orthodox-unorthodox - lexical question, perhaps I shoud have used another description eg. unconventional
but as I can see it in substance we agree, because You wrote:
In answer I ask You about my first post because I have said there that:
in this sense they are both fundamentally orthodox
well, repeat what?
that "we still try", that "We just don't know yet" or that:
?
All I would like You to do is to decide on Your position - is it "we just don't know yet" or is it "In the light of facts only one approach is reasonable"?
It seems he's expressing the same idea just from 2 different angles. At least that what my take is on what he's saying.
Dan
edit: sorry, Markus got his post in first.
Right now Im listening to 3way dipole "setup"
Actually, drivers are just placed on the floor, on their magnets
Its kind of omni, I would say
Should I do another "omni", it would most likely look very much like Carlson
Mind you, not the old vintage, but the later mr Carlson(Sweede)
Which means ALL drivers placed close to floor, but slightly angled
Funny thing is that despite the drivers are positioned close to the floor, soundstage seems quite normal in height
Actually, drivers are just placed on the floor, on their magnets
Its kind of omni, I would say
Should I do another "omni", it would most likely look very much like Carlson
Mind you, not the old vintage, but the later mr Carlson(Sweede)
Which means ALL drivers placed close to floor, but slightly angled
Funny thing is that despite the drivers are positioned close to the floor, soundstage seems quite normal in height
Like when you "see" the musicians placed at same height as you when you sit listening
Whether thats correct is debateable, but its the only option we can perceive as acceptable
Maybe ideally slightly above
Ofcourse there also need to be some effects coming from other than an exact point, to give some sense of "room"
I suppose thats what you call ambience
But to me, the source of sound, meaning the musician, should always be placed accurately, and pin pointed
And I mean ALL musicians in a band
All this ofcourse also relates to distance from speakers
Im sitting about 3 meters away
A bit more would be better, but then I would need speakers to be wider apart also
I prefer distance between speakers to be equal to listening distance
Whether thats correct is debateable, but its the only option we can perceive as acceptable
Maybe ideally slightly above
Ofcourse there also need to be some effects coming from other than an exact point, to give some sense of "room"
I suppose thats what you call ambience
But to me, the source of sound, meaning the musician, should always be placed accurately, and pin pointed
And I mean ALL musicians in a band
All this ofcourse also relates to distance from speakers
Im sitting about 3 meters away
A bit more would be better, but then I would need speakers to be wider apart also
I prefer distance between speakers to be equal to listening distance
Right now I'm experiencing my first satisfying stereo experience in my residence--which I've been doing most of the day. I've searched long and hard for such a beast and found it by copying some ideas from Dr. Geddes. I put together some drivers that would achieve something like constant directivity from 1kHz to 20kHz (I couldn't reasonably build better)and aimed them to cross in front of me by about a meter so that the lateral reflection would hit my opposite ear judging by and of incidence equals the angle of reflection. Maybe the real reason this works is because the the smoothest part of the tweeters response is on axis with the ear now. There is something to his madness and sensibility for his confidence in the approach. Now I'm thinking he might not be crazy with his approach to bass.
Has anyone heard a similar system done with an OB woofer?
Dan
There is something to his madness and sensibility for his confidence in the approach. Now I'm thinking he might not be crazy with his approach to bass.Has anyone heard a similar system done with an OB woofer?
Dan
The more I think about it, the less I like the idea of an OB woofer unless it's used for mastering. Above 300Hz or so, we hear through the room. This system is as close to ideal as I've ever heard. Resistance is futile.
Laughing like a maniac drunk off cheap Scotch (Lismore NAS),
Dan
Laughing like a maniac drunk off cheap Scotch (Lismore NAS),
Dan
Last edited:
quite the contrary
because You admit it Yourself that "we don't know yet" how "sound field" translates into "audible":
so how can You at the same time insist that:
and so on
what facts? Do we know those facts or are is it just guessing or hit-and-miss because "we don't know yet"
You cannot maintain at the same time that:
1) we don't know - I understand "know facts" because what else can we possibly know?
and
2) that only one approach is reasonable in the light of facts - I understand "known facts" because what can we possibly do in the light of "unknown facts"?
therefore I ask You to decide
what You describe is actually rather an old idea (advocated for years by eg. Ted Jordan*) than Dr Geddes' approach, which is much more sophisticated and the requirements of which are much more demanding
*Carlsson approach also incorporates (i.a.) this idea of crossing well before the listener and of opposite reflection
Lucky You!
Last edited:
You've got patience!
Explaining what is (should be) obvious for every audiophile...
yes, You are right, it is not necessarily correct but it is at least something achievable and expected, especially in a conventional stereo setup where the perception of height is restricted (perhaps I should rather say "ruined") by dominant floor reflection
What happens to the perception of height when You stand up? Do the phantom sources stay where thhey were ie. "lower" or do they somewhat "stand up" with You?
I experience the latter - just like in case of line sources - the level -/0/+ of the soundstage is always at the ear-height regardless where the ear is
but perhaps the crucial factor in this is that I am more than 4 metres away from the speakers that additionally are directional at the highs - and the nearer and the less directional the speakers the less of this effect I would expect because of the unmasking of the speakers' real position in the room
Are You trying to tell Markus that You have pin-pointed phantom sources from an omni laying on the floor? How dare You?!!
Last edited:
sound coming from the floor?
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy"
- sound reproduction philosophy
The more prominent transients a sound has the better it can be localized. That's the same with speakers as with reality. There were experiments where after the initial trasient the following purely periodic part was shifted and the perceived localization stayed the same.
After putting these parts together and listening to CDs and DVDs it seems to me that more DVDs are probably mastered on speakers like these and music CDs are probably not. I don't really know how true that is, but every DVD I've played on these has sounded perfect where avery CD has required a bit of EQ. Most CDs sound a bit bright. Maybe things will change as I get to play more, but I'm 8 CDs and 2 DVDs into it. I'd try more DVDs, but I'm having too much fun listening. Give me a few daze. Standardization sure seems like a great idea. Break the circle of confusion!
Dan
Standardization sure seems like a great idea. Break the circle of confusion!Dan
Sorry accidently answererd in an old but related thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...es-loudspeaker-small-room-35.html#post2099760
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...es-loudspeaker-small-room-35.html#post2099760
We don't know enough about our hearing in order to objectively define optimal sound reproduction. On the other hand we have fully operational sound reproduction techniques.
So looking at the room and the speaker is a step forward but looking at recording, mixing, loudspeaker and the room makes up the whole picture.
That's probably why Bob does not agree with the soundstage of speakers with low directivity. Did you already ask him about his post at Gearslutz?
it was in this older thread where it became obvious to me that the title question was incomplete, and that led me to starting this thread
because the real practical question is "objectives of loudspeaker in a given placement in a given, typical (=acoustically untreated) listening room"
in order only of the time delay? what about intensity, angle and spectral content of reflections?
yes, mainly, but not exclusively - floor, ceiling reflection are typically also within the range of <5 ms, and very often front and sidewall reflections also - unless the loudspeakers are not moved well into the room away from the walls - which is the case in most rooms which are typically living rooms or second/third bedrooms (guest bedrooms) and as such are not dedicated to music listening exclusively
can we say that my proposition from the first post falls into this category?
I am not sure if this is principal problem. And Moulton says something completely to the contrary:
from: Moulton Laboratories :: Nick Batzdorf Interviews David Moulton
best regards,
graaf
Last edited: