Here is a link you might be interested in: ORION++
I think it's along the lines you are hoping for.
Grant.
Hi TMM!
I get it, frequency x 2 and amplitude x 1/4 results in max velocity x 1/2.
I must locate the source of your excursion versus frequency information as I'd like to increase my knowledge.
And your second paragraph reminds me that nothing can be taken for granted in the realm of loudspeaker reproduction!
Thanks for your explanation, I'm off to do some quick Fourier analysis before my late Saturday lunch!
I get it, frequency x 2 and amplitude x 1/4 results in max velocity x 1/2.
I must locate the source of your excursion versus frequency information as I'd like to increase my knowledge.
And your second paragraph reminds me that nothing can be taken for granted in the realm of loudspeaker reproduction!
Thanks for your explanation, I'm off to do some quick Fourier analysis before my late Saturday lunch!
Hi again TMM!
Have just read the edited version of your post containing two additional paragraphs.
In my opinion you provide a superb answer to the OP's question!
The main, third paragraph is in accord with much that I've been trying to say, but you've expressed the concepts with much more 'detail' and conviction!
Have just read the edited version of your post containing two additional paragraphs.
In my opinion you provide a superb answer to the OP's question!
The main, third paragraph is in accord with much that I've been trying to say, but you've expressed the concepts with much more 'detail' and conviction!
It seems the OP had the answer to which driver before posting. Only cost needs looking at.
A tweeter contains a lot less raw material than a mid/bass driver. No basket. less suspension. Though could have ferrofluid and a diaphragm that's more complex and maybe even a little more exotic. This means the price bracket we are in is important. A cheap tweeter is cheaper than a cheap woofer. An expensive tweeter is a fiddly thing to make and it's design is being evolved. It's very hard to get them right, so pairs have to be matched up rather than them all hitting the mark equally during a production run.
I'm not building with exotic parts. What I buy has a value related to what I see in my hands. I spend more on bigger things.
A tweeter contains a lot less raw material than a mid/bass driver. No basket. less suspension. Though could have ferrofluid and a diaphragm that's more complex and maybe even a little more exotic. This means the price bracket we are in is important. A cheap tweeter is cheaper than a cheap woofer. An expensive tweeter is a fiddly thing to make and it's design is being evolved. It's very hard to get them right, so pairs have to be matched up rather than them all hitting the mark equally during a production run.
I'm not building with exotic parts. What I buy has a value related to what I see in my hands. I spend more on bigger things.
Was it these by any chance??
6moons audio reviews: Living Voice Vox Olympian
Often paired in demo rooms with Kondo. And also my favourite speaker of all time (to listen too that is. I think they look hideous!)
Thank you all for taking the time to answer my question. With all the negative tone and condescension early on I thought this thread is gone. But good to know there are still many helpful and civil people around here. 
It seems that some people spend so much time here that they forgot there are normal people out there. Most people, including me, have next to no electronic knowledge, and have no knowledge of the inner functioning of speaker speaker design. I'm not here often, usually only when I have a problem that need solving. I have no idea of whatever ideological war between camps, nor I have the slightest interest. So I really have no idea if I what I asked would invoke emotion from the some quarters. If I do, frankly I'd rather not do this.
l appreciate everyone who contributed to the discussion. That said I think some people do not understand, or missed a very important aspect of my question, that is the word "perceived".
This is not in my original question. But it may help in understanding where I am coming from. The whole idea of perception is not really a big thing in the DIY community I guess. understandably so because most are not selling the stuffs they make.
When a company develop a product, never mind the market research that set the parameters for the product design in the first place, it will be presented to a target group. Products designed for enjoyment, such as hifi speakers. A big part of it is customer perception. As you well know, this would largely decide the price point, as opposed to the production cost. Because on the other hand, it is possible to make a product of a high production cost that is perceived poorly.
Where am I going with this? When we go out and try to buy a pair of hifi speakers (I stress hifi speakers made solely for enjoyment here, not studio or PA gears). Some speakers sound cheap, some sound expensive, the price tag often but don't necessarily correlate, nor their production cost, nor build quality. Most people, like me, will listen to them, and decide if the price tag is worth it. A big part of the perception is in perceived "detail". A speaker perceived to be detailed would tend to fetch more. I think this is why many speakers tend to boost some frequencies for added perception of details.
As with all perception, this is subjective. I know what some of you are thinking, the frequency response. Most studio gears for example, are designed for flat frequency response as opposed to enjoyment. Personally, I will only buy budget studio product for use in non critical setting. For higher end studio monitors or headphones, for me, their sound don't worth their price tag. I also don't find them particularly detailed. They are detailed in the way that all the frequencies are there (depending on specs) so they do not sound "soft" or muddy, but my perception is they are otherwise mediocre.
Like I said this is subjective, but I suspect most people's perception aren't that different from mine. Most people probably would probably prefer "hifi" stuffs than "studio" stuffs in their living room.
That said, for a speaker to sound "natural" (again another subjective term. IMO it has to be reasonably close to a flat frequency response.
Back to speaker building, I personally would consider it unfortunate if I spend $500 building a speaker that I perceive has the detail level of a $300 pair of speaker. Say an Andrew Jones Elac B6, I heard this I would say it's worth what it's asking, the parts used cost likely cost much less even considering economy of scale, and FR is probably not that flat. I think investment in the right parts is key and I would be interested in your wisdom, if I decie to build one.
Thank you for your explanation, I agree with them. Just that some of your description resembles what is generally called "tone" rather than "details". But details does exist in harmonics and I agree their reproduction is essential for a pleasant perception.
Thank you. That's an interesting read regarding spatial cues, it would be nice if one has the space (4' space around speakers) to play with this.
Thank you for your response.
As said I have no experience in speaker design. During the on and off time that I was here, I read a little bit of what others did here. I only entertained the idea recently because I am currently looking for a pair of speakers.
Actually I don't think I will make a 2 way anytime soon, though at the moment I find the idea interesting. From the little I know I think I agree with you. It looks to be much easier pick 2 drivers that matches, than investing in heroic efforts in order to make them work together.
It seems that some people spend so much time here that they forgot there are normal people out there. Most people, including me, have next to no electronic knowledge, and have no knowledge of the inner functioning of speaker speaker design. I'm not here often, usually only when I have a problem that need solving. I have no idea of whatever ideological war between camps, nor I have the slightest interest. So I really have no idea if I what I asked would invoke emotion from the some quarters. If I do, frankly I'd rather not do this.
l appreciate everyone who contributed to the discussion. That said I think some people do not understand, or missed a very important aspect of my question, that is the word "perceived".
This is not in my original question. But it may help in understanding where I am coming from. The whole idea of perception is not really a big thing in the DIY community I guess. understandably so because most are not selling the stuffs they make.
When a company develop a product, never mind the market research that set the parameters for the product design in the first place, it will be presented to a target group. Products designed for enjoyment, such as hifi speakers. A big part of it is customer perception. As you well know, this would largely decide the price point, as opposed to the production cost. Because on the other hand, it is possible to make a product of a high production cost that is perceived poorly.
Where am I going with this? When we go out and try to buy a pair of hifi speakers (I stress hifi speakers made solely for enjoyment here, not studio or PA gears). Some speakers sound cheap, some sound expensive, the price tag often but don't necessarily correlate, nor their production cost, nor build quality. Most people, like me, will listen to them, and decide if the price tag is worth it. A big part of the perception is in perceived "detail". A speaker perceived to be detailed would tend to fetch more. I think this is why many speakers tend to boost some frequencies for added perception of details.
As with all perception, this is subjective. I know what some of you are thinking, the frequency response. Most studio gears for example, are designed for flat frequency response as opposed to enjoyment. Personally, I will only buy budget studio product for use in non critical setting. For higher end studio monitors or headphones, for me, their sound don't worth their price tag. I also don't find them particularly detailed. They are detailed in the way that all the frequencies are there (depending on specs) so they do not sound "soft" or muddy, but my perception is they are otherwise mediocre.
Like I said this is subjective, but I suspect most people's perception aren't that different from mine. Most people probably would probably prefer "hifi" stuffs than "studio" stuffs in their living room.
That said, for a speaker to sound "natural" (again another subjective term. IMO it has to be reasonably close to a flat frequency response.
Back to speaker building, I personally would consider it unfortunate if I spend $500 building a speaker that I perceive has the detail level of a $300 pair of speaker. Say an Andrew Jones Elac B6, I heard this I would say it's worth what it's asking, the parts used cost likely cost much less even considering economy of scale, and FR is probably not that flat. I think investment in the right parts is key and I would be interested in your wisdom, if I decie to build one.
Thank you for your explanation, I agree with them. Just that some of your description resembles what is generally called "tone" rather than "details". But details does exist in harmonics and I agree their reproduction is essential for a pleasant perception.
Thank you. That's an interesting read regarding spatial cues, it would be nice if one has the space (4' space around speakers) to play with this.
Thank you for your response.
As said I have no experience in speaker design. During the on and off time that I was here, I read a little bit of what others did here. I only entertained the idea recently because I am currently looking for a pair of speakers.
Actually I don't think I will make a 2 way anytime soon, though at the moment I find the idea interesting. From the little I know I think I agree with you. It looks to be much easier pick 2 drivers that matches, than investing in heroic efforts in order to make them work together.
Not this one, it has a cube like shaped cabinet below, and a giant horn flare on top, almost 50/50 proportion. About the height of a person if I recall it right.
Edit: The horn has a very high efficiency too, I don't recall the number but something like high 90s or low 100, driven by push pull tube amps. The subwoofer box below may be self powered because I cannot imagine a tube amp can push a driver of that size in a room that big.
Last edited:
I have a rickety 1926 Orthophonic acoustic phonograph (with hummy electric motor) - although graphs of its response don't reach high, it has better presence (and much better "lows" than my 1917 Victrola). For very low levels of listening and vintage speakers, I think perhaps very small coils, small spiders, and low moving mass gave a better illusion of detail than say a modern speaker with a lot more moving mass.
The perceived detail I believe is synonymous with what Dave calls DDR (downward dynamic range) which I believe is synonymous with transient response because this is a measure of how accurately the speaker system can follow the input signal and this is all it has to do in order to present you with the detail. The detail does not reside in the woofer or the tweeter but in the system as a whole.
Truer words seldom spoken IMO
Transient response = flat freq and flat phase response..... over as wide a bandwidth as is possible.
Directivity, and desired SPL, are simply "fit to environment" overlays.
I really don't understand why we make it so complicated....
A term coined by Allen Wright — a superb engineer — to get us away from and to cover off all those flowery audiophile reviewer terms.
dave
Capacitors?
One thing that no one has brought up yet is the type of capacitors used in the crossovers. I've recently learned that different capacitors yield a different 'attack' from the transients, particularly in the higher frequencies. That being said if I was building a 2-way system I'd definitely save a few bucks on tweeters to spend a bit more on the capacitors in the signal path of the tweeters. At bare minimum I'd use something like a ClarityCap CSA and I think you'll find them well worth it to bring the 'detail' you're looking for out.
One thing that no one has brought up yet is the type of capacitors used in the crossovers. I've recently learned that different capacitors yield a different 'attack' from the transients, particularly in the higher frequencies. That being said if I was building a 2-way system I'd definitely save a few bucks on tweeters to spend a bit more on the capacitors in the signal path of the tweeters. At bare minimum I'd use something like a ClarityCap CSA and I think you'll find them well worth it to bring the 'detail' you're looking for out.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.