He gets to the point at about 8 min. What he describes is exactly the reason i abandoned OBs.
He does have some good points… boxiness, his opinion, his taste all explicitly factored into his opinion on OB.
He only brushes up against the … any loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises… reality, there is no best.
dave
He does have some good points… boxiness, his opinion, his taste all explicitly factored into his opinion on OB.
He only brushes up against the … any loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises… reality, there is no best.
dave
Boxiness is when the enclosure structure contributes sufficient radiation in the audio range itself to be heard colouring the sound radiated from the drivers.
dave
Last edited:
I personally do not want the speaker with box and crossover.
Music system must be as simple as possible.. The more you add the more you will lose
100% agree your opinion ""any loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises… reality, there is no best
Airy and fine detail music is more important for me..
I want the speaker has the best way to reproduce human voice.
Music system must be as simple as possible.. The more you add the more you will lose
100% agree your opinion ""any loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises… reality, there is no best
Airy and fine detail music is more important for me..
I want the speaker has the best way to reproduce human voice.
Speaker membrane is rather sound transparent. We want to listen only to the sound radiating towards us, from the front of the speaker membrane. Ideally.
However, sound radiating back in negative phase radiating towards the enclosure is supposedly absorbed. It never happens completely, no matter of box construction. Very close is B&W Nautilus with pipes, but still speaker frame and magnet reflects some energy back.
Worst box is flat back panel which reflects oposite phase sound, now delayed, through the cone coinciding with front wave.
Result is boxy sound.
Since you naively ask the question, you are likely accustomed to it that you believe that's how speakers are supposed to sound.
Most of speakers i made are open back or completely open baffle. Countless comparisons prove it to be better sounding. To me personaly.
But if you like boxy sound, good for you.
Naively, naw. Very serious question. Most of the explanations I've read so far are qualitative. I'm looking for serious quantitative.
Interesting, the assumption you've made of me.
in searching, I came across this attempt at correlating frequency band emphasis with terminology. (from an audio engineer/mixing perspective)
https://audiouniversityonline.com/describing-sound-quality/
And per Sweetwater
"Boxy. A sound or mix composed of mostly midrange frequencies with not enough lows and highs. For example: “These guitars are too boxy, we should try a mic with more high end.” “These guitars are too boxy, we should try a mic with more high end.” A boxy mix sounds flat and can lack detail."
Boxiness, as you describe, doesn't match it. There seems to be a camp that uses boxiness to describe the noise created by the box itself as the drivers couple to it. Another camp uses it to describe a frequency band emphasis.
"Why didn't you ask how do you measure it?"
Measuring it is only one piece of the puzzle. Have to correlate those measurements to how humans perceive it. How do you measure and correlate it?
https://audiouniversityonline.com/describing-sound-quality/
And per Sweetwater
"Boxy. A sound or mix composed of mostly midrange frequencies with not enough lows and highs. For example: “These guitars are too boxy, we should try a mic with more high end.” “These guitars are too boxy, we should try a mic with more high end.” A boxy mix sounds flat and can lack detail."
Boxiness, as you describe, doesn't match it. There seems to be a camp that uses boxiness to describe the noise created by the box itself as the drivers couple to it. Another camp uses it to describe a frequency band emphasis.
"Why didn't you ask how do you measure it?"
Measuring it is only one piece of the puzzle. Have to correlate those measurements to how humans perceive it. How do you measure and correlate it?
I am with you on the evils of XOs, but…
There is some merit with that, the more information a system looses the poorer it is. But ti is more complex than just simple.
We don’t disagree there, but i abandoned OBs since the thing the video presenter likes, also subtracs information from your ear/brain, the particualr small detaisl that give voice, insturments, and music life.
OBs compromises are not something everyone can live with they are not better, just different.
dave
Please give us only one example of good OB speaker without crossover (besides full-range electrostatic loudspeakers).
@6sX7, Yes, we all have different definitions.
Its impossible to agree on subjective tearms.
I can't measure it, but i am quite sensitive to it. Recently had to remove even side pannels on my 4 open baffle mid array. Could not measure it, bit clearly heard improvement in clarity.
Again, recently drilled holes on the sides of mtm open back speakers, since i could not remove the sides.
In both cases less coloration. Much improved soundstage. How do you measure soundstage?
Its impossible to agree on subjective tearms.
I can't measure it, but i am quite sensitive to it. Recently had to remove even side pannels on my 4 open baffle mid array. Could not measure it, bit clearly heard improvement in clarity.
Again, recently drilled holes on the sides of mtm open back speakers, since i could not remove the sides.
In both cases less coloration. Much improved soundstage. How do you measure soundstage?
I think no one can describe "boxy" sound without having exprerienced the difference by observation. Since we most likely all have, we can relate to the terminology but not necessarily due to loudspeakers. I think "diffuse" is the word the guy in the vid was looking for. So by nature that would detract from the presentation of the stereo image. Since he stated no boxiness with well designed speakers, what then is the attraction to OB?
Well... I was ready to mention the MAGNEPAN speakers, but they do have crossovers...
Using classic electrodynamic speakers, I wonder if an Open Baffle or Plane Baffle with multiple speakers without crossover offering satisfactory results really exists... To be honest, I don't know. Maybe ?
With a single Full-Range speaker mounted in Open Baffle or Plane Baffle, this speaker should be circa 7" diameter to offer the best bandwidth compromise, and the size of the matching baffle would then be very large to avoid acoustic short-circuit that inevitably occurs in the low frequencies, in order to achieve a suitable bass extension - think several Sq.Mtrs. surface...
But it's me, OK ?
T
Last edited:
@adason , that is my current audio problem I'm investigating and why I'm asking about the boxiness. I've always taken boxiness as being a not quite a honk like a horn but a bit of cupping with no high end, like the audio engineers describe it. Like talking into or through a box.
Back to the current soundstaging investigation. I've owned Maggies. I've heard high-end MLs. I've built my own magneto-planars as well as helped a friend build a pair of electrostatic speakers in competition. I've also heard B&W 801s with McIntosh monoblocks running in a from-the-ground-up built mixing salon that could convincingly project the Osaka Symphony performing Mahlers 8th. I've also had countless box speakers both bought and built. Some of the above has provided that holographic soundstage that has me on the search for it again.
So I've got a pair of Curt Campbell's Halcyons running from monoblocks and a Benchmark DAC so I know the channel separation is phenomenal. And with Alpair 10P loaded by a 2 foot long tube and 8 inches of foam, I should have minimal reflection. But I've had a hard time getting that image dialed in. That most likely culprit at this point is the room. How do I rule out the speakers? How and what do I measure to track down the imaging issue? Timing has something to do with it. Also, have to have an appropriate recording and test equipment. Getting there.
Suddenly have the feeling I'm one of the Hardy Boys in "The Great Imaging Investigation" Or maybe Shaggy hiding in the Mystery Machine. Zoinks.
Back to the current soundstaging investigation. I've owned Maggies. I've heard high-end MLs. I've built my own magneto-planars as well as helped a friend build a pair of electrostatic speakers in competition. I've also heard B&W 801s with McIntosh monoblocks running in a from-the-ground-up built mixing salon that could convincingly project the Osaka Symphony performing Mahlers 8th. I've also had countless box speakers both bought and built. Some of the above has provided that holographic soundstage that has me on the search for it again.
So I've got a pair of Curt Campbell's Halcyons running from monoblocks and a Benchmark DAC so I know the channel separation is phenomenal. And with Alpair 10P loaded by a 2 foot long tube and 8 inches of foam, I should have minimal reflection. But I've had a hard time getting that image dialed in. That most likely culprit at this point is the room. How do I rule out the speakers? How and what do I measure to track down the imaging issue? Timing has something to do with it. Also, have to have an appropriate recording and test equipment. Getting there.
Suddenly have the feeling I'm one of the Hardy Boys in "The Great Imaging Investigation" Or maybe Shaggy hiding in the Mystery Machine. Zoinks.
Last edited: