Re: 3 Pi and 4 Pi comparison [message #73528 is a reply to message #73526] |
Tue, 07 August 2012 10:36 ![Go to previous message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/up.png) ![Go to next message Go to previous message](/forum/theme/AudioRoundTable/images/down.png) |
![](http://audioroundtable.com/forum/images/custom_avatars/5.gif) |
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18835 Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
Well, the three π loudspeaker does offer greater extension. I think if I weren't planning to use a sub, I'd go with that. It sounds good without a sub, but please be mindful that flanking subs smooth room modes. That's even more important than the extra extension, in my opinion.
I'm also a little concerned about the adjustment to box size you mentioned. I can appreciate your wanting to use a cabinet you built in the 1950s. I'm pretty sentimental, so there's a big value to me in that. But the problem is large cabinets always have internal standing waves in the midbass and midrange, and they might cause ripples in response.
A 7ft3 box is great for a sub, but for fullrange mains, it presents a potential problem. Depending on where the midwoofer and port is, it may have a standing wave node line up in such a way that you get a response abberation. The only way to know for sure is to measure it. So I'm always kind of iffy on the mods. The speaker described in the plans is tested, and if you deviate, you have to go through some testing to know what you've got.
|
|
|