Hi Paul,
I don't have TC2+ in the list of drivers, do you think you could mail me the WinISD file for it? Also for my Coral Beta 8, what should I enter for the parameters? I'm a little confused on the terminology here...
So I guess to plot multiple curves, just open more 'projects' will do correct?
thanks for helping!
I don't have TC2+ in the list of drivers, do you think you could mail me the WinISD file for it? Also for my Coral Beta 8, what should I enter for the parameters? I'm a little confused on the terminology here...
So I guess to plot multiple curves, just open more 'projects' will do correct?
thanks for helping!
funny, it seems quite a few aussies are interested in this thread!!
Have been tossing up whether I need to get a sub or not, only listen to two channel not HT, and if I were to go for subs have been seriously considering something from the servo rythmik line.
The positive feedback seen over the last few pages is encouraging!
My big conceptual question is-do I need it?? I get a very flat response down to 30 hz (well 29 actually) after which it drops like a stone.
Sooo, for the remaining small bit of the frequency band I am missing the question has to be asked, does it matter?
I quickly threw together a Thor a la Seigfreid Linkwitz, just had a driver sitting around and to be honest it didn't seem to make a hell of a difference. Of course, it must be said that that sub would not be approaching one of these in quality, but none the less the doubt remains.
Of course, if I had one (or two) subs like this you would lessen the load on the mains by cutting them of higher and letting the sub do the hard work lower, the benefit there may not be in increased extension but maybe lessened distortion overall, in in effect end up with a four way.
I realise that I haven't asked anything here, so how about this. Accepting that these subs are of good quality (as seems to be the case) what argument could be mounted about getting one/pair given that I already get flat to 30 hz?? It would be a different question if I used it for HT, how much music is there down to say 20 hz??
In any case, if this post goes thru to the keeper, am enjoying this thread and will watch developments with interest.
thanks all
Have been tossing up whether I need to get a sub or not, only listen to two channel not HT, and if I were to go for subs have been seriously considering something from the servo rythmik line.
The positive feedback seen over the last few pages is encouraging!
My big conceptual question is-do I need it?? I get a very flat response down to 30 hz (well 29 actually) after which it drops like a stone.
Sooo, for the remaining small bit of the frequency band I am missing the question has to be asked, does it matter?
I quickly threw together a Thor a la Seigfreid Linkwitz, just had a driver sitting around and to be honest it didn't seem to make a hell of a difference. Of course, it must be said that that sub would not be approaching one of these in quality, but none the less the doubt remains.
Of course, if I had one (or two) subs like this you would lessen the load on the mains by cutting them of higher and letting the sub do the hard work lower, the benefit there may not be in increased extension but maybe lessened distortion overall, in in effect end up with a four way.
I realise that I haven't asked anything here, so how about this. Accepting that these subs are of good quality (as seems to be the case) what argument could be mounted about getting one/pair given that I already get flat to 30 hz?? It would be a different question if I used it for HT, how much music is there down to say 20 hz??
In any case, if this post goes thru to the keeper, am enjoying this thread and will watch developments with interest.
thanks all
terry j said:
Terry,
my mains also go to below 30Hz. And no, I don't listen to test CDs, and have perhaps grand total of 3 CDs that will go below that (one is gimmicky Time Warp and other two are classical with low organ pedals used). Sorry, make that 4, Kunzel's '1812' uses real cannons supposedly hitting 8Hz!
Bottom line, I'll never need subs if I was only to use them for below 30Hz duty.
BUT ! As you have observed, most drivers will distort dramatically less if relieved of high excursion duties. Just look at just about any driver's distortion specs - once you go below 100Hz they ramp up like a tsunami wave ! Dedicated subs are different beasts, and with servo feedback they are even better.
So that is the idea for me ... the question remains about integration. Matching phase shift, delay and combined acoustic and electric filter characteristic on both sides is no child's play. I still have painful memories of searching for that elusive sub to match Quad's incomparable ESL 57's.
I have failed miserably ...
That's the scary bit for me anyway.
hi all
thanks for your feedback, I guess it's fair to say that for sound quality everyone agrees that it's better if you can to have the subs.
I'm certainly leaning that way, if only as Bratislav says (how was your trip Bratislav??) to lessen the load on the mains.
Integration would be my biggest concern, at the moment my mains are a three way using the deqx to tri amp them. Add the subs (if I bit the bullet I think I'd go the whole hog and get one each side) and in effect it becomes a four way, and in addition to whatever eq I'd apply to the mains bass the subs would need eq as well, BUT I'm not sure I could justify the expense of a second deqx for that role!!
Now is the perfect time for me I suppose to make the decision, as I intend very soon to rebuild my mains into their final form (unashamedly based and inspired by the SF stradivari) and so should actually build them into the box at the outset.
That I feel is a bit off topic, so to bring it back on topic anyone up for some sort of group buy in Aus to help with freight costs?
Will re-read th rythmik site and perhaps send an email or two, must first talk to the 'boss' I suppose, she controls the purse strings ha ha.
thanks for your feedback, I guess it's fair to say that for sound quality everyone agrees that it's better if you can to have the subs.
I'm certainly leaning that way, if only as Bratislav says (how was your trip Bratislav??) to lessen the load on the mains.
Integration would be my biggest concern, at the moment my mains are a three way using the deqx to tri amp them. Add the subs (if I bit the bullet I think I'd go the whole hog and get one each side) and in effect it becomes a four way, and in addition to whatever eq I'd apply to the mains bass the subs would need eq as well, BUT I'm not sure I could justify the expense of a second deqx for that role!!
Now is the perfect time for me I suppose to make the decision, as I intend very soon to rebuild my mains into their final form (unashamedly based and inspired by the SF stradivari) and so should actually build them into the box at the outset.
That I feel is a bit off topic, so to bring it back on topic anyone up for some sort of group buy in Aus to help with freight costs?
Will re-read th rythmik site and perhaps send an email or two, must first talk to the 'boss' I suppose, she controls the purse strings ha ha.
terry, a sub can be a backward step in SQ. This is true of many subs, and normally without a servo I'd expect woofers to be better than subs in SQ. When I added subs to my TL mains, I found the SQ dropped and the bass was less defined. This was true even when the subs were running at 1% of their xmax compared to the TLs using half their xmax. (I think a lot of DIYers over-emphasize the importance of flat BL curve).
What I noticed about my Rythmik is that it sounds very much like the bass from high end woofers. I recall liking the sound of some focal audiom 13" woofers. As I recall, they cost about $1k each which is more than the cost of the Rythmik 12" kit shipped with an amp included.
If 30 Hz is all you need, then there could be an argument for some reasonably priced hifi woofers, like Peerless SLS with an active xo and dedicated power amp. Still, by the time you include an amp and active xo and a box that is going to be bigger, the sub starts looking more and more attractive.
Also, I find the result is not the same. There is more to it than freq resp. There is more authority with a sub. I calibrate it to flat with and without the sub and the sound is not the same. In the past, the difference was the sub made the bass less defined. Now, it just has more authority.
Bass goes deeper than you think. I use a RTA all the time and there is always action down to 20 Hz. Often more than you think.
What I noticed about my Rythmik is that it sounds very much like the bass from high end woofers. I recall liking the sound of some focal audiom 13" woofers. As I recall, they cost about $1k each which is more than the cost of the Rythmik 12" kit shipped with an amp included.
If 30 Hz is all you need, then there could be an argument for some reasonably priced hifi woofers, like Peerless SLS with an active xo and dedicated power amp. Still, by the time you include an amp and active xo and a box that is going to be bigger, the sub starts looking more and more attractive.
Also, I find the result is not the same. There is more to it than freq resp. There is more authority with a sub. I calibrate it to flat with and without the sub and the sound is not the same. In the past, the difference was the sub made the bass less defined. Now, it just has more authority.
Bass goes deeper than you think. I use a RTA all the time and there is always action down to 20 Hz. Often more than you think.
Terry, trip was -er- exhausting. But it's good be be home !
Paul, yes, there could be "things" below 30Hz but they aren't produced by instruments (not usually anyway). Even if the lowest note on some instruments can go lower, it is seldom played, if ever.
Now, HT sound effects are different kettle of fish altogether, but I'm not into that sort of thing.
As far as SQ, I know for sure that Seas Excel bass drivers in my VAFs, despite having all the modern wizardry incorporated, struggle when pushed hard (or even not so hard). Their distortion figures go into whole percents as soon as you give them more than 1W at say below 60-70Hz.
Now, some may argue that distortion isn't heard easily at low frequencies, but contrary is true. Because our hearing (look how Fletcher-Munson curves bunch up at low frequencies!) even relatively small amount of harmonics will be heard as coloration. Big bass drivers don't have to work as hard. I can tell you that there is no small difference in bass quality between ATC's ('proper' 12" driver) and VAFs (so called 8" but in reality more like 6") in a large room when volume goes up. Now, I don't normally listen at those volumes, but knowing it now, it bothers me
Paul, yes, there could be "things" below 30Hz but they aren't produced by instruments (not usually anyway). Even if the lowest note on some instruments can go lower, it is seldom played, if ever.
Now, HT sound effects are different kettle of fish altogether, but I'm not into that sort of thing.
As far as SQ, I know for sure that Seas Excel bass drivers in my VAFs, despite having all the modern wizardry incorporated, struggle when pushed hard (or even not so hard). Their distortion figures go into whole percents as soon as you give them more than 1W at say below 60-70Hz.
Now, some may argue that distortion isn't heard easily at low frequencies, but contrary is true. Because our hearing (look how Fletcher-Munson curves bunch up at low frequencies!) even relatively small amount of harmonics will be heard as coloration. Big bass drivers don't have to work as hard. I can tell you that there is no small difference in bass quality between ATC's ('proper' 12" driver) and VAFs (so called 8" but in reality more like 6") in a large room when volume goes up. Now, I don't normally listen at those volumes, but knowing it now, it bothers me
Thanks guys
I guess I should say that the bass drivers I'm using are 18" PHL's (7030) which I marry up with a PHL 1660 mid, at 300hz.
The 18's have real authority, but being pro drivers don't really go that low, and to get them down to 30 hz takes an awful lot of boost. They don't seem to mind however, but of course theoretically it would seem that it would be less 'strain' if I only took them down to say 40-50hz and filled in the bottom with some quality subs, with an added benefit of going lower anyway. And by all accounts it seems that these rythmiks will do it with good sq.
Thinking on it further today, the integration of the subs is looming as the bigger problem, given my self-imposed restraints of not wanting the extra expense of using another deqx.
Whilst I could possibly use an external unit such as the behringer deq 2496 to handle the eq duties, I would be losing the huge advantage the deqx gives of being able to eq via the remote (this allows me to compensate for a bass heavy/shy recording via the remote). In the case where the sub is seperately eq'd then the remote would only affect the main bass driver, the sub will stay untouched.
One possible way around it would be to put a passive network between the mid and the tweeter, then allowing the deqx to treat the combined two drivers as a single unit (called upper say), then the main bass units could be the 'mid' leaving the subs as the 'bass'.In this case the remote eq functions would then operate on the system as a whole.
That of course means I have to design the passive network, something for which I am totally ill-qualified!!aarrggh.
An alternative would be to put an aftermarket active unit as the x-over, but it would have to be of reasonably high quality given where in the frequency scale it is being inserted, which starts back towards expensive.
Does anyone know of a quality unit that would suit for this application?? The trouble with a passive network would be to match the steep slopes I currently use between the drivers, cause from memory the mid's response goes a bit wonky up around 5-6k, which I avoid at the moment with 200 db slopes.
Having said that, maybe the problems I'm envisaging with a passive network aren't as bad as I imagine.
What to do, what to do.
I guess I should say that the bass drivers I'm using are 18" PHL's (7030) which I marry up with a PHL 1660 mid, at 300hz.
The 18's have real authority, but being pro drivers don't really go that low, and to get them down to 30 hz takes an awful lot of boost. They don't seem to mind however, but of course theoretically it would seem that it would be less 'strain' if I only took them down to say 40-50hz and filled in the bottom with some quality subs, with an added benefit of going lower anyway. And by all accounts it seems that these rythmiks will do it with good sq.
Thinking on it further today, the integration of the subs is looming as the bigger problem, given my self-imposed restraints of not wanting the extra expense of using another deqx.
Whilst I could possibly use an external unit such as the behringer deq 2496 to handle the eq duties, I would be losing the huge advantage the deqx gives of being able to eq via the remote (this allows me to compensate for a bass heavy/shy recording via the remote). In the case where the sub is seperately eq'd then the remote would only affect the main bass driver, the sub will stay untouched.
One possible way around it would be to put a passive network between the mid and the tweeter, then allowing the deqx to treat the combined two drivers as a single unit (called upper say), then the main bass units could be the 'mid' leaving the subs as the 'bass'.In this case the remote eq functions would then operate on the system as a whole.
That of course means I have to design the passive network, something for which I am totally ill-qualified!!aarrggh.
An alternative would be to put an aftermarket active unit as the x-over, but it would have to be of reasonably high quality given where in the frequency scale it is being inserted, which starts back towards expensive.
Does anyone know of a quality unit that would suit for this application?? The trouble with a passive network would be to match the steep slopes I currently use between the drivers, cause from memory the mid's response goes a bit wonky up around 5-6k, which I avoid at the moment with 200 db slopes.
Having said that, maybe the problems I'm envisaging with a passive network aren't as bad as I imagine.
What to do, what to do.
Lots of interest in Rythmik's subs for the Aussie crowd.
I ordered 3 kits a couple of months ago (2 x 12"CV + 1 x 15" for a friend) and they are now starting to arrive (interestingly not at the same time). I have 2 subwoofer cabinets ready for driver mounting, so I guess I have something to do this weekend!
I'll report findings once they are assembled & tested. I bought the kits for home theatre duty - I have a pair of Dunlavy SC-IVa speakers for mains that are -3db at 20Hz however they will distort with loud bass passages (mostly when doing HT duty, not music) and dont quite give me the authority I'd like, even with music. I'll try rolling off my mains below 50Hz which hopefully will give me better authority, HT rumble and not compromise music listening (which was the main reason for going the servo route).
Regards,
Dean
I ordered 3 kits a couple of months ago (2 x 12"CV + 1 x 15" for a friend) and they are now starting to arrive (interestingly not at the same time). I have 2 subwoofer cabinets ready for driver mounting, so I guess I have something to do this weekend!
I'll report findings once they are assembled & tested. I bought the kits for home theatre duty - I have a pair of Dunlavy SC-IVa speakers for mains that are -3db at 20Hz however they will distort with loud bass passages (mostly when doing HT duty, not music) and dont quite give me the authority I'd like, even with music. I'll try rolling off my mains below 50Hz which hopefully will give me better authority, HT rumble and not compromise music listening (which was the main reason for going the servo route).
Regards,
Dean
Bratislav, I don't quite know how it works, but I do know there is always 20 Hz content in music - I see it as I have the RTA running all the time. If it's there in the original and it contributes to a faithful reproduction then I want to hear it. Some say why bother below 30 or 40 Hz for music, others say 20 Hz isn't enough, you must have 10 Hz! Personally I think 20 Hz is a good target - it's easy to achieve and worth doing. For music only, it wouldn't bother me if I only got down to 30 Hz, but who not go to 20 Hz if you can?
If you look at the fundamental notes of instruments, then they are all above 30 Hz, yet there is more going on than this, because there IS content below that in music, and I'm not just talking about organs! I'm also not talking about synthesized stuff.
Terry, it sounds to me like you are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Just use the low level outputs from the Rythmik plate amp. This gives you a 2nd order highpass for your woofers. Effectively the amp has a built in active crossover. Just use that and you won't need to add on anything else.
You have a few options.
1. Run your 18" drivers to say 50 Hz with them tuned at this point. That gives you 4th order acoustic rolloff. Then cross the sub in at this point, and switch to 4th order crossover at this point. Cross at the -6db point.
2. Put the 18" drivers in a sealed box and see where your -3db point is. Cross with a 2nd order option on the sub at this point. Don't use the low level outputs in this case.
3. Same as previous, but use the low level outputs and use 4th order for the sub. This gives you a 4th order crossover with -6db at the xo point.
Simulate in WinISD pro.
If you look at the fundamental notes of instruments, then they are all above 30 Hz, yet there is more going on than this, because there IS content below that in music, and I'm not just talking about organs! I'm also not talking about synthesized stuff.
Terry, it sounds to me like you are making this more complicated than it needs to be. Just use the low level outputs from the Rythmik plate amp. This gives you a 2nd order highpass for your woofers. Effectively the amp has a built in active crossover. Just use that and you won't need to add on anything else.
You have a few options.
1. Run your 18" drivers to say 50 Hz with them tuned at this point. That gives you 4th order acoustic rolloff. Then cross the sub in at this point, and switch to 4th order crossover at this point. Cross at the -6db point.
2. Put the 18" drivers in a sealed box and see where your -3db point is. Cross with a 2nd order option on the sub at this point. Don't use the low level outputs in this case.
3. Same as previous, but use the low level outputs and use 4th order for the sub. This gives you a 4th order crossover with -6db at the xo point.
Simulate in WinISD pro.
paulspencer said:
Paul,
I do visit live concerts (perhaps on average twice a month). Subsonic stuff can come from many things (movements in the floor, trams, trucks or subways nearby etc.). It does get recorded, especially with modern equipment. The only time I felt more than heard the music was with Taiko Drums (and only when big one was played at full blast) and of course in pieces where largest tympani is used (quite seldom). Of course, organ is a granddaddy of them all, capable of truly building demolition frequencies and volumes ! But again, lowest pedals are almost never used, and when they are, volume is typically kept at disappointingly low levels.
In any case, I can live with 30Hz extension. Just need it clean and -well- loud
But you're right if we can reach 20Hz, why not ?
When I integrated my DS 15, I bought a BFD and using REW, I set about optimizing everything.
The first thing I did was play with room placement, and when I was done with that I had a curve that was fairly optimal, and some folks over at Home Theater Shack suggested I leave it alone. I didn't of course, and after I optimized it as much as possible using the BFD, I can't really tell the difference by ear.
I guess what I am trying to say is that you may not need to EQ the heck out of the sub, unless your room has significant problems.
Paul
The first thing I did was play with room placement, and when I was done with that I had a curve that was fairly optimal, and some folks over at Home Theater Shack suggested I leave it alone. I didn't of course, and after I optimized it as much as possible using the BFD, I can't really tell the difference by ear.
I guess what I am trying to say is that you may not need to EQ the heck out of the sub, unless your room has significant problems.
Paul
That is one source of subsonic frequency. Let me say it is very unfortunately that the "bandwidth" requirement we often quoted was from "research" done 30 years when the difference between "static" and "dynamic" behavior was not as well known as today. It is correct that each note on the instrument has it is own "natural" frequency. However, that frequency normally takes time to settle. But what happen when before it settles? The bandwidth requirement for the stage of settling is greater than that of a static signal.
Second, this transient signal can travel along the instrument and gives a sense of "body" and this type of clue requires "dynamic signal". Wouldn't a constant playing of a particular note (if that is doable and enjoyable) lumps all information to just a few discrete spectral points? How does that play in providing us with the sense of sound stage?
Solo violin is my favorite instrument. A correctly done subwoofer can connect the ambience with the instrument to provide a correct portrait of the room or studio, vs a mediocre subwoofer can completely distroy the connection and one just hears the ambience as a noise totally unconnected to the event. You don't have to tell me the lowest note on a violin is not even remotely close to the upper limit of a subwoofer.
Brian
Rythmik Audio
rythmikaudio said:
Hi Brian,
I agree with your 'ambient' observation. I have several excellenet recordings of Bach's Sonatas and Partitas and prefer
by far Kremer's live recording at Lockenhaus, St. Nikolaus Church (ECM) to any of the studio stuff. It is just, well, right.
Whether a good subwoofer would further enhance these, can't really say (yet
). What I have no doubt about is that ambience noises (can't quite call them 'music') are somewhat exaggerated on CDs. I'm never aware of these in a live venue in the same way I am at home. Pehaps we tend to overlook them as our expectations are different ? I mean, large hall or church may be full of background subsonic creeks and knocs, but we kind of expect them and tend to hear through them. At home, I'm kind of surprised to hear them. It's a nice effect, but still sounds, well, artificial. Not unpleasant, mind you, but if anything, reminds me even more about shortcomings of domestic sound reproduction.
Thank goodness we have live concerts !!!
Bratislav
Bratislav said:
It is surprising that you though that way though. Chesky issued several test CDs in an attempt to explain how their audiophile recording is better because in addition to the mics to capture the instruments directly, they add additional mics to pick up the ambience (or reverberation). They even have the tracks to demo the sound of a dry studio. Compared that with "enhanced" ambience recording, I would rather choose the latter. In their test CD 3, they even demoed how that ambience can be added by computer (or DSP). In my opinion, that are awfully close to the natural recording. Chesky would not have developed those computer programs (Chesky is not a software company). They seem to claim all of their recordings are natural. So what are those programs being used? Movie companies. Whenever in the movie we hear that water dripping sound in an ancient jail cell, that is artificial ambience. For a sound effect, that is pretty cool.
Another thing to remember is each room has its own ambience and reverberation. I always wonder what makes the label of "Proprius" so popular in US audiophile community. The answer would be in the recording sites they have picked -- local bars, churches, or large music halls that the reverberation is so much enhanced. You may be right that we just love excessive ambience
Brian
Rythmik Audio
hi brian
not sure if I should ask you on the forum, But I'm certainly considering adding some subs, and I do like the look of yours.
I'm stuck on the integration aspect of how I'd get it into my system, given my post a little earlier.
Paul is probably right in that I may be making it more difficult than I need to, but I would like to run them via the deqx so as not to lose the full functionality of it. Some purists may even question the use of such a thing, but I have it and so that's the way it goes
I've been in touch with the supplier of my mids and tweeter (he is also a designer) and he is able and willing to do a passive cross between the two so freeing up an output on the deqx by which I can run the subs.
Do you see any problems with this arrangement??
I'd like to be able to build in the subs with the mains when I do the rebuild, but am beginning to think that the volume required will interfere with the look I want, so might have to go seperate enclosures. That is good in a way, as I can build the mains now and add the subs later, one advantage of the versatility of the deqx. That also means they can be closer to the front wall (I have my mains at least 1.5 m off the wall) thereby getting help from room gain.
Given the ability of the deqx for measuring and eq'ing, that would remove any need for a Linkwitx Transform wouldn't it?? Must admit I'm a little confused about that little piece of tech.
Thanks for popping on, although I realise it probably makes good business sense to do so, I still appreciate the ability to have the chat with you.
not sure if I should ask you on the forum, But I'm certainly considering adding some subs, and I do like the look of yours.
I'm stuck on the integration aspect of how I'd get it into my system, given my post a little earlier.
Paul is probably right in that I may be making it more difficult than I need to, but I would like to run them via the deqx so as not to lose the full functionality of it. Some purists may even question the use of such a thing, but I have it and so that's the way it goes
I've been in touch with the supplier of my mids and tweeter (he is also a designer) and he is able and willing to do a passive cross between the two so freeing up an output on the deqx by which I can run the subs.
Do you see any problems with this arrangement??
I'd like to be able to build in the subs with the mains when I do the rebuild, but am beginning to think that the volume required will interfere with the look I want, so might have to go seperate enclosures. That is good in a way, as I can build the mains now and add the subs later, one advantage of the versatility of the deqx. That also means they can be closer to the front wall (I have my mains at least 1.5 m off the wall) thereby getting help from room gain.
Given the ability of the deqx for measuring and eq'ing, that would remove any need for a Linkwitx Transform wouldn't it?? Must admit I'm a little confused about that little piece of tech.
Thanks for popping on, although I realise it probably makes good business sense to do so, I still appreciate the ability to have the chat with you.
rythmikaudio said:
It is surprising that you though that way though.
<snip>
Another thing to remember is each room has its own ambience and reverberation. I always wonder what makes the label of "Proprius" so popular in US audiophile community. The answer would be in the recording sites they have picked -- local bars, churches, or large music halls that the reverberation is so much enhanced. You may be right that we just love excessive ambience
Brian
Rythmik Audio
I think there is confusion (in my brain at least
) between what my eyes see and what I hear. I know my room pretty well; it is big, but nowhere near as big as Melbourne concert hall (Hamer Hall) or even less than average church. No amount of imagination or closing eyes can help. The room adds its own familiar reflections and they are so distinctly in conflict with ambience being portrayed that whole thing simply fails to convince. Coincidently, it is the same with levels - I can play the system at home at much higher levels than my normal seating gets exposed to, yet subjective perception of 'loudness' is never the same. Home system sounds either too loud, or not loud enough. Never right. I think we tend to forget that process of hearing involves brain, which gets overwhelmingly influenced by vision.
When I hear tympani or battery of contrabass' even when they are objectively not ear-splitting from where I hear them (good 20-30m away), they sound loud, as I am perfectly aware of distances and volumes involved. When I hear speakers, I know they are at least 10 times as close, radiating into a volume 1000s of times smaller. I think we are perfectly aware of energies involved, so even after cranking up the volume to deafening levels, paradoxically it still isn't perceived as loud !
Confusing, I admit .... but that's my take
Bratislav
Bratislav,
Now this is getting quite interesting. I don't normally listen to the type of material you are talking about, but my preference is for open baffle midrange. I believe OB is particularly well suited to recreating a large space, because of the way an OB interacts with the room. Side wall reflections are reduced, but there is increased longer delayed reflections. I have run my speakers as a TL and as OB, with eq to match the response. The difference is that the sound from the OB creates a much bigger sound stage, and I find the sound extends more beyond the speakers. The immediate reaction when going from OB back to a box speaker, all other things being equal, is that the sound suddenly sounds like it is coming from a speaker again.
I think some other key issues are distortion and dynamics. I've heard it said that you can tell live vs reproduced music even when you aren't in the room. It's easy to tell because it's about dynamics. Recorded music is too compressed to sound live. This is unfortunate, because even if you were to design a system capable of handling the dynamics and SPL of the live recording with low distortion, the recording would most often stuff it up. The other day I had Norah Jones on when I came into the house, and listened from outside the house to see how convincing it sounded. Sadly, I could tell it was a recording - the piano notes didn't quite have the punch in them.
Now this is getting quite interesting. I don't normally listen to the type of material you are talking about, but my preference is for open baffle midrange. I believe OB is particularly well suited to recreating a large space, because of the way an OB interacts with the room. Side wall reflections are reduced, but there is increased longer delayed reflections. I have run my speakers as a TL and as OB, with eq to match the response. The difference is that the sound from the OB creates a much bigger sound stage, and I find the sound extends more beyond the speakers. The immediate reaction when going from OB back to a box speaker, all other things being equal, is that the sound suddenly sounds like it is coming from a speaker again.
I think some other key issues are distortion and dynamics. I've heard it said that you can tell live vs reproduced music even when you aren't in the room. It's easy to tell because it's about dynamics. Recorded music is too compressed to sound live. This is unfortunate, because even if you were to design a system capable of handling the dynamics and SPL of the live recording with low distortion, the recording would most often stuff it up. The other day I had Norah Jones on when I came into the house, and listened from outside the house to see how convincing it sounded. Sadly, I could tell it was a recording - the piano notes didn't quite have the punch in them.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.