TECH

Syn-Aud-Con TOPIC
Supplement to Newsletter Volume 26, Number 3 Summer 1998  Pat Brown

Low-Frequency Directivity and Arrays

by Pat Brown

The lack of low frequency directivity is a problem
that plagues many sound systems. It is usually manifested
by poor gain-before-feedback at low frequencies where
the loudspeaker radiation becomes either omnidirectional
or directional with a radiation pattern that is unsuitable for
the array’s position. It is possible and even feasible in
some applications to achieve low frequency directivity by
An omnidirectional radiator would produce a sound level
that is the same at each mic position around the device. A
“point source” suggests such a radiator that is infinitely
small in size. While this is never realized in practice, the
theory provides useful results if the radiator is very small
relative to the wavelengths that it is emitting.
horn loading loudspeakers, but the shear physical size of
“bass horns” makes them impractical for many applica-
tions. It is a well-documented fact that low frequency di-
rectivity can also be achieved by constructing arrays of
direct radiators positioned in such a way that their interac-
tion allows the radiated energy to be concentrated in one
or more directions. This information is not new, and was
well documented in the early days of motion picture the-
ater systems in the first half of this century. What is sur-
prising however how often these principles are overlooked
by system designers, evidenced by the number of com-
mercially implemented systems that violate low frequency
array principals.
This Tech Topic is an attempt to quantify the theory
and application of low frequency arrays for sound rein-
forcement applications, and is essentially a “repackaging”
of an existing knowledge base using some modern tools
for presentation and clarification. The Tech Topic does
not address the modal response of the room, and makes
the assumption that the spaces in which these arrays might
be implemented are very large with respect to the array.
In other words, free field radiation conditions are assumed
in which the inverse square law correctly describes the
propagation of energy as a function of time and distance.
The other assumption made is that the individual radiators

Wavelength (Ft)
111 11 1.1
5 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 5.6 3.7 2.5
0 7 5 2 8 6 4 2

2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8

10 100 1K
Frequency

Wavelength vs. Frequency chart for determining subwoofer spacing.

Volume 26 No. 3 1
that make up the arrays are themselves “point sources” From the chart at right, phase difference summation
radiating energy equally in all directions at the frequen- note that the energy sum- (degrees) (dB)
0 6.02
cies of interest and much smaller physically than the mation between two devices 10 5.99
wavelengths being radiated. A benefit of this approach is can be as high as 6 dB (re- 20 5.89
that the resultant arrays are independent of manufac- sulting from in-phase sum- 30 5.72
40 5.48
turer, and can be implemented using most any low fre- mation) or can result in com- 50 5.17
quency loudspeaker and enclosure that approximates a plete cancellation when the 60 4.77
point source. radiated waves are 180 de- 70 4.29
80 3.71
A number of excellent software modeling tools are grees out of phase. Cancel- 90 3.01
available for investigations of this type, and have served lations of this type indicate 100 2.18
designers for a number of years. The application chosen that the energy has been ra- 110 1.19
120 0
for this Tech Topic is ArraySHOWTM from Mark Ureda diated in a different direc- 130 -1.46
and EVI Audio, chosen mainly for its simplicity, speed, tion, and does not mean that 140 -3.30
and graphic output capabilities. the energy no longer exists. 150 -5.72
Low frequency arrays are 160 -9.19
170 -15.17
Background theory effectively “energy steering” 180 infinity
For our purposes, and array is a combination of two systems, that can be used to
or more low frequency point sources in close enough keep the energy on the au-
Summation of two
proximity to allow acoustic coupling at the frequencies dience and off of the micro-
equal-level sources
of interest. The graph on page 1 shows the relationship phones.
between acoustic wavelength and frequency, and while
it would be possible to speak in terms of frequency alone
the use of wavelength provides much more insight into
the processes.
Harry Olson, in his 1939 book Acoustical Engineer-
ing documented the interaction of omnidirectional radia-
tors when placed in close proximity. The graphic at right
provides some insight into this interaction as a function
of the fractional wavelength spacing of the devices. The
lobes result from the time/distance offset between the
energy arrivals from the radiators at various positions Polar response of spaced radiators at a single frequency
around the array. The principle of superposition is used as a function of wavelength. (Note: Polars will be
to combine the responses of the devices as a function of mirror-imaged for omnidirectional radiators.)
the phase offset between them resulting from their physi-
From Acoustical Engineering
cal spacing and the point of observation.

1/4 λ 1/2 λ 1λ
Polars of devices spaced by fraction of wavelength for one-third octave bandwidths.

2 Syn-Aud-Con Tech Topic

 Performance spaces that require sound reinforce-
ment normally have several possible locations for the
low frequency arrays. These are:
Directly above the stage
Directly in front of or under the stage
Stage right, stage left or both
It would be impossible to construct one specific low
frequency array whose energy radiation is optimized for
all of these positions. For instance, an array over a stage
would need to radiate minimal energy straight down, yet
maintain a broad horizontal coverage pattern. The same
array placed on stage left or stage right could radiate
excessive energy to allow distant miking - an application
where a null toward the stage might be desirous. The
first step of implementing an array therefore becomes
the decision as to where it must be placed; something
determined by the physical constraints and conditions
that exist in all venues.
The variables that determine the polar response of
an array are:
1. The number of devices
2. The spacing between the devices
3. The frequency (wavelength of interest)
4. The time offset between the devices (delay)
5. The polarity of the devices
6. The relative levels of the devices
All of these parameters can be readily input into the
computer, and the polar responses generated.
The following pages depict some arrays that have
been optimized for each type of placement. pb
Horizontal spacing: 3 wavelengths at 100 Hz (33 ft). This is not a recommended placement, but does serve
to show the lobing caused by split subwoofers.
Volume 26 No. 3
Array Guidelines
Some conclusions can be drawn from the array
models:
1. For most venues, sub arrays should be stacked
vertically to narrow vertical coverage and maintain hori-
zontal coverage.
2. If subs are to be split horizontally, they should
be as far apart as possible (> 5 wavelengths).
3. If subs MUST be arrayed horizontally, con-
sider the Bessel array.
4. Cardioid subwoofers can be useful for control-
ling rear radiation.
5. Remember that the polars are frequency de-
pendent, and a good polar at one frequency will pro-
duce the opposite effect at twice (or half) that fre-
quency. For this reason, it may be necessary to use
multi-way subwoofer systems with each passband
optimized for the desired polar.
6. The room’s response will interact with the
subwoofer array response, and can nullify the ben-
efits of the array.
7. A ridgid boundary near a subwoofer (floor, wall,
ceiling or combination) will produce a reflection that
can be treated as another low frequency source. The
principles of subwoofer spacing apply, and the best
coupling takes place within 1/8 wavelength of the sur-
face, producing a mirror image that couples with the
sound source as though separated by 1/4 wavelength.
Interested designers can perform these investiga-
tions using ArraySHOWTM software from EVI Audio
(Customer Service Department: 1-800-234-6831
Phone 616-955-6831 Fax.
3
From Joe Etrick... A “Car-
dioid” subwoofer from an
AES paper authored by
George Augspurger. Device B
B is located 1/4 wavelength A
behind the device A (34” at
100 Hz), inverted in polar-
ity and delayed by 2.5 ms.
A good choice when rear ra-
diation must be reduced.

Five subs lined up horizon-

tally within 1/4 wavelength.
Note the narrowing of the
horizontal coverage. This is
a useful configuration if ro-
tated 90 degrees, which
“swaps” the horizontal and
vertical patterns.

The same configuration as

above, but with each sub
“splayed” by 15 degrees
forming an arc array. When
located over a stage, the low
frequency spill prevents
good gain-before-feedback.

The same configuration as

above, but with the subs con-
figured as a Bessel array.
The outside loudspeakers (A
and E) are reduced in level A
B
by 3 dB, and loudspeaker B C
D
or D is connected reverse- E
polarity. This can be useful
if the subs MUST be located
in front (or under ) the stage
and a broader horizontal
radiation pattern is desired.

4 Syn-Aud-Con Tech Topic