Home » Sponsored » Pi Speakers » 4 Pi Design Questions
Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73123 is a reply to message #73054] Sun, 24 June 2012 20:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nichol1997 is currently offline  Nichol1997
Messages: 21
Registered: December 2009
Location: Virginia
Chancellor
My back hurts just looking at those horns. I bet they are close to 250 lbs each.
Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73124 is a reply to message #73123] Sun, 24 June 2012 20:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nichol1997 is currently offline  Nichol1997
Messages: 21
Registered: December 2009
Location: Virginia
Chancellor
I ran a few more sweeps outside and I think that I got some good measurements...

index.php?t=getfile&id=801&private=0
Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73126 is a reply to message #73124] Mon, 25 June 2012 07:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18167
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Yes, that looks much better. I still see some reflections (mostly above 1kHz) - probably from nearby structures - but this chart has captured the basic trend very well. You have the measurement system configured properly, and have recorded an accurate response curve. Good job!

Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73132 is a reply to message #73126] Mon, 25 June 2012 17:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mantha3 is currently offline  mantha3
Messages: 72
Registered: May 2012
Location: Lino Lakes, MN
Viscount
Wayne,

How does this look in comparison to a more standard build of a 4pi? Does this curver differ much? I was guessing it may have more difference in the bass side of the curve maybe? Just curious on this thread as I'm thinking of building to this 7" taller box size and interested in hearing from you on any difference observations for good or bad from ya.

Thanks,
Andy
Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73133 is a reply to message #73132] Mon, 25 June 2012 18:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18167
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

I think Nick's build is pretty much the same as a standard four π loudspeaker above 100Hz. I was initially concerned that his box might have introduced anomalies in the lower midrange. But his measurements tell me that his box is ripple-free in the lower midrange, which is a very important thing to consider when building a two-way loudspeaker that is physically large.

Since Nick kept the woofer/tweeter spacing relationship the same and used the same crossover, I was pretty sure it would act right in the crossover region. So from 500Hz upward, I would have expected the same response.

We all would expect bass to change, but the thing I often point out is that a box this size also needs attention paid to the midrange, since standing waves can line up inside. That's why modeling and measurements are really important in a large two-way loudspeaker like this. So many DIYers use a box modeling program to determine bass response, but fail to look at the midrange. That's an extremely important thing to consider in a large two-way speaker, because of the matter of standing waves.

Nick's speaker looks like it probably sounds pretty darn good. There is no midrange ripple, and that's what we wanted to see.

Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73709 is a reply to message #61737] Fri, 31 August 2012 15:13 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mantha3 is currently offline  mantha3
Messages: 72
Registered: May 2012
Location: Lino Lakes, MN
Viscount
Wayne,

I'm planning to build some 4 PI "Tall" speakers like Nichol1997 did here in this thread. Basically, I'd build exactly like your plan but add 7" in height to the cabinet as Nick did. I'd center the horn but have it spaced exactly the same distance from the woofer as you have outlined in the plan.

I'm planning to use a lower brace where the bottom panel would be on your normal 4PI. I'd basically stuff the entire cabinet below this lower brace with the damping material you outline in the plan. I'd stuff around the ports and behind the port like you advise on the normal 4 PI

Here is the face of the speaker I drew up. I'd use 4" Internal Dia ports that are flared to 7" on the face. The 4" run of the Port would be 9.25" in length. This is what Nick said he did with his build.
index.php?t=getfile&id=849&private=0

I'm a little worried on the Port part.

You run an internal size of 3.5" X 6" for an Area of 21.5"
Two ports at 4" would be a lager area. 1 port at 4" would be pi × r2 at 12.5" so two would be 25" of area

I think if I used two of the 4" ports I'd need to run them at least the 10" you run your 3.5" X 6" rectangle ports or more given the extra area.. Or is this somewhat larger port area not such a big deal.. Or if it was we would see something in the test Nick did? I was hoping that this test Nick did shows this port idea of Nick at two 4" ports at 9.25" is good to go.

Sorry for all the questions.. Maybe I'm over-thinking this all

PS I have an plunging head router and the round ports would be easier for me... I like the look of the round ports too... And the 7" extra height is cool as the speaker will look a bit more like a tower and not need a stand perhaps.
Cabinet design, port placement and internal standing waves [message #73713 is a reply to message #73709] Fri, 31 August 2012 18:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18167
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

There are three things that come into play with the cabinet geometry and the arrangement of the woofer and port(s).

First is the Helmholtz frequency, which is something pretty much all DIYers think about. When you run a T/S simulation, this is primarily what it is showing. Cabinet volume and Helmholtz frequency set the response in the bottom octave or two, and most hobbyists are aware of that part.

Second is the port airspeed, which is not an issue below 50MPH, and probably not even at 100MPH. It's only an issue at extreme excursion levels, meaning it's being played very loudly (or is being pushed too low, below its passband).

Truly, we don't want the excursion anyway, since it increases intermodulation distortion. So if extreme SPL is needed, high-pass the speaker to limit the signals sent to the speaker below the Helmholtz frequency.

I only say this because I think port airspeed is sometimes over-analyzed by DIYers. We don't want the ports to be too small, but they don't have to be huge either, especially in a speaker like this. The midwoofer in a matched-directivity two-way is really a midrange driver that digs deep, and it shouldn't be pressed hard in the subwoofer range, because that will increase IMD and make vocals less pure. These should really be seen as three-way speakers with detached woofers in the form of flanking subs.

The third thing is the frequency and position of standing wave modes that line up inside the cabinet. This is what most DIYers overlook. But it is a very important consideration in speakers like these, as it directly influences sound quality, particularly in the midrange.

When people complain about the "box sound", it's usually this anomaly that causes it. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the only reason open-baffle speakers are ever considered is the fact that so many speakers suffer from midrange anomalies caused by standing waves. But with careful cabinet layout, they can be perfectly mitigated.

If we were making subs, it almost wouldn't matter what size and shape the box was or where the woofer and port were. The wavelengths presented to the box would be very long compared to box dimensions, so standing waves would not form. Don't even need acoustic damping material inside a subwoofer.

Similarly, when the cabinet is small, standing waves aren't too bad because even though they will line up in the passband, the frequency range where they do is high enough that the stuffing damps the standing wave modes very effectively.

But larger cabinets used for mains can be kind of tricky, because the standing waves often line up in the lower midrange. This is a tough frequency range to deal with because acoustic insulation lining the walls doesn't do anything at all. There is no absorption at midrange frequencies, so any standing waves inside will cause response ripple, and sometimes it can be pretty bad.

The best thing you can do is to put the midwoofer and port(s) in positions where standing waves don't develop a high-pressure node. It also helps to put a sheet of insulation in the middle of the cabinet, spanning the cross-section. The insulation can attenuate midrange if spaced away from the walls. That's why we put a sheet on the brace between woofer and tweeter, in addition to the sheets that line the walls. It sort of breaks the cabinet into two sections, and traps the midrange while allowing the bass to pass right through.

So this brings me to the point. It's best to make acoustic measurements to verify response when contemplating cabinet dimension modifications, and/or port or midwoofer position changes. There are very few software modeling tools that will show the response anomalies caused by standing waves, so it has to be measured.

My suggestion would be to either stick with my plans or with the mod described in this thread. These are configurations that have been tested. You can center the tweeter, provided the distance between woofer and tweeter remain the same, but don't deviate from the box dimensions or the placement and size of the port and midwoofer.

Or if you have measurement equipment, by all means, you can find other configurations that work well. But you definitely don't want to just pick a port with a box modeling program and call it good. That isn't good enough for speakers like these.

Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73714 is a reply to message #73713] Fri, 31 August 2012 18:39 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mantha3 is currently offline  mantha3
Messages: 72
Registered: May 2012
Location: Lino Lakes, MN
Viscount
Wayne,

I am a huge fan of these speakers and the time you take to discuss things on this forum. All you say makes sense and I appreciate the time you take to respond.

I'll post when I build and with some luck the sound will be excellent

Have a good holiday weekend!!!

Andy
Re: 4 Pi Design Questions [message #73715 is a reply to message #73714] Fri, 31 August 2012 18:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Wayne Parham is currently offline  Wayne Parham
Messages: 18167
Registered: January 2001
Illuminati (33rd Degree)

Thanks, Andy. Hope your Labor Day is good too. And please post back with your build progress!

Re: Cabinet design, port placement and internal standing waves [message #75651 is a reply to message #73713] Wed, 27 February 2013 15:16 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
dheflin44 is currently offline  dheflin44
Messages: 47
Registered: November 2012
Location: Carrollton, TX
Baron
Wayne,

Are there any simulators available that would predict where the internal high pressure nodes will be?

Thanks,
Darrell
Previous Topic: 2Pi's completed - now I want a center channel
Next Topic: 4Pi Plans for new HT build
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue Nov 30 05:10:55 CST 2021

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