markus76 said:
I agree
so don't be! please
because criticising without listening something someone other have listened to and likes is rude and arrogant IMHO
markus76 said:
ok! what is Your experience then? with Stereolith or Stereolith-like set ups?
markus76 said:
? what claims? what are You taking about?
first "assertions and conclusions" now "claims"
my only claim is that I can hear better imaging and soundstaging with Stereolith-like set up and that I like it
what data can I show to support that I can hear and that I like?
what books? what papers?
show me any book or paper where Stereolith or Stereolith-like set up is discussed - I am very interested
markus76 said:
no I don't want You to list
but how about some listening instead?
best!
graaf
The Nathan 10 uses a 10" woofer:
http://www.gedlee.com/images/nathan_polar_FR.GIF
http://www.gedlee.com/images/nathan_polar_map.GIF
Best, Markus
markus76 said:
Impressive polar response. I wonder whether a Carlsson-like orientation works with CD-horns / waveguides too.
Meanwhile I have tried a 180°-phase-shifting allpass filter that inverts the phase of one channel in the treble, and this works as well. But this can´t be the Stereolith-principle since it only has one tweeter.
Other recordings however work much better without these dirty tricks (I didn´t try so many because I have to load/store/transfer them and can´t play them directly). So my recommendation for people who have problems with phantom image location is the "native" version.
I quoted directly from Moulton. This is not just my interpetation - this is what he says.Elias said:
this is not the situation, not "behind a corner"Elias said:
in stereo it is rather as if You were "behind a pillar"
You have reflections form the left and from the right
they are discussed here and in "Loudspeaker and room" thread: Beveridge set up, Carlsson corner set up etc.Elias said:
no - the first sound is not coming from reflection - there is no dipole like null on axis of stereolith like set upElias said:
let my say it again: crosstalk is not eliminated - but it's negative effect is sufficiently diminished
no - not right in case we have two - left and right - coherent reflectionsElias said:
this is how stereo works according to Moulton and I agree
Elias said:
? two spaces with the same reflection (not only early but total - up to RT60) pattern are acoustically identical from perspective of sound reproduction
Elias said:
no - absolutely not, the first two coherent lateral reflections are sufficient - they carry all information about lateral location of a sound source, later reflections form every direction carry the rest - information about vertical position, distance etc.
all information is passed from one reflection to the next - and all recorded reflections are mirrored by speakers-as-reflections
read the interview with Moulton carefully
he explains all this very clearly
certainly more clearly than me with my limited English skills, limited time I can spend writing all this and limited technical knowledge
best regards!
graaf
I have just read the interview with Mr. Moulton again - and to use his words, my ultimate goal is to "be in a really interesting room with the performers". I have had this kind of feeling (from standard stereo coaxial speakers) with one Nightwish recording, where Tarja Turunen is singing solo for a while - that was just as sitting a few feet in front of her in a completely different room than the one I had the speakers in. The room was quite "live" with carpet on the floor and cloth on the ceiling (my cellar room in my parents' house).
After my short experiments with ambiophonics - that gives similar results, but the electronic crosstalk cancellation screwes the sound I am used to.
After my short experiments with ambiophonics - that gives similar results, but the electronic crosstalk cancellation screwes the sound I am used to.
graaf, that's how the land lies. Where are the studies that proof that Moulton is right? It's just a thesis, nothing more. Did you read Theiles paper (http://www.hauptmikrofon.de/theile/ON_THE_LOCALISATION_english.pdf)? Hopefully this leads to a more objective discussion.
Best, Markus
Best, Markus
SO . . . after reading both the Stereolith and Duetto sites and all this thread, I have yet to see anything that leads me to believe that anything mysterious is going on inside those cabinets, or in the signal chain.
It's basically two back-to-back bookshelf speakers, perhaps with different tone-shaping than front-firing speakers, but component-wise nothing special.
Am I right? It seems that the main reason for using a front firing tweeter (current Stereolith) is to give sone stability to the frequency response, as that is the one area that is most unpredictable when using a (substantially) reflecting speaker in wild-card rooms.
Can anyone substantiate (not speculate, please - 3 pages of that already) that the required technology is pretty much speaker-building 101?
Maybe I'm nuts here . . . but we can probably move on to doing some tests now!
-- Mark
It's basically two back-to-back bookshelf speakers, perhaps with different tone-shaping than front-firing speakers, but component-wise nothing special.
Am I right? It seems that the main reason for using a front firing tweeter (current Stereolith) is to give sone stability to the frequency response, as that is the one area that is most unpredictable when using a (substantially) reflecting speaker in wild-card rooms.
Can anyone substantiate (not speculate, please - 3 pages of that already) that the required technology is pretty much speaker-building 101?
Maybe I'm nuts here . . . but we can probably move on to doing some tests now!
-- Mark
Yes, to me Duetto are just two back-to-back bookshelf speakers. Hopefully I will make some experiments on Friday - but first I need some reference tracks (mentioned above ), so that I could describe differences as precise as possible (and that anyone can try the same with the same tracks). Maybe some chamber orchestra recording...or a string quartett - something with real space and not too many instruments.
), so that I could describe differences as precise as possible (and that anyone can try the same with the same tracks). Maybe some chamber orchestra recording...or a string quartett - something with real space and not too many instruments.
markus76 said:
hey Markus!
thanks for the link!
on the other hand I am still waiting to know something about Your experience with Stereolith or Stereolith-like set ups
and for listing books You know where Stereolith or Stereolith-like set up are discussed
as to Moulton - for me the proof of his thesis is in what I can hear
I am HiFi hobbyist
and who are You?
what is your hobby? studies, assertions, claims?
enough listing books and papers! start some listening !
Your attitude remind me of something a fellow diyer wrote on this forum:
he is so right!
it is sad and... funny at the same time
best!
graaf
also interesting PhD dissertation:
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bits...524302whole.pdf
"Spatial Hearing with Simultaneous Sound Sources: A Psychophysical Investigation"
best!
graaf
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/bits...524302whole.pdf
"Spatial Hearing with Simultaneous Sound Sources: A Psychophysical Investigation"
best!
graaf
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.