Realistic? I mostly agree, but what is realism about these days?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOL9se4xavw
Clone the performance of a pair of line arrays in the early evening in summer in Vienna?
Should have used it for an upward firing radial mid..
......for dipole? Worse design. Maybe with the other end well damped or capped off. Regardless, a waste of driver IMNSHO, though have auditioned some cone/dome speakers done this way that did well if one likes omni in confined spaces.
GM
There are two aspects to a "forward" design:
1. an apparent shift of imaging beyond the forward plane (..closer to the listener) of the loudspeaker, and/or the "bunching-up" of images in the depth plane. I wouldn't say that the former was necessarily wrong (though I'm not fond of it), but the later is most certainly *wrong - and as you've noted, most of this is a matter of unequal dispersion characteristics between drivers (at least above the modal region).
2. a reduction in reproduced Hall sound (be it real or artificial-added by the sound engineer). This usually has 2 characteristics with that reduction in Hall sound: a. the Hall sound is diminished relative to the presence of imaging (ie. spl of the Hall sound is reduced), and b. the Hall sound is still present relative to the presence of images, but has the apparent quality of being dramatically smaller in presentation - as if a cathedral has become a night club. Both of these characteristics (if present) are *wrong.
*when I say "wrong", I mean in relation to what's on the recording.
All of the above generally results in some form of "in room" experience or "they are hear" as opposed to a "you are there"/"threashold/window" experience. And the "in room" experience is not what I'd call "HiFi", particularly when the "they are hear" images are "bunched up" (sometimes on top of each other) or are not presented as "life-sized" - filling your room with sound when in many instances those real sources (say grand piano, drum kit, etc.) couldn't possible fit in your room. ..well, unless you are rocking a palatial listening room.
As far as that "alive" sound is concerned, I think that's just a matter of excursion and it's effect on rise and settling time of the driver's diaphragm.
Ex. (digital eq. for both designs: flat and over the same bandwidth and same modest spl range)
-put a good dome tweeter with a steep enough high-pass filter (for the spl transients) in a properly configured waveguide with similar dispersion to a compression driver in its waveguide, and you'll likely hear very similar sound assuming similar diaphragm material - and may actually prefer the dome tweeter. (..though my guess is that on a blind test you would not reliably hear a difference.)
Still though, that's a lot of conditions that the dome tweeter must "acquire" that they very rarely do in any given loudspeaker design. (..so it's still likely to be an "apples to oranges" comparison for most designs using either technology.)
Last edited:
Realistic? I mostly agree, but what is realism about these days?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOL9se4xavw
Clone the performance of a pair of line arrays in the early evening in summer in Vienna?
Hall sound in as reasonably correct relation to images position and size.
-though again, it's not a matter of realistic, but rather *more* realistic vs. less realistic.
(..two-channel, unless properly binaural to the listener, is never going to sound truly real.)
(..and there is actually quite a lot of environmental/Hall sound in that youtube ..echos even). Perspective-wise though, I get thrown off by the visual cues which don't relate well to the presentation.)
Actually what i am saying is the direct radiator mated to a good treble compression driver is not balanced dynamically and the small micro to large transients are not working as a whole so it is not realistic and is unbalanced.
As far as size, my horns combined with thr omni circle surround horns and delayed reat sub can be very convincing. To be fooled into real sound has only happened to me with large full range electrostatic panels and full range horns with the latter being unlimited with the recording where electrostats are fine with small less complex sounds and are borderline with a piano.
As far as size, my horns combined with thr omni circle surround horns and delayed reat sub can be very convincing. To be fooled into real sound has only happened to me with large full range electrostatic panels and full range horns with the latter being unlimited with the recording where electrostats are fine with small less complex sounds and are borderline with a piano.
I'd say our experiences with compression tweeters differ. Some say they can go loud so they must be bad when quiet, I'm sure that's not it.
(..and there is actually quite a lot of environmental/Hall sound in that youtube ..echos even). Perspective-wise though, I get thrown off by the visual cues which don't relate well to the presentation.)
And added reverb, though not by Phil Spector's standards nor springs made, probably a sophisticated convolution made one, for a wet artificial fake hall sounding mix: sophisticated state of the art pa crap sound...
I agree with this. My system becomes more cohesive and realistic when components are better matched in sensitivity, headroom and directivity (indoors). Even non-enthusiast commented on the quality of sound at a backyard party with my horn loaded system over the same compression driver/horn with direct radiators. Same spl.
It sometimes works with adding direct radiators depending how many you can get away with before lobing becomes an issue.
I'm not exactly sure how to measure for this to "prove" it. Maybe the Klippel can describe it. It seems the better I can match my horns (from 100 cycles up) in linear phase, smooth response, low distortion and ultra high sensitivity the more the recordings come alive. It's not subtle. I had to get away from tube amps though because I didn't have any that could unravel the micro nuances in good recordings like dead quiet ss amp,s too much noise. Put the tube amps back in and it's "what the hell happened to the realism?"
I wouldn't say that either (that loud = bad when quiet), IMO the more efficient the device (all else equal) the better the clarity at any spl (..though it's almost never equal, there are many factors "at play").
Ex. if I can get a driver with the same mechanical resistance (and loss loss surround), but with a higher gauss magnet (and resulting lower Qts), I'll usually take that over the lower gauss variation. The higher gauss magnet almost always results in higher detail at any spl.
As for experiences, Kimmo's subjective impressions, (listed under "Sound" in his projects), tend to mirror my own. His projects are an interesting read, particularly when compared and specifically when compared in-time as a progression of experiments (both objectively and subjectively):
DIY Loudspeakers Kimmo Saunisto
(also: see the latest "Kontiainen" project's non-linear measurements in the treble with a sufficient high-pass slope - it's similar to Zaph's waveguide project results.)
BTW, his VituixCAD is a fantastic bit of software..
Last edited:
The speakers I looked at from that site (a few different types) have a flat response out past 10k, so I'm disinclined to read much into the subjective impressions. The crossover is important. A compression tweeter set up properly on an OS waveguide is deceptively natural, and consistently so, but not with that EQ.
I'm not sure what the problem is there - it's exceedingly well documented.
(..perhaps it's disbelief in the extended response of some of the horn's - that specifically use a BMS coaxial compression driver that extends past 20 kHz, and even has the manufacturers pdf on the driver linked at the top of the page in the "Introduction".)
Ex.
http://kimmosaunisto.net/Kirppis/bms_4590_4590p_t_data.pdf
vs.
"Frequency response
On-axis response; Left, Right
- measuring distance 230 cm
- time window 5.6 ms, no smoothing"
Attachments
..other than the manufactured variety, there aren't too many DIY efforts with that.
Given the right planar/ribbon/AMT and high-pass filter, I suspect the result would be excellent.
Other than a light wave guide is there not too much mechanichal constraints ? Shape of the planar, Its lightness in relation to the front load ? (not the same than 180° on a plane bafle)
Horn = better for the hard dome or strong BL ? (Always in relation to the treble range topic I mean)
Hey ScottG, have not used to listen compression drivers before changing for more domestical domes ? I mean you made the opposite from the PA towards the "hi-fi" drivers ? (Always in relation to the treble range topic I still mean).
A question please ! Due to the back "simple" short chamber has the treble compression driver less impulsion response than a dome ? Or is it finally the way the suround is made (more than electrical and force factor as the mvts are far below the mm - but maybe in its low end - ?
Just a question of vocalubary, we should speak instead of tweeter between 2K and 10 K Hz and super tweeter above ?
Horn = better for the hard dome or strong BL ? (Always in relation to the treble range topic I mean)
Hey ScottG, have not used to listen compression drivers before changing for more domestical domes ? I mean you made the opposite from the PA towards the "hi-fi" drivers ? (Always in relation to the treble range topic I still mean).
A question please ! Due to the back "simple" short chamber has the treble compression driver less impulsion response than a dome ? Or is it finally the way the suround is made (more than electrical and force factor as the mvts are far below the mm - but maybe in its low end - ?
Just a question of vocalubary, we should speak instead of tweeter between 2K and 10 K Hz and super tweeter above ?
Last edited:
Supet tweeter over 5khz have little chances to integrate if any... In those Hiraga/Lacrampe NRDS visits to these famous "installations examplaires", super tweeters were usually "demonstraded" unconnected, because this is how they sounded best...
In those days when Hiraga was french audiophiles unobtainum father christmas dream stuff supplier... and me audiophiles son of a bitch as usual ghost buster...
In those days when Hiraga was french audiophiles unobtainum father christmas dream stuff supplier... and me audiophiles son of a bitch as usual ghost buster...
Last edited:
Above 8K or 10K Hz does the Center to Center so important ?
Hey GDO, do you remember the rear compression driver firering on his comercial try ? the one with the big coax Altec and a JBL on the top-rear speaker anfled to 45°
I hear as well a re design made by him where the super TAD tweeter (the all in one tweeter alu horn with Be diag maybe firering to 30-45° outside in front position this time... one of the most natural treble I heard, and the SS behind or dacs were not stellar...
Also we can have some asking about such designs like the LX Mini. But maybe here all is about of choice of aesthetic sound ?
Hey GDO, do you remember the rear compression driver firering on his comercial try ? the one with the big coax Altec and a JBL on the top-rear speaker anfled to 45°
I hear as well a re design made by him where the super TAD tweeter (the all in one tweeter alu horn with Be diag maybe firering to 30-45° outside in front position this time... one of the most natural treble I heard, and the SS behind or dacs were not stellar...
Also we can have some asking about such designs like the LX Mini. But maybe here all is about of choice of aesthetic sound ?
Last edited:
If the "carnet à points" applyed to audio, Bastianni ( Forza Bastianni...
) and Hiraga would drive cars like this...
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.