Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

cv wrote:

Romy, Can you expand a little more on what the issue with dipole bass is and what it does incorrectly? I'm still not sure I know exactly what you mean (and I've had a look at some of your other comments on the site).

being a strong opponent of the open baffles for LF an I have written a lot about it’ misery in many places, probably even within this site. There area many reasons way open baffles should not be used: absent of drivers capable to work while the cones are un-damped, the devastating affect that the large baffles have to the imaging, the infinite problems MF propagation due to the acoustic diffraction, the severe distortions in the drivers due to the barbaric exertion while the coils dive into the arias where the flux is not linearly saturated, disability it integrate opened baffle upperbass with LF modulus and many-many others. However, the most unpleasant in the open baffles is the actually upper bass SOUND that the dipole open baffles produces.

It is imposable to convince anyone in anything and practically it is imposable to demonstrate or illustrate verbally in this post what the open baffles sound might be in comparing to a damped suspension. One should try it, preferably with many different environments and topologies and then make up his/her mind based upon own sensations.

To summarize my findings in two worlds: if you would drink the open baffle sound then it tastes like SAE 10W30 motor oil, spiced with MSG. the sound has feeling of that “thin” reality and impactfullness of that Monosodium garbage. However, under the objective light of unbiased sensations the upper bass form the open baffles is essentially very much “helped” sound.

In the case of this Chinese guy the effect even more aggressive as the misery of the open baffle in his case catalyzed by the problem from the horn.

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site