I guess I just needed to spend some time listening to the current setup. Last night, I think my brain finally registered what was wrong with the setup. After a few nights with the GF out of town and able to sit and listen, something sounded wrong as it always had but seemed more obvious. Nudged the left speaker inward and things got better. Slid it slightly farther from the wall and nudged it again. Sat back down and imaging snapped right in. While I still have some odd resonances, I'm not touching the setup for awhile, just going to enjoy it.
Not sure when I'm getting to the redesign.
Not sure when I'm getting to the redesign.
That's funny, I had the opposite experience. I agree that I found the imaging is affected quite a bit by the angle of the speakers, but I never found much difference pulling the speakers out into the room, unlike my open baffles. The Halcyons are probably about 6 inches from the wall now. I tried as much as 2 feet out, which is really intruding into the living space, and I didn't notice much difference. Different, but not necessarily better, IMHO. But my ears are not great. These speakers are so deep that even up close to the wall the driver is still 2.5 feet away, and the sound coming out the back is pretty muted by all the acoustic foam lining the tube. Even when played loud, I don't hear that much coming out of the back. I would not expect a lot of audible interference between back reflections and direct radiating sound. But keener ears may differ.
Yes, I have noticed that too. Keep in mind, I do not have the Halcyon speakers. I have one of Jim and Curts collaborations.
I get the best imaging with my speakers pulled out about a couple of feet and the speakers and myself creating near to a equilateral triangle. With everything set up like this way, when the recording calls for it, it sounds like someone is singing between my two speakers. Sounds stage is wide and sounds tend to float around making the speakers disappear.
The back wave seems almost as critical as the direct wave. Something kind of trippy is if I move my seat to create an equilateral with the first rear reflection point of the back wave hitting the front wall, I can get a center image. In other words say my front baffle is 36" from the front wall, if I move my seat forward 36", I can get a center image.
I get the best imaging with my speakers pulled out about a couple of feet and the speakers and myself creating near to a equilateral triangle. With everything set up like this way, when the recording calls for it, it sounds like someone is singing between my two speakers. Sounds stage is wide and sounds tend to float around making the speakers disappear.
The back wave seems almost as critical as the direct wave. Something kind of trippy is if I move my seat to create an equilateral with the first rear reflection point of the back wave hitting the front wall, I can get a center image. In other words say my front baffle is 36" from the front wall, if I move my seat forward 36", I can get a center image.
BTW, @6sX7, what do you mean by odd resonances? It's pretty obvious I'm a Halcyon partisan, and will defend her to the death, but are you saying the Halcyon boxes resonate? That seems hard to imagine unless perhaps the sonitube or speakers are loose or something like that.
Just looking at the design of the box, it's hard to imagine a more rigid speaker construction. I know you know this, but for casual readers considering the Halcyons, I'd hate for them to be scared off by fears that the Halcyons resonate. Possible, but much less likely than most boxes, no?
These things are vaults. There is no point inside the speaker that is more than probably 4 inches from a big slab of 3/4 inch birch ply that is itself never more 3 inches from a 90-degree interface to more 3/4 inch birch ply. Am I over doing this? Sorry.
Just looking at the design of the box, it's hard to imagine a more rigid speaker construction. I know you know this, but for casual readers considering the Halcyons, I'd hate for them to be scared off by fears that the Halcyons resonate. Possible, but much less likely than most boxes, no?
These things are vaults. There is no point inside the speaker that is more than probably 4 inches from a big slab of 3/4 inch birch ply that is itself never more 3 inches from a 90-degree interface to more 3/4 inch birch ply. Am I over doing this? Sorry.
Last edited:
I am building this in Cambodia with 19mm MDF not 3/4 inch - not a lot of difference but it's enough to cause issues. Looks like a lot of fun however. Got the drivers etc from Madisound. which should be here in the next few days. I am going to use MoroWood in Siem Reap for the woodwork - https://www.facebook.com/morowoodcambodia/
You could ask Bob Berner bob@bigwoodstudio.net if he has something. Same for Leland Crooks at Speaker Hardware questions@speakerhardware.com. They probably have CAD files sitting on a computer somewhere, not improving their lives much. They might be willing to sell you a license to use their stuff for a modest price. I assume a CAD file is easy to convert to different metric systems.
As to rounded baffles. I rounded mine. That’s what Curt had in his photos, and I think he recommended it. Whether it makes a difference or not, I have no idea. Mine were beveled using a 3/4” radius router bit. Edge diffraction is real, so it’s probably better, at least in theory, to bevel the edges if you can. You see a lot of high quality speakers with rounded baffles but some excellent ones that have sharp edges e.g. Devore, Audio Note. I guess one set of questions would be, does a radius of, say, 3/4” make a difference, and for which frequencies, and how much of a difference does it make? I would put money on the idea that in a blind test, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference, unless you knew exactly what you were listening for, and even then, the difference would be slight, and have no material impact on your enjoyment of the speakers overall.
As to rounded baffles. I rounded mine. That’s what Curt had in his photos, and I think he recommended it. Whether it makes a difference or not, I have no idea. Mine were beveled using a 3/4” radius router bit. Edge diffraction is real, so it’s probably better, at least in theory, to bevel the edges if you can. You see a lot of high quality speakers with rounded baffles but some excellent ones that have sharp edges e.g. Devore, Audio Note. I guess one set of questions would be, does a radius of, say, 3/4” make a difference, and for which frequencies, and how much of a difference does it make? I would put money on the idea that in a blind test, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference, unless you knew exactly what you were listening for, and even then, the difference would be slight, and have no material impact on your enjoyment of the speakers overall.
A round over isn’t quite as “size” efficient as a chamfer.
The “softening” of the sharp corners on a rectangualr box help minimize edge diffraction. To be effective into lower frequencies they need to be quite large. But even a small one is recommended.
there is a (series?) of aXp articles with experiments. Large seems to be on the order of 75-100 mm diameter radius.
When we get into rounded/chamfered edges that large one is approaching the frequency range where we get baffle step diffraction, and the entire box shape starts to play a role in the evenness of the 2∏ to 4∏ steriradian transition.
dave
The “softening” of the sharp corners on a rectangualr box help minimize edge diffraction. To be effective into lower frequencies they need to be quite large. But even a small one is recommended.
there is a (series?) of aXp articles with experiments. Large seems to be on the order of 75-100 mm diameter radius.
When we get into rounded/chamfered edges that large one is approaching the frequency range where we get baffle step diffraction, and the entire box shape starts to play a role in the evenness of the 2∏ to 4∏ steriradian transition.
dave