I wouldn't call either of those speakers neutral, but yes they might be boring.
True high-end speakers are actually very exciting with lots of detail at any frequency, and limitless output. It does take some adjustment but i've never met a person who didn't eventually start to appreciate neutrality after living with it.
Neutrality is NOT a poor thing, even though people expect speakers to "add flavor".
I've built systems that produced an almost clinical sounding neutraliy that seemed so perfect that it was boring. But these speakers are far from perfect. Maybe they just lacked anything objectionable because I tried so hard to take out anything I didn't like?
A good speaker will be neutral, and will offer plenty of whatever the recording has to offer, good or bad, and you won't be left wanting for anything if it is good. Although there is too much variation to make a firm claim, I'd typically take a bad recording over a speaker that isn't right.
Back to the OP, there are several issues with replacing the drivers:
Would the DB output be the same?
Would they fit nicely?
A set of new drivers would run the price back up.
The warranty would be voided.
You would never be sure the upper response would be as good as original design.
I don't see anything to gain here.
Would the DB output be the same?
Would they fit nicely?
A set of new drivers would run the price back up.
The warranty would be voided.
You would never be sure the upper response would be as good as original design.
I don't see anything to gain here.
I suspect the bad bass may simply be the usual problem with commercial designs: potentially capable drivers in too-small boxes with too-high tuned ports.
Sure, they'll hit you in the chest when called upon, but so what? The 30Hz kick in the gut is where it's at.
Chris
PS - the solution: get a decent parametric eq, and some measurement software.
Sure, they'll hit you in the chest when called upon, but so what? The 30Hz kick in the gut is where it's at.
Chris
PS - the solution: get a decent parametric eq, and some measurement software.
Last edited:
Can you explain how to stuff the ports with drinking straws? It seems the port would then be lots of little ports?
Yes, the way you'd hold a packet of dry spaghetti after you've removed the packet. You'd probably want to trim them to length.
you have to run the speakers full range then if those speakers are anything good you just need a active sub to improve (flatten) the low end , shouldnt even take powerfull one 200w more than enough
How about getting two active subwoofers and cross them as high as possible (that would usually be 120-150Hz)?
As for the 'gold standard' regarding speakers to me that would be large active systems from ATC, PMC, Quested Audio, Klein&Hummel (Neumann), ME Geithain just to name a few. But they are not cheap and many come in black only but then speakers should be heard but not necessarily seen.
As for the 'gold standard' regarding speakers to me that would be large active systems from ATC, PMC, Quested Audio, Klein&Hummel (Neumann), ME Geithain just to name a few. But they are not cheap and many come in black only but then speakers should be heard but not necessarily seen.
I've used silicon on the woofers many a time to enhance bass. There are self leveling products, e.g. RTV118. I use a thin coat on all my composite (plastic) cones, it does smooth them out. It doesn't work as well on paper cones and looks dreadful.
Drinking straws!...what does that do? Add "length" to the port?
Drinking straws!...what does that do? Add "length" to the port?
Genelec, Revel/JBL Pro LSR, TAD/PioneerEX, Audiokinesis, Gedlee, KEF, Philharmonic, Salk Sound, Vapor , Soundfield Audio, Procella, Don Keele/Audio Artistry, Linkwitz/Wood Artistry, Gradient, SoundLAB...
It's these companies' principles/performance that I look to emulate/surpass.
...I suppose I might throw EMP/RBH/Status, PSB, BESL, Legacy,and ATC in there, but not with the same degree of confidence.
Last edited:
There does seem to be a lot of hi end speaker companies out there; a friend of mine had a well renowned consultant advise him, he bought these:
Aerial Acoustics - Loudspeakers and Subwoofers
(They are very impressive) (I still like my homebuits)
**
Doping cones: I dope all the plastic cones, I know some find this ploy distasteful, but it does help the plastic cones sound more natural. It will stay on there if it in not touched, but will come off if they are played with; which is good if you don't like it, just pull it off.
The fellow that had the one man speaker company in the area did this; he's still going btw.
Aerial Acoustics - Loudspeakers and Subwoofers
(They are very impressive) (I still like my homebuits)
**
Doping cones: I dope all the plastic cones, I know some find this ploy distasteful, but it does help the plastic cones sound more natural. It will stay on there if it in not touched, but will come off if they are played with; which is good if you don't like it, just pull it off.
The fellow that had the one man speaker company in the area did this; he's still going btw.
Just looking at those speakers, I can see a multitude of possible reasons that there is an apparent lack of bass. The driver configuration and claimed "3-way" design suggests a lack of proper considerations for baffle step losses, and the differences in driver efficiency if un-accounted for in the x-over would really put the effect over the top. An MTM 2-way, on a narrow baffle, will need roughly 4-6+ "bass" drivers of the same diameter to overcome both baffle step losses, and longer-throw driver efficiency losses. The "92dbA1W@1M efficiency claim only further reinforces my belief that there was no BSC taken into consideration in the design.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.