I'm not sure you'd find Tomtom's approach quite what you need , but worth seeing :
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/100392-beyond-ariel-776.html
I quite like a good-natured discussion myself - makes a change from many of the DIY Audio threads ! .... but I have been guilty of the occasional rant myself on an off-night .
Ps. Lynn : I'm currently getting side-tracked into an OB experiment from 70 to 700Hz based on something like your 'fave' Tone-Tubby 12" . I'm going to check first with a Jensen P12N I'm buying cheap . I'm concerned about the lack of tone and micro-dynamics in the 'overlap' region ( 300-1000Hz ) I've had with both bass options so far - the Supravox-based Onken, and the 120Hz/Fane St-8M horn - Neither 'keeps up' without embarrassing itself in that frequency region. Bass would hand over to a tapped horn or conventional sub below 70Hz . Not perfect, but may be better than the other options, for me.
Thank you.
One thing is that from the linked post I have no idea what's Tomtom's taste in reproduced music. Therefore I have no idea if I may like to tread in his footsteps, or not.
Second, I cannot possibly build a house around speakers. I cannot build any house, I live in a rented one.
In the living room in the house I live in, the width (from back wall, near which the speakers stand, to the front wall, near which I sit) is about 2.82 meter (about 9.25 feet). All other rooms are much smaller, not much useful for dedicated listening to music. The way it looks now, I cannot afford to rent a house with a bigger living room. (I cannot rely on winning the lottery, nor on the documentary film I'm in the process of making winning the Oscar for documentaries…)
A most interesting concept. I would love to see some good measurements of those horns. I have always wondered how well that would work. Its complicated to do that, but if it worked well enough it might be worth a try.
LOL
. Let me open the kimono too. I like very much this thread. One reason is that experts and newbies (like me) feel welcome to it. Stupid questions are asked. Statements of personal preferences are welcome. Experts chime in now and then - sometimes with conflicting views. Through all of this, some kind of common understanding of what Mr Olson aspires to build is slowly emerging. His goal may not be your cup of tea, but the journey is educative and often entertaining.IMO another reason this thread works is by virtue of good manners, and Mr Olson deserves credit for setting a good example.
Now, while busy picking up bread crumbs left behind by Mr Olson, I look forward to the post count hitting 10000
. Who knows, my new speakers might be finished by then!
A pretty good, very simple, off the shelf shortcut is a Denon receiver hooked up to the right Klipsch domestic speaker. I tried this is in a very ordinary, electrical store showroom and it did so many things right it would be an excellent basis for a bit of tweaking - was way out in front of the majority of what I heard at the recent hifi show.
Denon, reasonably decent electronics, putting out genuine Watts without too many unpleasant additives, the Klispch, relatively efficient, very benign load, a perfect match to the Denon power supply and output stage. What did the combination do right? Number one was dynamics, this combo did the KHorn thing with ease - big, big sound which seemed to have no limit to the SPLs, deafening levels with no nastiness, soundstage just stayed there; very clean and satisfying listening no matter what the volume control was set at; downsides were not obvious to me, but pristine chamber music may need some work done -- perhaps,
...
People who want sound that meets the blindfold, or 'lifelike' test will be extremely lucky to get it just by acquiring the 'perfect' speaker. Everything I've learnt over a period of 30 years has always emphasised that the only true solution is a defect-free overall system - having a 'perfect' part anywhere in the chain merely emphasises the remaining defects, often making it worse to listen to ...
It appears that Lynn's comment was misunderstood. He was sharing tips for potential builders of Ariels, which aren't sealed, but instead use a specific type of transmission line. In order to obtain optimum performance from this enclosure, it is important to seal the joints properly, and mount the woofers to the baffle in an airtight manner. Builders who fail to do this are likely to be disappointed with the bass performance of the Ariel.
Thought I would put the thread back on horns. This picture is from about 1977. Bottom horns were with 15" drivers, middle units had 10" mid drivers, and the top horn on the right was a 1" entrance horn, the other was a 1.4" entrance horn. These were intended to be used in multiple units at the time. Portable PA horns, molded polyurethane rigid foam.
Attachments
I have heard that someone here also built a system into a wall with precise time alignment. From one description, it was the most holographic experience he ever had, and this person owns a store and sells some high priced systems as well. I would love to go and listen to it, but since I am not the "oh man, that's really great" type person, I never attempted to ask.
With tomtom's arrangement, it seems that the reflection pattern is not symmetric, I had that problem in one of my apartments, and the imbalance of my ears seemed to enhance the imbalance. Drove me nuts for a while.
Going back to the day of the Arpanet and the "rec.audio.high-end" forums, I've never made an anonymous post on an audio forum. Ever. People who meet me at audio shows know who I am; they look at the badge, and see my name. If they don't like me, they avoid me, and if they like me, they shake my hand and say hello.
I'm a big boy, can defend myself, and don't want the moderators to shut down your postings.
But I'm genuinely curious about your motives. I really am. Do you think the readers of this thread are being misled by me? Do you have any designs you'd like to share with the readers of this forum? Better yet, would you like to start a thread of your own?
Last edited:
A pretty good, very simple, off the shelf shortcut is a Denon receiver hooked up to the right Klipsch domestic speaker. I tried this is in a very ordinary, electrical store showroom and it did so many things right it would be an excellent basis for a bit of tweaking - was way out in front of the majority of what I heard at the recent hifi show.
Denon, reasonably decent electronics, putting out genuine Watts without too many unpleasant additives, the Klispch, relatively efficient, very benign load, a perfect match to the Denon power supply and output stage. What did the combination do right? Number one was dynamics, this combo did the KHorn thing with ease - big, big sound which seemed to have no limit to the SPLs, deafening levels with no nastiness, soundstage just stayed there; very clean and satisfying listening no matter what the volume control was set at; downsides were not obvious to me, but pristine chamber music may need some work done -- perhaps,
My yardstick is pretty primitive; if I'm having trouble pinning down the sound of a speaker, I listen to a short segment of pink-noise. That usually discloses resonances, peaks, FR balance, or crossover phasing problems. If there's no pink-noise source, I ask to listen to an excerpt of large-scale choral music, but that can be subject to the balance preferences of the mastering engineer.
What's really difficult is assessing the sound with a short excerpt of jazz or what I call "audiophile blues", which is very different than what you'd hear in a crowded bar in Memphis. The sparse instrumentation, combined with extreme close-miking and a dead acoustic, makes it really difficult to tell if the speaker is smooth or not. Maybe jazz fans can decode certain famous recordings, but I can't. I wasn't there, I didn't go to any of XYZ performer's concerts, and don't know what it's meant to sound like.
Movies soundtracks, same thing. There's not much reality in there, so what's it supposed to sound like? The big B&W's in the mastering room? The dubbing theater? The local movie theater with Dolby Atmos sound?
Last edited:
If I just take the fidelity thing, this is what I expect from my two ears at a hall with good acoustics say hearing and observing chamber music - i.e each instrument clearly audible in its own place where the original placement to meet the typical audience expectation , and what was intended by the composer and performer. For Jazz quartets etc the same thing. It is more than just the analogue thing. Very simple mic say Blumlein crossed mics placed well, 1" master tape recording when that came along.
When one listens to some of these authentic performances on 78's with let us say a good valve and some solid state amps into horn or hybrid, with all the crackles and other faults, the goose pimples can convey what impact it may have had at the original performance. From radio, Dame Myra Hess piano recitals from the War Museum in London during WWII were astounding and soothing and helped the nation through the war, along with Churchills speeches. Sure there were limitations.
In the fifties LP vinyl similarly, simple recordings on master tape (Ampex etc). eg. Blue Note label comes to mind for the jazz and the blues.
As Lynn suggests, where most recording is a mish mash. from the superb simple solo or small stuff, jazz, folk etc so simply recorded today this is refreshing. But the mass of the genres are infected with studio mixers ( possibly the worst aspect) along with too many mics, and too much other very good and not so good recording equipment. The effect is like pushing a good boxer into the ring, for bout after bout, until there is nothing left. With the strong emergence of small scale recording, it may be less impacted, but the darned mixer is still usually there. Try mixing a string quartet. Something is irretrievably lost.
The good news is that there is also an emergence of simple recording with the excellent (digital) results which even comes over on high quality radio FM or Web.
When one listens to some of these authentic performances on 78's with let us say a good valve and some solid state amps into horn or hybrid, with all the crackles and other faults, the goose pimples can convey what impact it may have had at the original performance. From radio, Dame Myra Hess piano recitals from the War Museum in London during WWII were astounding and soothing and helped the nation through the war, along with Churchills speeches. Sure there were limitations.
In the fifties LP vinyl similarly, simple recordings on master tape (Ampex etc). eg. Blue Note label comes to mind for the jazz and the blues.
As Lynn suggests, where most recording is a mish mash. from the superb simple solo or small stuff, jazz, folk etc so simply recorded today this is refreshing. But the mass of the genres are infected with studio mixers ( possibly the worst aspect) along with too many mics, and too much other very good and not so good recording equipment. The effect is like pushing a good boxer into the ring, for bout after bout, until there is nothing left. With the strong emergence of small scale recording, it may be less impacted, but the darned mixer is still usually there. Try mixing a string quartet. Something is irretrievably lost.
The good news is that there is also an emergence of simple recording with the excellent (digital) results which even comes over on high quality radio FM or Web.
I normally start with dynamics - if a system can't go beyond certain SPLs before starting to fall apart, congesting, compressing, changing tonality, however you want to describe it, then I immediately lose interest - I know that the handicap of being incapable of producing more intense sound will always taint whatever is being played - like having a rev limiter on a car engine, so that it can't go above 2,000rpm ...
A cymbals workout in drumming can tell me in 30 secs most of what I need to know ...
A cymbals workout in drumming can tell me in 30 secs most of what I need to know ...