the operating term above is primarily
interestingly Markus usually talks rather about " summing localization in the median plane":
page 100 of this thread
and also about "breakdown of precedence" in the median plane:
page 172 of this thread
apparently He believes that this is possible in the median plane but only in case of the ceiling reflection, not in case of the floor reflection, interesting, isn't it?
I don't see a contradiction there. High freqs allow the vertical spatial localisation.
I thought the issue at hand is placement of the bass-midrange very close to the floor reproducing frequencies below about 1kHz.
it is - but are You sure that 1 kHz is low enough?
what is wrong with my argument about the range 0.4<4kHz?
Why would such a range apply only for binaural perception and lateral localisation?
Perception of a wavefront shape can be monaural also - why not?
but the mechanism here working is not "breaking of precedence effect" or "summing localisation", not temporal at all but spectral instead - it is a change in the spectral HRTF data
Last edited:
ps. ad:
perhaps Allison would concur and exactly therefore the floor coupled woofers in His designs were all low-passed at 350 Hz?
and perhaps this was the main cause of Snell Type 1 problematic soundstaging - not the floor position of the tweeter but the floor position of the midwoofer which was crossed to high (at 2 kHz)?
perhaps Allison would concur and exactly therefore the floor coupled woofers in His designs were all low-passed at 350 Hz?
and perhaps this was the main cause of Snell Type 1 problematic soundstaging - not the floor position of the tweeter but the floor position of the midwoofer which was crossed to high (at 2 kHz)?
Take look at HRTF data. There is negligible change in interaural signals nor spectral variance at low freqs as a function of source elevation.
but are we talking about interaural here?
interaural in the median plane???
I thought we were talking about the median plane and about monaural hearing consequently.
And what about the evidence suggesting that floor reflection may act quite independently from the HRTF mechanism?
In my opinion it would be completely logical and it is perfectly physiologically possible
Last edited:
You are inventing new theories here ? If the ear canal signals remain unchanged what we have ? Bone conduction... tactile hairs...
You can link the "evidence" here, so we can study it objectively
?? What do You mean?
You can link the "evidence" here, so we can study it objectively
I have already:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/121385-loudspeakers-room-system-196.html#post3399593
what is wrong with NASA or University of Edinburgh??
what is wrong with NASA or University of Edinburgh??
They don't provide evidence source elevation is perceived at low-mid freqs.
It's very easy to test by yourself. You promote experimentations, right
Then go for it.In my test with 10" element close to floor and tweeter horn at ear level (see earlier), there is no sound coming from the floor. Everything comes from the ear level where the tweeter is.
- Elias
Why should they?
The argument is not that it is a spectral mechanism (like HRTF) - the argument is that it works in time domain because there is no suppression effect (like Haas efect) in the median plane and because of that the floor reflection can be used by our auditory system for a sort of a vertical triangulation of the sound source localisation - it is a temporal mechanism which contributes to the distance perception and the elevation perception (it does not mean that it overrides other cues when they are present and stronger)
that it is an important cue in the distance perception You can read for example here: Francis Rumsey, Tim McCormick "Sound and Recording"
and that it is an important cue in the elevation perception (and one that conflicts with elevation cues in the redording) is for example confirmed explicitly by Linkwitz in this 2009 AES Paper
this is not a HRTF mechanism, therefore I believe that the frequency range I believe is critical in the spatial hearing in general - ie. 0.4-4.0 kHz - applies here as well
oh yes! experimenting at home is great, but so is learning from other more experienced people
for example from Ray Allison - He clearly must had conducted many experiments before He concluded that 350 Hz is about as high one can go with a floor-coupled woofer
He applied this principle in all designs of this type from Allison One to Allison IC20 and when in He needed to cross the woofer at 450 Hz in Allison CD9 then the woofer went on top of the speaker, flooder-like
Perhaps it's just that stronger cues override weaker cues? Have You tested it with the tweeter switched-off?
He is an commercial manufacturer, we cannot really know the unbiased reasons behind his products.
Yes. With 1.5kHz 4th order cross over, when tweeter switched off the sound direction gets a bit lower. I think this is due to off-skirt leakage from the filter that the woofer is emitting. I may try higher order filters and lower cross over freqs to confirm this.
- Elias
Are You suggesting that He deliberately preferred to design a worse product rather than better?
in the range where it is certainly completely beaming?
Last edited:
I said we don't know the reasons why he did what he did.
Element is tilted back and aimed towards the listener can be seen from the earlier picture I posted. Any high freq fed to the 10" driver will be radiated to the listening position.
we never know, I don't know anything about You for example
Can't we just assume that He was a typical businessman and wanted His product to be rather better than worse?
...giving pinna cues for its position in the median plane?
it is unlikely because there is not happenig much until around 6 kHz:
CIPIC International Laboratory
in fact:
The ability of listeners to locate sound in the vertical plane was investigated. The results showed that for auditory stimuli to be located accurately (1) the stimulus must be complex, (2) it must include frequencies above 7000 cps, and, (3) the pinna must be present.
so You have 24 dB/1500 Hz and 10'' woofer?
Can You measure any output of such a system at 7 kHz at the listening position?
Last edited:
The 10" driver in the test was very cheap but surprisingly good.
Rockwood / Senon DY 1026 U
It is wide band. Response goes beyond 10kHz. Surely there is high freqs leaking with 4th order low pass at 1.5kHz.
HIGH-TECH-HIFI
I found this measurement of the driver.
- Elias
Rockwood / Senon DY 1026 U
It is wide band. Response goes beyond 10kHz. Surely there is high freqs leaking with 4th order low pass at 1.5kHz.
HIGH-TECH-HIFI
I found this measurement of the driver.
- Elias
Last edited:
I see so it is a wideband and it has a whizzer.
Sure there is a leaking but can it be audible in practice?
The theoretical filter attenuation at 7 kHz is already >50 dB and going down fast