Home » Sponsored » Pi Speakers » Phase, delays and offset baffle spacing
Phase, delays and offset baffle spacing [message #37590] Wed, 31 July 2002 20:58 Go to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18691
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
Check out the π crossover document for a complete description of various two-way networks and filter techniques. I'm sure there are other good ones out there too, but I wrote this one specifically to be reasonably readable, to illustrate issues with graphs, and to show the schematics of the circuits involved. It shows first, second and third order networks, and pays particular attention to phase. As you know, phase is another way of saying "delay."

The moral of the story: Phase changes in a crossover as a function of frequency. Since phase moves, so does the amount of delay between subsystems. While the idealized first order low pass has a fixed rate, this is a specialized condition that is not found in the tweeter circuit. And it also requires the load be resistive, and that is not the case with speakers with voice coils. Even damped, the speaker is not anywhere close.

But let's look at it anyway, just to make things clear.

Phase response of idealized first order network

The graph shown above is the phase response of an idealized first order crossover for a two-way system having a crossover at 1600Hz. This means that the components chosen have pure capacitance for the tweeter circuit and pure inductance for the woofer circuit. It also means that the speaker motors are perfect resistor loads. In this idealized model scenareo, we find that the woofer is shifted 1" further away from us through the points of interest.

But the problem is that the tweeter just won't behave. As we draw nearer to the asymptote, the apparent sound source position shifts. As we go further into the passband, the tweeter's apparent position moves. So you can delay the perfectly resistive woofer by a perfectly fixed amount. But you can't do this for the tweeter. As phase moves, so does the offset.

Now let's look at the real world. Here's what the phase looks like when a voice-coil woofer and compression horn tweeter are used:

Phase response of actual first order network

Ouch! That one's "all over the map."

The components used in this case are the Eminence Delta 15 and the PSD2002 tweeter on the H290 horn flare. And really, those are more "well behaved" than many because voice coil inductance is unusually low. So all in all, this is typical of what should be expected of two-way speakers having a compression horn and a woofer.

The reactance of the tweeter makes a peaky phase curve, and the voice coil inductance of the woofer tends to make the crossover coil act more like a wide-band voltage divider than a frequency splitter. Some don't expect this interaction, and so their crossover filters don't work as they intend and response suffers. But you can also use this behavior to your advantage, as long as you know that it's there. The point is that interaction between driver and crossover reactances alters the frequency and the phase characteristics of an "idealized" network.

No passive network - high order or low order - can make a speaker "time aligned" with any baffle offset. This is true of a specific point in space on axis, where all driver diaphragms are fixed in their distance relationship to the listener. So you can imagine what happens when you move in 3D space off axis, where path length changes and one driver is made further from the listener than the other. As movement is made relative to one driver or the other and the listener, we move these offsets around even more.

That's why I sometimes bristle when I hear discussions of baffle offsets or fixed delays to create "time alignment." I much prefer to talk about constructive summing, because that is something we can work with.

Now then, what good is this information, you might ask. Does this mean there is no hope, no way to provide good sound anywhere except at a single pinpoint "sweet spot" location?

When you calculate out all the phase angles, driver positions and arrival delays what you find is that summing becomes destructive at set angles. If you position the drivers so that they sum constructively at the crossoer frequency on the forward axis, then the phase of the crossover and the delay from driver positions make the sound arrive in-phase on the forward axis. This will be the case at frequencies very near the crossover frequency. Naturally, the point of phase-zero constructive summing will shift as a function of frequency, moving the forward axis up as freqency rises.

The other thing that happens is there are two angles where nulls appear, one above the forward axis and the other below. The angles are determined by the distance between sound sources and the frequency sound that they are both generating. The reasons these appear is vertical movement causes a path length difference between the listener and the two sound sources. At certain angles, the path length distances are multiples of 1/2 wavelength, causing cancellation. So what you see is a forward lobe of in-phase summing surrounded by anti-phase nulls. Further out, side lobes appear if the sound sources angular coverage is wide. Unless the sound sources are horns with pretty tight pattern control, there is usually enough off-axis energy for the side lobes to appear out beyond the nulls.

OK, so now we know there are forward lobes, nulls and side lobes out beyond that. Now what?

Remember, you cannot hope to make a multi-driver loudspeaker generate a point-source spherical wave in all directions with uniform coverage. A single driver speaker won't do it because it has collapsing directivity, so high frequencies are much more directional than low. A coaxial driver won't do it because even though it is sort of like a point source, it has collapsing directivity like the single driver does, but when the woofer starts to beam, crossover is made to the tweeter wheich then widens back up again. So coverage is weird, going from wide to narrow to wide again, probably beaming yet again higher up. And a speaker with vertically stacked drivers has anti-phase nulls that form above and below, with an in-phase forward axis that drifts upward slightly through the overlap band.

But here's one way to work with all these factors to provide uniform coverage. While we want a wide horizontal pattern, vertical coverage doesn't need to be nearly so tall. The target area is usually much wider than it is high. There is no need to waste energy on the floor and ceiling, so a wide but short pattern is ideal. I like 90x40 because it can set in a room corner and cover the entire room. It is a useful pattern. It also happens that if you crossover around 1.2kHz to 1.6kHz with midwoofer (or dedicated midrange, for that matter) and tweeter center-to-center spacing of about 12", the vertical nulls are about 50o apart. That's a convenient angle when using horns with 40o vertical pattern.

Another thing happens around the same frequency that is useful in for the three π and four π loudspeakers. A direct radiator begins to become directional as frequency rises. The pattern is nearly omnidirectional at low frequencies, but by the time wavelength equals diameter, the pattern has narrowed to a cone shape of roughly 90o. So 1.2kHz to 1.6kHz crossover between a 12" or 15" midwoofer to a 90x40 horn just above it on the same baffle results in a pattern that narrows in the horizontal to 90o, and then hands off to the tweeter horn with matching directivity. The vertical angle is "squeezed" by the nulls down to 50o, and then as the tweeter takes over, it eventually narrows to 40o through the rest of the band. This is a great way to provide uniform directivity through a useful coverage angle.

There is one more thing to consider, and that's crossover slope. Low-order crossovers have a very wide overlap, so they aren't attractive for this solution. The wider the overlap, the greater the shift of the in-phase forward axis and the anti-phase null angles. As frequency rises, the forward axis drops and the null angles get closer together. So it is important to limit the overlap band. Of course, high-order slopes add more phase shift, so there are some limits to what you can do. High-order crossovers tend to also introduce more insertion loss, so second and third order filters are probably the best compromise between reducing the width of the overlap band without causing too much insertion loss.

Re: Phase, delays and offset baffle spacing [message #37594 is a reply to message #37590] Thu, 01 August 2002 03:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JLM is currently offline  JLM
Messages: 69
Registered: May 2009
Viscount
Wayne:

Your point regarding baffle offsets/slopes and time delay circuits is well taken. I really apreciate you posting this information (even if most of it is over my head). But how does this affect the sound?

Re: Phase, delays and offset baffle spacing [message #37597 is a reply to message #37594] Thu, 01 August 2002 06:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
pickle is currently offline  pickle
Messages: 24
Registered: May 2009
Chancellor
This is an explanation of why claims of various schemes for time alignment are fooey. Basically, as long as the differences in time arrival are within a window, it isn't important. Even a single driver can be shown to have this problem as sound emanates from different areas of the cone, and bounces from areas within the cone. Dr Edgar had a graph from a German study which showed the ability of subjects to discern delay, and it was also very frequency dependent. As long as the delay was kept under the window, all was well. You could chase the time delay "problem" ad infinitum, but also, your solution only works for one exact listening position, so again, do whats reasonable and get on to other issues, like motor distortion, box tuning, x-overs, etc.
And now for something completely different, anyone ready for Waynes "audiophile" series TAD based three way?!? That'd be fun.

Re: Phase, delays and offset baffle spacing [message #37601 is a reply to message #37597] Thu, 01 August 2002 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18691
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

That's right, Mike.

The point I was making was that perfect time alignment isn't possible in a speaker system, at least with current technology. Even a single driver is not immune because it is not really a point source. It is a moving plane that only acts like a point source at low frequencies.

But with careful choices of directivity, baffle spacing and crossover, you can provide constructive summing (i.e. good response) over a wide angular coverage angle.

on the subject... [message #37603 is a reply to message #37601] Thu, 01 August 2002 12:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dbeardsl is currently offline  dbeardsl
Messages: 127
Registered: May 2009
Master

On the subject of moving planes and drivers producing HF...

How does a driver accurately produce sounds with wavelengths that are smaller than the diameter of the driver? And when they do, does the beaming exhibited mainly come from the path length cancellation thing where two edges are producing the same wave but since the observer is off axis, the edges are different distances away from him?

Danny

P.S. Two Pi's are done, and sound beautiful, will post pictures.

on the subject... [message #37605 is a reply to message #37603] Thu, 01 August 2002 13:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18691
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Bingo. You've hit it right on the head.

Re: on the subject... [message #37607 is a reply to message #37605] Thu, 01 August 2002 14:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
dbeardsl is currently offline  dbeardsl
Messages: 127
Registered: May 2009
Master
I remember reading about a new idea for speaker drivers, some guy from the place where they make those Zen amps was experimenting and tried inverting a cone. He cut it out, and turned it upside down and devised a method of connecting the voice coil to the tip of the inverted cone. The cone actually protruded from the basket. Supposedly This really helped a lot of things, making a more even dispersion and some other stuff. Now he makes them and sells em...

Here's a link

Coax point source drivers?? [message #37608 is a reply to message #37590] Thu, 01 August 2002 20:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Robert Hamel is currently offline  Robert Hamel
Messages: 93
Registered: May 2009
Viscount
From what you are all saying is if a single driver is not a point source then 2 can't be either. Funny thing the Urie Coax monitors were "Time Aligned" point sources. When you look at the measured data in the Improvements in Monitors AES article they measured better than the other 2 but all 3 are below the audible threshold. If they are all below this then any diferences should not be audible? So why go to the trouble??? Marketing tool??? Am I missing something???
Could this [message #37611 is a reply to message #37597] Sat, 03 August 2002 01:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Peter Krojgaard is currently offline  Peter Krojgaard
Messages: 30
Registered: May 2009
Baron
Hi mikebake,

Sorry to interrupt, but I have question:

You wrote:

Phase and "time alignment" revisited [message #37612 is a reply to message #37611] Sat, 03 August 2002 04:20 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18691
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)
Best thing would be to do a search here and look over the posts about "phase" or "time alignment."

You'll find several hours of reading material on this subject, just from the discussions in the last month alone.

Previous Topic: Pi owners pictures wanted
Next Topic: Two Pi's up and running
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu May 16 07:52:00 CDT 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Smith & Larson Audio
Smith & Larson Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest