Omnis work well outdoor. And maybe in a very large venue. In small rooms, they trigger specular reflections to such extent that imaging suffers way too much. Sound is everywhere and nowhere.
Too me it's confusing, weird and I can't get used to a speaker like MBL 101E. Despite the fact that MBLs flagship measures quite flat at a certain hight. I would pick a cheap waveguide speaker over MBL 101E any day.
Too me it's confusing, weird and I can't get used to a speaker like MBL 101E. Despite the fact that MBLs flagship measures quite flat at a certain hight. I would pick a cheap waveguide speaker over MBL 101E any day.
Which omnidirectinal speaker's have you listened to.
My implementation images with spectacular specificity from very large sweet spot. Spectral balance is maintained throughout room. This is with both speakers along wall as pictured; when moved out into room as more typical, imaging and spectral balance are both just as good. Sound passing into adjacent rooms is balanced, sound through windows outside is suggestive of live event going on inside.
^
Now compare to free field listening. You'll notice tons of details that are simply lost when listening to omnis.
Imaging with omnis can be surprisingly good though. It's probably our brain giving up on trying to make sense from all the reflections, i.e. more ambiguous cues result in a less ambiguous perception.
Now compare to free field listening. You'll notice tons of details that are simply lost when listening to omnis.
Imaging with omnis can be surprisingly good though. It's probably our brain giving up on trying to make sense from all the reflections, i.e. more ambiguous cues result in a less ambiguous perception.
Sure and it's difficult to debate against taste. At the same time, I don't know of any studies that have showed a preferance for a frontwall contribution. Only from sidewalls (Toole) and a CBT would be a much better speaker then. It not only avoids the frontwall reflections, but measures clearly better then MBL 101E vertically.
MBL 101E, other and smaller MBLs, different German Physiks speakers and Boose.
We know what comb filtering does to the sound from countless studies and it refutes your point of 'spectral balance'. I can't argue agains you taste, an omni speaker will however in a small space never sound accurate. Unless you overdampen the room, but then you have a dead space.
I like accuracy where reflections are atteunatued as much as possible up to a certain point, and especially when it's combined with a late highly diffusive field from behind. That gives the best of two worlds IMO. Spacious, accurate and also lively if the room isn't overly dampened at the highs. Using redirection or/and broadband absorption only placed surgically makes the latter possible.
As much as an anechoic space is perceived as a hostile environment for humans, I believe it's the perfect environment for stereo reproduction.
This hypothesis could be tested with headphones. We would simply need to convolve a stereo signal with HRIRs from an anechoic space. Such HRIRs are freely available at Audio Group Download Server
I disagree. It's neither a good environment for a control room nor a listening space. There's a good reason why that type of environment was abandoned as control rooms in the 70s or so. Psycoacoustics tells us it's not a natural. And what becomes strange and unatural becomes inaccurate too. With a dead space the brain perceives localization errors. That's why diffusion in the rear of the room is much better then absorption when the distance permits it.
I'm 100% sure that a room that is both accurate and lively would be preferred by a great majority.
Not sure what type of control rooms you're referring to. What followed those 70's LEDE rooms was NE rooms which are even more anechoic.
Did you ever listen outside?
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Spaciousness IS preferred by most listeners, sure, but the recording should provide it, not the room.
I'm referring to the rooms before LEDE/RFZ. They had a lot of absorption and were not pleasant to work in. NE rooms never became as popular as LEDE/RFZ. But yes, they are semi anechoic.
What's your point? We're talking about sound inside. Outside we expect something differently. When that has been said; An outside concert can never resemble a good concert hall in an enveloping experience. And good concert hall (hard to find) is simpy much better then outdoor sound.
You can have both to a large degree the way I've described it. Maybe you have something yet to experience. The more redirection (splayed sidewalls for instance) is used, the more late arriving diffuse energy you can have. Thus more spaciousness too.
Last edited:
Didn't they remove "Haas kickers" from those old 70's control rooms exactly because they had detrimental effects? Sure you can find a compromise but that's what it is, a compromise. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
My point is that we're discussing sound REproduction. This is a completely different thing than perception of natural sources in real spaces. In order to get an idea what stereo really is we have to exclude the room, e.g. listen outside.
Rest assured that I have done a lot of testing. A RFZ doesn't create spaciousness per se. Certain reflections do.
My point is that we're discussing sound REproduction. This is a completely different thing than perception of natural sources in real spaces. In order to get an idea what stereo really is we have to exclude the room, e.g. listen outside.
Rest assured that I have done a lot of testing. A RFZ doesn't create spaciousness per se. Certain reflections do.
Last edited:
Lateral diffusion does create spaciosness when it's done correctly. Not in the same way as lateral reflections from the front. To say it doesn't create speaciousness is like saying wheat bread isn't bread because it contains less fiber than whole wheat bread.
It's in the nature of diffusion of creating a larger and more spacious soundfield.
It's in the nature of diffusion of creating a larger and more spacious soundfield.
I have been listing to - and reading about - people's opinions and thoughts about speakers for over forty years now - - - - - - and it is still the same as it always has been. There is not a speaker that I know of that will "do it all" for people. The only solution I know of is to have a set of each type and enjoy them for the mood that suits you at the time. To make things even more interesting you can mix and match them with different types of amplifiers and sources and cables......
I came to the conclusion that if I'm enjoying what I'm listening to then that's close enough....
I came to the conclusion that if I'm enjoying what I'm listening to then that's close enough....
Ok, then tell me please - REproduction of what sound? What is the original sound? What is the measure of the fidelity of this REproduction?
Countless studies? And others discount this completely.
Would you provide reference to these?
Character of music with my radial array, really a form of CBT, provides no audible evidence of what looks to be massive comb effects above 4kHz in frequency response. At these frequencies, pure tone from true single source produces strong standing wave effects when any moderately good reflector is present. Stereo in and of itself sets up sound field full of comb features. Many complain about this as deficit, when at worst it the entry point to listening without headphones. Live music is full of combing effects.
For impulsive high frequency sounds, directional cues provided are intensity based using head shading.
Really small rooms need to be dead; or listened in with headphones. No speaker sounds accurate in small room.
With your MBL experiences did you have control of speaker locations and try diverse setups? Such as close to walls, or close to long walls near their midpoints, stuffed in corners v more typical stereo speaker setups.
Both MBL and German Physiks speakers have poor vertical coverage; likely leading to overly spacy sound. Floor bounce is not the enemy; it provides cues to location of speaker plane and thus influences perceived image depth. Tiny speakers up close provide amazing image detail; depth is incredible when head and speakers are fixed; this
is tempered by small motions of head and highly limited output of tiny speakers. Ear buds in very quiet room are excellent demonstration when held several inches in front of face and located in proximately eyes' blind spots for fixed forward gaze.
I have; many more setups provide great results over wide range of recordings. Some do indeed result in sound everywhere with inconsistent imaging with some recordings, and not with others.
In nature piercing cries are difficult to localize; a parent can recognize distress call, and with foreknowledge of offspring location respond quickly. Predator with big head can't zero right in, and also knows that potentially lethal help may be on the way.
My space dead? Yes, floor is fully carpeted, ceiling has acoustic tile. Brick in picture extends for half of long sidewall; other half is almost completely floor to ceiling glass; front wall to left of pictured speaker is also almost completely floor to ceiling glass. Other long wall is somewhat broken up, and comprised mainly of open shelving against solid wood wall; rear wall is also solid wood. Carpeting makes good sink for HF; ceiling tile looks to have been painted and is directly attached to original plaster ceiling. Acoustically dead? Not so much.
Previously I posted horizontal response of array without woofers in "Uniform Directivity - How important is it?" thread:
The "narrow directivity junkies" didn't have much to say, nor the "detail" junkies for huge dip in 6kHz region or the general roll off above 10kHz. Spectral content of most real music sources isn't big contributor; most recording microphones and EQ techniques leave little content up high. Yes, some thoughts have gone to adding tweeter array; but after several months of listening, even metalic percussion seems to come across quite well without that last bit of fizz. Then again the ears turned fifty this year too.
Horizontal data was taken with stationary microphone and rotation of array at 2.5 degree intervals. Clearly, 30 degrees worth of measurements represents entire array. Cherry picking with orientation and limiting to 10 or 15 degree measurement intervals, excessive smoothing and loading into one of those neat color maps could present speaker as having near perfect 360 degree horizontal performance to 10kHz. Sure, small full range pointing up will have truly static performance in horizontal plane; but limitations of lateral reflections and dominant ceiling reflections generally guarantee blown out spacy performance, and highly limiting distortion performance when driven.
During same measurement set somewhat hasty vertical response measurements were taken; horizontal reference, and 15 degree intervals above horizontal plane. They reveal CBT behavior of array. Array was stationary for measurements with microphone moved; windowing was 6ms. Results suggest array may be used with major axis in horizontal plane instead of vertical plane; I listened to pair this way too. Also with one vertical and one horizontal. Imaging remains very stable in all cases.
Overlays of frequency response for vertical measurements, 6ms windows, and no smoothing:
Vertical coverage across 120 degrees given symmetry. I am certain that MBL speakers and German Physiks speakers do not do this.
Measurements were performed in living room with array equidistant from side walls and front wall. Today I revisited data set and produced room spectragrams for horizontal and vertical data with 100ms time frame using 6ms windowing. Consistency of features across time and frequency reveal the exceptional omnidirectional behavior of the array. Pictures are zipped up and are best viewed as slide show to get best overlay perspective. Pleas see attached files; spectrograms from vertical measurements in this post and spectrograms of horizontal posts in following post.
Would you provide reference to these?
Character of music with my radial array, really a form of CBT, provides no audible evidence of what looks to be massive comb effects above 4kHz in frequency response. At these frequencies, pure tone from true single source produces strong standing wave effects when any moderately good reflector is present. Stereo in and of itself sets up sound field full of comb features. Many complain about this as deficit, when at worst it the entry point to listening without headphones. Live music is full of combing effects.
For impulsive high frequency sounds, directional cues provided are intensity based using head shading.
Really small rooms need to be dead; or listened in with headphones. No speaker sounds accurate in small room.
With your MBL experiences did you have control of speaker locations and try diverse setups? Such as close to walls, or close to long walls near their midpoints, stuffed in corners v more typical stereo speaker setups.
Both MBL and German Physiks speakers have poor vertical coverage; likely leading to overly spacy sound. Floor bounce is not the enemy; it provides cues to location of speaker plane and thus influences perceived image depth. Tiny speakers up close provide amazing image detail; depth is incredible when head and speakers are fixed; this
is tempered by small motions of head and highly limited output of tiny speakers. Ear buds in very quiet room are excellent demonstration when held several inches in front of face and located in proximately eyes' blind spots for fixed forward gaze.
I have; many more setups provide great results over wide range of recordings. Some do indeed result in sound everywhere with inconsistent imaging with some recordings, and not with others.
In nature piercing cries are difficult to localize; a parent can recognize distress call, and with foreknowledge of offspring location respond quickly. Predator with big head can't zero right in, and also knows that potentially lethal help may be on the way.
My space dead? Yes, floor is fully carpeted, ceiling has acoustic tile. Brick in picture extends for half of long sidewall; other half is almost completely floor to ceiling glass; front wall to left of pictured speaker is also almost completely floor to ceiling glass. Other long wall is somewhat broken up, and comprised mainly of open shelving against solid wood wall; rear wall is also solid wood. Carpeting makes good sink for HF; ceiling tile looks to have been painted and is directly attached to original plaster ceiling. Acoustically dead? Not so much.
Previously I posted horizontal response of array without woofers in "Uniform Directivity - How important is it?" thread:
The "narrow directivity junkies" didn't have much to say, nor the "detail" junkies for huge dip in 6kHz region or the general roll off above 10kHz. Spectral content of most real music sources isn't big contributor; most recording microphones and EQ techniques leave little content up high. Yes, some thoughts have gone to adding tweeter array; but after several months of listening, even metalic percussion seems to come across quite well without that last bit of fizz. Then again the ears turned fifty this year too.
Horizontal data was taken with stationary microphone and rotation of array at 2.5 degree intervals. Clearly, 30 degrees worth of measurements represents entire array. Cherry picking with orientation and limiting to 10 or 15 degree measurement intervals, excessive smoothing and loading into one of those neat color maps could present speaker as having near perfect 360 degree horizontal performance to 10kHz. Sure, small full range pointing up will have truly static performance in horizontal plane; but limitations of lateral reflections and dominant ceiling reflections generally guarantee blown out spacy performance, and highly limiting distortion performance when driven.
During same measurement set somewhat hasty vertical response measurements were taken; horizontal reference, and 15 degree intervals above horizontal plane. They reveal CBT behavior of array. Array was stationary for measurements with microphone moved; windowing was 6ms. Results suggest array may be used with major axis in horizontal plane instead of vertical plane; I listened to pair this way too. Also with one vertical and one horizontal. Imaging remains very stable in all cases.
Overlays of frequency response for vertical measurements, 6ms windows, and no smoothing:
Vertical coverage across 120 degrees given symmetry. I am certain that MBL speakers and German Physiks speakers do not do this.
Measurements were performed in living room with array equidistant from side walls and front wall. Today I revisited data set and produced room spectragrams for horizontal and vertical data with 100ms time frame using 6ms windowing. Consistency of features across time and frequency reveal the exceptional omnidirectional behavior of the array. Pictures are zipped up and are best viewed as slide show to get best overlay perspective. Pleas see attached files; spectrograms from vertical measurements in this post and spectrograms of horizontal posts in following post.
Barleywater, your speaker doesn't behave well horizontally, actually it is rather bad. Vertically it is quite good. But it is diffucult to say because I can't see the angles that you used - up to 180¤ ?
Omnis are different totally. To be able to call a speaker omni it should have even radiation (+- 5dB) at least up to 10kHz horizontally 0-180¤ or at least 120¤. But there is no spesific criteria about that.
Omnis are different totally. To be able to call a speaker omni it should have even radiation (+- 5dB) at least up to 10kHz horizontally 0-180¤ or at least 120¤. But there is no spesific criteria about that.
well ...and it clearly conflicts with the image depth cues that are recorded, and image height cues as well, for that matter, right?
sure, agreed
Why would they?
Besides a "generally guarantee blown out spacy performance" is such a very unspecific, vague statement... meaning nothing more than that You just don't like something (what exactly???), right?