opaqueice;229952 Wrote: > Nope. Just as Pat says, dipole fields fall off like 1/r^3, monopoles > like 1/r^2.
All I can tell you is that is contrary to multiple loudspeaker articles I've read over the past 30 years, which have unanimously stated that dipole's output falls off with distance more than monopole's. > As far as I know "omnipolar" isn't a word, but if it means > non-directional to you, that's known as monopolar to the rest of us. You're correct. "omnipolar" isn't a word. And neither is "smarmy", but that's how your response sounds to me. BTW, if you'll visit the Mirage Loudspeaker website, you'll find they are brandishing that "non-word" about at will. You may want to correct them, also. And if "non-directional" is synonymous with "monopolar" to you and your crowd, then I suggest the lot of you get yourselves a good dictionary and have a go at it. > I don't think you understood what I said there. My point was that at > higher frequencies the Orions would produce a higher ratio of reflected > to direct sound than boxes, because boxes become increasingly > directional while the Orions remain dipoles. After re-reading your original post, I concede I mis-read it previously. I agree that the dipole radiator would produce a higher ratio of delayed, reverberant energy to direct than the monopole. -- jdm56 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jdm56's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9919 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38593 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
