Tools of the Trade: How Boundaries Affect Loudspeakers
Failure to consider loudspeaker/boundary interactions can result in uneven frequency response, spotty coverage, poor intelligibility and over-equalized sound systems
+- Print Email Share Comments (10) RSS RSS

It’s nearly impossible to mount a loudspeaker in a room without placing it near a room boundary.

Some logical questions arise:
1. Does this affect the response?
2. Is the effect good or bad?
3. Can I use the boundary to my advantage?
4. Will treatment help?

And, can room boundaries be a “tool of the trade”?

Space-Loading
Space-loading loudspeakers means that the otherwise spherical radiation is limited by a boundary or boundaries.

Some common scenarios are shown in Figure 1 (below), and are often described by the fraction of a sphere to which the radiation is confined.

Since these are fractions the correct usage would be “1/n-space” but I have used the common descriptors that omit the “1/”.

The classical theory states that the effective gain realized from incoherent summing due to radiation confinement is +3 dB for each additional boundary, and that +9 dB relative to the free-field response can be achieved by “corner-loading” a loudspeaker.

In acoustics the results are never that ideal, so part of my motivation was to determine when this or something different happens.

Figure 1 (click to enlarge)

We would certainly expect the boundary interaction be frequency-dependent, and indeed it is.

This makes the answers to the boundary questions the usual “it depends.”

Overview
The test environment is a large, open space with very rigid boundaries on three surfaces.

I selected a loudspeaker line-up with some devices commonly used by contractors - a bookshelf loudspeaker, a subwoofer and a medium-format horn (Figure 2).

Figure 2 (click to enlarge)

A microphone and dodecahedron were added to round out the field.

Each loudspeaker was first measured (Figure 3) on a 12-foot Genie-lift with the measurement mic in the approximate far-field (1/1- space).

Next it was placed on the floor with the mic placed overhead (1/2-space). The floor-wall junction provided the 2-boundary condition (1/4-space), and the floor-wall-wall junction the 3-boundary condition (1/8-space).

Figure 3 (click to enlarge)

The mic-to-loudspeaker distance was kept the same for each placement.

The Results
It is always both interesting and educational to compare ideal theory with actual measurements. Some of the results were as expected. Some were as expected with some interesting caveats.

There were also a few surprises. Some points-of-interest have been highlighted in the plots.

A general conclusion from the measurements is that if your objective is accurate sound reproduction with minimal coloration, it is bad news to place a loudspeaker anywhere near a boundary. The striking exceptions are that of the horn/driver and the in-wall.

While I often hear horns condemned as “unmusical” or “harsh,” they are the only devices that we have that can be placed near boundaries without detrimental effects.

How “musical” is a low-directivity loudspeaker whose response is dominated by severe comb filters?


Comments (10) Most recent displayed first | All comments in chronological order
Posted by James Allen  on  12/21/11  at  01:04 PM
Very interesting report. I worked in pro-sound in the 60's and 70's then took what I learned and went into autosound in the 70s and 80s ... now working with computers and users .... but get to browse the 'net once in a while

came across this article; good research and I agree with all your results and conclusions.

One thing bothers me though; that you keep refering to an infra-woofer as a "sub-woofer" I would expect someone in "Pro-sound" would use the correct term.

Just incase you don't know "sub" means 'under' as in submarine; "infra" means "of a lower frequencey" as in infra-red light

Just nit-picking as this is WAY more interesting than the work I need to get back to now.

FYI Sony published some very good papers on this subject and near-field vs far-field

Posted by Exploratory Essay  on  12/12/11  at  05:51 AM
This blog is really surprise for me because we read you article and your blog article as well but when suddenly i want to be a part of your discussion than immediately a question come to in my mind that if my request not submitted than you lose your love once take care.
Posted by dfghj5tfd  on  12/12/11  at  05:50 AM
Nice site! I enjoy a couple of from the articles which have been written, and particularly the comments posted! I will definately be visiting again!otwcroec sd vistanekol gh puxdipve gh gkantinlen
Posted by koline  on  11/16/11  at  12:55 AM
I have a great interests to your blog.The concept of your blog is very fresh i definitely sure the visitors who visit your will like your content and pointers. Carbon Footprint Calculator
Posted by johnson  on  11/04/11  at  02:24 AM
Great info. I like all your post. I will keep visiting this blog very often. It is good to see you website.

350-018 testking = 350-029 training = 350-030 testking = 350-030 tests = 350-050 test king = 352-001 training = testking 6401.1 = 640-461 testking


+ View all comments on this article

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.