ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12   Go Down

Author Topic: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"  (Read 26956 times)

Josh Millward

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 713
  • Meridian, MS
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #100 on: July 29, 2016, 06:29:12 pm »

...they are creating a model that creates a known result along the listening plane by making the individual cells within the array function together as a CDPS.  They don't care what is happening at the driver or cabinet other than for the initial information so that the model can be accurate. 

So they are only modeling what is happening at the listening plane and manipulating the DSP to make it happen.

What about the rest of the room?

What is coming off the sides, top, bottom, and backside of the array?

I'm asking because I don't know. I've never heard it... though I am intrigued by it. I'd like to learn more about it.
Logged
Josh Millward
Danley Sound Labs

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1346
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #101 on: July 29, 2016, 06:41:03 pm »

So they are only modeling what is happening at the listening plane and manipulating the DSP to make it happen.

What about the rest of the room?

What is coming off the sides, top, bottom, and backside of the array?

I'm asking because I don't know. I've never heard it... though I am intrigued by it. I'd like to learn more about it.

Cellular Drive in Display 2.1.10 is modeling the surface planes of the whole room as entered by the user.  It is only doing that right now in a section but the models used are fully 3 dimensional and I am told that the software can be as well but that is somewhere down the line. 
The model does show what is happening from the back, top, bottom, etc. but at this point it does not include a model of the sides.

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1346
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #102 on: July 29, 2016, 06:42:32 pm »

Actually, that's the real joy of patents: in return for legal protection, you have to immediately tell the whole world "how you did it" (with enough detail that someone else can do it too when the patent expires).

For example: US 20140348355 - Speaker Configuration.

-Russ

Patents are outside of my normal realm so, there you go.  I guess those interested should be able to look up the specifics of what is patented.

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1346
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #103 on: July 29, 2016, 06:48:16 pm »

The only thing that makes me at  all nervous about the whole "multicellular" technology is the lack of candour that appears about it.  we all know that even with the best designed horn technology there are limits to off axis response control, that clever manipulation of time, phase, level and frequency response can assist in controlling this still isn't the magic bullet.

Unless I'm getting it completely wrong what it boils down to is that they are doing what most other manufacturers of line array are doing, but taking it down to a driver by driver basis rather than a cab by cab.  To suggest that it's not a line array is, for me, to ignore the fact I doubt it can create a completely coherent wave front any more than any line array can genuinely create a genuine curved wavefront.

It is not about a coherent wavefront.  It is about altering the output of every cell such that when each individual cell combines with the other cells of the same band pass that cover the same area of the listening plane they are phase and frequency coherent and the edges of their coverage is phase and frequency coherent with the next covered area, and on and on.

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Russell Ault

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 902
  • Edmonton, AB
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #104 on: July 29, 2016, 06:51:41 pm »

US 20140348355 - Speaker Configuration.

Patents are outside of my normal realm so, there you go.  I guess those interested should be able to look up the specifics of what is patented.

Sorry, I should have been clearer: despite its generic title, I believe what I linked to is the patent for the technology behind MLA for anyone interested in having a look. The description certainly contains a lot of math beyond my ability!

-Russ
Logged

Lee Buckalew

  • Classic LAB
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1346
  • St. Louis, MO area
    • Pro Sound Advice, Inc.
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #105 on: July 29, 2016, 10:27:29 pm »

Sorry, I should have been clearer: despite its generic title, I believe what I linked to is the patent for the technology behind MLA for anyone interested in having a look. The description certainly contains a lot of math beyond my ability!

-Russ

Sorry about that, I did not check the link, I was in a hurry to get to an event with my wife and kids.

Lee
Logged
Lee Buckalew
Pro Sound Advice, Inc.

Scott Holtzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6143
  • Ghost AV - Avon Lake, OH
    • Ghost Audio Visual Systems, LLC
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #106 on: July 30, 2016, 03:08:15 am »

Yep, now you have a great sounding system which you might not be able to turn up because it starts to feed back so you start killing those frequencies killing part of the art in the process...


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

That exactly described by night.  We about 20' off a brick wall that formed the back of an aquarium building underneath a dome.   The array was short so I should not have expected much but exactly what you describe,  the rear lobe built up and bounced off the wall.   Could not use all the gain and hacking up the EQ was ugly.

Logged
Scott AKA "Skyking" Holtzman

Ghost Audio Visual Solutions, LLC
Cleveland OH
www.ghostav.rocks

Roland Clarke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 827
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #107 on: July 30, 2016, 03:51:01 am »

It is not about a coherent wavefront.  It is about altering the output of every cell such that when each individual cell combines with the other cells of the same band pass that cover the same area of the listening plane they are phase and frequency coherent and the edges of their coverage is phase and frequency coherent with the next covered area, and on and on.

Lee

I fully understand that the calculation isn't aimed at making the sound good at the source, more at the audience position, however, the point I was making is that all speakers (cells as they are being described here), exhibit unevenness in their off axis performance, both in frequency and of course phase.  As this is the smallest level of adjustment possible, the processing must by definition be a "fudge".  I'm not disputing that it might be the best possible result available in real terms, more the marketing blurb that suggests it is better than this.
Logged

Merlijn van Veen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 309
    • www.merlijnvanveen.nl
"Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #108 on: July 30, 2016, 09:08:09 am »

Actually, that's the real joy of patents: in return for legal protection, you have to immediately tell the whole world "how you did it" (with enough detail that someone else can do it too when the patent expires).

For example: US 20140348355 - Speaker Configuration.

-Russ

I read the patent which is quite informatieve and inspiring. However it only reveals one aspect of the "magic" behind MLA.

Basically it describes a generic optimization routine that iteratively minimizes variance in SPL, frequency response, leakage, rate of change in SPL over distance and rate of change in SPL over frequency with respect to predefined parameters.

With respect, but not limited, to MLA, FWAICT it's used in the first round of calculations in the Display software to determine the splay angles. You could think of it as Martin's proprietary "autosplay" function. But that's just one particular application of the routine.

I imagine that the same routine, again not limited to MLA, could be used to distill the MLA processing parameters, but that's not being mentioned in the patent.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

Ivan Beaver

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9090
  • Atlanta GA
Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #109 on: July 30, 2016, 11:07:50 am »

It would be "nice" if the sound from each cell in a "multi cellular" device would cover just one part of the audience, like the true cellular horns of years past in which we would stuff the cells we did not want to operate to change the pattern somewhat.

But unless they are VERY LARGE-that simply cannot happen.

And if the patterns are narrow (as they would need to be in a many cellular system), then they have to be even larger than a wider coverage pattern horn.

Since they are not large enough to cover a specific area, and therefore "spray" over the coverage areas of other devices that are physically in different places, the phase MUST be different at different seats.

Once the parameters have been set-when you have 2 different devices at physically different places, the response at different seats has to be different.  How much?  Does it matter?  It depends.

There are 2 ways to "control the pattern" of a sound wave.

One is by the use of large horns and the other is electronic manipulation/cancellation/interference of the signal.

There is no way to preserve the original signal when it has somehow been "changed" electronically.  Once it has been changed it is NOT the original signal anymore.

Once you start to have signals interfere-the sound quality must go down.

But sometimes the pattern control provided is more important than the sound quality.  Just as with any directional sub configuration.

The sound quality will go down on axis, but the overall result may be better.  Sometimes this is by not having people behind the subs complain.

Sometimes it is to steer a sideways lobe on the stage so the bass is reduced on stage.

Logged
A complex question is easily answered by a simple-easy to understand WRONG answer!

Ivan Beaver
Danley Sound Labs

PHYSICS- NOT FADS!

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: "Multi cellular array" vs "Single Source array"
« Reply #109 on: July 30, 2016, 11:07:50 am »


Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.046 seconds with 25 queries.