[Ultralight]

In another circle, I asked this question in passing while discussing other questions.  I figure it is worth a specific ask here.

There are a number of approaches to speaker design.  (Box, Open Baffle, Flat Panel etc.)  Each has its adherents. For example, there are many who like the OB sound which is supposed to be more 'open' and 'airy' etc.  The OB circles has more posts than this circle - so there is at least no lack of interest.

However, at the retail level, box speakers absolutely dominates.  Why is this?  What are the advantages of box speakers that overcomes the additional cost of a contructed box compared to the likes of OB or panel speakers? 

Thanks!
UL

[RDavidson]

I think it is two-fold
1. Consumers have accepted the form factor of boxed speakers.
2. Boxed speakers behave or can be designed to behave in a predictable manner (generally).....so they can perform (as designed/specified) in perhaps a wider range of environments / applications.

[srb]

My take on it is size, bass and placement.

All but the larger panels seem to need a subwoofer.  I see many OB speakers that are augmented with 4 x 15" OB woofers.  Yet there is no shortage of relatively compact box floorstanders with a pair of 8" or a single 10" that seem to satisfy the bass requirements for the majority of people.

I think that most panel and OB speakers also need to be placed further out into the room than box enclosures and often dominate the room.

Steve

[Guy 13]

My take on it is size, bass and placement.

All but the larger panels seem to need a subwoofer.  I see many OB speakers that are augmented with 4 x 15" OB woofers.  Yet there is no shortage of relatively compact box floorstanders with a pair of 8" or a single 10" that seem to satisfy the bass requirements for the majority of people.

I think that most panel and OB speakers also need to be placed further out into the room than box enclosures and often dominate the room.

Steve

Hi Steve,
I am and have been the owner of both OB and box speakers
and your description/explanation is right on.
Since I have now lots of room, I will stay with OB,
be later on, I will probably go with box speakers,
because of less space,
it's too bad, because I love the sound of OB speakers.
Sorry to have barged in like that.
Just want to share.

Guy 13 on planet Vietnam.
 

[steve f]

Box speakers are the norm. Various panel and open baffle types are very space intrusive. People can't fit them into their lives. If you live in an apartment, you need portability, and unobtrusive speakers. It has nothing to do with sound quality. Just size and cost.

Steve

[JLM]

Speakers were put into sealed/ported boxes to extend bass performance.  So smaller boxes can produce the same bass as an open panel/diaphragm/horn designs.  As I spent years trying to get into the low wattage scene, I came to realize how conditioned listeners can become to a lack of deep bass (to the point of becoming "allergic" to realistic amounts of bass).  This occurs because of the power required to generate bass energy.  I believe this conditioning is the same for the O.B. crowd. 

The whole dipole concept of projecting in and out of phase sound waves into the room makes no sense to me.  (What sound source, other than a gong, naturally generates sound from a vertical dipole?)  The created time smears confuse the brain, making precise imaging virtually impossible without a huge room (to provide enough distance for sufficient time delay of the back wave to allow the brain to separate direct/indirect waves and to not block the back waves with the huge baffles needed to generate even mid-bass).

Sound waves are 1130 feet divided by frequency (in Hertz) long.  That's nearly 20 feet for a 60 Hz signal and over 4 feet for middle C (256 Hz).  So what dipole effect for bass (or lower midrange) can be hoped for in a typically sized baffle?  Below high C (512 Hz) you're basically listening to the raw driver(s) not dipole effect.

[steve f]

JLM,

I tend to agree with you. And I own one of the best OB designs around. Linkwitz Orions. All OB speakers need very careful placement, and take up too much real estate. I hate moving them in and out between listening sessions. And yeah people get acclimated to a type of sound.  It's kind of like using single driver speakers. I've noticed that a lot of single driver guys, and a couple of companies, add tweeters and subwoofers to their systems. Or they own a lot of girl with a guitar music.

The trouble with playing recorded music in a room tends to be the room itself. Designs are needed that take normal rooms into account. Most of us would probably prefer a speaker that doesn't sit six feet out in a room. And who really has two good corners in their living room either? We shouldn't need to pad rooms with diffusers, and have just a narrow sweet spot for listening.

Steve

[mcgsxr]

In short, lifestyle products rule. 

High WAF, low perceived space requirements, and easy to setup and use.

I have run OB speakers in the past, and found they sounded great to me.  They were of course DIY at my budget.  They were 3x4 foot folded open baffles, so they were enormous by modern standards.  They got the boot when the basement was finished into a 2nd family room, and "other users" started to come into the space I previously had to myself.

I have returned to small box speakers, and still enjoy my system.

I'd suggest that predictable results with minimal setup woes, for average users is why boxed speakers dominate.

[JohnR]

Implementing OB well basically requires an active system. That's probably the biggest reason for not finding too many (if any) in hifi stores.

[Tyson]

Box speakers are easier to place because they tend to sound mediocre no matter where you put them.  OB speakers sound better to my ears even when jammed into the corners.  The downside of OB is that large woofers are required for strong bass.  And since they don't pressurize the room the same way that box speakers do, some feel that they lack bass.  But IMO, the bass is more accurate/correct.

So the reason OB is less popular has nothing to do with sound (where OB excels) but rather because of size issues.  But what kind of man are you if you let your spouse dictate what you can have based on that?  Might as well just throw in the towel completely and get a bose lifestyle system.  It will save you a lot of money and make the most important person in the house happy (ie, not you).

[Wayner]

Well, that's mighty big talk! (quote from Clint Eastwood).

I just finished working on a restoration project, working on some 45+ year old Altec Lansing Valencia speakers that will blow any OB out of the water, while using about 3 WRMS of power. The fact is, lots of older, "big Box" speakers dominated the music (and movie) scene years ago. For many reasons, they have faded away, but there is still a huge fan base for them. These speakers were rather large (like 2' x 2' x 1 1/2') and featured a 15" woofer with massive magnet assemblies and horned tweeter that crossed over at 800 hz. Even to this day, they are a technological marvel, at least to these ears.

Happy New Year!

Wayner

[steve f]

You guys are a riot! 

[lowtech]

JohnR has the correct answer.  Anyone who disagrees does not have a firm grasp of the subject matter.

To add, most drivers used in "exotic" speakers are not well suited for OB use (even if they are actively driven).  OB also means less wood and that means less for manufacturers to promote (and up-charge for) and less for audiophiles to gush over.

[JohnR]

These speakers were rather large (like 2' x 2' x 1 1/2') and featured a 15" woofer with massive magnet assemblies

A wide baffle has benefits in terms of balancing the power response of the speaker. (See: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Acapella_WB.htm) Makes it more like an OB But I generalize

[Russell Dawkins]

The whole dipole concept of projecting in and out of phase sound waves into the room makes no sense to me.  (What sound source, other than a gong, naturally generates sound from a vertical dipole?) 

Because it makes no sense to you does not mean it makes no sense - sorry. 

As to dipolar musical instruments; the soundboard of a grand piano is basically a dipole radiator, albeit horizontal, and it sounds good near and far even though the listener is more or less in what should be the null zone. A kick drum is a dipole radiator with or without the front skin and it would seem to defy the notion that huge baffles are needed for bass. And have you ever heard an orchestral bass drum, live, in a theatre? There's a baffle-less dipole of around 5' diameter with prodigious bass output that precious few home playback systems duplicate with any degree of plausibility - ported, sealed or open baffle, planar or cone type.
By the way, much of the output of the port or passive radiator in a box speaker is out of phase in varying degrees to the direct output from the front of the cone driver(s).

[JohnR]

Thank you, Russell

[Ultralight]

Thank you to ALL who responded.  Keep it coming - I find your posts very informative.

Overall, it does seem that the main reasons given for why OB is not in the retail channel is due to its size and demanding setup.  I note with interest that the reasons stated are for the most part, not about deficiency in its musical performance.  I had expected otherwise.  For me, this seems to indicate that along with boxed speakers, OB is worth exploring if one is willing to 'pay the price' to set it up properly. 

As a side note, I do like the SET tube sound so doing an active system for an OB with that may mean active woofers and SET for the mids/tweeters.

if I had any concern, ti seems that many think the OB sound is more diffused and thus offer less pinpoint imaging.  Regardless of whether live music is pinpoint or not, i do find the pinpoint imaging very engaging. But that is grist for another post in the OB forum.

I do realize that we are drifting off topic a little from my original post but I am fine with that if you guys are.

And also thanks for some of the hilarious responses.  Always appreciate the jovial and friendly tone.

UL

[Russell Dawkins]

If I had any concern, it seems that many think the OB sound is more diffused and thus offer less pinpoint imaging.  Regardless of whether live music is pinpoint or not, i do find the pinpoint imaging very engaging.

UL

I like pin point imaging also, so it is worth mentioning that by far the most palpable, coherent and life-size imaging I have ever heard (and I have been listening critically for about 50 years since I built my first serious boxes) came from a very carefully set up pair of middle-of-the-range Martin Logans (hybrid curved panel electrostatics) driven by a YBA amplifier and listened to in the near field in the centre of a large room. I have never heard anything so closely resembling a sonic holograph as this true Blumlein recording - the image of the grand piano was utterly detached from, and behind, the speakers. It was truly as if the speakers were not playing at all - absolutely no sound seemed to be emanating from them. Also, I knew what the recording should sound like as I made it myself and knew what processing had been done to it (none!).
David Janszen makes a couple of clever hybrid electrostats which are unique as far as I know in being monopolar - the back wave is absorbed - so they don't need to be so far out in the room to work to maximum advantage.

[JLM]

So to get back on topic, can anyone please explain how the dipole effect from a 3 foot wide baffle applies to a 20 foot long bass wave (60 Hz) any better than the raw driver itself?


Russell - I believe the points you've made in regard to imaging is not box versus dipole, but:

1.) The importance of the quality of the recording, something that is extremely variable.

2.) Possibly the power of the brain to imagine (or in this case recall).


Should the home listener not prefer to use the same basic technology (box versus dipole) to recreate what the studio, mixing, and final production staff used (assuming the goal was to endeavor to recreate a quality recording).

[Wayner]

Listening room size plays a huge roll in producing low bass tones.