Anyone tried stacked Stages for Center Channel

[JonFo]

JonFo,

What about the chances of doing this with three Stages instead of 5? With just 3 would there be any less tweaking since the speakers are closer together?

It would definitely not be a line array at that length, but might produce more output than just one unit. I'd also turn off the two outer tweeters on a 3 stack. Which implies needing to then EQ / Gain manage the one tweeter to have a more balanced output relative to the rest.

Not sure this would be quite the performance you'd be looking for.

 

[JonFo]

I just looked at the Statement manual and brochure. I can't say whether you are correct or not. The column of drivers are the bass modules not mid and high range. Which may or may not make a difference...

The Statement e2 used a line array of dipole mid-bass drivers to mate with the ESL. It also had a stack of bass modules as well.

The key is the mid-bass. Their line-array was long enough to achieve correct cylindrical wave front for (most of) those frequencies. This mated very well with the long ESL panel in that model.

I was partially inspired by that product when I designed my Center Channel, except I decided to use sealed box alignment for my mid-bass drivers.

For these frequencies, power shading is not really required.

Power shading and phase alignment is required as one goes up the frequency spectrum. See the white paper I posted earlier.

 

[robertawillisjr]

The Statement e2 used a line array of dipole mid-bass drivers to mate with the ESL. It also had a stack of bass modules as well.

The key is the mid-bass. Their line-array was long enough to achieve correct cylindrical wave front for (most of) those frequencies. This mated very well with the long ESL panel in that model.

I was partially inspired by that product when I designed my Center Channel, except I decided to use sealed box alignment for my mid-bass drivers.

For these frequencies, power shading is not really required.

Power shading and phase alignment is required as one goes up the frequency spectrum. See the white paper I posted earlier.

Thank you.

 

[JayJayHache]

For more detail on the ‘why’ and a good bit of ‘how’, please read this white paper on line array theory and design. It’s written in a very accessible manner by an expert in the field.

That was very helpful in many respects - Thanks!
I've done some more digging and can now see that the gaps between the drivers are the majority of the problem at the higher frequencies from superposition of the frequencies - just as you've said

One option could be to switch to a stack of theatre-i CCs - these have a stack of 3 tweeters per unit and thus far less gaps between drivers in a stack.... but is also discontinued.

I'm now leaning towards shifting 100% to an AT screen - and using a standard floorstander ML as the centre channel. I can buy a pair of Ascent-i's for under £3500 - half of which should hold up well against the Prodigy FL & FR.
I'm now running a Sim2 Lumis FP system and have bags of light output to play with - but i'd be at the extreems of the wide-angle setting for my T2 Lens if I bring the screen away from the wall. That plus a new 14 foot screen should cost less than 10K - which is less than any 5-stack I can put together +/- processing units etc.

Thanks Guys! Help was handy for me...
JayJayHache

 

[JMAUSGP]

JonFo,

Do you think that a CLX placed on it's side would work well for the Center Channel?

I can configure an aluminum mounting bracket for the CLX so it is not actually on the floor but what do you think about it working horizontally in conjunction with the other CLXs?

 

[JayJayHache]

Do you think that a CLX placed on it's side would work well for the Center Channel?

I'm sure JonFo will answer but I've tried something similar myself unsucessfully - using Aerius-i - what happens is there is no horizontal dispersion for the high frequencies when the CC is on it's side - so unless you are sitting dead centre everthing is muddy.

JayJayHache