[-Richard-]

Yesterday I got together with Jim McCarthy here in Ojai to experiment with wings
 on the simple OB panels he made for me for my B200's...Jim is a master cabinet
 maker and extraordinary designer whose work is legendary...

 This is in preparation for building an OB for my new pair of Silver Iris Coaxials...

 I thought perhaps my experiences could shed some light on the subject of wings...

 My OB panels are made from 3/4 inch birch plywood 25" X 41.5"...the B200 is an eight
 inch driver and sits off center from side to side...7 inches from the top and 7 inches
 from the shortest side of each panel in a mirror image configuration for the pair...

 Jim used 1/4 inch mdf for the wings...a 16 " and a 10" rectangular wing that was
 cut to the full length of the baffle (41.5")...these were made only for this experiment...

 One side of each rectangular wing was glued to a 2" X 3/4" full length (41.5")
 wood strip with a 60 degree angle cut into one 3/4" side...that allowed each wing
 to stick out at a 60 degrees angle when the wood strip was clamped to the back of
 the panel with one side flush to the panels side edge...

 Being that the B200 driver is off center, I used the longer wing (16") to reflect that
 side of the front baffle that has more space from the driver to the side edge...
 and the shorter wing (10") to reflect the shorter distance of the driver to the
 other side edge...occasionally we tried switching them without a noticeable effect...

 The 2" X 3/4" wood stick had one 3/4" side that was perpendicular (normal) and
 one side that was cut at a 60 degree angle...the angled cut was used on the inside
 of the panel closer to the drivers...the normal 3/4 side flushed to the edge of back
 panel...the wing was pre-glued to the 3/4" side with the precut 60 degree angle
 (the 2" side rested against the back panel held in place with clamps)...

 This had the effect of allowing the wings to stick out at 60 degree angles from the
 back of the panel...Jim used 2 black plastic spring loaded clamps with orange
 grips to keep each wing in place...one on top and one on the bottom...since the
 wings were glued to the inside 3/4" edge of the wood sticks, it left the entire length
 of the wood strip free to accept the clamps anywhere along its length...

 This simple set up allowed us to continuously drop and then replace the wings quickly
 during certain musical passages, to hear the effects with them and without them,
 repeatedly...Jim conceived of this approach to allow us to experiment easily...
 and everything proceeded flawlessly...

 Jim comes to audio from the pro-audio side of things...he is an accomplished
 professional musician who still does gigs on a regular basis and is an accomplished
 composer who uses the computer to help him to process his musical creations...
 Jim is currently building preamps from a kit for his microphones so he could bring
 further control to his recording sessions...thus I was listening with someone who
 was a very sophisticated listener and was used to very critical aural discrimination...

 Jim selected CD's that illustrated different frequency levels and the characteristics
 of transient attacks through instrumental passages and voice...for example,
 drums kicks to see if the bass and attack was influenced by the presence (or absence)
 of the wings...tangled musical textures to see if the wings helped to separate the
 instruments...and so on...

 During our long audition period, Jim would jump up and remove the wings so we could
 hear the effect as the music was playing...he also would back up the CD so we
 could hear short passages for a particular sonic effect it contained...and this we
 did over and over and over again...comparing our aural judgments continuously...

 I should also mention that Jim relies very much on his own highly tuned judgment
 just as I do...so we did not try to influence each other with what we heard...

 Jim also moved the wings inward, closer to the driver at one point...
 about 1" away from either side of the driver...to see what effect this had...he also
 raised the wings to create a roughly 1 1/2 foot space off the floor and we listened
 to that effect as well...

 We also used 2 rooms in Jim's house...one that is very alive with tall ceilings
 and the other deader...with rugs and other absorbent surfaces...

 We used 2 different amps...my Single Ended Pentode tube integrated with tone
 controls and Jim's older SS NAD integrated from the late 70's...

 Here are the results: Both Jim and I felt that the wings deepened the frequency
 range very noticeably...Jim felt that with the wings in place, the front wave was
 more focused than the back wave...he thought he could hear that subtle distinction...
 so he attributed the highly focused front wave to musical information that was being
 thrust forward in the music...like the voice...the more diffused, yet just as noticeable
 lower frequency back wave musical information he attributed to the
 musics background "textures"...

 Jim described the bass as being "punchier" with the wings...

 That kind of distinction was not obvious to me...I did not hear the front and back
 wave as two distinct musical waves...each with its own characteristics...
 the greater lower frequency response and more fleshed out midrange sound
 from the use of wings on the B200 OB's sounded seamless and organic to me...

 We both felt that the mid-range, lower mid-range and upper base sounded much
 more "filled-in" or fleshed-out with the wings...and that was true in both rooms...
 the result was a much more harmonically rich presentation...

 The more we got used to listening to the baffles with and without the wings, the
 more obvious it became that without the wings the panels sounded much more
 diffused and less focused...

 The B200's in OB sounded noticeably better in Jim's deader room...much more
 focused and less expansive...the bass was tighter as well...

 Moving the wings closer to the drivers had a shrinking effect on the sound
 space and the voice and instruments suffered as well...an all-over congested
 presentation...

 Raising the wings to allow space below them and de-coupling them from the
 floor allowed Jim to fine-tune the sound to allow for a merging between the
 highly focused "full-winged" effect and the more lively but diffused "wingless" effect...
 in other words if the wings were designed to be raised and lowered one could
 use that to further fine tune the OB sound to better meet the characteristics of
 each room's sonic personality...in the very lively room the raised wings were
 preferable with certain music than the full wing, for example...

 When our listening session ended I took my OB's back to my house and set
 them up with the wings in place...later that evening, Deb and I sat down to listen
 attentively to some of our well experienced recordings...

 Deb's impressions bare out the fruits of her careful listening habits and experience
 with audio...she heard an all-over redection in scale of the voice and instruments...
 a most impressive observation...I knew immediately that she was right...I just was
 not able to put it into words...the more tightly focused presentation that the wings
 brought about altered the diffused sound that we had gotten used to over the last
 6 months of listening to the OB's wingless...

 The immediate result was a reduction in spaceousness...the very thing that I most
 admired in the OB's magical presentation...however in its place was a startling
 transparency that easily matched the new Quad electrostatic speakers with speed
 and an altogether ephemeral nature...I am still getting used to this new presentation...

 Deb also noticed that instrumental passages that had been buried in the all-over
 musical textures were suddenly revealed in a most emphatic manner...
 this was not subtle...it was as if we had switched amps...as if we were now
 using a $30,000. Super XXX tube amp that reviewers fall over each other to get a
 sample of for review, and then gush, drooling ink prose onto endless sheets
 of magazine paper...

 The voice was the most intimate presentation I have ever heard...every breath, every
 swallow was heard as part of the performers in-the-room realism...but on the other
 hand there was now something a bit cooler in the presentation as well...by that I
 mean a bit less warmth...but not less compelling...

 I think that the expansive characteristic of the OB's without wings gave the human
 voice a bit of a glow...like some tube amps do...especially the older generation of
 tube amps...which is very beguiling...but also a bit less intimate because the wings
 bring the voice "closer" to you...even if the glow has been trimmed back a bit...

 Here is where being able to raise the wings might be beneficial if one prefers
 a dose of the glow...but still wants to retain that illusive intimacy...perhaps they can
 be "blended" to taste...further experimentation might shed light on this "control"...

 To finish: Deeper bass, punchier, a greater harmonic fill in the mid-range and lower
 mid-range and upper bass, a more intimate presentation of the voice, a slightly
 cooler perspective, much greater focus, much greater awareness of instrumental
 presence/separation from the musical textures...

 Draw backs? Yes one so far: I cannot achieve a convincing sound stage between
 my baffles yet...so discreet musical information tends to stay near each driver...
 this is not true for every CD...sometimes the voice floats in the middle which helps
 to create the illusion of a real sound stage...

 The previous simple OB panel that was wingless created a remarkable
 sound stage...and an incredible spaciousness to the sonic picture not unlike
 huge horn speakers...

 In addition, the wings make the entire "speaker" a bit too large for my listening
 space...at least too large to move around easily in order to find the best position
 to create that illusive (for now anyway) sound stage...

 So I have things to experiment with...what is up next? Making the wing depth
 narrower...let's say 12 inches and 7 inches (instead of 16" and 10")...perhaps
 that would bring all the benefits listed above and give me a greater chance to
 render a sound stage...also perhaps the front baffle panel can be made to be
 narrower...

 Hope this helps...

 Warm Regards -Richard-

[jeffreybehr]

WOW, what a report, Richard, TYVM.

I've been fascinated by winged OB designs since my friend started looking for full-range* single-driver systems last year.   He's not the DIY type so I've not started anything yet, but I'm scheming.    

I currently use and LOVE Eminent Technology 8s and have improved them substantially since they were new last fall.  I've completely redone the crossover, eliminating the MR hi-pass filter**, and I'm actively biamping them.  

But back to baffles.  I've added a 14"-wide one to the MR sides of the 8s; that has added as much as 4dB to the sound of the power region of the orchestra, and that has allowed me to further lower the already-low bass lo-pass filter (3rd-order) to 35HZ!  I've posted a pic in the linked album.  Will be adding a 10"-wide baffle to the tweeter side and then reshaping them.

* they're never quite full-range, are they?
** They're driven full range by my new ASL Hurricanes in triode.

http://community.webshots.com/album/428279357pwCBqP[/u]

[TomekZ]

What a truly fine report. During the past month, I too have been playing around with wings on my open baffled Fostex F200a 8 inch drivers. (These drivers may not be considered appropriate for such a set up, but I'm playing with 'em and often liking what I hear).

The most certain thing is that the shape and positoning of the boards/baffles/wings can all be heard.

The drivers are on a tilted back panel 17" wide x 34" high. Their is a outer wing of about 13" that approaches the side walls and has been almost constantly in place. The main baffle is toed in.

So mostly, the experimenting has been with the inner wing. All that you, Richard have reported, I've also found to be.

*With a 10 inch inner wing at about 60 degrees back, there is a blurring of the center fill of the stage. Moved almost 90 degrees back helps relieve the blurring. Probably hearing the front wave bounced back off angle by this inner wing

*Taking away the inner wing completely and the stage fills in nicely. Images are more located. There is greater space, a freer sound. A sparkle. The inner wing always seems to makes for a left-left / right-right sound.

*The inner wing does help the lower frequencies a lot. Darn it anyways.

So I'm trying to compromise,

*Now I like a short inner/center 5 inch wing straight back at 90 degrees.

A Wright Sound 3.2 (2a3 SET) has been the usual amp.

[JoshK]

Sorry if this post it sort of off the mark, I haven't read this thread in entirety but I thought I'd offer one idea that might help out if it works.

One could take two pair of B200s and wire them for a 1.5 way speaker (two drivers in series with an inductor in between).  This is quite often used in 2.5 way designs where the ".5 woofer" is used in this fashion to overcome the -6db rolloff from baffle step, also called the baffle step woofer.  In this configuration the first woofer before the inductor plays full range and the BSW only plays the lower range (chosen by size of inductor) to help fill in the bottom (that you are loosing because of dipole configuration).

Then the imagined baffle I conceive would have no wings on the upper portion where the upper woofer is placed, and have 90º "wings" (also called a U baffle) on the lower portion with the BSW to help lower the supported frequency.  

This setup would not be all that different from the NoBox except that the network would be a lot simpler.   I am not sure it would still be flea power worthy or not.

[J North]

Sorry if this post it sort of off the mark, I haven't read this thread in entirety but I thought I'd offer one idea that might help out if it works.

One could take two pair of B200s and wire them for a 1.5 way speaker (two drivers in series with an inductor in between).  This is quite often used in 2.5 way designs where the ".5 woofer" is used in this fashion to overcome the -6db rolloff from baffle step, also called the baffle step woofer.  In this configuration the first woofer before the inductor play ...

Here's something similar to what you are proposing except the XO is "mechanical":

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=811094#post811094

[JLM]

I'd try using with the drivers offset so that the close side is away from the center, then adding wings to just the close sides, so that you have wing reinforcement to the sides and large open baffle towards the center.

[JohninCR]

TomekZ,

A few of my finding regarding wings.

If they connect to the baffle well away from the driver, then they become reflectors of the rear wave.  I prefer to start angled wings right next to the driver cutout to avoid this, but you do have to be careful of horn loading effects.

Once you use folded wings, you want to be careful not to cause the distance over the top to be the shortest distance or the waves will flow that way.  The last thing you want is to funnel the high frequency content of the rear wave toward the ceiling.  Typically some type of angled top cap is needed.

The disjointed center soundstage created by the rear wave you and Richard are reporting is likely to be a combination of both.

I've also had more luck with wings that are deepest and the floor and at least somewhat angled to be not as deep at the top.

Those wings also seem too deep.  The B200 isn't going to make deep bass anyway, so don't even try.  I'm able to get away with even deeper wings than those with my Silver Iris baffles, but they don't have nearly the HF content in the rear wave that a B200 has.

That's my 2 cents.

[mcgsxr]

Nice to see some experimentation going on, and some insightful sharing around the results.

In the manner that I built my winged baffles, I am unable to directly A/B them, so it is interesting to hear from others who can/have.

I found that the addition of the top piece (a short panel attached over the driver to increase the effective distance up over the top) helped balance the sound more, but for me, the biggest change in the sound, has been synergy, or lack thereof, around amps.

Amps that don't play well, come off sounding extremely thin.  Amps that play well, come off rich, and lovely.  Odd, but that is what is up in my basement.

I am still finding the JVC EX A1 to be the best amp for my OB visatons, with a gainclone 2nd, then the Panny receivers utilizing the digital input and leveraging the tone controls to boost the bass, then the Panny with flat response, tied with the Teac A700-LP that I used, both modded and stock.

Looking forward to hearing about those bass augmenters...

[gilbodavid]

Nice experiments. I now have three B200's, one repairable, and will start my OB quest very shortly, to help with the experiments. Thankyou Richard, john et al for your efforts on behalf of all of us

[JohninCR]

TomekZ,

At a minimum you can always A/B with one new version and one old version on each channel plus balance control for the comparison.  I always start any comparison that way.  Listening to just one speaker you can hear the actual differences and to me it's the best test of any speaker because there's no stereo illusion to hide behind, or in this case, next to.

[gilbodavid]

B200's in their open baffles (chipboard), and running in. Been going for about 10 hours. First impressions are that they take almost as much power to drive them as my Quad esl57's, through my 7W triode monos. Very strange. Sound is ok, but nothing special as yet. Am hoping that breakin performs wonders

[gilbodavid]

Well. 30 hrs and things are starting to open up. They are starting to sound rather good. Not yet at Quad level, and that treble peak's a bit wild. I'll be sticking stuff on its backside i think. Bass seems definately to go a bit lower than the Quads, which is interesting, as several hi fi pundits in the UK suggest a single high quality sub is sufficient for the quads.

As an aside, just plugged in my modded sonic impact, having just set up one of Nuuk's SMPS's, and I do believe its already better than it was with an SLA battery, more alive and musical, though nowhere near me SET's... hold on, ... my oh my... its amazing what 10 minutes warming up does to an SMPS and a SI. suddenly its faster, tighter in the base, and, dare i say it, musical!!! Perhaps its the easier load allowing the Si room to breath, maybe its the SMPS doing its thing. Still that wondeful SET bounce and swing eludes it, but its certainly closer. Another 70 hrs to the 100 hrs on the B200's and I'm starting to get really into this on all fronts.  

Another interesting point here that Richard has alluded to is the "OB sound" which even wings can dampen. I have to say that after my 5 years of quads, this is a very familiar sound, and one that I like richard, love dearly. the experience of voices and instruments hanging in the air in front of me, the speakers doing their dissappearing act, and me closing my eyes, and feeling like I can reach out and touch the musicians, is a concept that I read often in the audiophile world, but I think is not  truly experienced until one really locks in electrostatics or, it seems, OB's in a room. Then the magic opens up and the musician's very emotions and souls make themselves known to me.

Like Richard's wife, Debby, I play music, on pianos and guitars, and when noone else is around, I sing. The soul of a piano or a guitar is what I search for and attempt to harmonise with when i play, and being unable to connect with an instruments soul is a depressing experience. This may seem farfetched, but one of the most amazing musical experiences of my life was walking into my siser-in-law's house one xmas morning, and hearing a Chopin piano sonata being played with the soul of Chopin himself. It was sublime, like I've heard perhaps twice live ever. The music died 10 seconds after I walked in, and I entered the lounge to see my partner Debby's brother Bob walking away from the piano. i almost burst into tears.

you see Bob, has a Steinway Grand in his living room, and he is a master of his craft far beyond the many "greats" I have seen in London's Great halls and beyond, but the piano at Debby's sister's house, that Bob was walking away from, is a dog, an excuse for a piano, and one that I play for 2 minutes and leave in disgust and boredom. How bob made it sing like the greatest of pianos I'll never know. to me it was a miracle.

That's why I own my Quads, and am not amazed by Richards eloquence and excitement over this OB project that we seem to be immersed in.

Meanwhile its The The, and Infected, to blow the cobwebs away...

[-Richard-]

Hi gilbodavid,

I use a 6 watt Single Ended Pentode tube amp with my B200's...I find it provides
more than enough power...however on DVD's the amp must be turned up to
12 o'clock sometimes rather than their usual 8 or sometimes 9 o'clock setting...

So the draw on my amp seems to be media dependent...the B200's are 96db
sensitive...and Open Baffles have no cabinet in which to build resistance for
its pistonic action...which means the drivers work extremely efficiently making
low watt amplification very friendly indeed...

However these drivers need to burn-in for at least 200 hours for you to get a
feeling for their sonic personality...and 1000 hours is even better...

Give us some details about your baffles and room and position...especially  if
you are finding after an appropriate burn-in period you are still not getting
the magic these drivers have in spades...

Warm Regards -Richard-

[-Richard-]

Hi Gilbodavid,

If you are hearing a peak in the upper frequencies it must be a burn-in issue...
and if not I would look into the amp issue as well...

My reason for saying this is that the B200 in OB has a very refined highly
resolved and "organic" upper frequency sound...violins...which in many ways
may be the most difficult instrument to get right from any speakers...sound
silky and remarkably rich with resonance...the most perfect resolution I have
ever heard from any speaker...

I like the Quads very much Gilbodavid, one of my favorite speakers in fact...
And your take on what is possible in terms of the "transcendent" movement of the
soul in the presence of beautifully rendered music is a lovely description of what
music is capable of...I am most interested to hear your thoughts as your
OB's burn-in...

Incidentally...which SET are you using?

Warm Regards -Richard-

[JLM]

Have any of the OB experimenters here tried adding sound absorbing material to the front and/or back of the baffles, like Hawthorne Audio does?  Darrel's idea was that the sound from one speaker reflects off the baffle of the other.  If you follow the discussions around providing wide spectrum absorption it might set you back realizing that this could add 6 inches to the baffle thickness.

[gilbodavid]

Thanks for the comments, richard. i'm embaresed to say i dont know what type of SET's i run. They were made by a guy i know before i knew that SET is like wine.  60 hrs now, and the sound is definately changing for the better. I'm becoming impatient for the 200hr mark, when i can really compare speakrs, but the B200's are looking more and more promissing. Its way cool to have exceptional Quads to compare them to befor and after runin. The possability of being able to sell the Quads, and not do my back in moving them and having my speakers "tied" to electric sockets is seriously enticing!!

[-Richard-]

Hi gilbodavid,

I am very familiar with the sound of the Quads which as I have already
mentioned I especially like...you may find it of interest that when I put
fairly "wide" wings on my basic straight board OB's and tilted them back
about 60 degrees what I heard was remarkably close to the ultratransparency
of the Quads...I was quite amazed actually...

Ultimately I opted for a richer and more dynamic sonic picture...
I turned my baffles upside down and I am using very narrow wings that are
only 3 inches "wide" (at the same 60 degree angle)...

The thing that is so remarkable to me is the ability to fine "tune" the OB's to
change their sonic character...something you may want to explore once you
have allowed your B200's to burn-in for let's say 500 hours...it could be less
of course but my B200's are still improving and they are close to 1000 hours...

Incidentally...I was told by a prominant speaker designer that most speaker
designers keep a pair of Quads hidden away in a back room which they use
to compare their ongoing designs to...a classic reference that has never been
bettered in commercial offerings...

However the B200 in OB is equally seductive...for me more so...because they
combine the transparency of the Quads and the dipole back wave harmonically
layered richness with the pistonic driver dynamics that puts real flesh on
the musical bone...the result is a timbrel distinctiveness that makes each
instruments unique characteristics come alive...

Keep us informed...I am most interested in your insights...thanks for sharing
with us...

Warm Regards -Richard-