Was that the speaker, or the speaker revealing difficiencies in the recording?
Try it. Cable is quite system dependent.
It is rare when you can pop a different driver into an alien box and have it work well.
dave
It have to chuckle a bit when someone does this, and then rants on about how crappy the drivers are.
jeff
That's kind of rude and inaccurate. I have not ranted, and in my first post (extract below) I acknowledged that the enclosure might be ill-matched and asked whether this might cause the issue in question. I was well aware that the enclosure might be wrong for the bass response and therefore made no comment on this.
Nobody answered my question. Perhaps you would care to since you are clearly so very proud of knowing more on the topic than me?
(If you do then I'd be glad to help you work on your sentence construction.)
I did wonder this myself but was aware my post was rather longwinded so didn't say anything as I do not believe it to be the case.
I will probably give it a try after I go shopping, as I mentioned.
I know, but it worked well with a another much cheaper driver and I was partly planning to just get a feel for this driver and whether I wanted to keep it in the main system or not - since that determines what size of cabinet I might ultimately want it in. Still not sure to be honest, but figuring it out is kind of fun for now.
Last edited:
My post wasn't actually directed at you, but I will apologize as I have obviously offended you. I've come across a few posts were people have put full range (and multi-way) drivers in commercial boxes intended for completely different speakers, and then proclaimed them to be crap.
BTW, a 10 litre vented box will work fine for the A7.3.
jeff
An overly sensitive individual might well infer the above parenthetical remark as an oblique personal attack, something with which we can probably do without.
Thank goodness for emoticons As to the question of an inappropriate / ill matched enclosure affecting the highs as you've outlined, I'd posit that under some conditions, perhaps yes? I'm thinking about my own experiences with a couple of different type of enclosures in which I could definitely hear something amiss in the vocal range. Specifically a BLH with a chamber that sounded rather "honky" - and subsequent computer modeling confirmed was under sized , and a too-shallow folded TL that had similar coloration. Both used 4" Fostex drivers with relatively lightweight paper cones - I suspect that very early reflections back through the cones caused inter-modulation which would have contained complex harmonic that might well have shown up on measurements such as yours.
Anecdotal and conjectural, certainly - to be discounted out of hand, I'm not so sure.
dboy thanks for clue about how the Audioquest cables sound.
Is the CAT cable likely to sound better? People have different taste, but luckily cheap to try. Very good in my setup.
I thought of one thing more that is important to top, see link to Markaudio thread OPERATION INFO below.
Some tools to try to tame the topend:
Speaker cables
Zobel filter
Cabinet
Markaudio thread http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mark...ng-markaudio-driver-response.html#post3671987
Good trip to town.
Is the CAT cable likely to sound better? People have different taste, but luckily cheap to try. Very good in my setup.
I thought of one thing more that is important to top, see link to Markaudio thread OPERATION INFO below.
Some tools to try to tame the topend:
Speaker cables
Zobel filter
Cabinet
Markaudio thread http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mark...ng-markaudio-driver-response.html#post3671987
Good trip to town.
Well, yes, I was being a little touchy and overreacting to what I saw at the time as an unfair criticism from Jeff/vinylkid58. I apologize for that now. I guess I am a little paranoid about seeming like a muppet to you audio experts and Jeff inadvertently tapped into that.
Regarding the enclosure, there is a decent volume and depth behind the driver. When it was made, I positioned an internal panel/brace close to the rear in such a way as to reflect sound down into the cabinet and away from the driver cone as much as possible. Listening tests at the time confirmed that this made a very noticeable improvement in clarity. I am a little surprised that I do not see similar arrangements occasionally in other people's designs as it worked excellently for me in several BR boxes with a variety of drivers.
By the way, the cabinet is based on the angular spiral horn concept developed by Masaaki Takenaka. The exact dimensions and design were developed by me through experimenting and tweaking to work well with the FR125. The operation of the spiral horn, if I remember (and understand) correctly was thought to be quite similar to that of a bass reflex, but with stronger effects over a wider range of bass frequencies. This is what led me to entertain a hope that the A7.3 might drop in. The bass response is not at all a disaster in this box. It is just that after a week or two of listening, and also reading about the A7.3, I feel the driver could do better in a different setting.
Masaaki Takenaka has now removed most of his webpages relating to the spiral horn idea as I think he has developed something that he prefers. This page gives the general idea, although mine is a larger floorstanding type as the photo shows:
Detailed information on Helix-AG180Z
Attachments
Thanks BYRTT, that was one of the first things I read. At first I was intrigued by Mark's comment that he "purpose design
I also found the fr125 to be lacking in the top end based on my own personal tastes. I originally picked them up for full range duty but eventually used them with a tweeter in an mtm design. In this arrangement I found them to be excellent.
The Alpair 7s on the other hand left me in awe from the start. In the right cabinet they are spectacular drivers.
The Alpair 7s on the other hand left me in awe from the start. In the right cabinet they are spectacular drivers.
Right, seems little logical if flat EQed on axis or at a point you need to have ears on axis or at that point all time to sound good because of power response in audioband is decreasing for FR off axis as going up in freq. Ref Markaudio http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mark...ng-markaudio-driver-response.html#post3671987.
A smooth as possible rising still preferred i think to sound natural and non coloring.
What do you mean by "flat"? Flat direct response, steady state response, something else?
Not sure how this answers my question, "flat direct response, steady state response, something else".
I'm currently swatting up in a possibly vain hope of getting entry into the 'novice' category. But at the risk of incurring a scathing put down (and since this seems to have been started by a comment I made) I wanted to quote something I read by Thorsten Loesch quite a while ago and that this discussion prompted me to remember and look up:
"Some may dispute that this frequency response, the one that includes the resonant field and the direct sound is the one that makes for our perception of tonality, but based on my own experiences in both pro-audio and high-end I beg to differ. The more even the in room, total summed response, the more natural the sound."
from: Behringer Ultracurve Pro 8024 Digital Equaliser by Thorsten Loesch
This is from a review of a digital EQ unit. I can't say for sure whether I personally prefer a flat response or a smiley face as I have no reliable method of measuring. I know whether I like a particular sound or not though. Going out on a limb, won't the flatness or otherwise of the frequency response that is perceived by a listener depend on the particular room in which the speaker is played as well as the frequency response of the ears of the listener? Is there really a right or wrong here beyond what we prefer with our own imperfect ears in our own imperfect listening space?
(Ducking for cover now).
"Some may dispute that this frequency response, the one that includes the resonant field and the direct sound is the one that makes for our perception of tonality, but based on my own experiences in both pro-audio and high-end I beg to differ. The more even the in room, total summed response, the more natural the sound."
from: Behringer Ultracurve Pro 8024 Digital Equaliser by Thorsten Loesch
This is from a review of a digital EQ unit. I can't say for sure whether I personally prefer a flat response or a smiley face as I have no reliable method of measuring. I know whether I like a particular sound or not though. Going out on a limb, won't the flatness or otherwise of the frequency response that is perceived by a listener depend on the particular room in which the speaker is played as well as the frequency response of the ears of the listener? Is there really a right or wrong here beyond what we prefer with our own imperfect ears in our own imperfect listening space?
(Ducking for cover now).
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.