Home » Sponsored » Pi Speakers » 1pi or 2pi for surrounds?
Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69477 is a reply to message #69473] Tue, 13 September 2011 14:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18793
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Very good, it looks great!

Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69480 is a reply to message #68904] Tue, 13 September 2011 21:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
plugged them in tonight for a quick listen.

at first, i thought my 4x 15" subs were ovepowering them, so i turned down the subs, still lots of bass. i shut down the subs completely, and wow!!! i was surprised, these little 8"s packed some punch. huge mid bass, for their size.

they seemed to lack a bit of dynamics/details, but that's what i expected coming in. i guess i am used to the horns/waveguides.

i'll take some measurements tomorrow to see how the response is in my room, but they sound pretty nice so i expect fr to be decent.

Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69487 is a reply to message #68904] Wed, 14 September 2011 21:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
here's the freq response as measured in REW, 3ft from speakers.

i am not quite sure what to make of it below 300hz.

wayne, any comments?



http://www.pispeakers.com/Measurements/onePi_indoor_1M_response.jpg
Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69488 is a reply to message #68904] Wed, 14 September 2011 21:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
and here's the graph with both speakers measured at the listening position, 9ft.



http://www.pispeakers.com/Measurements/onePi_indoor_3M_response.jpg
Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69489 is a reply to message #69488] Wed, 14 September 2011 22:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18793
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Above 200Hz, your chart is pretty close to what I measure from the little one π speakers. They're flat up top, with gradually reduced bass below a couple hundred Hertz. By 65Hz or so, they're really pretty much done, although in your case, a room mode boosts the output around 40Hz - 50Hz. The point is, the room is what really sets the response below 200Hz.

This illustrates pretty well why I don't use baffle step filters in my crossovers.

The reduced output below 150Hz - 200Hz is caused by the omnidirectional radiation at low frequencies contrasted with the half-space (forward-only) radiation above around 200Hz or so. At higher frequencies, the baffle sets the pattern, directing it forward. Since lower frequencies are omnidirectional, the same amount of power is distributed over a larger area, and the net result is on-axis response drops. The higher frequencies are "focused" into a forward-only direction, concentrating the energy in a smaller area.

This is why some people use baffle step compensation. The idea is to equalize the speaker with a gentle low-pass filter, lowering output above 200Hz to match the on-axis output below 200Hz.
The problem I have with baffle-step compensation on speakers the size of mine is that the directivity shift happens in the room's modal region. The thing is, directivity ceases to be a function of the loudspeaker below the Schroeder frequency, around 200Hz in most homes. So what we have is a situation where the room's influence makes electrical equalization impossible. You don't get a steady 6dB drop like you would outdoors. Instead, you get a series of peaks and valleys. If you push that range up using a baffle step circuit, then the peaks and valleys become really pronounced. Essentially, you're throwing more energy into the modes, making them worse.

Whether used as main speakers or as surrounds, I prefer to use multisubs to provide the foundation of deep bass. It has the added benefit of smoothing the room modes too. What we really want is to add more sound sources at low frequency. This gives extension and smoothing, mitigating room modes at the same time.
Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69494 is a reply to message #68904] Thu, 15 September 2011 07:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
thanks wayne.

i was a bit suprised as they seem to produce quite a bit of mid bass.

so, what would you reccommend as a good crossovers to the subs? i am thinking 100/120hz?

Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69495 is a reply to message #69494] Thu, 15 September 2011 07:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18793
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Don't crossover to subs - blend them. Let the mains run full range and low-pass the subs. Flanking subs should be run up into the low 100's, more distant subs need to be cutoff lower to prevent localization cues.

Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69496 is a reply to message #68904] Thu, 15 September 2011 08:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
wayne, the one pis will be used as surrounds so subs are far away.

i need to crosss them to subs, but like you said i can't cross too high due to localization. i am thinking 100/120 and just play around with those.
Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69498 is a reply to message #69496] Thu, 15 September 2011 10:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18793
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

What I mean is this - Run mains (and surrounds) full range. Flanking subs placed near right/left front mains should be low-passed between 90Hz and 120Hz or so. I prefer a second-order slope for flanking subs, third-order max. Don't use fourth-order if you can help it. The greater the slope, the higher the low-pass cutoff frequency should be. We want a seamless blend. More distant subs should be crossed lower to prevent localization cues, usually around 50Hz or 60Hz works well.

When I talk about flanking subs, I'm always talking about subs that flank the front mains. They smooth the midbass and midrange modes for stereo content. Surrounds generally don't have their own flanking subs. I mean, it wouldn't hurt to have them but I don't see them providing a lot of benefit either. Bass isn't directional, so the subs that are there will provide the foundation. Flanking subs are mostly for modal smoothing and the mere fact that there are so many sound sources in a multichannel system tends to do this anyway.

Re: 1pi or 2pi for surrounds? [message #69499 is a reply to message #68904] Thu, 15 September 2011 11:32 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
smokarz is currently offline  smokarz
Messages: 56
Registered: June 2011
Location: CT - USA
Baron
ah, i see. but that raises a few concerns.

1) by running mains and surrounds as full range, that would put a lot of strain the amp. it takes power to produce low freq at high volume.

2) we're asking small drivers (such as the 1pis) to produce db at freq that they can't simply handle.

i guess the above concerns are not signficant for music, but for movies where there are plenty of bass in the 20hz-100hz region.

Previous Topic: Flanking subs and phase
Next Topic: Pi 3 or 4?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Dec 17 22:20:17 CST 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest