I assume you're asking about the Econowave and not the dipole?
See below graph. The 115db is actually 97db in real measurement as my tools are not calibrated to real SPL. Hence at 50hz, the efficiency of Eminence 12 in the box is 90db.
The black line is the effect of Linkwitz transform and at that time I set the target pole and q to be 20hz and 0.707 respectively. Since then I changed them to 20hz and 0.5 (critically damped). Such is the flexibility with active XO.
With regards to max SPL, this is entirely dependent on surface area and excursion. "SPL_MAX" spreadsheet at Linkwitzlab is a nifty tool to approximate it. I haven't punched in the number as I did not need it (it's very loud already).
Last edited:
That's more than 20dB boost @20Hz if I read it right 
Is Beta 12 doing OK with this?
Last time I did a test to my 18" :
YouTube - Eminence SigmaPro18 doing 20Hz.AVI
The harmonic distortions were all over the place. Then I put a very deep notch @ 20Hz to release the improper load to those poor things.
Is Beta 12 doing OK with this?
Last time I did a test to my 18" :
YouTube - Eminence SigmaPro18 doing 20Hz.AVI
The harmonic distortions were all over the place. Then I put a very deep notch @ 20Hz to release the improper load to those poor things.
The final version has Q of 0.5 (-6db at 20hz) so the EQ is about 17. Yes, they're fine. My ears/wife gave up before the Beta distort.
I can relate to your observations. As my point of reference is the dipoles, having lived with them longer, I see the CD as "forceful" for the lack of a better word. SL used the analogy "rectangular window" versus "Cloud". So most likely we are trying to convey the same subjective feeling about those loudspeaker's presentations.
Again, it seems to come down to personal preference. May I know what you listen to mostly? Myself I listen to a lot of acoustic recordings. I did notice briefly that with studio music and close-miked stuff like pop music, the CD vs. Dipole is much less relevant.
Perhaps It's good time also to review what the champions of these types of Loudspeaker listen to. It may have driven them to the direction they are going?
Earl Geddes:
3D audio report
Sigfried Linkwitz:
Surround stereo system
YouTube - Sigfried Linkwitz Interview - Orion and Pluto Loudspeakers
SL seems to be more interested into live classical concerts and ambience reproduction of it. That had driven him to develop microphones, etc. I could be wrong, but I also do not see HT being a consideration. Linkwitz' room does not even have a TV.
So... different preference leads to different loudspeaker. I think ?
Last edited:
I assume you're asking about the Econowave and not the dipole?
See below graph. The 115db is actually 97db in real measurement as my tools are not calibrated to real SPL. Hence at 50hz, the efficiency of Eminence 12 in the box is 90db.
The black line is the effect of Linkwitz transform and at that time I set the target pole and q to be 20hz and 0.707 respectively. Since then I changed them to 20hz and 0.5 (critically damped). Such is the flexibility with active XO.
With regards to max SPL, this is entirely dependent on surface area and excursion. "SPL_MAX" spreadsheet at Linkwitzlab is a nifty tool to approximate it. I haven't punched in the number as I did not need it (it's very loud already).
Yes, I was asking about the econowave. That is indeed a lot of EQ. Really though, once you get into the low 30s, it feels pretty deep in terms of perceived bass response.
Anyway, this helps, thanks! I have a smallish space (18' x 12') and it would probably get too loud before running out of excursion.
Btw, were the subs on when listening to the dipoles and off during the econowaves? That would certainly impact the perception of dynamics.
Cloud also works for me in describing what I've heard from OBs - light, diffuse, insubstantial and wet.
I listen to a lot of stuff. Much of it modern music, but over the last few years I am discovering classical again and opera for the first time. Most jazz leaves me cold at best and searching for automatic weapons at worst.
Upright bass is often used as an example of why OB's are better, but I had a bass teacher for some years who often used his URB in class, and the OBs so far have not had the weight or body (hate using descriptive stuff for audio) that I recall from his.
Beethoven's 9th Ode to Joy is the main soundtrack in my head, interspersed with whatever catches my ear that day.
Perhaps it does. If the acoustic is already recorded into the performance, I'm still not seeing (or hearing so far) the advantage in having the room involved via rear radiation from a dipole in many cases.
My room will be dual purpose music and HT, but it was designed from scratch to have the 2ch the same as I would were it single use music, and add quality surrounds etc later (one reason it's taken so long and cost a bit). It's also configured so the 2ch analogue or digital can go straight into the xover in the most direct path - no AVR etc unless movies are being viewed.
I have read SL, MJK and JKs sites over the years, tried a few myself based upon that, heard a few others, but so far not an SL or JK design, ie no Orion or NaO or variant. The last was at a GTG in October and I will hear the new iteration of it in the next few weeks.
So far, none have gained the slightest bit of interest on my part in pursuing further builds of this type. My description before was slightly tongue in cheek, but not too far off how the ones I have heard, have sounded to me. Monet is still a better description.
So basically, I am not really interested in a discussion of those systems that don't exist any more or might have changed in the mean time.
It is with considerable personal gratification that I observe EconoWave receiving fair measure and scrutiny in threads such as these in comparison to alternative technologies and topologies. We continue to improve the original "Econo" platform for precisely this purpose, our intent from its very outset....
Monet versus Architectural Drawing
I can follow you easily.
On the other hand - quite any *real* sound is exactly that like - cluttered with reflections / echoes / reverberation .
There was a nice experiment when an orchestra was to be recorded in a anechoic environment to have a "clean" basis for further tests on perception of room influence.
Those musicians had a really hard time to get the pieces right - simply because they did not have any acoustic room to sense while playing.
I'm pretty sure you will answer regarding "fidelity" and so on - but thats not exactly the point I was making.
John did put it best when he said "because it is really the room that is the system"
In the end its a matter of taste (kind of) which frame you like on the picture. Consider the "cloud" as the frame and it becomes more easy to focus on the presentation embedded (the picture), which is by no means pale, washed or diffuse with OB.
Just my 2ct
Michael
I can follow you easily.
On the other hand - quite any *real* sound is exactly that like - cluttered with reflections / echoes / reverberation .
There was a nice experiment when an orchestra was to be recorded in a anechoic environment to have a "clean" basis for further tests on perception of room influence.
Those musicians had a really hard time to get the pieces right - simply because they did not have any acoustic room to sense while playing.
I'm pretty sure you will answer regarding "fidelity" and so on - but thats not exactly the point I was making.
John did put it best when he said "because it is really the room that is the system"
In the end its a matter of taste (kind of) which frame you like on the picture. Consider the "cloud" as the frame and it becomes more easy to focus on the presentation embedded (the picture), which is by no means pale, washed or diffuse with OB.
Just my 2ct
Michael
IMO, with a dipole it is very important to have the front and rear radiation from the speaker have the same or similar spectral content if the reflected sound is to be correctly balanced. That is why I designed the NaO II and Note with rear tweeters, and basically why SL eventually added a rear tweeter to the Orion. Once that is accomplished, assuming that by front wall you means the wall behind the speaker, then yes, it should be treated to provide the level of reflected energy that is satisfactory to you. In my room I have drapes behind the speakers as you can see in this picture.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The drapes are in the corners and extend about 3 feet into the room from the side walls. The center section of the front wall is bare except for some art work.
That said, I typically prefer a room with RT60 around 300 msec. SL recommends something in the 600 msec range. To my tastes 600msec is way to reverberant.
Room RT60 is another issue that has to be addressed. Let's be honest. If you place either the dipole or the direct radiator CD speaker (or any other speaker) in an anechoic chamber and the have the same response at the observation point, then they are going to sound pretty much the same. Directivity only becomes an issue in a reverberant environment.
I do not find dipole bass satisfactory, which is why I do not build system with dipole woofers. My speakers are designed with U-frame, quasi-cardioid, acoustic resistance enclosures which behave more like monopole woofer but couple differently to the room. Several years ago I built a woofer system called the CRAW = Controlled Radiation Active Woofer. It used two drivers and could be switched between monopole, dipole and cardioid formats. Each format had the exact same free field response. I measured and listened to this woofer any arbitrary positions in several listening rooms and I found the cardioid to be the must flexible and satisfactory.
I would say that highly directional speakers which minimize the effects of room reverberation tend to give you more of a window on the performance. The image is laid out in front of you and you look into it. As the room reverberation is increased there is more of a sense of openness and bringing the performance into the room. They are two different approaches to listening and there are many degrees in between. What suits one listener may not suit another.
But at lease for me, I don't see any revelations here. It just seem like CD is the current hot topic. What's next, the Bose 901 clone?
Hi Gainfile,
congrats, good job. A nice, reasonable and honest write up !
When I started reading the thread the other day, I had a similar thought: Speakers are like motor bikes. You should have several ones depending on the kind of ride. A 916 for Sunday mornings before the Police gets up. A BMW for vacation and a Japanese 600cc or a 675 Daytona for the race track. So we play the speaker that fits the mood / program material.
Slightly OT again:
I was studying the MiniDSP links about the LT and played with the spread sheet. It really seems that the guys from NL have implemented it properly. I test drove the LT tab of the spread sheet with another application of the LT than LF extension: You can use it to make the HP behavior of a driver part of the acoustical HP transfer function (filter + driver). I also tried it with Q<0.5 and seems to work as well. So for now this is the only DSP S/W I know that can do it !
congrats, good job. A nice, reasonable and honest write up !
Two years ago I would have thought that as well. It was actually one of the behaviors that fascinated me about dipoles right away.
So funny that you say that !Being a fan of sportsbikes, the CD must be something of a Ducati: Fast, loud, and exciting. But try to ride them for long journey and your back will scream in protest. The dipoles would be those japanese bikes: smooth and forgiving. I ride a Kawasaki Ninja, and my preference is ......... Dipoles
When I started reading the thread the other day, I had a similar thought: Speakers are like motor bikes. You should have several ones depending on the kind of ride. A 916 for Sunday mornings before the Police gets up. A BMW for vacation and a Japanese 600cc or a 675 Daytona for the race track. So we play the speaker that fits the mood / program material.Slightly OT again:
I was studying the MiniDSP links about the LT and played with the spread sheet. It really seems that the guys from NL have implemented it properly. I test drove the LT tab of the spread sheet with another application of the LT than LF extension: You can use it to make the HP behavior of a driver part of the acoustical HP transfer function (filter + driver). I also tried it with Q<0.5 and seems to work as well. So for now this is the only DSP S/W I know that can do it !
Hello gainphile,
Would you be able to post the impulse responses of both of these speakers at the listening distance (2-3m)? I'm interested to see the room response in time-frequency domain so I'll run some wavelets on them and post here, if that is ok?
ARTA export will do, WAV or ASCII. Should be > 200ms in duration. Ungated.
- Elias
Would you be able to post the impulse responses of both of these speakers at the listening distance (2-3m)? I'm interested to see the room response in time-frequency domain so I'll run some wavelets on them and post here, if that is ok?
ARTA export will do, WAV or ASCII. Should be > 200ms in duration. Ungated.
- Elias
Not disagreeing with anything you've said, but from a long term audio DIYer's perspective, I would have said OB's were the current hot topic, more so than CD speakers at least amongst the 2ch audio set. Zilch's work on CD designs has made them popular amongst a certain subset, but to my eye, it appears OB's (and I am speaking as a class of non box systems of whatever variant) are more popular for the same reason SET amplifiers had a huge popularity run a few years ago; they are simple to build, at least on the surface and that attracts novice DIYers.
Whilst I personally am not so keen on OB class speakers, just as I dislike most SET amps, I am keen on people becoming involved in DIY audio, if for no other reason than it gives many a much better perspective on what the mainstream audio industry actually sells.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.