My multi location subwoofer thread inspired by Welti,Devantier,Geddes !!! - Page 7 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #181 of 191 Old 01-12-2013, 01:22 PM
Member
 
JackNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 190
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I should have been more specific in my question about ceiling bounce. I'm contemplating a corner horn which sits on top of a direct radiator base bin or a base horn, such as the pi7 corner horn, and has no flanking subs. I don't see enough spatial separation for the direct radiator to fill in the null but, when I penned that question, I hadn't considered the path length of a corner horn, which add to the effective spatial separation. Ultimately though, there ought to be something I can do with a miniDSP equalizer on the woofer to introduce a peak at the null frequency to smooth out the null, at least for my own seat. The ability to intrroduce phase shift just at the null frequency would be nice but that isn't quite as simple as a PEQ term. (any suggestions?)

The calculated null in my geometry is 235 hz with the speaker centered at 3' elevation. Should I just lower the speaker 6" and raising the null.to 325 hz and then hope I get enough attenuation from the carpet and pad to make the null go away?

Jack
JackNC is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #182 of 191 Old 01-12-2013, 01:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zheka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 1,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
What does spatial averaging measuring technique have to do with seat to seat FR consistency?
zheka is offline  
post #183 of 191 Old 01-12-2013, 03:38 PM
 
Wayne Parham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka View Post

What does special averaging measuring technique have to do with seat to seat FR consistency?

The seat-to-seat consistency is really described by the deviation of a series of measurements. But one of the proposed approximations is to take an average of the measurements. I personally think the averaging procedure is less important than the mean deviation, whether done mechanically by physically sweeping the microphone or by taking a series of masurements and mathematically averaging them together. Averaging tends to tell power response and deviation tells seat to seat consistency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackNC View Post

I should have been more specific in my question about ceiling bounce. I'm contemplating a corner horn which sits on top of a direct radiator base bin or a base horn, such as the pi7 corner horn, and has no flanking subs. I don't see enough spatial separation for the direct radiator to fill in the null but, when I penned that question, I hadn't considered the path length of a corner horn, which add to the effective spatial separation. Ultimately though, there ought to be something I can do with a miniDSP equalizer on the woofer to introduce a peak at the null frequency to smooth out the null, at least for my own seat. The ability to introduce phase shift just at the null frequency would be nice but that isn't quite as simple as a PEQ term. (any suggestions?)

The calculated null in my geometry is 235 hz with the speaker centered at 3' elevation. Should I just lower the speaker 6" and raising the null.to 325 hz and then hope I get enough attenuation from the carpet and pad to make the null go away?

You're on the right track here, in my opinion. The way I handle this is to use the proximity to the apex of the corner remove any possibility of anomalies from the adjacent walls. The distance from midhorn to woofer and their overlapping band helps smooth the vertical anomalies, much like a truncated line array.

In fact, line arrays are what made me come up with the whole flanking sub / helper woofer approach in the first place. We were having those early multisub discussions and I also recalled how line arrays suffered no notch from ground reflection like a point-source speaker elevated off the ground does. So I tried a pair of drivers elevated off the ground and found this did a great job of mitigating floor bounce too. That's when I knew that the approach was effective.

So my suggestion is to put the woofer near the ground and the mid a couple feet up, overlapping them in the low midrange. That will mitigate the notch when it falls in the region of the band where the midhorn isn't directional enough to limit off-axis output. That's what my design does anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

I don't see Geddes talking about using subwoofer placement to achieve seat to seat consistency, instead choosing to measure/optimize at one location (unless he's changed his mind, yet again).

That's possible too. Geddes seems to shift around and change position sometimes. But the multisub configuration is (or should be) intended to reduce seat-to-seat variation and improve smoothness of response, simultaneously. Otherwise, I see little point in going to the trouble to use multiple subs.

The conversations we had in 2005, and the internet discussions that followed it, were about using multiple subs for the simultaneous goals described above. You can see that in the threads. Geddes was pitting his approach against Welti's, and even bet me that his approach would do the same things and do it better. It did not prove to be true, which is perhaps why he decided to morph his stated goal.

If one decides to tackle just one problem by itself, they've reduced the problem to a much simpler one. Like I said earlier, if all you want to do is make the bass response really smooth indoors, get a nice sweep on a response chart, then just close mic the subwoofer. It will be as smooth as an anechoic chart. No need for multisubs at all.
Wayne Parham is offline  
post #184 of 191 Old 01-12-2013, 07:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zheka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 1,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Parham View Post

The seat-to-seat consistency is really described by the deviation of a series of measurements. But one of the proposed approximations is to take an average of the measurements. I personally think the averaging procedure is less important than the mean deviation, whether done mechanically by physically sweeping the microphone or by taking a series of masurements and mathematically averaging them together. Averaging tends to tell power response and deviation tells seat to seat consistency

I think in the post sdurani quoted Geddes expressed skepticism about utility of spatial averaging, not importance of seat-to-seat consistency. hence my comment.
zheka is offline  
post #185 of 191 Old 01-12-2013, 08:57 PM
 
Wayne Parham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
I guess since spatial averaging really just means smoothing, that comment could probably interpreted two different ways. One interpretation would be spatial averaging of the sound produced and the other would be spatial averaging of the measured datasets.

As for me, I would want spatial averaging of the sound field, and to know how well I achieved that, I would not want spatial averaging of the measured data.
Wayne Parham is offline  
post #186 of 191 Old 01-13-2013, 11:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,410
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1046 Post(s)
Liked: 885
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Parham View Post

But the multisub configuration is (or should be) intended to reduce seat-to-seat variation and improve smoothness of response, simultaneously. Otherwise, I see little point in going to the trouble to use multiple subs.
It's probably impossible to avoid getting both attributes simultaneously. Even if subs were being placed purely to minimize spatial variance, the frequency response will likely get smoother. Likewise, using subwoofer placement to improve frequency response will probably yield improvements (even if they are slight) in more than one seating location.

When the local home theatre group I belong to got a tour of Harman a few years back, I got a chance to ask Alan Devantier about the multi-sub investigations he worked on with Welti. They seem to be starting from the premise that EQ (manual or automated) would be used at some point during set up. Indeed with automatic room correction being ubiquitous on consumer gear, their premise was not incorrect.

However, one of the biggest concerns with EQ is that fixing a problem at one seat can cause problems elsewhere. For example, if you measure at 6 seating locations with Audyssey, it's not going to pull down a peak it sees at a couple of locations only to create dips at the other four seats. With that in mind, Devantier said that their goal was to get as close to the same response in every seat; doesn't matter if the response is crappy, just as long as it is as similar as possible across the seating area.

Once that is accomplished, you can apply global EQ without concern for ruining other seats. So, Welti & Devantier do have a point in using subwoofer placement exclusively for improving seat to seat consistency, with zero concern for improving the frequency response itself (that part comes later). Of course, for people that are not interested in more than one listening position and/or prefer not to use electronic equalization, this approach isn't for them.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #187 of 191 Old 01-13-2013, 12:08 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zheka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 1,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
In my room, the mid opposing walls position per Welti did not help with the modes and seat-to-seat consistency. The only pace where I could get a relatively smooth response was in the center of the room, though the over all SPL was lower there for some reason.
zheka is offline  
post #188 of 191 Old 01-13-2013, 12:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
zheka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 1,049
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Parham View Post

I guess since spatial averaging really just means smoothing, that comment could probably interpreted two different ways. One interpretation would be spatial averaging of the sound produced and the other would be spatial averaging of the measured datasets.

As for me, I would want spatial averaging of the sound field, and to know how well I achieved that, I would not want spatial averaging of the measured data.

What is "spatial averaging of the sound field" and how does one measure it?
zheka is offline  
post #189 of 191 Old 01-13-2013, 02:26 PM
 
Wayne Parham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 19
"Spatial averaging of the sound field" is just another way of saying smoothing over a wide area to achieve good response in every location in the listening area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdurani View Post

It's probably impossible to avoid getting both attributes simultaneously. Even if subs were being placed purely to minimize spatial variance, the frequency response will likely get smoother. Likewise, using subwoofer placement to improve frequency response will probably yield improvements (even if they are slight) in more than one seating location.

I agree, and in fact, that's the point of the multisub configuration - to get both simultaneously. It's not terribly difficult to get smooth response in one spot, but more difficult to get it over a wider range of listening positions. But like you said, adding more subs will probably make most spots smoother than having just one sub.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zheka View Post

In my room, the mid opposing walls position per Welti did not help with the modes and seat-to-seat consistency. The only pace where I could get a relatively smooth response was in the center of the room, though the over all SPL was lower there for some reason.

You know the two-opposing walls configuration is not the best Welti configuration. If it gave you smoother response in the center of the room, I guess it was working to some degree though. Still, I think I would have done the same thing you did - which is to make my placement choices based on models and/or measurements. With just two distributed subs, you really need to place them carefully.

Actually, as you know, if I only had a pair of subs, I'd run them in a flanking configuration. I'd only run distributed subs if I had three or four to work with. I always place the flanking subs as first priority, and then run one or two more distributed subs when possible for smoothing the lower frequency modes.
Wayne Parham is offline  
post #190 of 191 Old 04-07-2013, 06:44 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
kgveteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rochester NY
Posts: 5,706
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 38
I had an easy job when i did my multi sub system. i only had one couch with 3 to 4 positions. with my main quad sub set up it left a huge hole around 60hz. placing one sub on either side of the couch solved it. i'm not sure how that would work with multiple locations or LP. the AUX subs need to be as able as the mains though. my little 12's had a tough time when dialed in flat, i had to back them off as to not fry them, but as members stated it more likely the 240watt plate amp that was clipping....... i never got the chance to use another amp with the AUX subs to see if it was the amp or drivers.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
<Multi sub Thread


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
< Garage Audio !!!
kgveteran is offline  
post #191 of 191 Old 06-04-2013, 07:44 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
kgveteran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Rochester NY
Posts: 5,706
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Hello Gents. I am without a room at this time. All i can do is dream about my next system with all i've learned in my last room.

I think i would like to use my quad Tumults as side subs along with the QSC 1450's and Mini DSP. They will be the fill in subs or AUX subs.....

The Mains will be either quad RE XXX 18's or quad TC LMS's sealed, driven by LG ft14000 clones driving them, or a single, which ever. Those would be the two top contenders as i can see for a sealed system.... @ $900+ each either way they seem to be able to do single digits at the LP..

All i can do is dream for now........


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
<Multi sub Thread


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
< Garage Audio !!!
kgveteran is offline  
Reply DIY Speakers and Subs

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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

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