Consul said:
In addition to what Scott said - I'll add this:
Chances are that very little acoustic absorption was used for this measurement. In otherwords its a "warts and all" measurement. Though I could be wrong, I'd bet that most other manufactureres "clean up" the decay by using absorption material (and windowing the graph), on the rare occasion where they provide this graph.
As an example lets look at Zaph's measurement of the Vifa DX25 vs. the Scan Speak AirCirc 6600:
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tweetermishmash/
These are basically the same tweeter BUT the Scan Speak has worse decay character than the Vifa despite having a price that is almost 8 times as expensive. The major difference here is that the Vifa uses absoprtion material in its rear chamber and the Scan Speak doesn't. Now don't go thinking that the Scan Speak is a "rip-off" relative to the Vifa. Though I haven't hear the two, I can almost guarantee you that the vastly more expensive Scan Speak sounds considerably better - AND it isn't due to an improved motor (which would show marked differences in non-linear distortion).
Now there are some areas where the B200 is "messy" and it will impact performace some. Notably the resonant "shelf" between 2 and 7 kHz. "Push" the driver a bit and it won't sound as "clean" in this passband. On the other hand most of the time it will sound quite "clean" and "transparent" in this passband because there is still a good 9 db's of clean decay. Notably however the speaker is incredibly clean from 200 Hz to 2 kHz compared to most drivers. Sure, there is a resonant mode around 300 Hz, but it doesn't last long and again, its a lot better than most drivers.
Many would argue that the fairly high NON-linear distortion would be more objectionable.. but I don't think those arguing have ever really tested their ability to audibly detect this distortion.
That leaves the on and off axis response of the driver - now THAT is something to worry about.. IF you don't have the ability to effectivly EQ it. (..and thats pretty easy to come by - especially for computer play-back.)
well.. just some thoughts.
EQing the signal to the speakers is out of the question. I need this for critical listening applications, which means I need to be able to record and mix music using these as a reference. That's also why spectral decay data is important as well, although, like you said, so much depends on just how the driver was tested.
It's beginning to sound less and less like the B200 is the one for me.
I'd really like to know where you're getting the information on distortion and such. Is there something to these graphs that I'm missing? I'm still waiting for my copy of Dickason's Cookbook to come in, so I'm kinda shooting in the dark.
I do really love how those Mangers look. I just wish I could afford them. Do they really sound ten times better than a good Seas or Vifa woofer-tweeter combo? They sure do cost it.
It's beginning to sound less and less like the B200 is the one for me.
I'd really like to know where you're getting the information on distortion and such. Is there something to these graphs that I'm missing? I'm still waiting for my copy of Dickason's Cookbook to come in, so I'm kinda shooting in the dark.
I do really love how those Mangers look. I just wish I could afford them. Do they really sound ten times better than a good Seas or Vifa woofer-tweeter combo? They sure do cost it.
On the other hand, it's cool that my humble thread made it to five pages.
I really am learning a lot from this thread. It's just that every new post, I have to step back, learn yet another new thing about speakers, and then re-evaluate what I thought I already knew.
Thanks for the help, guys!
I really am learning a lot from this thread. It's just that every new post, I have to step back, learn yet another new thing about speakers, and then re-evaluate what I thought I already knew.
Thanks for the help, guys!
Consul said:
post eq. for the speakers should not effect your ability to eq for mixing music. The process is transparent - in effect its like getting a perfectly flat transducer. You can still make adjustments mixing without even knowing its there. In otherwords it should not be a problem. The ONLY time it would be a problem is when you need to determine just how trasparent an application/plug-in is, but frankly you can do that with a driver that doesn't have a linear response. IF the plug-in eq. used to modify the B200's response isn't transparent - then find another (there are lots). Once you've found one - no more problems.
now for decay at lower sound pressure levels, the B200 should be excellent. If you need louder sound - then yes the treble could be a bit compromised. (..and note that many/most recording engineers mix with something that is FAR worse.)
the non-linear distortion I was referring to is further down the page "Klirrfaktor" where its referenced at 85 db, 90 db, and 95db - and it rotates.
as to the Mangers sounding ten-times better.. if you are a very critical listener - quite possibly.
one more note - if you listen closer than one meter the response will likely be "tilted-up" a bit more at higher freq.s. (i.e. the closer you get the more pronounced the treble becomes.)
ScottG said:
Boy, ain't that the truth! I could build a set of BIBs with a Fostex driver and come up with something that sounds better than those NS10Ms that so many mix engineers swear by. Yamaha recently released a speaker that looks like an NS10 with a bigger woofer. It's still awful.
In fact, I'm thinking about building a nice set of BIBs, forgoing the soffits for now, and seeing what I come up with. For all I know, I might be able to mix quite nicely on them. If not, I still have a nice set of speakers for the parlor.
I was just reading the whitepaper on the BBC LS5/8 monitor (now that I can understand a lot more of it), and I was struck by the similarity of their approach to my original approach of pairing a woofer with a smaller full-range. They used a 30mm dome tweeter with a fairly wide band, and paired it with a polypropylene woofer. In the end, though, they put their crossover at 2khz, but then again, such wide-band speakers that I have access to now were not available back then.
Now that I understand a little more about on- vs. off-axis coloration and stuff like that, I can hopefully make a more informed decision about what to get. Hopefully, the Dickason book will help, too, once it finally gets here.
Now that I understand a little more about on- vs. off-axis coloration and stuff like that, I can hopefully make a more informed decision about what to get. Hopefully, the Dickason book will help, too, once it finally gets here.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.