Stands for the CLS

[JonFo]

...

I'm actually working on a couple of really cool design ideas that will integrate some more sophisticated methods of coupling the CLS frame to a rigid structure much better than the method used in the Sound Anchor design. Ray, image focus actually did improve quite a bit even though the speakers are on 3 seperate glass blocks. One thing I forgot to mention is that I also put a concrete paver on top of the electronics enclosures, so the additional weight helps bear the spikes down more on the blocks, and I angled the blocks so that they are all directionally aligned so that the weak axis in any direction on any of the blocks is countered by the long axis of the other blocks. It's decently rigid all things considered. I'm a product design guy, I have a pretty good understanding of what I'm doing.

I've actually modeled the speaker in SolidWorks and run it through COSMOS to measure what sort of deflection I might actually see near the top assuming a rigid anchor near the bottom. Even with a force of 120lbs applied at the top the frame will only deflect about .033". If I have a chance I'll take the time to see what it would take to make them deflect the 2" Neil suggests, but I suspect the material would fail well before it actually deflected anywhere near than number.

Once I've finalized some of the solid models I'll post the designs here for some feedback, but I may try to get some design and utility protection prior to that.

Tim, very cool. That's the way to do this. Whip up a 3D model and test it in virtual space.

I also have to give C.A.P. kudos for doing it the old-school way and doing real-world 3D modeling in wood before committing to metal.

BTW- I did have one observation about Ray's stands, where the panel brace forms a V behind the speaker. I think that introducing reflective surfaces behind the speaker is deterimental. All braces should be as out of the sound-path as possible.

 

[C.A.P]

Tim, very cool. That's the way to do this. Whip up a 3D model and test it in virtual space.

I also have to give C.A.P. kudos for doing it the old-school way and doing real-world 3D modeling in wood before committing to metal.

BTW- I did have one observation about Ray's stands, where the panel brace forms a V behind the speaker. I think that introducing reflective surfaces behind the speaker is deterimental. All braces should be as out of the sound-path as possible.

Thanks Jon, Yes I too agree with the reflections being the least . My rear braces will not be in the panels area. I am working on that now !

 

[MiTT]

Tim, very cool. That's the way to do this. Whip up a 3D model and test it in virtual space.

I also have to give C.A.P. kudos for doing it the old-school way and doing real-world 3D modeling in wood before committing to metal.

BTW- I did have one observation about Ray's stands, where the panel brace forms a V behind the speaker. I think that introducing reflective surfaces behind the speaker is deterimental. All braces should be as out of the sound-path as possible.

Thanks Jon, I'll share some views of the models and FEA (Finite Element Analysis) as soon as possible. My virtual work is taking a lot longer than C.A.P.'s hands on models - which look very good by the way; nice work C.A.P.!

I also agree on the way the panel supports attach to the stand. I won't take the time to validate the effect of the brace returning behind the panel (although intuitively I think there would be a negative effect), the visual implications alone are directing me to a different approach.

 

[SundayNiagara]

Gee, let's review. Who is the lemming here:





But as expected, you had no information to impart, no facts to convey, nothing of substance to add to the discussion. Just condescension and name-calling. That pretty much shows what you are made of.

The dis-believe bone that was between my ears dissolved many years ago. I thought this place was a high end forum.

 

[nsgarch]

Thanks Jon, Yes I too agree with the reflections being the least . My rear braces will not be in the panels area. I am working on that now !

Don't worry about it guys. A 1" wide surface can only reflect frequencies of 13kHz and up! Brace well and save those transients!! Don't worry about the f*****g reflections!

 

[C.A.P]

Oh don't worry Neil MY stands will be rock solid and NOT flex. I am a man of the school of 'WHEN IN DOUBT BUILD IT STOUT"

 

[MiTT]

Yeah, mine too. As I said, I wasn't overly concerned with the relective aspect as much as I didn't like the visual discontinuity. Mine will also be securely braced, but with a much nicer design aesthetic.

 

[DTB300]

Yeah, mine too. As I said, I wasn't overly concerned with the relective aspect as much as I didn't like the visual discontinuity. Mine will also be securely braced, but with a much nicer design aesthetic.

Oh don't worry Neil MY stands will be rock solid and NOT flex. I am a man of the school of 'WHEN IN DOUBT BUILD IT STOUT"

Since both of you already have your CLS raised up on stands and have heard the benefits of that, it will be interesting to see your thoughts on the changes once the bracing is put in place. Both designs and ideas are interesting.

 

[Rich]

Any of you guys thought about trying the wing concept from the CLX to try to reduce phase cancellation from the rear wave? If it works for the CLX, why wouldn't it work for the CLS? Just a thought.

 

[SundayNiagara]

Any of you guys thought about trying the wing concept from the CLX to try to reduce phase cancellation from the rear wave? If it works for the CLX, why wouldn't it work for the CLS? Just a thought.

Sound Lab has tried wings. I'm not sure of the results. Anyone?

 

[zaphod]

Any of you guys thought about trying the wing concept from the CLX to try to reduce phase cancellation from the rear wave? If it works for the CLX, why wouldn't it work for the CLS? Just a thought.

yeah, i've thought about it since looking at the CLX. my electronics box is the style that has an upper lip so i could bolt/weld/attach the bottom of the wing there and then attach the front edge of the wing to the logan frame. the lip isn't directly inline with the frame, but if i bend the mounting flanges in opposite directions i think that i could get a puchase on the frame and the lip of the electronics box.

it might be a nice little retrofit tweek to the CLSs. both from a frame tightening aspect and for bass cancellations.


the other thing i've been thinking is how all these stands with frame stiffening attach to the frames. they all seem to drill a hole in the side of the frame. i've been thinking that it should be possible to have a clamp built onto the strut such that you have a knob on the top that allows you to tighten and get a good purchase on the frame without drilling into it.

 

[nsgarch]

Sound Lab has tried wings. I'm not sure of the results. Anyone?

The fact that the bass panel on the CLX is flat and wide (compared to curved, narrow, and divided on the CLS) makes the wing more important on that one side of the CLX, I'd think.

In any case, many people feel that the "dead zone" off to the sides of dipole panels helps reduce secondary reflections from
the room sidewalls.

 

[JonFo]

yeah, i've thought about it since looking at the CLX. my electronics box is the style that has an upper lip so i could bolt/weld/attach the bottom of the wing there and then attach the front edge of the wing to the logan frame. the lip isn't directly inline with the frame, but if i bend the mounting flanges in opposite directions i think that i could get a puchase on the frame and the lip of the electronics box.

it might be a nice little retrofit tweek to the CLSs. both from a frame tightening aspect and for bass cancellations.
...

Adding 14" of 'wing' to either side of a CLS should extend the mid-bass SPL a good bit. Look at other Dipole speaker designs, like line arrays of mid-bass drivers, they all have splayed wings of 12 to 16" on them to reduce rear wave phase cancellation and to improve support.

I've played around a bit with some less than rigid wings on my Monoliths just to test this, and yes, they do improve mid-bass performance by 3 to 4dB, which is quite noticeable.

The problem is the looks

 

[Rich]

Interesting. O.K., Jonathan. Let's just forget about WAF for a moment and take this theory a step further. What do you think the effect would be if you had a bass trap panel, mounted on a stand, placed beside the speakers (one panel on each side of each speaker)? This would provide a 24" wide absorptive barrier to either side of the speaker which should, I would think, greatly reduce phase cancellation in mid-bass maybe down to lower bass.

The wings off the back of the speaker have the added bonus of providing stability to the panel, but the idea of bass traps to the side I would think might be more efficient at preventing phase cancellation to a lower frequency level. What do you think?

 

[zaphod]

well, my CLS are only a foot from the side walls. i doubt that i could get away with traps on the outside sides, which is where i would put the wings.

i'm tempted to whip up something in the shop that i can attach to one of the CLS and then push the same signal through each of them and doing some measurements.

 

[C.A.P]

As with any signal trapping Bass will be more pronounce with a corner type loading. That is what you are creating with side panels. Will it blend and help the overall system ? Who knows ! I think its a bit of overkill in the attempt to get one thing by messing with another. Remember in Audio you usually cant have your cake and eat it too.

Now don't get me wrong , I am a tweaker , Ill play around with the idea and see if it helps or hurts.

Its easy to make rear baffles into a stand design if needed.

 

[Rich]

CAP, the idea I am getting at isn't about bass trapping per se or about corner loading. It is about using traps as "side wings" to slow down the rear wave from coming around the speaker and canceling the front wave. With a dipole speaker, you get rear-wave cancellation of the front wave at mid to lower frequencies. By hampering that rear wave's ability to get around the speakers and delaying it just a few milliseconds, you get less phase cancellation and a stronger mid to low bass response from the speaker. This is different than corner loading, which is basically a horn effect.

It just seems to me that the bass traps would be an easier and possibly more efficient way for someone to accomplish this than installing wings on the back or sides of their speakers. Of course, you would need a lot of room for a big speaker with a trap on either side of it.

 

[raygunn]

Speaking of "Wings", have you ever heard the Audiostatic ?

These full range electrostatics were available with a "wing" option.

I was fortunate enough to hear them at the Novotel Show in the UK back in 2000. In fact, I heard a pair with the wing and a pair without.
In my opinion, the wing did improve the feeling of bass, however (and this is purely subjective), I found that the wing also added an unnatural warmth to the upper bass/lower midrange that I did not care for. This type of strategy is not a sure bet.

Also, FWIW, these are very fine-sound fullrange 'stats and they have been around for many many years.
Their latest incarnation is fully active.

http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html#

Adding 14" of 'wing' to either side of a CLS should extend the mid-bass SPL a good bit. Look at other Dipole speaker designs, like line arrays of mid-bass drivers, they all have splayed wings of 12 to 16" on them to reduce rear wave phase cancellation and to improve support.

I've played around a bit with some less than rigid wings on my Monoliths just to test this, and yes, they do improve mid-bass performance by 3 to 4dB, which is quite noticeable.

The problem is the looks

 

[rhd1953]

Also, FWIW, these are very fine-sound fullrange 'stats and they have been around for many many years.
Their latest incarnation is fully active.

http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html#

Looks interesting. Pricing, specs, distributation, dealers? Their webpage says 30 years experience but is sparse on details ($$$$? and you find them where?).
Are their products "if you have to ask...you can't afford them".

Show me (more, please)!

 

[zaphod]

Also, FWIW, these are very fine-sound fullrange 'stats and they have been around for many many years.
Their latest incarnation is fully active.

http://www.audiostatic.com/default.html#

interesting indeed. but the pictures all show just one. i think that the last mono 'stat was QUAD's ELS-57