Narrow Baffle versus Wide Baffle

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 2888 times.

daveapex

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 5
Narrow Baffle versus Wide Baffle
« on: 28 Oct 2013, 05:00 am »
I noticed Omega is using wide baffles on the system enclosures and narrow baffles in the DIY picture gallery. I must guess both of these have specific advantages. I would like to know if this is correct and what each strength and/or weakness either has versus the other. I am thinking of using two 7A's in each bass reflex type enclosure. Does this also make a difference of which baffle type is best. Mainly listening to Santana, Pink Floyd, and other classic rock bands.
Thanks

JLM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 10744
  • The elephant normally IS the room
Re: Narrow Baffle versus Wide Baffle
« Reply #1 on: 28 Oct 2013, 10:49 am »
Like most things in life, choosing baffle width involves trade offs.  It has nothing to do with commercial versus DIY considerations.  Sometimes it's as simply as needing to account for driver width and side wall thicknesses or making best use of available material (substrate or veneer) sizes.

Sound waves (in air, near sea level) are 1100 ft long divided by the frequency (in Hz).  So a 100 Hz sound wave is 11 feet long, 10,000 Hz sound wave is 0.11 feet (1.3 inches) long, 20 Hz sound wave is 55 ft long.  As a sound wave approaches a 'boundary' (in this case the edge of the baffle) it either wraps around it or 'can't make the turn' and continues straight past the face of the surface (again in this case the face of the baffle).  Sound waves that are relatively long compared to the size of the baffle tend to wrap around the speaker, filling the entire space (all of your room) around the cabinet.  Sound waves that are relatively short only fill the space in front of the baffle.  This phenomenon is called 'baffle step' and results in loss of energy (loudness) in front of the baffle for those longer sound wave (lower frequencies).  Typical speaker design compensate by adding a simple baffle step filter that correspondingly reduce higher frequency loudness.

Narrow baffles (slightly) raise the frequency where baffle step occurs (so the baffle step filter is driver/cabinet dependent).  Narrow baffles also interfere less with sound wave dispersion, thereby improving imaging but all other factors being equal can sound 'thinner'.  Frankly the performance difference is minimal and can probably be caulked up more to the eyes telling the ears what they should be expected to hear.

Wide baffles do the opposite (can sound 'fuller') and better accommodate the radiation patterns of dipole designs that have in-phase drivers facing front and back.

Proper design of the baffle step filter or circuit (often abbreviated as BSC) accounts for baffle width.  Frankly modern design fashion considerations (visually smaller is cool, Wife Acceptance Factor - WAF) and smaller living spaces have driven baffle width more than anything else.


Your choice of musical genre typically slants toward big high efficiency woofer/tweeter speakers with 'big bass' (exaggerated/loose mid-bass and harsh treble), like a PA speaker found at concerts.  A wise man decades ago suggested to me that since this genre is so full of exaggerations already, why exaggerate the sound further.  I congratulate you for seeking this wiser path that will allow you to hear the actual performance, function within the reasonable limits of domestic restraints, and avoid the listener fatigue associated with added exaggerations. 

Canada Rob

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1075
Re: Narrow Baffle versus Wide Baffle
« Reply #2 on: 28 Oct 2013, 06:54 pm »
Hello daveapex,

I have heard quite a few Omega speakers and Hoyt-Bedford speakers over the years ranging from the narrow baffled Super 3i to the wide baffled Super 3XRS with the medium baffled Hoyt-Bedfords in between.  All of them are winners - not a dud in the lot.  You may have seen this link but here it is anyway.  Maybe it will help.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=544490