Sounds like a title for another "uninteresting" thread
Such an approach would probably decrease efficiency considerably.
To dismiss the Audielity system as "stupid" without hearing one can hardly be fair. My experience as an audio engineer is that what may look bad on paper and in the anechoic response pattern may sound great to the marketplace. It has made Mr. Bose very rich.
I bet they sell a lot of them along with those $1000.00 per meter cables that do nothing more than make the cable maker rich.
I bet they sell a lot of them along with those $1000.00 per meter cables that do nothing more than make the cable maker rich.
If you want to see an Omni speaker that will really make you purist blood boil. Look at my latest project, The Castles at; audioXpress - Home September issue.
I was quickly looking into the acoustic lense idea. Here's the 8" fullrange speaker "naked" and playing through a 5 cm thick Basotect board mounted directly in front of the driver with a 5 cm hole in it (0°-30°, 2nd set of curves offset by 20 dB):
Quite encouraging!
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Quite encouraging!
Last edited:
All measurements should be used for comparative evaluation but as some have noted, fullrange drivers with rising response might work well. But this is a question of implementation which would be a second step.
Hello,
That would be the stereophonic artefact of pin point imaging of the tweeters that do not happen in real life. The image split in two. Very unrealistic. This only happens when the directivity in the treble range is too high, like horns and waveguides.
Isn't it rather absurd, that there would be people who didn't want the speakers to disappear, like they wanted to listen to the speakers instead. Are there such people, really.
And those people in the studio listening to the tweeters of the high directivity monitors keeping their fingers on the buttons to make recordings we have to settle.. Aren't they more interested in listening to the sound rather than the speaker?
- Elias
That would be the stereophonic artefact of pin point imaging of the tweeters that do not happen in real life. The image split in two. Very unrealistic. This only happens when the directivity in the treble range is too high, like horns and waveguides.
Isn't it rather absurd, that there would be people who didn't want the speakers to disappear, like they wanted to listen to the speakers instead. Are there such people, really.
And those people in the studio listening to the tweeters of the high directivity monitors keeping their fingers on the buttons to make recordings we have to settle.. Aren't they more interested in listening to the sound rather than the speaker?
- Elias
Updated measurements now including vertical polar response:
Demokrit Measurements
Demokrit Measurements
Here are some measurements of the study object in post 1.
I'm building this speaker for certain reasons documented on my web site. For that it is easy enough and should suffice. If it turns out to be a good speaker, great. If not, I have a big basement
Amongst these reasons are the following, which are spelled out in more generic terms on my web site:
- Is 360° radiation constant directivity desirable or is less better ?
- If less is better, where should the response start to roll off ?
- If it is not better where is the minimum that will be good enough to create what I want from a speaker for recreational listening.
Have fun !
Oliver
Maybe the speaker is not to blame, but the recording engineer who panned the signal to one speaker.
I don't blame the engineer since I'm a nice person and respect humanity 
It is the uncompleteness of the stereo system as such.
Typical problem in stereo triangle: Singer (maybe female) panned in the center, mostly ok when pronounsing vovels, but when it comes time to sing "sssssshhhss" image is no more in the center but split in to two located at +/- 30 degrees at the speaker positions.
The best stereo triangle can do. sigh.
- Elias
It is the uncompleteness of the stereo system as such.
Typical problem in stereo triangle: Singer (maybe female) panned in the center, mostly ok when pronounsing vovels, but when it comes time to sing "sssssshhhss" image is no more in the center but split in to two located at +/- 30 degrees at the speaker positions.
The best stereo triangle can do. sigh.
- Elias
Quite honestly that is not what most people perceive. I've heard that very few people do have problems perceiving phantom images but it is certainly not typical.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.