bjackson said:
Ever heard about decibells?
It is a logarythmic scale, very very verstile for audio stuff, concerning volume it is 20log(pressureRMS/0.00002Pa)
quality is 20log(price/1$) , the measure is so-called dBQ (decibels of quality).
Easy to calculate, that squaring the price doubles the quality.
Here is an idea that just popped into my head.
4 WR125s with a Aurum Cantus ribbon and 2 Dayton RS270 woofers, does this seem like a good idea at all. I thought it might make a good mini line array. Note in the picture, the woofers should all line up and be centered, but I just threw it together.
I also considered Vifa PL11MG which I am using in one of my current projects and works very well. Here is a link to some various info:
http://www.bmm-electronics.com/Product.asp?Product_ID=3699
Any suggestions?
4 WR125s with a Aurum Cantus ribbon and 2 Dayton RS270 woofers, does this seem like a good idea at all. I thought it might make a good mini line array. Note in the picture, the woofers should all line up and be centered, but I just threw it together.
I also considered Vifa PL11MG which I am using in one of my current projects and works very well. Here is a link to some various info:
http://www.bmm-electronics.com/Product.asp?Product_ID=3699
Any suggestions?
Attachments
planet10 said:
I agree with you, ribbons are probably better but let say dome tweeters, and it seems money can't buy a better one when you get 30$ hehe. I know I tend to exagerate hehe!
BTW, why a horn loaded dome would sound awful? Some people say that no compression driver could beat a dome in sound quality, but if I understand you correctly, if you want a horn-loaded system then your only option is a compression driver? I heard some people made experiments with domes and liked the results...
Problem with drivers like Fostex and Exact, I guess you can't find any review on them that is not subjective so we never know if it's placebo or not... If you know of reviews of these drivers, I'd like to see them please.
Again, thank you very much guys.
Its strange, but we all have differing opinions on what is "best".
Broad statements such as receiving only a 1% increase in sound quality for a 10X increase in price are just plain wrong.
I will however give some generalizations that I have personally tested:
1. The most expensive commercially available loudspeakers are more DIFFERENT than a-like. (-that should tell you a LOT right there about subjectivity.)
2. System, (source, gain, amp, speakers), interaction at a high cost component level TYPICALLY provides a MUCH greater influance on the perceived overall sound quality than the interaction with system and room. (chalk this one up to two factors - 1. its difficult to radically improve a room with out demolishing it and re-building, or conversly its fairly easy to get better sound with proper placement and minor room treatment; 2. Your brain can actually compensate for room interaction while it cannot for component inter-action.)
3. Most of the widely regarded "Hi-Fi" designs (and many DIY based designs like the THOR) are based on drivers with seamingly good measurements that typically require amplifiers with low-output impeadances and substantial current capability (i.e. large well-filtered power supplies for solid state devices). Note than when I state "seamingly good" I mean that flat freq. responses at a 1 meter distance with CSD plots that are clean beyond a 1 millisecond time, are not neccesarily indicative of overall quality - they are however important parameters to consider.
As to specifices for a loudspeaker design.. well that depends on the type of sound you are trying to achieve. Can you describe what you are looking for - perhaps subjective description and/or commercially available models you like?
Broad statements such as receiving only a 1% increase in sound quality for a 10X increase in price are just plain wrong.
I will however give some generalizations that I have personally tested:
1. The most expensive commercially available loudspeakers are more DIFFERENT than a-like. (-that should tell you a LOT right there about subjectivity.)
2. System, (source, gain, amp, speakers), interaction at a high cost component level TYPICALLY provides a MUCH greater influance on the perceived overall sound quality than the interaction with system and room. (chalk this one up to two factors - 1. its difficult to radically improve a room with out demolishing it and re-building, or conversly its fairly easy to get better sound with proper placement and minor room treatment; 2. Your brain can actually compensate for room interaction while it cannot for component inter-action.)
3. Most of the widely regarded "Hi-Fi" designs (and many DIY based designs like the THOR) are based on drivers with seamingly good measurements that typically require amplifiers with low-output impeadances and substantial current capability (i.e. large well-filtered power supplies for solid state devices). Note than when I state "seamingly good" I mean that flat freq. responses at a 1 meter distance with CSD plots that are clean beyond a 1 millisecond time, are not neccesarily indicative of overall quality - they are however important parameters to consider.
As to specifices for a loudspeaker design.. well that depends on the type of sound you are trying to achieve. Can you describe what you are looking for - perhaps subjective description and/or commercially available models you like?
simon5 said:
IMO tweeter's are one of the most subjective elements in a loudspeaker design. Sure the Seas is in Johns opinion the best in the group, that doesn't mean that everyone else when evaluating the same tweeters would come to the same conclusions. John puts a lot of emphasis on value and HD, others may put more emphasis on other things. I note that he says of the seas
, I for one have not liked the metal domes I've heard, and would not be simply taking his word for it, but would want to hear one myself
You need to very carefully read what John says about the testing methodology, especially the bit about how the tweeters are run full range. IMO some of the tweeters may fall down in the tests when they get too much low freq energy, that they would never get when properly crossed over. Think about it. If the tweeter is trying to reproduce say 200Hz (or lower) which it would never do in a real world speaker design, how is that going to affect things in the passband??? you could be getting all sorts of dome distortions and crud that just won't be there when it is run over it's intended freq range.... (this may not be an issue, depending on the test, I note he says sweep methodoligy, so possibly it isn't as at any one time it should only be producing one freq, assuming perfect transient response...)
The other thing is that all of his tests are just a comparison between tweeters within a very controlled environment, they in no way take into account other aspects of the system design, can they handle the power required for the application, can they be crossed over low enough to match the other driver(s) in use..... there is a lot more to it than which one tests best in a particular circumstance
and one final thing
measurements are good, but don't IMO tell the whole story, how they sound to you is the most important part IMO, for me a successfull design is one that sounds good, not one that measures well if it does both then great!! just my
worth Tony.
I agree with you, it's very important how they sound to you.
On the other hand, let say you want to hear the recording exactly the same way as it was recorded. You want to know how the recording really sound.
I mean, we might find speakers that sound good, but it's not the way it's meant to be played, it sounds good yes, but...
I'm a strong believer of objectivity over subjectivity, show me CSD plots, multitone IMD plots, THD plots, HD plots, FR plots, etc... don't tell me it sounds better, prove it. Why it sounds better? What is exactly better sound? I think better sound means closer to the real recording. Show me the original song in CoolEdit, play it in dozen of different speaker systems, record it with the same mic at the same level in the same room at the same listening position with the same amplifier and compare.
Alot of people think that tweeters with slightly rolled off top end sounds better, but they may sound better to some, but they are worse...
On the other hand, let say you want to hear the recording exactly the same way as it was recorded. You want to know how the recording really sound.
I mean, we might find speakers that sound good, but it's not the way it's meant to be played, it sounds good yes, but...
I'm a strong believer of objectivity over subjectivity, show me CSD plots, multitone IMD plots, THD plots, HD plots, FR plots, etc... don't tell me it sounds better, prove it. Why it sounds better? What is exactly better sound? I think better sound means closer to the real recording. Show me the original song in CoolEdit, play it in dozen of different speaker systems, record it with the same mic at the same level in the same room at the same listening position with the same amplifier and compare.
Alot of people think that tweeters with slightly rolled off top end sounds better, but they may sound better to some, but they are worse...
The problem with that idea Simon (and I totally agree with it, if this were true), is that most recording studios do not attempt to create mixes that play best on a flat system.
They are usually optimized for cheap speakers that most people have, which means too much midbass and too might high end to make it exciting. Atleast a lot of pop music, but is creeping over to some classical and jazz IMO.
They are usually optimized for cheap speakers that most people have, which means too much midbass and too might high end to make it exciting. Atleast a lot of pop music, but is creeping over to some classical and jazz IMO.
You're right.
But if we think that way, recording studios won't care to produce better recordings.
They also follow no basic rules it seems, if all of them made the high end 3 dB louder, we could design every speaker with 3 dB less high end, but they all do it differently.
I think it's better to design flat, to reproduce flat, then if it sounds awful, you can play with electronic EQ to compensate, IMHO.
Very nice issue you bring here, very important one...
But if we think that way, recording studios won't care to produce better recordings.
They also follow no basic rules it seems, if all of them made the high end 3 dB louder, we could design every speaker with 3 dB less high end, but they all do it differently.
I think it's better to design flat, to reproduce flat, then if it sounds awful, you can play with electronic EQ to compensate, IMHO.
Very nice issue you bring here, very important one...
Oh, I do agree with that statement. I do believe flat speakers with EQ would be best, but I was just meaning that a tweeter with rolled off high end sounding better than a ribbon tweeter that is almost perfectly flat is understandable.
Recording industries will never change for a few audiophiles though, however, we have Telarc and Chesky and a few others, LOL. Other than that, I play around with my computer and stuff.
Recording industries will never change for a few audiophiles though, however, we have Telarc and Chesky and a few others, LOL. Other than that, I play around with my computer and stuff.
simon5 said:
Good in theory, but where I think this falls down is that you are evaluating only on what has been tested. What if there is some as yet undevised test that could show things that were much more important to the SQ??? just because no one has thought of the test yet, doesn't mean that there isn't something that we aren't measuring that is just as (or more) important as the things that are comonly tested for....
what sounds better??? who knows, as I said I think that ultimately comes down to the individual!! why do you think there is such a range of designs out there?? it's because sound quality is subjective...
Don't underestimate psycho acoustics in all of this either. would a speaker (with really good measurements), sound as good if you were shown fake measurements that looked bad?? would a speaker with bad measurements sound better if you were shown fake measurements that were good??
In the end it is IMO a prefference thing. If "most accurate" does it for you then that's great, if it doesn't do it for someone else, then that's no problem... we all have our oppinions and beliefs and I think we should regard them as such, IMO there is no generic BEST sound.
Tony.
Oh no, so now we would need to optimize the speaker system with the ear lobe? Maybe the ear lobe is the biggest flaw in the system, the one causing the most THD... hehe! One thing I'm sure, our lobes are probably causing more THD than cables...
Thank you wintermute for your two last replies, very interesting points you make there.
I think I'll keep on designing the most accurate stuff possible, we must hang on something we believe in, right?
Now I should rephrase my stuff above...
I think that very expensive stuff is not THAT much more accurate than not that expensive and well designed stuff. I didn't see tests that proved me wrong yet. I really hope there's tests proving me wrong on the other end. Like tests of those Diamond tweeters, in theory it's the best material so it should be more accurate...
Zaph? Could you test that one?
Thank you wintermute for your two last replies, very interesting points you make there.
I think I'll keep on designing the most accurate stuff possible, we must hang on something we believe in, right?
Now I should rephrase my stuff above...
I think that very expensive stuff is not THAT much more accurate than not that expensive and well designed stuff. I didn't see tests that proved me wrong yet. I really hope there's tests proving me wrong on the other end. Like tests of those Diamond tweeters, in theory it's the best material so it should be more accurate...
Zaph? Could you test that one?
simon5 said:
I think I'll keep on designing the most accurate stuff possible, we must hang on something we believe in, right?
Absolutely
but IMO we should also try to remain open to the fact that there may be other possibilities.... I tend to be extremely skeptical about a lot of things audio, but never discount things outright (well maybe sometimes a certain volume knob comes to mind ) Tony.
The Seas 27TBFCG may be the best dome tweeter produced now, but has it ever been compared to a compression tweeter?
Granted, the compression tweeter will have a drooping high-end (which can be equalized), depending on mass and efficacy of the phase plug. However, the low-end response will be better (not to mention the obviously superior sensitivity). Same goes for distortion, IMO, in a good diffraction-free horn/waveguide.
If that's so, then the best tweeter would not cost anywhere near $30.
Granted, the compression tweeter will have a drooping high-end (which can be equalized), depending on mass and efficacy of the phase plug. However, the low-end response will be better (not to mention the obviously superior sensitivity). Same goes for distortion, IMO, in a good diffraction-free horn/waveguide.
If that's so, then the best tweeter would not cost anywhere near $30.
simon5 said:
A speaker is a mash of compromises. What parts do you choose to make more accurate?
Flat FR? A laudable goal, but often means a complex XO which in most cases robs the system of downward dynamic range and drives amplifiers into coniptions. (with this one i am always reminded of something a wise man told me "the difference between a good system, and a great one is what they are doing 40 dB down")
An easy to drive speaker where a simple amp can do the job? Usually means a less than flat FR.
A very efficient speaker so you can use that absolutely wonderous SE 45 amp? (It does seem that as a general trend, sound quality is inversly proportional to its power output) Usually even worse FR, but often better phase response.
You have to choose YOUR compromises.
In the end it is about the music, and to my mind the one that does the best job of conveying the emotion of the music is the winner. Now you have to hook yourself up to a brain wave monitor to even hope to measure that. An MRI would probably be even better, but they haven't made one yet that can be used and let you listen to the hifi simultaneously.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.