Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ron Kreiger" data-source="post: 22582" data-attributes="member: 68">Re: Coaxial Wedge Collaboration2.1cu. ft is for a horn loaded wedge not the reflex design. Reflex design is 1.52 cu ft which is roughly 17&quot; deep x 17&#039;&quot; high @ the back and 16&quot; wide @ the back x 12&quot; wide @ the front and 7&quot; high @ the front in a wedge shape. That is a preliminary shape as most likely I will drop the back height and increase the length a bit. Maybe even the width as well.As it stands now 1.52 cu ft isn&#039;t that big of a box especially considering the possible LF response.The only real advantage with the horn load is some efficiency gain&nbsp; between 200 and 500Hz +3db with the hump at about 400hz in the horns loading passband but given the size increases I dont see it as a viable option.A 400hz hump in response is probably what I dont want in a wedge?? In fact that&#039;s usually an area of cut for me so the added output would be just another point of EQ to fix the response.Of course different environments will vary those results but I still like to process the box out of the chute and simply tone first and graph second during sound check.I&#039;d be curious as to others approach to dialing in wedges and what they would want from the wedge in raw response.I&#039;d like to include some DSP processing parameters after testing&nbsp; but at the same time have the box do well in passive mode.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ron Kreiger, post: 22582, member: 68"] Re: Coaxial Wedge Collaboration 2.1cu. ft is for a horn loaded wedge not the reflex design. Reflex design is 1.52 cu ft which is roughly 17" deep x 17'" high @ the back and 16" wide @ the back x 12" wide @ the front and 7" high @ the front in a wedge shape. That is a preliminary shape as most likely I will drop the back height and increase the length a bit. Maybe even the width as well.As it stands now 1.52 cu ft isn't that big of a box especially considering the possible LF response. The only real advantage with the horn load is some efficiency gain between 200 and 500Hz +3db with the hump at about 400hz in the horns loading passband but given the size increases I dont see it as a viable option.A 400hz hump in response is probably what I dont want in a wedge?? In fact that's usually an area of cut for me so the added output would be just another point of EQ to fix the response.Of course different environments will vary those results but I still like to process the box out of the chute and simply tone first and graph second during sound check. I'd be curious as to others approach to dialing in wedges and what they would want from the wedge in raw response.I'd like to include some DSP processing parameters after testing but at the same time have the box do well in passive mode. [/QUOTE]

Verification