[zobsky]

Can someone explain the difference  in performance between these 2 W-baffle driver baffle alignments (magnet to cone a-la LInkwitz) vs. cone to cone. In both alignments, the drivers are wired such that the cones move towards and away from each other in unison.

From what I read, the Linkwitz alignment cancels out cabinet vibrations. Why won't the other (more symetric) cone-cone alignment do so too (I'd imagine subjective benefits too from having the full driver area fire directly at the listener)?

Thanks

[scorpion]

Someone with more knowledge should answer:

1st: 2nd order distortion is supposed to be lowerd by the inverse Push-Pull arrangment.
2nd: It really doesn't matter

/Erling

[zobsky]

From my recent education on this matter , I can add the following

If you consider imaginary X (horizontal) and Y (vertical) axes on my diagram

1. you will have cabinet vibration cancellation along the X axis for both alignments. You won't have cabinet vibration cancellation along the Y axis for either alignment. If you align the cabinets in a true W (drivers in - line), all displacement is along the X axis and since the driver cones move towards and away from each other at the same time, you gain complete cabinet vibration cancellation.

2. Motors being somewhat non linear in reality, wiring one driver electricaly out of phase, but acoustically in phase, enables you to cancel 2nd order non-linearities.

[scorpion]

Extremly well put !

In Sweden we had a discussion about this. The common knowledge seemed to be in favour of mouting the speakers both facing forward, solely subjective though.

/Erling