Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bennett Prescott" data-source="post: 92377" data-attributes="member: 4">Re: Cardioid Subs in a Smaller venue.I have never tried a cardioid array this close, but I don&#039;t particularly see why it couldn&#039;t be done. All cardioid arrays lose LF energy since below a certain frequency the woofers are too close and sum coherently - but of course one is out of polarity so eventually they are so close that all that energy gets turned into structure movement and heat. This is a pain to measure with most arrays since the wavelengths are so long and the maximum frequency of interest is usually kept reasonably low, but you can easily see it in a simulation that doesn&#039;t have a HPF (validity of simulation notwithstanding). Certainly some companies have products that work this way, essentially processing each driver in a &quot;dual 18&quot; cab differently to create directionality along the long axis of the subwoofers. Means you can pack face to face too which gets really great summation.The only real difference IMHO having them back to back, or front to back, is the additional delay created by the waves having to travel around the front cab means that you can pack the subs tighter together than might otherwise be indicated (e.g. the sub stack, bottom sub reversed). The subs certainly aren&#039;t big enough to act as a boundary in the normal sense, but they are a big thing in the way! Either way you get what you need, separation in the axis in which you want to create directionality, and different processing - get them too close and you&#039;re just going to have maximum addition and cancellation at a higher frequency than you might like it at.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bennett Prescott, post: 92377, member: 4"] Re: Cardioid Subs in a Smaller venue. I have never tried a cardioid array this close, but I don't particularly see why it couldn't be done. All cardioid arrays lose LF energy since below a certain frequency the woofers are too close and sum coherently - but of course one is out of polarity so eventually they are so close that all that energy gets turned into structure movement and heat. This is a pain to measure with most arrays since the wavelengths are so long and the maximum frequency of interest is usually kept reasonably low, but you can easily see it in a simulation that doesn't have a HPF (validity of simulation notwithstanding). Certainly some companies have products that work this way, essentially processing each driver in a "dual 18" cab differently to create directionality along the long axis of the subwoofers. Means you can pack face to face too which gets really great summation. The only real difference IMHO having them back to back, or front to back, is the additional delay created by the waves having to travel around the front cab means that you can pack the subs tighter together than might otherwise be indicated (e.g. the sub stack, bottom sub reversed). The subs certainly aren't big enough to act as a boundary in the normal sense, but they are a big thing in the way! Either way you get what you need, separation in the axis in which you want to create directionality, and different processing - get them too close and you're just going to have maximum addition and cancellation at a higher frequency than you might like it at. [/QUOTE]

Verification