Limited edition new NX-Otica and NX-Treme models coming soon too.

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 50380 times.

Chops

What's the point of the "wing" on one side of the OB?

I understand the point of using a wing on both sides such as a U-frame baffle, but this L or J-frame doesn't make sense to me.

Also, having that wing along side the MTM section, doesn't that create some sort of odd reflections or resonances being that close to the mids? I would think it would also close in the sound stage some.

Of course, I could be, and probably am completely wrong about all of that. Never hurts to ask though.

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
What's the point of the "wing" on one side of the OB?

I understand the point of using a wing on both sides such as a U-frame baffle, but this L or J-frame doesn't make sense to me.

Also, having that wing along side the MTM section, doesn't that create some sort of odd reflections or resonances being that close to the mids? I would think it would also close in the sound stage some.

Of course, I could be, and probably am completely wrong about all of that. Never hurts to ask though.

What the wing or wings do is separate the front and back waves to allow a lower extension.

You can only use a U or V shaped frame in low frequency ranges only. If frequency comes up high enough to allow a wavelength to propagate within the U or V baffle then it will set up a cavity resonance. So basically in this application anything playing over 200Hz can only use a single wing.

The angled wing around the MTM section doesn't create any odd reflections and it is not loaded or pressurized in any way. So there is no resonance issues from it either.

Chops

What the wing or wings do is separate the front and back waves to allow a lower extension.

You can only use a U or V shaped frame in low frequency ranges only. If frequency comes up high enough to allow a wavelength to propagate within the U or V baffle then it will set up a cavity resonance. So basically in this application anything playing over 200Hz can only use a single wing.

The angled wing around the MTM section doesn't create any odd reflections and it is not loaded or pressurized in any way. So there is no resonance issues from it either.

Okay, that all makes sense except for allowing for lower extension. The reason I can't understand it (and I understand OB's as I've built several) is because you have one side that has a distance about a meter or more separating the front and rear wave which makes sense. However, on the other side there's only a few inches separating the front and rear wave.

So while the wing side may allow an extra 100 Hz extension, the short side might only allow a 5-10 Hz extension (just made up figures mind you). So does this type of one-sided wing sort of halve that result and get you something like a 50 Hz extension overall instead?

Trust me Danny, I'm not doubting any of this at all, or you for that matter. I'm just trying to figure out how it all works out together.  :wink:

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
Okay, that all makes sense except for allowing for lower extension. The reason I can't understand it (and I understand OB's as I've built several) is because you have one side that has a distance about a meter or more separating the front and rear wave which makes sense. However, on the other side there's only a few inches separating the front and rear wave.

So while the wing side may allow an extra 100 Hz extension, the short side might only allow a 5-10 Hz extension (just made up figures mind you). So does this type of one-sided wing sort of halve that result and get you something like a 50 Hz extension overall instead?

Trust me Danny, I'm not doubting any of this at all, or you for that matter. I'm just trying to figure out how it all works out together.  :wink:

Adding the short wing that is two inches deep is not the sme thing as adding two more inches to the long one. And the short wing really doesn't add extension. It can change the response in adding gain and in decreasing gain in the area above where it adds gain by shifting the knee to a lower range.

When I get a chance I'll post some curves so you can see what happens.

Oscillate

Danny, if it is not a proprietary question, then is there a 'rule of thumb'
ratio for the midwoofer wing depth to the width of the front baffle?

...asked from the perspective of someone with amateur aspirations of
creating an OB line source from inexpensive 'close out / discontinued'
drivers
:)

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
Danny, if it is not a proprietary question, then is there a 'rule of thumb'
ratio for the midwoofer wing depth to the width of the front baffle?

...asked from the perspective of someone with amateur aspirations of
creating an OB line source from inexpensive 'close out / discontinued'
drivers
:)

Keep in mind that the front baffle represents forward reflecting surface reflections. Ideally you want zero forward reflecting surface reflections. And the bigger and wider the front baffle is more all those surface reflections make the sound appear to play at you from the baffle. A big wide baffle might as well be in an in-wall speaker.

Wing depth and short side wing (in some cases) all has to do with the drivers natural response and roll off and how to control or manipulate it without having to add passive or active correction. So it can vary with each application.

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
New measured curves that include the lower four woofers.

On axis response:



Spectral decay:



Crossover points:



Vertical off axis:



Horizontal off axis response:



Impedance response:



This all looks really great and I am really pleased with it.

Peter J

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1214
  • Hmmmm
Were the original measurements done with only the top three drivers connected?

 I suck at this stuff Danny, could you do some remedial explanation (again) of what we're looking at in some context a dumb woodworker can grapple with.

Captainhemo

They are looking  very good to me Peter

remeber, it's a  5 db scale so it looks rougher than it actually is. There would  appear to be a bit of a peak around 18-19 KHz but that is getting pretty high in the response to worry about ( I think)
The waterfall shows there is not much energy being stored, it's all falling off  evenly and fairly quckly (again,I think I'm reading that ight).
The off axis  response is very similar to the  actual response which is exellent  !!

I can't wait to get the pair down to you Danny !! And the Extremes    :thumb:

jay

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
Were the original measurements done with only the top three drivers connected?

Yes, and with a different tweeter.

Quote
I suck at this stuff Danny, could you do some remedial explanation (again) of what we're looking at in some context a dumb woodworker can grapple with.

Here is a really good explaination regarding the way I measure speakers and some good examples of how speakers typically measure. http://www.stereomojo.com/Small%20Speaker%20Shootout%202007/StereomojoSmallSpeakerShootout2007Measurements.htm

Peter J

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1214
  • Hmmmm
Yes, and with a different tweeter.

Here is a really good explaination regarding the way I measure speakers and some good examples of how speakers typically measure. http://www.stereomojo.com/Small%20Speaker%20Shootout%202007/StereomojoSmallSpeakerShootout2007Measurements.htm

Concerning the tweeter, did I miss something? Both neos?


Ahhh, just the ticket in the link. I work with this stuff infrequently so it's just not always intuitive to me. The explanations are very helpful.

You've raised another question for me though. I think you mentioned earlier that the response dropped off significantly below 60 Hz. This was just the top section?

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
Concerning the tweeter, did I miss something? Both neos?

Yes, I have been testing with the standard Neo 3 pdr and the custom units that I got from Serenity.

Quote
Ahhh, just the ticket in the link. I work with this stuff infrequently so it's just not always intuitive to me. The explanations are very helpful.

Good.

Quote
You've raised another question for me though. I think you mentioned earlier that the response dropped off significantly below 60 Hz. This was just the top section?

No, that was with the lower four playing. The MTM woofers crossover near 160Hz.

david45

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 103
Hey Danny,

Glad to hear the x-otica speakers sound even better than you expected. Have you had the chance to spend some more time measuring/listening to the NX version?

Cheers,

David

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
Hey Danny,

Glad to hear the x-otica speakers sound even better than you expected. Have you had the chance to spend some more time measuring/listening to the NX version?

Cheers,

David

I am being sent a pair of the flat packs to finalize. And then I will build out a pair and make sure I don't want to change or tweak something.

After that they will be made available.

Captainhemo

They're coming guys...  going from  paper to CNC cutting  has been  more work than we envisioned but we are almost there..  Some custom tooling and material is on the way and if all goes according to plan, cutting  will commence next week for the pair going to Danny and a pair to assemble here to be sure no issues exist. We're trying to keep thiese as simple to assemble as possible  but there is some complexity in the design/cutting, lots of angles and radii.

The Extremes will follow soon after.

Also worth noting is we'll be running off some pairs of  both dual and triple H-frames which we'll make available in either a  flush mount top  or the over hang we've seen in other posts

-jay  :beer:

Danny Richie

  • Facilitator
  • Posts: 12638
    • http://www.gr-research.com
They're coming guys...  going from  paper to CNC cutting  has been  more work than we envisioned but we are almost there..  Some custom tooling and material is on the way and if all goes according to plan, cutting  will commence next week for the pair going to Danny and a pair to assemble here to be sure no issues exist. We're trying to keep thiese as simple to assemble as possible  but there is some complexity in the design/cutting, lots of angles and radii.

The Extremes will follow soon after.

Also worth noting is we'll be running off some pairs of  both dual and triple H-frames which we'll make available in either a  flush mount top  or the over hang we've seen in other posts

-jay  :beer:

And for everyone ordering these please keep in mind that the cost of the flat pack has to cover the development time of a lot of programming, and a lot of work to make these go together easily for you.

These are going to really be worth it though. They will be a benchmark for a long time.

Captainhemo

Hey Folks
Thought I'd share some  photos of  progress on these  cabinets with everyone. I know this has taken a bit longer than anticipated,  this has been  a lot  tougher than we ever anticiplated.  Rest asured,  , here is one of the  cabinets dry fitted  that will go out to Danny  within the next  day or  two.  We are  plannin to glue up a pair ourselves this weekend so  I'll share more pics soon.

These bases will be  mirrored , one specifically for each side, and the pics don't do them justice, they are pretty cool


The bases have  3 dowels and 2 screws for each wing   to ensure alignemnt is correct (these will come in the kits)

(cold outside, had to work in the kiitchen !!)















Still a couple minor  tweaks to make but these are getting very close to being avasilable, features and details to follow soon.

We are alos considering producing a version that will be  almost identical but will accomadate the   design of the X-Ottica,  curiouos to know if there would be  much interest in such  a product

Sorry guys, I obciouisly forgot to get one of the  front of the cabinets.  I'll get one soon !!
-jay

ebag4

Jay, I really like the way you handled the back cutout for the face of the NEO3.   I love my Wedgies but I have this illness that makes me want to build these as well.  :? :lol: :thumb:

Best,
Ed

Captainhemo

Jay, I really like the way you handled the back cutout for the face of the NEO3.   I love my Wedgies but I have this illness that makes me want to build these as well.  :? :lol: :thumb:

Best,
Ed

Thanks Ed ,
This  was  something we watned to be spot on, we wanted that tweeter to sit in a pocket   and be  right up against the backside of the wave guide just like the  face plate of the Neo 3 PDR .

Unfortunately,k I haven't heard these yet.... Don  has spent many, many hours listening to my system ... he has only heard one of these at Danny;'s but keeps telling me  how  surprised/impressed I am going to be !!.  Can't wait :beer:

jay

jzexport

Danny:

I feel for you over the Neo 3 supply situation. With so many of your designs dependent on it, it has to hurt. What is the status about renewed delivery?

I have been looking for an open baffle kit to build. Went all the way through the Wedgie thread only to find that it, too, was impacted by the Neo supply problem. I thought they, with the still undisclosed bass section, would be the answer for me.

Now, I see these NX-Otica, and think they could work. The NX-Treme is just too tall for me (read WAF). I wonder why you went to 16 inch driver design over the LGK?

The issue I have with buying the NX-Otica is the need for subwoofers. I have two JL Audio f113s, but as you know, those are sealed boxes. I really want open baffle bass. To get open baffle bass with the NX-Otica, it seems I will need another stack of speakers, which is undesirable (WAF again, without even asking). Is it possible to take two of the bass woofers and replace them with servo woofers in a U, W or H configuration? It seems those would fit within the cabinet. The speakers would then be 4-ways.

Josh