Savyasaachi schrieb:

oh...yeah...that's what i meant. even the Behringer 2496

that works very well in the digital domain..actually gives a pretty flat response (ie before the DAC) but its analogue "equalisation" does rob the music

Arj schrieb:

Savyasaachi schrieb: oh...yeah...that's what i meant. even the Behringer 2496 that works very well in the digital domain..actually gives a pretty flat response (ie before the DAC) but its analogue "equalization" does rob the music

Yes Arj, Many don't seem to know the fact that the longer the signal is in the digital domain the better.

And any manipulation in the signal is better done when it is digital form as the chances of noise encroaching on the signal is much less here. But jitter is going to be a factor. How big a factor is the important question.

I have heard nothing but praise about the Behringer DEQ2496 on diyaudio.com

It would be interesting to check out how much of an improvement it would actually make in a system.

Savyasaachi schrieb:

Yes Arj, Many don't seem to know the fact that the longer the signal is in the digital domain the better. And any manipulation in the signal is better done when it is digital form as the chances of noise encroaching on the signal is much less here. But jitter is going to be a factor. How big a factor is the important question. .

true, pragmatically speaking it works fine..but for those who follow the hi fi purist way of thought, any external manipulation of the signal causes loss of Purity..hence the "if the room is the problem then fix the room". (Same reason for prefering Passive to active, min compinents in the chain etc etc)

the best approach as per experts is to treat the room to the best possible. it is only those freq which cannot be treated (typically the 40-60 Hz Bass Hump) in most medium to average room ..equalise it.

ideally equalisation should only be done to sub 100Hz signals, the ones above can be solved by placement/treatment options.

additionally "tonality" becomes a issue from midbass upwards..proper bass may not have that problem ..hence can be equalised.

But I too agree with your point on longer the digital chain , the better it is..hence would actually prefer a digital chain extending up to the amp ! (something using the dcS/Wadia digital volume control)

I guess with the new Digital speakers (ie reads 0s/1s and converts it to sound ) might take us to a n3ew level of transparency some time in the future..

I have listened to the Wadia being used as a CDP + Pre-amp (volume controlled through the CDP) and I didnt like them.
Dry and un-involving is the right word. Or could it be because of the Krell amplification ? ...Dont know but I had more doubts on the CDP being used as a Preamp.

abhi.pani schrieb:

I have listened to the Wadia being used as a CDP + Pre-amp (volume controlled through the CDP) and I didnt like them. Dry and un-involving is the right word. Or could it be because of the Krell amplification ? ...Dont know but I had more doubts on the CDP being used as a Preamp. ;)

A Linn Classik ought to change ur mind

abhi.pani schrieb:

I have listened to the Wadia being used as a CDP + Pre-amp (volume controlled through the CDP) and I didnt like them. Dry and un-involving is the right word. Or could it be because of the Krell amplification ? ...Dont know but I had more doubts on the CDP being used as a Preamp. ;)

i think it could the speaker or the setup..wadias are accurate and that is their strength (And IMHO that is the primary objective of a source !)

Maybe the cd played was dry and and un-involving. Many recordings are just that. Just a thought.

i think it could the speaker or the setup..wadias are accurate and that is their strength (And IMHO that is the primary objective of a source !)

Hmmm..I dont have any doubts on the CDP as such but I do have some doubts on the CDP directly feeding the amp. To feed the amp directly the CDP should produce enough voltage at its output so that the amp is able to carry it from there. Which basically means their should some amount of pre-amplification taking place within the CDP (not sure about this though ) and this is where I guess the wadia was not great at. As far as I know, the direct output of a CDP is too low to be sent to a Power amp so we need a pre-amp, how does Wadia handle that? .

I have to point out that, the system sounded extremely detailed. The tone and timbre was one to die for. This was the first time I could understand how a good CDP can improve the SQ. But the involvement factor was nowhere there...totally dry. This is where I had a hunch that, had their been a good external pre-amp used, things could have been in a different world.

But I am not sure what could have gone wrong.

Manek,
We were playing conventional albums...Eagles, Dire Straits etc which sounds pretty juicy on other systems

abhi.pani schrieb:

Hmmm..I dont have any doubts on the CDP as such but I do have some doubts on the CDP directly feeding the amp. To feed the amp directly the CDP should produce enough voltage at its output so that the amp is able to carry it from there. Which basically means their should some amount of pre-amplification taking place within the CDP (not sure about this though ) and this is where I guess the wadia was not great at. As far as I know, the direct output of a CDP is too low to be sent to a Power amp so we need a pre-amp, how does Wadia handle that? .

Wadias and dCs have a higher output than usual..they are more than 2V and upto 5 V (i think) the higher power also contributes to them being rather "High Gain" inputs.

My wadias are so High gain that i cannot use an active Preamp with sensitive speakers. I had to use a resistor based attenuator for them..and in the end get rid of my electrocompaniet pre which i rather loved.


most low-fi to mid fi CDPs have rather poor power supply with the reason that they turn into Constant voltage outputs rather than the constant current outputs that they should have been (Hence the difference with Tube buffers)

i would maintain that the problem of the sound being un involving might most probably be due to the speakers or to their setup.
in fact the output of most good cdps with volume control (Especially with a built in preamp like the Cary, Wadia, Audio Aero, Audio Resolution , dCS etc) are better than those of pure CDPs.

of course the Marantz kind of digital volume cotrol causes loss of resolution as they in effect reduce the "content"..they should only be used in full volume

adding a preamp is necessary if you have multiple sources especially analogue. as that is when a preamp is really required to boost the input to the required level of a power amp

Abhi,
Wadia series from 86x and above do have hefty ouput stages and are capable of driving most poweramps. How the combo sounds depends a lot on other factors. If you add a line stage/pre amp and if it is making the system musical it can be the colouration introduced by the new component.

One olaso has to adjust the o/p level of Wadia by adjusting the internal DIP switches so that the volume level is above 85% level so that resolution is not lost by adjusting the volume in digital domain.

Regards
Anil

abhi.pani schrieb:

I have listened to the Wadia being used as a CDP + Pre-amp (volume controlled through the CDP) and I didnt like them. Dry and un-involving is the right word. Or could it be because of the Krell amplification ? ...Dont know but I had more doubts on the CDP being used as a Preamp. ;)

Ach! I have a lot to say about this!

which Wadia CDP model was it, if I may ask? (i'm curious to know).

1stly, your observation that Wadia CDPs can sound clinical is not out-of-line. On other forums I have read very similar descriptions - dry, uninvolving, hyper-detailed but no soul, etc, etc.
If the Wadia model was an 850 or an 86X (860 or 861) then the transport used is some version of TEAC VRDS. Though this transport is an engineering marvel, there are some user reports that the sound from it can be clinical. It is very tough to point this finger @ the transport & say that the dryness emanates from it.

One thing that should have been a must for your Wadia listening session/audition was that the CDP should have been on for a minimum of 72 hrs straight! No kidding! The Wadia manual says this very clearly & my ears can tell when the CDP is not on for 72 hrs - sound is clinical & the hi-freq has a glare to it. Listening fatigue sets in quite quickly. Having the CDP on for 72 hrs (min) is an absolute must. it makes WORLD of difference.
So, if the Wadia you heard was not properly warmed up, my suggestion to you is that you drop this data point from your mental memory re. Wadia CDPs.

Another point: Wadia CDPs have 3 algorithms that you can choose from (called A, B & C). The A is their proprietary DigiMaster algo. Depending on the CDP you heard, it would have had some (older) rev of this algo. Algo B & C are variations of this algo with the listener sitting at different locations in the "hall".
Did you note which algo you were listening to?
Did you change the algorithms to see if you liked any of the others better/more?
All this takes time & a simple 1-time listen to this CDP is not enough. If your friend still has this CDP, go back several times & listen to it.

The digital volume control on the Wadias is done via DSP. there is a Motorola DSP 56000 variant in there (actually 2 of them!) that is used to signal process the CD data. The DSP upsamples the data by 32X & elongates the word lenngth to 22 bits (I think). There are 100 0.5dB steps in the volume control & when you go from 100 --> 0, you eat gradually eat into this 22-bit word. Of the 50dB of volume control, about/approx 36dB of it will not affect the 16-bit CD data because the 6 additional bits are being affected where there is not CD music. Beyond this, you begin to eat into the CD data.
Practically, when the volume control is 70 or lower, it begins to sound like the music is being affected.

Like Anil wrote, the Wadia output stage can be configured by internal DIP switches to go from 4.25V down to 0.25V in 6dB steps. So, practically any preamp or power amp can be driven. I've certified this myself.
The best is to know your preamp & adjust the output stage so that you get the most range on the volume control.
It is a horrific thing that CDP output stages are defaulted to 2V output - it causes tremendous compression of the signal as it courses down the chain to the preamp & power amp. Many preamps have 14-20dB gain & many power amps have 26-32dB of gain. can you imagine/calculate what the 2V (max) signal might look like at the power amp input or the speaker input??? It'll be needlessly HUGE!! I've found that 1V (max) or even 0.5V(max) are sufficient such that the preamp volume control can be between 12 o'clock & 2 o'clock for optimum listening. Analog volume controls seem to sound most linear in this range. Arj seems to have discovered this as well when he used that resistor attenuator.

The ability of the Wadia to drive a power amp directly, I found out the hard/expensive way, depends a lot on the cables. I found that most "normal"/"usual" cables that exist in the market cannot allow the Wadia to drive the power amp very effectively. The sound is, how would I describe it? - "anemic"!
However, as your cables become more linear (& the cost goes up exponentially! ) the ability of the Wadia to drive the power amp improves dramatically. Now, the internal volume control is simply superb & very revealing & with no particular sonic down-side. It was a total revelation to me!!!!

Now, having written this "bhashan", I will still say that Wadia's can sound uninvolving. Their sound can quickly turn to being rather detailed & amusical. IMHO, Wadia CDPs are perhaps one of the most linear CDp sources around. Not the only one but one of the very few available. They will reveal the flaws of the down-stream components in a hurry.

Sadly, modifying the Wadia helps a great deal! One would think that such an expensive unit ought to sound just right, correct? However, modding it does wonders to its sound - makes it far more musical. I think that even the Wadia is built to a price point keeping in mind the dealer's (horrendous) mark-ups.

The Wadia is a magnificient machine but it takes a lot of care to set it up correctly. I've not touched on the rack, the isolation of the Wadia from the rack & the power cord. These 3 items can also make or break the Wadia sound.
This is not out-of-line: I find this to be the case as one climbs higher & higher up the equipment curve i.e. care of setup seems to matter most to more expensive equipment.

Hi Bombaywalla,
The CDP was a Wadia 302. Regarding keeping it switched on for 72 hours straight, I guess its too difficult to implement it in India....given the voltage fluctuations and power cuts here, even if you have the best voltage protection mechanism you are never sure...

abhi.pani schrieb:

Hi Bombaywalla, The CDP was a Wadia 302.

Thanks!

abhi.pani schrieb:

Regarding keeping it switched on for 72 hours straight, I guess its too difficult to implement it in India....given the voltage fluctuations and power cuts here, even if you have the best voltage protection mechanism you are never sure... :.

I agree! Wadia is a product that is not made for India given its horrid power grid. Hence making this particular CDP sound good in that part of the world is going to be a challenge.
In fact, none of people that I know who used to own one have it any longer! I can understand why.

Eerr...open baffles anyboby

Deaf.

deaf schrieb:

Eerr...open baffles anyboby Deaf.

LOL, deaf!
I agree that we hijacked this thread momentarily. Now I'll stick to the topic of this thread.....

So anyone know of good implementations of open baffles besides Jamo in India ?

Manek.

Burge and Sanjeev were doing Audio Artistry about a decade ago, and they had the Beethoven model in India way back then.
But on another trip altogether, way back in the 80's I had read about a drama theatre system, which used a Tannoy Monitor gold 15" bare mounted atop a Bose 302 woofer system. It was considered amazing.
Deaf,

what was amazig...???? the bose or the tannoy ?

audio artistry......wonder what happened to those ? B&W a more lucrative line I would assume. BTW his juhu outlet I have heard is kick ass !

Wonder if the tannoy 15" is around anywhere ? Was told there is a guy in surat who has the westminsters.


Manek.

[quote][/quote]But on another trip altogether, way back in the 80's I had read about a drama theatre system, which used a Tannoy Monitor gold 15" bare mounted atop a Bose 302 woofer system. It was considered amazing.
Deaf,[/quote]

Hi
I have tried my 15 inch Golds in open baffles with a Rel sub.The sound was fantastic.They sounded better than the original cabinets ,with clearer mids and faster(no overhang) bass, with both the Leak TL12+(EL84) monoblocks and also the Quad II/II(KT66) amps.
But the big 4'x3'baffles in the middle of the living room were not to my wifes liking,so the Tannoys are back in the original corner York cabinets.
Regards
Rajiv

ah ! my prayers are answered !

Rajiv...do tell us more on your experience with the tannoys.....what are you currently using them with ? How long hve they been with you ?

manek.

Hi

My Tannoys are currently being biamped with two Leak TL12+ monoblock amps per side.The crossover is an active one designed by John Ridley specially for the Gold and Hpd versions of the DC loudspeakers. These crossover boards were custom made for a few of the members of the Yahoo Tannoy group.

The Tannoys are in corner York cabinets.The open baffle experiment was after I had read an article a few years ago in HI-FI News/World about how good the Tanoys sounded with open baffles.The trade off is that they have to be well away from the rear walls to sound good.This may not be practical in domestic situations.
Regards
Rajiv

Rajiv schrieb:

Hi My Tannoys are currently being biamped with two Leak TL12+ monoblock amps per side.

Leaks are not something we hear of very much.. I remember someone whom i knew jumping with joy when he found an old leak amp on ebay and then spend months trying to refurbish it..

I guess it is one of those old world british amps who have so sadly disappeared from the scene.

am sure they sound delicious with the Tannoys

I remember hearing a leak amp in my teens. My dad's friend had it. But dont remember much of the characteristics now.

Manek.

Hi
Here is a picture of Tannoys on open baffles.They are not mine but from the JE Labs web site.
Regards
Rajiv

I guess that Turntable in the rear corner will be having a "Rocking" time

Nice pic... conveys the scale of things... and probably not at someone's home... unless he is not married !

Rajiv,
thanks for posting the pics
are these tannoy concentric drivers ?

Arj schrieb:

Rajiv, thanks for posting the pics are these tannoy concentric drivers ?

they most certainly are!
These drivers seem to be ones taken out of Tannoy speakers like the Red or Gold Monitor speakers. The middle section that has the horn-loaded tweeter is covered with a fine mesh grill cloth. If a pix is taken from an angle (as in Rajiv's pix) it gives the impression that the driver is all-woofer! A head-on pix with a flash clearly reveals the metal horn behind the mesh.

I wonder if an Indian open baffle design, a proper 3 way, would be acceptable as a commercial product. Price range would be about 75K. This should be interesting I think.
Deaf.

deaf....could be acceptable. Does it have to be 75K ?
Cant it be lower as an experiment and once it catches on....maybe then it could command a steeper price.

Secondly, does a typical indian flat support a open baffle design ? Would there be a sales on counts of WAF ? A 12" or 15" woofer is very intimidating to the better half.

Manek schrieb:

deaf....could be acceptable. Does it have to be 75K ? Cant it be lower as an experiment and once it catches on....maybe then it could command a steeper price. Secondly, does a typical indian flat support a open baffle design ? Would there be a sales on counts of WAF ? A 12" or 15" woofer is very intimidating to the better half. :(

Dear Manek, a few things are in order here.
a)WAF? whatzat? Guys who buy open baffles don't have a better half. Or had one earlier, now he has an open baffle.
b)Guys who listen to good open baffles are reclusive audio idiots who will do anything to the domestic enviroment, whatever the size of the said house to get a great sound.
c)Keeping the above point in mind, 12" or 15" or even 24" does not matter, the bigger the better. However I propose dual 8" on an 18" baffle.

Price for forum idiots and looneys 50K.

Deaf.

:-)

deaf ...you have a pair ready ?

Manek schrieb:

deaf ...you have a pair ready ?

No, I scrapped an experimental one years ago, then got down to the pipe, which I now call SMOKE IT, now I got some fresh ideas on open baffles hence the proposal.