[tINY]

Originally Posted by SAC

I think you totally miss the point.

The point is that the arrangement is worse than with simply one driver or a better spaced pair. 4 spaced drivers on a vertical wall are not optimal, and the result is INCREASED comb filtering and polar lobing in addition to the modal response.

I disagree with your point. I don't miss it at all.

I am trying to explain to you why multiple woofers in small room can actually be much better. Part of that explanation is getting you to understand that the low-frequency behavior of a small room is nothing like free-field behavior. In small rooms, one woofer is among the worst options from a fidelity standpoint in the low-frequency range....

It is a comparative valuation. And one that increased over the presence of a single driver, whose behavior is confirmed in Pat Brown's comparative study.

And as far as path lengths, it is the separation between acoustic origins that matters as all signals originate on the same plane. The calculations are very easy and well vetted.

What are those calculations? And what do they say about positions within 15 degrees of perpendicular to the plane measured from the midpoint of the drivers?

What is surprising is that you, for some reason, want to debate the existence of additional comb filtering and polar lobing that is a fundamental quality and direct consequence of spaced drivers, made worse by the additional drivers and boundary relations.

Not at all. I simply question their relevance to the situation at hand. If those same 4 drivers were suspended in the middle of a hockey arena, then the effects you describe would be easy to measure and hear. When you turn a whole small room, effectively, into the throat of a bass horn, you see very different things.



-tINY