Oh I know what he *explains*.. I just can't understand it - at least not fully.
BTW, I believe he advocates near field AND a synthetic system. (..if I remember correctly - it's been several years since I've read his papers on the subject.) I've never tried that before, and it would certainly help (or at least makes sense) when using a sub into the lower midrange/upper bass.
Last edited:
bwaslo,
So are you saying that you have a 450hz mouth size and below that you are using a direct radiator? I have had horns with 75hz mouth size in my rather large living room, just for a short time, not something that I would want to keep there. But I will tell you my neighbor at the time wasn't to pleased with me.... I know about the dynamics of a horn are and the easy SPL levels with very low power, but I just go over the sound of compression drivers after enough years of hearing them, they have a very unique sound and not the best for listening in an intimate environment with a smooth frequency response. Lots of boost needed to get the top octave filled in up to 20khz.
So are you saying that you have a 450hz mouth size and below that you are using a direct radiator? I have had horns with 75hz mouth size in my rather large living room, just for a short time, not something that I would want to keep there. But I will tell you my neighbor at the time wasn't to pleased with me.... I know about the dynamics of a horn are and the easy SPL levels with very low power, but I just go over the sound of compression drivers after enough years of hearing them, they have a very unique sound and not the best for listening in an intimate environment with a smooth frequency response. Lots of boost needed to get the top octave filled in up to 20khz.
Using a Celestion CDX1-1445 as tweeter driver, there' no issue in this instance in reaching to 20kHz with normal CD compensation (not that I can hear anywhere near that high myself!). Actually, all drivers are playing from within the horn* (which keeps the system point source) though the horn only gives directivity control above about 450Hz.
Actually much easier on the ears than cone and domes I've used in the past and better in lower midrange than long BG ribbons in another favorite speaker. Also easier to understand dialog when used in HT with the Synergy. I find the pattern gives it a very relaxed effect in that the sound doesn't change (nor the image) if I move my head around, recline my chair, bend over to get a drink, walk nearby to get a CD from the rack, etc. It's much more like having music happening in the room than with other speakers, in that my movements don't effect the presentation with the large controlled directivity horns operating as point source. If you get a chance, go hear them. A similar effect is with the Geddes or Parham type large horn 2-ways, though those have more room variations (from being non-coincident? Or maybe just psychological).
*except a reflex port tuned to 40Hz, placed about 12" below the horn mouth.
Actually much easier on the ears than cone and domes I've used in the past and better in lower midrange than long BG ribbons in another favorite speaker. Also easier to understand dialog when used in HT with the Synergy. I find the pattern gives it a very relaxed effect in that the sound doesn't change (nor the image) if I move my head around, recline my chair, bend over to get a drink, walk nearby to get a CD from the rack, etc. It's much more like having music happening in the room than with other speakers, in that my movements don't effect the presentation with the large controlled directivity horns operating as point source. If you get a chance, go hear them. A similar effect is with the Geddes or Parham type large horn 2-ways, though those have more room variations (from being non-coincident? Or maybe just psychological).
*except a reflex port tuned to 40Hz, placed about 12" below the horn mouth.
Last edited:
bwaslo,
So you are not using the Paraline in your cabinet. You are using a conic horn with a secondary flare to extend the bottom and four what are those 8" or 6" speakers? So are you having to equalize the range below cutoff as that is a long way from mouth cutoff to your port tuning point?
So you are not using the Paraline in your cabinet. You are using a conic horn with a secondary flare to extend the bottom and four what are those 8" or 6" speakers? So are you having to equalize the range below cutoff as that is a long way from mouth cutoff to your port tuning point?
Yes, the mid and tweeter and top end of the 6" woofers are attenuated to match the conventional bass, not really getting any overall sensitivity boost from the waveguide. This one is just to get the drivers close together and to get directivity. Sensitivity wouldn't be bad, but I'm in the low 90's or so still, more than good enough for me. The bass goes down to about 40Hz, but I cross them over at 60Hz to subwoofers which I can place more optimally for the lows, and which do better down there than the 6" woofers.
I'm about to redo the crossover, Tom has given me some tips on how to approach linear phase response. Early modeling looks promising. I kinda hate to mess with these though, there isn't really anything I don't like about the sound right now. But maybe I can get it better, at least that's the idea.
No Paralines here, that's only in Danley's REALLY big horns so he can use multiple tweeter compression drivers at the throat. I haven't seen much I can do with a Paraline in the home yet (though there are people on diyaudio looking into that, maybe they'll come up with something?).
I'm about to redo the crossover, Tom has given me some tips on how to approach linear phase response. Early modeling looks promising. I kinda hate to mess with these though, there isn't really anything I don't like about the sound right now. But maybe I can get it better, at least that's the idea.
No Paralines here, that's only in Danley's REALLY big horns so he can use multiple tweeter compression drivers at the throat. I haven't seen much I can do with a Paraline in the home yet (though there are people on diyaudio looking into that, maybe they'll come up with something?).
I'd like to see higher resolution data, please.
This should be a standard test in any of the so called "HiFi" magazines.
I was talking about frequencies <80Hz. I doubt your box has much usable output there.
What was the bandwidth of your noise signal? What you hear is probably directional information of higher frequency content.
True for music but in movies there's tons of ultra low frequencies in the mains.
That's why I use multiple subs with EQ. Problem solved.
For this to work the source has to be very close to ones head. I once had a dipole sub directly behind the listening seat. Very deep and clean bass (nearly no modal effects). The problem is, as soon as you increase SPL, modal effects ruin the response.
I would have to re-read the Griesinger paper. Guess you're talking about "Loudspeaker and listener positions for optimal low-frequency spatial reproduction in listening rooms"? All I remember is a lot of "ifs".
You make too many assumptions. I use 4 12" elements in dipole for stereo bass.
I've done tests using low passed noise (4th & 8th order filter) with various corner freqs down to 50 Hz. It was a bit surprising that amplitude panning still works with dipole speakers at such a low freqs. But it does.
Why do you think it preserves low freq ITD cues ?
- Elias
The last thing I've seen from you was a bird box and nothing else. Is the system documented somewhere?
Would you mind posting those test signals?
Now you make too many assumptions. It doesn't preserve them and a monophonic signal is used. There are enough (and better) directional cues higher up in the mains so multiple subs simply have the duty to flatten the low frequency response. Works quite well.
Last edited:
for my part, as I have started this thread, the goal is more realistic reproduction of sterephonic recordings, and really no new formats are needed
it is possible with better solutions for loudspeaker-room interface problem, thinking about loudspeakers and room as a system (another thread I have started here) - not as enemies
this is what John Watkinson says and this is also what I am saying
real world propositions?
IF (a big "IF") one is into "more realism", then I have a few, first of all get a loudspeaker that is horizontally omnidirectional, then do not fight reflections but rather try to get a pattern that works best for You and Your room, use diffusors and deflectors, then read Floyd Toole's "Sound Reproduction: Loudspeakers and Rooms" and try to follow his recommendations, some of them I have quoted in my previous posts, leave side-walls untreated, try diffusors/deflectors on the front and back walls, then try Beveridge placement if You can, then try to get rid of a floor reflection - don't be afraid of a flooder (described in "loudspeakers and room as a system" thread), try to "flood" You own standmount speakers - the sound is not coming from the floor
and so on and so on
You can also try single bipolar stereo speaker with or without center - this is described in Elias' "single speaker" and "stereolith" threads - You may find it amazing in Your room and for Your taste
and so on
yes, Kantor approach is very interesting for people who believe they need no early reflections and a lot late reverberations, preferably lateral and from the rear quadrant, an opinion which I think is reasonable
I believe that this can be achieved without electronic delays
one needs a special bipolar speaker instead, or perhaps better called "bidirectional" - appropriately narrow directivity to the front - towards the listener - as in "Magic" AR MGC-1 and wide horizontal directivity to the back plus appropriate room positioning and a couple of deflectors on the rear and side wall in the vicinity of the speaker
in such a setup in a live room of around 4x5 meters first reflections reaching the listener position could be delayed by as much as 40 ms (forty ms) and they come laterally from 120 degrees
Earlier I also had narrow pattern constant directivity high frequency horns. What was worst about them I could locate the tweeter positions all the time. Their directivity was such that the floor (and ceiling and side wall) reflection was almost non existent (and besides that I have a thick carpet).
This would mean that floor reflection does not explain localisation of the speakers at high freqs (above about 2kHz).
By the way, for localisation experiments I have found it usefull to use band limited (less than 1 octave) signals to be able to focus in exact issue.
- Elias
but music is not band limited
anyway, my answer to Your previous post (via answering MaVo's post):
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ce-back-into-loudspeakers-35.html#post3162976
I believe that with horns it was the same - a combination of a auditory direction cue from crosstalk comb filter and a visual cue
What about the theory that a speaker has to be localizable for stereo to work properly?
Just like in stereoscopic picture viewing where the eye has to focus one single distance whereas convergence still works normally.
Surely it's due to interaural cross talk. Even slightest head movements reveal the speaker locations. Or at least directions. Because distance perception can be skewed depending on source material. Anyway, be it a location or a direction it is no good, and something should be done about it.
But, I wouldn't give too much emphasis on visual cues here, because on the other experiments where one creates an appropriate set of early reflections the speaker becomes impossible to localise even it is just 2 m in front of you and you are staring at it. For some people it might be hard to override the visual cues, but I think I'm not one of them.
- Elias
A dipole with some toe-in could do this (redirecting the rear lobe via the rear and side wall). Even though I have a very small room, I had a set-up more or like this with the speakers 2,5 m from the rear wall, reflection delay was ~15 ms. Did some nice things, but the room was quickly overloaded when turning up the volume.
Besides that it's not possible in most rooms. My next system will probably be something like the Kantor system, with side speakers for some ambience.
I see. Multiple subwoofer approach is a mono system.
Then a system that preserves low freq ITD cues is a better system.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.