Some of us who come here to seek the full range single driver experience have only read about it's virtues: The simplicity and directness of one driver untouched by a crossover and presenting to the listener sound from a single point in space. Even the enclosure itself may be dispensed with.
You can anticipate magic.
Just put a driver in a box... or not. And you are ready to experience those unique qualities.
For many, it's just that simple.
And once experienced, there are so many directions to pursue: To have more of what you like and have less of what you don't. All manner of things can be added, changed or taken away until... it is quite legitimate to arrive at something that is quite different from a single driver speaker - yet even closer to the ideal for that DIYer.
All of these many ways and preferences are documented and discussed in this forum. It is a goldmine of possibilities and information.
But now that there is so much choice, it can be difficult for the uninitiated - especially for those who came to build for themselves an opportunity to hear what it's all about.
Of course you could just start with something very, very basic. But, if that choice is not made quickly enough, with any amount of further reading one can find themselves drawn by many subtly sophisticated options. And suddenly, you realize, it may be difficult to tell which retain that original single driver quality and which represent valid trade-offs for other benefits.
There are resisters and condensers and additional drivers. Horns, bipoles, and omni's. Notch filters, supertweeters, baffle step corrections, dual widebands, and augmenting woofers crossed at 500 Hz...
Which are necessary or benign to the single driver experience?
Which are variations offering very similar qualities to this experience?
Which will result in obvious or perhaps subtle but very real trade-offs leaving the builder perhaps happier but bypassing the single driver experience?
Just how much can you add to a full range single driver design before risking its unique qualities?
You can anticipate magic.
Just put a driver in a box... or not. And you are ready to experience those unique qualities.
For many, it's just that simple.
And once experienced, there are so many directions to pursue: To have more of what you like and have less of what you don't. All manner of things can be added, changed or taken away until... it is quite legitimate to arrive at something that is quite different from a single driver speaker - yet even closer to the ideal for that DIYer.
All of these many ways and preferences are documented and discussed in this forum. It is a goldmine of possibilities and information.
But now that there is so much choice, it can be difficult for the uninitiated - especially for those who came to build for themselves an opportunity to hear what it's all about.
Of course you could just start with something very, very basic. But, if that choice is not made quickly enough, with any amount of further reading one can find themselves drawn by many subtly sophisticated options. And suddenly, you realize, it may be difficult to tell which retain that original single driver quality and which represent valid trade-offs for other benefits.
There are resisters and condensers and additional drivers. Horns, bipoles, and omni's. Notch filters, supertweeters, baffle step corrections, dual widebands, and augmenting woofers crossed at 500 Hz...
Which are necessary or benign to the single driver experience?
Which are variations offering very similar qualities to this experience?
Which will result in obvious or perhaps subtle but very real trade-offs leaving the builder perhaps happier but bypassing the single driver experience?
Just how much can you add to a full range single driver design before risking its unique qualities?
Hi,
have you looked at Nelson Pass' horn loaded full range drivers?
Or thought about the dual horn loading (front & rear horns) that Tannoy use for their 15inch driver, with a third horn for the coaxial treble driver. See the Tannoy Westminster Royal, or the Autograph (older) single back loaded horn version.
have you looked at Nelson Pass' horn loaded full range drivers?
Or thought about the dual horn loading (front & rear horns) that Tannoy use for their 15inch driver, with a third horn for the coaxial treble driver. See the Tannoy Westminster Royal, or the Autograph (older) single back loaded horn version.
"Just how much can you add to a full range single driver design before risking its unique qualities?"
a 2 driver indirect with distance less than the distance of your ears in a double horn like my KORNETT and SAXOPHON,
more soundstage more bass, no low impedanz peak,
half size of a single driver solution:
http://www.audiovoice-acoustics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=174
or on my HP "about what"
a 2 driver indirect with distance less than the distance of your ears in a double horn like my KORNETT and SAXOPHON,
more soundstage more bass, no low impedanz peak,
half size of a single driver solution:
http://www.audiovoice-acoustics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=174
or on my HP "about what"
Attachments
AndrewT said:
I'm sorry AndrewT, I failed to specify that what I'm trying to do is create a kind of guide on behalf of all newbies whatever their personal tastes might be to the typical add-ons and variations being used in full range these days.
My personal stake in this is to get a better understanding of the suggestions I'm getting myself, for instance, from my own thread on Low level body/weight presence wanted...
You see, I can research particulars such as yours and I thank you for them. But I find it takes a bit of savvy I'm having a hard time keeping up with to know if or how much many of these suggestions are going to take me away from that single point source, crossover-free listening experience that I myself am interested in.
For example, I've read a few posts about how a crossover is not as big a deal if it happens away from the critical range of our hearing. But what is that like compared to no crossover? And how low or high should this be to seem like there's hardly any crossover - if that's possible. I need to know things like this and I thought other's could use this too.
Plus, I think if newbies could get a foundation in this they'd ask better questions and make more effective use of the generous efforts of experienced people such as yourself.
Thank you again,
-jerry
...and [yet] another self-congratulatory advert by Horst for his own (commercial) speakers. 
Back OT, how much can you add to a full range single driver design before risking its unique qualities?
Good question, and nobody is likely to give you the same answer. Because it depends on what unique qualities you mean, and how you quantify them; what you value personally, what works in your system & what works in your room.
Purely a personal take: the midband is the critical zone. Bell Labs definition of 200Hz - 4KHz is a decent rough guide. This is where the majority of music lies & you tamper with it at your peril. Having one driver cover all, or the majority of this BW therefore is desireable (providing a reasonable response is maintained of course). Some of these units can also cover the LF & HF sufficiently well to satisfy a large number of people, so get them into a suitable cabinet & they'll probably never feel the need for additional drivers, especially if they can accept large cabinets, or their taste lies in music which is relatively undemanding at the frequency extremes. OTOH, some require more at the extremes & therefore may benefit from the addition of woofers to handle the LF & tweeters to handle the HF. The former does not necessarily have to provide more extension than you may be able to extract from a suitable FR driver alone, but it will (if correctly chosen / designed / whatever) improve transient response & power handling etc. While the latter might theoretically only go up a little higher than an FR unit solo, but will do it with more grace.
Whatever, ideally, you don't want to cross between drivers in this 200Hz - 4KHz telephone band where our hearing is at its best, & preferably an octave or more either side of it to account for the different slopes etc. There is arguably more leeway at the bottom end -if you listen to big orchestral pieces, Pink Floyd etc., then having some high efficiency woofers on hand & crossing a little higher can be a cunning plan as they'll handle all the high-energy stuff & let the wide-band driver, whatever it is, get on with the rest of it. You might loose a little of the supposed purity of 1 driver in the narrow band the woofer covers before handing over, but some will find that a better compromise than having one 'pure' driver distorting something chronic as it tries to keep pace with Nick Mason going ballistic on 'One of these Days...'
Step loss is a different issue. 99.999% of cabinets suffer from it -some are self-correcting, if so designed (high-gain horns, corner-cabinets, bipolar cabinets etc); others require some form of Eq, either via active or passive circuitry. If it's needed, the former is usually the better approach as the passive circuits lower efficiency (higher the better, all other things being equal) & do tend to cause some losses of detail etc. Notch filters can be useful if the driver has a large unwanted spike in its response -again, best cut activlely IMO. Passive's OK in all cases if well designed, but not as good or as refined / accurate as an active or digital adjustment can be.
Dual drivers = OK, so long as you don't mount them both on the front baffle & run them both up high or you'll run into lobing issues. You'll get better power handling in the LF, which is where it really matters, along with other things.
And so on. I'm not interested in following a particular philosophy -it's all tramlining. You go with the compromise that works best for you. Because everything is a compromise. Which suits you, only you know.
Back OT, how much can you add to a full range single driver design before risking its unique qualities?
Good question, and nobody is likely to give you the same answer. Because it depends on what unique qualities you mean, and how you quantify them; what you value personally, what works in your system & what works in your room.
Purely a personal take: the midband is the critical zone. Bell Labs definition of 200Hz - 4KHz is a decent rough guide. This is where the majority of music lies & you tamper with it at your peril. Having one driver cover all, or the majority of this BW therefore is desireable (providing a reasonable response is maintained of course). Some of these units can also cover the LF & HF sufficiently well to satisfy a large number of people, so get them into a suitable cabinet & they'll probably never feel the need for additional drivers, especially if they can accept large cabinets, or their taste lies in music which is relatively undemanding at the frequency extremes. OTOH, some require more at the extremes & therefore may benefit from the addition of woofers to handle the LF & tweeters to handle the HF. The former does not necessarily have to provide more extension than you may be able to extract from a suitable FR driver alone, but it will (if correctly chosen / designed / whatever) improve transient response & power handling etc. While the latter might theoretically only go up a little higher than an FR unit solo, but will do it with more grace.
Whatever, ideally, you don't want to cross between drivers in this 200Hz - 4KHz telephone band where our hearing is at its best, & preferably an octave or more either side of it to account for the different slopes etc. There is arguably more leeway at the bottom end -if you listen to big orchestral pieces, Pink Floyd etc., then having some high efficiency woofers on hand & crossing a little higher can be a cunning plan as they'll handle all the high-energy stuff & let the wide-band driver, whatever it is, get on with the rest of it. You might loose a little of the supposed purity of 1 driver in the narrow band the woofer covers before handing over, but some will find that a better compromise than having one 'pure' driver distorting something chronic as it tries to keep pace with Nick Mason going ballistic on 'One of these Days...'
Step loss is a different issue. 99.999% of cabinets suffer from it -some are self-correcting, if so designed (high-gain horns, corner-cabinets, bipolar cabinets etc); others require some form of Eq, either via active or passive circuitry. If it's needed, the former is usually the better approach as the passive circuits lower efficiency (higher the better, all other things being equal) & do tend to cause some losses of detail etc. Notch filters can be useful if the driver has a large unwanted spike in its response -again, best cut activlely IMO. Passive's OK in all cases if well designed, but not as good or as refined / accurate as an active or digital adjustment can be.
Dual drivers = OK, so long as you don't mount them both on the front baffle & run them both up high or you'll run into lobing issues. You'll get better power handling in the LF, which is where it really matters, along with other things.
And so on. I'm not interested in following a particular philosophy -it's all tramlining. You go with the compromise that works best for you. Because everything is a compromise. Which suits you, only you know.
Hi guys, Scott's answer is right on, as always. The only little newbie insight I could add is this: build something quick! You will not get perfection on your first build, so might as well get it out of the way.
On your first few builds, you're really just prototyping to see what your ears like. My starting point was simply popping Fostex drivers into existing boxes, then noodling with box calculators to see what was happening. I think it's critical to get those first few prototypes out of the way -- it's basically a process of elimination to end up with something you want to live with.
One last thought: if you're not handy with wood, don't try to learn on the job. Just get the carpenter or lumber yard to cut the wood, and then you can glue up, pop the driver in there etc. You need to take advantage of whatever shortcuts at first. And buy cheap plywood because chances are, at least in my experience, you /will/ be throwing it away.
On your first few builds, you're really just prototyping to see what your ears like. My starting point was simply popping Fostex drivers into existing boxes, then noodling with box calculators to see what was happening. I think it's critical to get those first few prototypes out of the way -- it's basically a process of elimination to end up with something you want to live with.
One last thought: if you're not handy with wood, don't try to learn on the job. Just get the carpenter or lumber yard to cut the wood, and then you can glue up, pop the driver in there etc. You need to take advantage of whatever shortcuts at first. And buy cheap plywood because chances are, at least in my experience, you /will/ be throwing it away.
Thank you Scottmoose,
I appreciate how well your post is on target and I hope it will help set the tone for other responders that follow.
200Hz - 4KHz: You have touched on this and the other issues quite well, but, understanding the peril, could you expand on what might the wiggle room be here in the LF? In terms of trade off, what would people negatively risk experiencing if they were to attempt to take their augmenting woofers up as going up as high as 300 or 400Hz for rock and HT. Could you comment on how much or in what noticeable ways that critically desirable extra bit is likely to contrast with a single FR driver in terms of a deviation from point source? As long as 2 drivers on the same baffle are not both covering HF, is there any benefit to greater or lessor vertical separation distance when using a LF augmenter?
Yes, compromise is key. However with your help and that of others, the hope is it'll be by choice and not as much by surprise
I appreciate how well your post is on target and I hope it will help set the tone for other responders that follow.
200Hz - 4KHz: You have touched on this and the other issues quite well, but, understanding the peril, could you expand on what might the wiggle room be here in the LF? In terms of trade off, what would people negatively risk experiencing if they were to attempt to take their augmenting woofers up as going up as high as 300 or 400Hz for rock and HT. Could you comment on how much or in what noticeable ways that critically desirable extra bit is likely to contrast with a single FR driver in terms of a deviation from point source? As long as 2 drivers on the same baffle are not both covering HF, is there any benefit to greater or lessor vertical separation distance when using a LF augmenter?
Yes, compromise is key. However with your help and that of others, the hope is it'll be by choice and not as much by surprise
rjbond3rd said:
Hi rjbond3rd,
If I may take the liberty to rephrase or paraphrase or otherwise mangle your response in terms of the single driver magic, let's put you down for the eminent wisdom that once you build it you'll forever hence know it when you hear it - or don't hear it.
ie. Go for a quick experiential baseline and let that guide you.
-jerry
Scottmoose said:
Yeah, this pretty much sums it up it since it depends on what the individual is expecting out of it. At the one extreme there's the 'I'll sacrifice whatever I have to keep it a single driver system' to folks like me that believes any serious HIFI/HT app other than possibly near-field (i.e. very small room, computer desk system, etc.) needs both LF and super HF augmentation to keep its various distortions vanishingly low in our acute hearing BW, preferably done actively multi-amped.
Once you move away from this you have to decide what trade-offs you're willing to accept (gain BW, dynamic headroom requirements, etc.) and this is so individual's hearing/room and location in-room/signal source dependent (not to mention the SO/WAF issue for some) that the number of different 'solutions' seems to approach infinity judging by all I've seen in ~12 yrs of browsing many of the various internet BBs/forums.
Bottom line, either build a well proven design that 'best' meets your needs overall or build/tweak till you find what works best for you overall in your app.
GM
The only thing I would add to Scott's comments is to emphasize: you have to get out and listen for yourself! How can you know what you want in a speaker if you have only heard a few examples down at the local big box store, where the environment prevents you from hearing them properly anyway?
A couple years back I wanted to get some new speakers, so I began to search the 'literature' (which these days is mostly the internet) and to seek out listening experiences by planning stops at hifi shops while traveling. I already knew pretty well what I wanted in terms of sound qualities, but I thought there might be new possibilities beyond what I knew from my searching back in the early '70s. I found speakers I liked, but didn't fit my listening environment, like Magnapans. I found speakers I liked but couldn't afford, like Martin Logans (need way pricey amps to drive them properly too.) Just as I was about to buy some Totems that were almost within affordability, our house needed a new roof.
It was then I caught wind of speaker building and single FR drivers. If you know the sound you want, and you read lots of reviews (taking all of it w/ a grain of salt,) then you can get a clue as to what you might want to build. Then it's time to jump in & do it! I've only built two pair of speakers so far, but I'm lovin' what I hear, and having fun making them. I was warned in advance that speaker building is addictive, but I don't care. By the time I spend as much money building speakers as I would have buying that one pair of Totems, I'll have over populated our house and our relatives with great sounding speakers--and have had years of fun building them. And all that fun is priceless!
Cheers, Jim
PS: And thanks to Scott and all the others who make this possible by sharing their knowledge!
A couple years back I wanted to get some new speakers, so I began to search the 'literature' (which these days is mostly the internet) and to seek out listening experiences by planning stops at hifi shops while traveling. I already knew pretty well what I wanted in terms of sound qualities, but I thought there might be new possibilities beyond what I knew from my searching back in the early '70s. I found speakers I liked, but didn't fit my listening environment, like Magnapans. I found speakers I liked but couldn't afford, like Martin Logans (need way pricey amps to drive them properly too.) Just as I was about to buy some Totems that were almost within affordability, our house needed a new roof.
It was then I caught wind of speaker building and single FR drivers. If you know the sound you want, and you read lots of reviews (taking all of it w/ a grain of salt,) then you can get a clue as to what you might want to build. Then it's time to jump in & do it! I've only built two pair of speakers so far, but I'm lovin' what I hear, and having fun making them. I was warned in advance that speaker building is addictive, but I don't care. By the time I spend as much money building speakers as I would have buying that one pair of Totems, I'll have over populated our house and our relatives with great sounding speakers--and have had years of fun building them. And all that fun is priceless! Cheers, Jim
PS: And thanks to Scott and all the others who make this possible by sharing their knowledge!
for newbies i wrote this:
Connections:
- the loudspeaker is with distance the weakest member in the Hifi chain, on the average comes an LS on under 1% efficiency, i.e. 99% are warmth the remainder sound.
- an inexpensive LS lead of 1,5 qmm is completely sufficient up to 10 m.
- connection terminals are never better than the wire.
- the sale price of the loudspeaker should be approx. 70% of the whole chain.
- the standard tuning tone a has the frequency 440 Hz
- the note lies nearly in the center of the violin key
- nearly 90 % of all played notes are 2 oktaven over and under this note
- your amplifier has straight times 1 Watt impulse e.g. with the bass drum impact if the volume control stands on "10 o'clock"!!
- a normal speech has about 60 dB
- a bad admission, is not be corrected by the best chain.
Unfortunately only approx. 2 is well taken up of 10 CD's.
- I keep a strong directive sound effect because it is positive for the today's furnishing (leather, parquet, shutters, glass).
- if you sit with the head closely (40-70cm) at a wall, you should use behind your head a "wall carpet" approx. 4cm before the wall.
- bad areas can checked through hand gossips of a person in front of the LS diaphragm during the other person sits at the listening place,
e.g. by the flutter echo you hear your room damping.
By space corner damping and e.g. 3/4 filled bookshelfes in opposite of the LS, it is possible to improve the room acoustics.
- the room acoustics and the listening place are very important,
first of all because you can take influence on it.
- if you are lucky with the sound, if you get an emotional dragging
along and or relaxing listening experience, then the sound is also correct.
- extremely laymen should listen to a something similar good speaker in your listening room for comparison.
A bass driver to use up to 500 Hz is listenable to a
fullrange solution, because you get at a very much used frequency range in music, Kammerton a 440 Hz,
crossover, different accelleration, active area, material etc.
Most fullrange limited by the Xmax, less than
1 mm Xmax is useful for houshold levels and low distance,
even in a horn.
taking about sound is like talking about eating, nonsence,
so every newbie should look for facts, like measurements,
step responce, membran movement if this info isn´t there
it might be only believe.
The best link i found is from austria so in german,
google translate would help:
http://www.hifiaktiv.at/diverses/realistische_betrachtungen.htm
Connections:
- the loudspeaker is with distance the weakest member in the Hifi chain, on the average comes an LS on under 1% efficiency, i.e. 99% are warmth the remainder sound.
- an inexpensive LS lead of 1,5 qmm is completely sufficient up to 10 m.
- connection terminals are never better than the wire.
- the sale price of the loudspeaker should be approx. 70% of the whole chain.
- the standard tuning tone a has the frequency 440 Hz
- the note lies nearly in the center of the violin key
- nearly 90 % of all played notes are 2 oktaven over and under this note
- your amplifier has straight times 1 Watt impulse e.g. with the bass drum impact if the volume control stands on "10 o'clock"!!
- a normal speech has about 60 dB
- a bad admission, is not be corrected by the best chain.
Unfortunately only approx. 2 is well taken up of 10 CD's.
- I keep a strong directive sound effect because it is positive for the today's furnishing (leather, parquet, shutters, glass).
- if you sit with the head closely (40-70cm) at a wall, you should use behind your head a "wall carpet" approx. 4cm before the wall.
- bad areas can checked through hand gossips of a person in front of the LS diaphragm during the other person sits at the listening place,
e.g. by the flutter echo you hear your room damping.
By space corner damping and e.g. 3/4 filled bookshelfes in opposite of the LS, it is possible to improve the room acoustics.
- the room acoustics and the listening place are very important,
first of all because you can take influence on it.
- if you are lucky with the sound, if you get an emotional dragging
along and or relaxing listening experience, then the sound is also correct.
- extremely laymen should listen to a something similar good speaker in your listening room for comparison.
A bass driver to use up to 500 Hz is listenable to a
fullrange solution, because you get at a very much used frequency range in music, Kammerton a 440 Hz,
crossover, different accelleration, active area, material etc.
Most fullrange limited by the Xmax, less than
1 mm Xmax is useful for houshold levels and low distance,
even in a horn.
taking about sound is like talking about eating, nonsence,
so every newbie should look for facts, like measurements,
step responce, membran movement if this info isn´t there
it might be only believe.
The best link i found is from austria so in german,
google translate would help:
http://www.hifiaktiv.at/diverses/realistische_betrachtungen.htm
Hi,
Things are going pretty good. There's been some very useful information so far. But I think I left one more thing out that would help this thread be as useful as I can think to make it.
Probably most of you are familiar with it...
I've described the common characteristics of single driver speakers but I didn't mention why they mattered - at least to me. So, on behalf of myself, and anybody else like me, I'd like to fess up that the most important aspect of the single driver's unique qualities to me is:
I need my brain not to work hard.
Maybe it's been a little too much work and not enough play or the fact I've aged a bit. I've lived in a pool of urban sonic mayhem most of my life filled with sonic alarms: false and real - to fight or flight. But... no, that's fine - that's the job. That'd be the good half. The real sounds.
Because the other thing is my brain expects sound to be emanating from real life and it's been having to work overtime interpreting, extrapolating, interpolating and otherwise putting back together that which recorded sound has torn asunder.
Either way, though, acoustically speaking, brain's always got to "get" every sound - real or not. And when the not real's as tough to get as it sometimes can be: that's stress.
You know, when I was young I thought what I heard coming out of a pocket AM radio was terrific.
Partly it was novelty, partly it was a great capacity to receive all that data. But mostly it was a young brain far better able to handle stress. Or perhaps, not care. It doesn't matter which - the fact is that though my hearing isn't that much worse now, I strain a lot to hear. I find immersive HT experience elusive, and I don't just mean the dialog. And there just isn't much left over after all the work and strain and stress to just, enjoy. Because in fact also for me, that sound is medicine. I need it. Sometimes I need it very much. And too often I've been having trouble taking it in.
In my personal living arrangement I don't have the wall clearances for OB. I've got to have enclosures. So, I need as little else as possible to complicate my mind's natural efforts to "get" every sound coming at me. Others may be more or less flexible.
I'm guessing a lot like me are bound to migrate to places like this forum for help. We're not trying to be picky or difficult. We just might not be able to take advantage of everything on the menu right now.
Personally I expect after spending a while with a FR single driver, or something fairly close to it, I'll be good to check out the rest of this good stuff soon enough.
So for now, based on what you've used and heard - of the many things you can add to a single driver speaker:
1. Which are necessary or benign to the single driver experience? Things like a resister here or a second driver way down here - but nothing to worry about if you want to protect that single driver quality.
2. Which are variations offering very similar qualities to this experience? I'm not sure what to put here. Coaxials and duos maybe? Dunno. Guess that's why I'm asking
3. Which will result in obvious or perhaps subtle but very real trade-offs leaving the builder perhaps happier but bypassing the single driver experience? Things to let a newbie know that there's something really neat here, but maybe for next time if what they really came for is more like (1) or (2)
It may seem like anybody with any backbone should be able to navigate this forum and get what they came for. But it's just when you're busy trying to pick up all the lingo, the abbreviations, try not to let the guy talk you into making an El-Pipe-O out of your well and keeping an eye out for the WAF that you're also like a kid in a candy store and can walk out with an armload of Batman tweeter arrays when you came in for a dose of single driver medicine.
-jerry
Things are going pretty good. There's been some very useful information so far. But I think I left one more thing out that would help this thread be as useful as I can think to make it.
Probably most of you are familiar with it...
I've described the common characteristics of single driver speakers but I didn't mention why they mattered - at least to me. So, on behalf of myself, and anybody else like me, I'd like to fess up that the most important aspect of the single driver's unique qualities to me is:
I need my brain not to work hard.
Maybe it's been a little too much work and not enough play or the fact I've aged a bit. I've lived in a pool of urban sonic mayhem most of my life filled with sonic alarms: false and real - to fight or flight. But... no, that's fine - that's the job. That'd be the good half. The real sounds.
Because the other thing is my brain expects sound to be emanating from real life and it's been having to work overtime interpreting, extrapolating, interpolating and otherwise putting back together that which recorded sound has torn asunder.
Either way, though, acoustically speaking, brain's always got to "get" every sound - real or not. And when the not real's as tough to get as it sometimes can be: that's stress.
You know, when I was young I thought what I heard coming out of a pocket AM radio was terrific.
Partly it was novelty, partly it was a great capacity to receive all that data. But mostly it was a young brain far better able to handle stress. Or perhaps, not care.
It doesn't matter which - the fact is that though my hearing isn't that much worse now, I strain a lot to hear. I find immersive HT experience elusive, and I don't just mean the dialog. And there just isn't much left over after all the work and strain and stress to just, enjoy. Because in fact also for me, that sound is medicine. I need it. Sometimes I need it very much. And too often I've been having trouble taking it in.In my personal living arrangement I don't have the wall clearances for OB. I've got to have enclosures. So, I need as little else as possible to complicate my mind's natural efforts to "get" every sound coming at me. Others may be more or less flexible.
I'm guessing a lot like me are bound to migrate to places like this forum for help. We're not trying to be picky or difficult. We just might not be able to take advantage of everything on the menu right now.
Personally I expect after spending a while with a FR single driver, or something fairly close to it, I'll be good to check out the rest of this good stuff soon enough.
So for now, based on what you've used and heard - of the many things you can add to a single driver speaker:
1. Which are necessary or benign to the single driver experience? Things like a resister here or a second driver way down here - but nothing to worry about if you want to protect that single driver quality.
2. Which are variations offering very similar qualities to this experience? I'm not sure what to put here. Coaxials and duos maybe? Dunno. Guess that's why I'm asking
3. Which will result in obvious or perhaps subtle but very real trade-offs leaving the builder perhaps happier but bypassing the single driver experience? Things to let a newbie know that there's something really neat here, but maybe for next time if what they really came for is more like (1) or (2)
It may seem like anybody with any backbone should be able to navigate this forum and get what they came for. But it's just when you're busy trying to pick up all the lingo, the abbreviations, try not to let the guy talk you into making an El-Pipe-O out of your well and keeping an eye out for the WAF that you're also like a kid in a candy store and can walk out with an armload of Batman tweeter arrays when you came in for a dose of single driver medicine.
-jerry
"How much can you add to a single driver design before risking its unique qualities?"
Its Spirit ?
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=57919.0
Cheers ...... Graham.
Its Spirit ?
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/index.php?topic=57919.0
Cheers ...... Graham.
Re: How much can you add to a single driver design before risking its unique qualities?
What is the unique quality of a fullrange driver ?
The answer may depend on the particular fullrange driver used.
What can we do ?
Improve the performance at the borders of the usable
frequency range by
- crossing in a subwoofer
- crossing in a supertweeter
When we do not limit the discussion to single driver designs
we can change dispersion characteristics and efficiency by
using a multitude of fullrangers.
To me it is the attempt to use drivers of same characteristics in
the whole "critical bandwith", which makes the use of fullrange or
widerange drivers interesting for high quality sound reproduction.
In my current design e.g. i can switch off the rear tweeter panel
and a functional system remains. Sound does not change
dramatically in the nearfield. In the far field there is noticeable change.
I can switch off the subwoofer and the 1. order highpass for
the satellites and the system will still be functional, but loosing
low bass extension and maximum SPL. But it will still sound nearly
the same when listening to chamber music e.g. .
Sometimes correction networks are used to correct some flaws
of fullrangers, since this is simply necessary with some drivers.
I would propose, that everything is allowed while keeping a
"minimal invasive" approach in mind.
Kind regards
VanJerry said:
What is the unique quality of a fullrange driver ?
The answer may depend on the particular fullrange driver used.
What can we do ?
Improve the performance at the borders of the usable
frequency range by
- crossing in a subwoofer
- crossing in a supertweeter
When we do not limit the discussion to single driver designs
we can change dispersion characteristics and efficiency by
using a multitude of fullrangers.
To me it is the attempt to use drivers of same characteristics in
the whole "critical bandwith", which makes the use of fullrange or
widerange drivers interesting for high quality sound reproduction.
In my current design e.g. i can switch off the rear tweeter panel
and a functional system remains. Sound does not change
dramatically in the nearfield. In the far field there is noticeable change.
I can switch off the subwoofer and the 1. order highpass for
the satellites and the system will still be functional, but loosing
low bass extension and maximum SPL. But it will still sound nearly
the same when listening to chamber music e.g. .
Sometimes correction networks are used to correct some flaws
of fullrangers, since this is simply necessary with some drivers.
I would propose, that everything is allowed while keeping a
"minimal invasive" approach in mind.
Kind regards
Graham Maynard said:
Guess i know what you mean. Since you cannot change
it's spirit you rather have to add what is missing to complete it.
So the whole thing starts with acceptance of the spirit,
the rest may be a bit more like artwork not quite like science or
pure engineering. Maybe this is what makes up the appeal of
the fullrange approach to most people addicted to it.
Cheers
LineArray said:
So very true.
LineArray said:
Like the delicate blending of a fine Cognac, or meticulous malting for Scotmoose's Scapa.
To me, the appeal of the single driver is the lack of crossover affected dynamics within the main listening range.
Single driver reproduction can remain more 'intact' when other divers augment, whilst on 'conventional' multi-ways their high pass crossover networks (active and passive) still have an audible effect two to three times above turnover, and low pass similarly to between one third and one half below turnover.
The 'art' here is to blend in the other drivers with a minimum degradation of the desired spirit, and yet via loudspeakers it is so often fundamental crossover, driver, enclosure and path length induced 'Q' effects which we hear imposing their prescence upon the quality of music reproduction; sometimes deliberately !
Cheers ......... Graham.
not much I believe
the most important and unique quality of single driver can be seen on an image attached (real life example)
it is time coherence, transient and waveform fidelity
I think that the only thing You can really add safely is more same type full range drivers - this is what EJ Jordan or Roger Russell (IDS25) do
the second thing is active line level frequency response linearization - but nothing between amplifier and the driver
any crossover splitting the signal, any addition of a woofer or a tweeter
problem is where does the "critical range" really start and end? and how far away is "away from"?
in practice all crossovers are bad by definition – in all cases unique qualities of single driver are lost
As John Watkinson put it:
more on this: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=105136 (Putting the Science Back into Loudspeakers)
unique qualities of single driver are the unique qualities of single driver - basic physics and psychoacoustics (see image attached)
the unique quality of single driver will be lost anyway
but perhaps crossing steeply above 8 kHz a supertweeter the bandwidth of which ends >5 kHz like in case for example of some Fostex supertweeters would be relatively benign sonically
everything BESIDES the single driver
this is not compromise - this is the ONLY WAY for HiFi hobbyist taking HiFi seriously
adding woofers/tweeters etc. is a compromise
yes - this is the real "musical" midrange - around 160<1600 Hz, most important audio range
unique qualities of single driver are the unique qualities of single driver - basic physics and psychoacoustics (see image attached)
yes, more same type drivers - this is the only thing that can be added to a single driver without the unique qualities of single driver being lost or at least negatively affected
plus an open baffle or a closed box and an active linearization
best regards!
graaf
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.