http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/danley/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/SH-50-Spec-Sheet.pdf
This isn't smooth? What.are you comparing to?
This isn't smooth? What.are you comparing to?
bwaslo,
No that is not smooth. That is a roller coaster response. I don't know how you can say that is smooth, and that is averaged over a fairly long distance. Not smooth at all. If I did that with a high end speaker I would not hear the last of that +/- 3db all over the band. We are not at all obviously talking about the same thing. Many people are well aware of +/- 1 db fluctuations in a response curve. This is fine for PA as I said, not for hifi sound.
No that is not smooth. That is a roller coaster response. I don't know how you can say that is smooth, and that is averaged over a fairly long distance. Not smooth at all. If I did that with a high end speaker I would not hear the last of that +/- 3db all over the band. We are not at all obviously talking about the same thing. Many people are well aware of +/- 1 db fluctuations in a response curve. This is fine for PA as I said, not for hifi sound.
That looks pretty smooth to me, compared to what I've seen offered by some hi-fi manufacturers.
If you're looking for something even smoother, perhaps consider that at the efficiency some of these horns offer, it would be rather trivial to eq an even smoother response. But again, are we subtracting more than we're adding?
That leads us to the "frequency response isn't everything" crowd.
In the end, I'm of the opinion that you'd really have to listen to them before you decided if you liked them or not. I've listened to some speakers with flat responses that sounded like turds ...dead, two dimensional, clinical...and some that were unmeasured (assumed not perfect) which presented lifelike reproductions that popped out with sounds floating around the room. I'd like to blame it on the booze, but ...
Reading charts and measurements can only take us so far.
What is?
(..I'm not saying it is either, but when compared to most commercially available "high-end" loudspeakers neither the freq. response nor the phase response is "bad" - at least not above the modal region. Below 350 Hz, not good..)
Impedance on the other hand is brutal (..but that too is often found in commercial "high-end" loudspeakers).
For the past 25 years the "Watt/Puppy/Sasha" epitomizes "high-end" yet has never had a particularly linear freq. response. Here is the current version:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/wilson-audio-sasha-wp-loudspeaker-measurements
I have found this very useful concept in the home end:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/200040-stereophonic-sound-single-loudspeaker.html
It is simple, effective in small domestic rooms, and solves many issues traditional stereo triangle has.
- Elias
Scott,
I never could follow why the Watt Puppy was such a hit except you could brag that you could afford them. I don't know what is in them now but in the past they used the Focal titanium inverted dome tweeter. I still have a couple of those in their box. They were very hard to listen to, very fatiguing to my ears. I have measured them and they do have a very marked ringing in the upper octave.
And Marcus,
Your correct most companies would be embarrassed by the polar plots of their speakers output. That is what I really think would make what you are trying to do with good localization possible an excellent off axis polar response across the entire frequency response curve and time coherency. Another factor is the waterfall response and any ringing that smears the sound, fast impulse response isn't talked about much either.
I never could follow why the Watt Puppy was such a hit except you could brag that you could afford them. I don't know what is in them now but in the past they used the Focal titanium inverted dome tweeter. I still have a couple of those in their box. They were very hard to listen to, very fatiguing to my ears. I have measured them and they do have a very marked ringing in the upper octave.
And Marcus,
Your correct most companies would be embarrassed by the polar plots of their speakers output. That is what I really think would make what you are trying to do with good localization possible an excellent off axis polar response across the entire frequency response curve and time coherency. Another factor is the waterfall response and any ringing that smears the sound, fast impulse response isn't talked about much either.
That's not real stereo bass. It's excatly the kind of "modal bass" I was talking about.
Why and what for would anybody want to do that? The low frequency response is a mess when filtered through an acoustically small room. It's tough enough to get that smooth. There are enough spatial cues higher up that can place a bass instrument at a certain direction.
Yes, those tweeters can be fatiguing - but also expose a lot of detail. (..the early fiberglass ones had a chalky sound IMO.)
The "hit" to it is: small form factor, near fullrange design nor particularly limited in dynamics in the bass region, good detail retrieval, and rather excellent portrayal of depth/breadth with good image "focus".
I think prospective purchasers "glom" to the strengths of the design and tend to forget about deficiencies.
(..then they are always searching for "matching" components that try to preserve what they like about the design's presentation while mitigating apparent flaws that "pop-up" over time. Sells a lot of other product though. )Hi Kindhornman
I am not sure where you might have heard this design in the home environment but I would point out that for one thing people often sit farther than one meter away.
The one dimensional view of loudspeaker radiation doesn’t tell you if the response will be the same several meters away as well or how much like the original signal is when it arrives where you listen (as opposed to one meter). Keep in mind these also have a TINY fraction of the harmonic distortion of a “hifi” speaker at the same SPL
Unless one is also listing from 1 meter, its how they perform at the listing position or area that counts.
With a speaker like an SH-50, in a real sense, there is very very little sound* radiated to the rear up/down or sides above a few hundred Hz so there is vastly less room crud arriving at the listening position after the direct signal. *you can view the 3d radiation balloon, polar plots and other aspects of its performance by downloading the CLF data file and the CLF viewer.
This is something hifi speaker companies could too, an independent lab takes the measurements.
Another thing that lab measures is the maximum usable loudness. The speaker is driven with a music spectrum shaped pink noise signal and very slowly increased in level. Maximum usable output is when at any point in the frequency response drops -3dB relative to the 1W response shape. It would be way for hifi to give some clue as to the dynamic capacity.
I have a single point test source (accuton driver passive eq’d ) which measure very flat on a baffle up close . In the same room positions, the difference in the cascade of reflected energy is obvious if you look at the Cumulative Burst Decay sonogram for each type from the listening position. Most of the difference is in the 1-4K range where your ears have the greatest acuity.
Have you ever measured your loudspeakers from the listening position? Ever look at the impulse response or ETC or magnitude and phase from the LP?
Best,
Tom
I am not sure where you might have heard this design in the home environment but I would point out that for one thing people often sit farther than one meter away.
The one dimensional view of loudspeaker radiation doesn’t tell you if the response will be the same several meters away as well or how much like the original signal is when it arrives where you listen (as opposed to one meter). Keep in mind these also have a TINY fraction of the harmonic distortion of a “hifi” speaker at the same SPL
Unless one is also listing from 1 meter, its how they perform at the listing position or area that counts.
With a speaker like an SH-50, in a real sense, there is very very little sound* radiated to the rear up/down or sides above a few hundred Hz so there is vastly less room crud arriving at the listening position after the direct signal. *you can view the 3d radiation balloon, polar plots and other aspects of its performance by downloading the CLF data file and the CLF viewer.
This is something hifi speaker companies could too, an independent lab takes the measurements.
Another thing that lab measures is the maximum usable loudness. The speaker is driven with a music spectrum shaped pink noise signal and very slowly increased in level. Maximum usable output is when at any point in the frequency response drops -3dB relative to the 1W response shape. It would be way for hifi to give some clue as to the dynamic capacity.
I have a single point test source (accuton driver passive eq’d ) which measure very flat on a baffle up close . In the same room positions, the difference in the cascade of reflected energy is obvious if you look at the Cumulative Burst Decay sonogram for each type from the listening position. Most of the difference is in the 1-4K range where your ears have the greatest acuity.
Have you ever measured your loudspeakers from the listening position? Ever look at the impulse response or ETC or magnitude and phase from the LP?
Best,
Tom
When I pan low passed noise from my stereo dipole bass in my small room, I perceive image moving side to side all the way down much below 100 Hz.
Only that almost no record has stereo bass to reproduce.
Response from a low frequency monopole source is a mess in a small room, and it sounds like one big mess, too.
- Elias
No, L & R subs nearfield (as mentioned with driver facing you), placed that close to your head are significantly higher in pressure and closer in time than resulting modal deviations. Direct sound dominates and you should in fact hear stereo bass (provided the recording even has much of it on offer).
Try it out (both subjectively and measurably).
Basically it's an open-air headphone with a much higher tactile sensation. It's what I was trying to get 'Shin to do with B&C sub design I recommended.
For most recordings I have it doesn't really do much though..
(..well, as far as tactile sensation and distortion-wise it does.)Now the synthetic version though.. yeah that does something with most recordings. Assuming you have variable phase control for your subwoofers then it's something you can try for yourself. Basically have one in each corner of the room and have someone start rotating the phase control on one side of the room until you get an expanded field (with oddly enough better bass positioning). Sort of removes the small room acoustic. Why it works? Don't truly know. Maybe Griesinger does.
Last edited:
Tom,
I wouldn't expect to see your PA cabinets in someone's house. I don't think that you intended them for that. When we are talking about the SPL levels needed in a concert or theater system of course a compression driver should win that contest. Perhaps measuring at 2 meters is a better test than 1 meter, just that 1 meter at 1 watt is standard testing reference level. We really can't compare cabinets that are meant to sum over large distance with multiple cabinets to a single enclosure in a home environment. As I keep saying I think that for PA use I wouldn't find fault with what you are doing. That is not a home room environment is all I am saying. Are you going to make a miniature version that would be designed for small rooms? Still needs a sub then and the smaller you make the waveguide the higher the direct radiator would have to take over.
I wouldn't expect to see your PA cabinets in someone's house. I don't think that you intended them for that. When we are talking about the SPL levels needed in a concert or theater system of course a compression driver should win that contest. Perhaps measuring at 2 meters is a better test than 1 meter, just that 1 meter at 1 watt is standard testing reference level. We really can't compare cabinets that are meant to sum over large distance with multiple cabinets to a single enclosure in a home environment. As I keep saying I think that for PA use I wouldn't find fault with what you are doing. That is not a home room environment is all I am saying. Are you going to make a miniature version that would be designed for small rooms? Still needs a sub then and the smaller you make the waveguide the higher the direct radiator would have to take over.
I've made quasi-Synergies for my home. They're large but not outrageous (pattern control frequency is 450Hz). Quite practical, really, and work remarkably well. As well as or better than anything else I've heard, in fact. (mine aren't as smooth as Tom's, nor are they linear phase, but, hey, they're a work in progress and Tom has about 20yrs experience more on these than I do!).
build thread:http://www.diysoundgroup.com/forum/index.php?topic=19.0
build thread:http://www.diysoundgroup.com/forum/index.php?topic=19.0
Last edited:
It is a Watson
Griesinger explains that there must be interaural fluctuations in a specific modulation bandwidth. Then low frequencies will be satisfying in a small room.
- Elias
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.