Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > GedLee

GedLee Home of the renown Geddes Loudspeakers

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 23rd January 2010, 02:59 PM   #71
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post

My Summas are firing straight-forward.

Could my preference for putting them at least ten to fifteen feet away be due to time alignment?

I mean, the stands at the RMAF tilted them back, but that would seem to delay the waveguide even further.

Or is the tilt on the stands for something else?

Thoughts?

Preference is a hard thing to explain, but straight forward placement is not what the speakers are designed for so I don't know what to say. I can't imagine them working as I am used to in that fasion. It could be that sitting on axis is not as pleasant until you get further back into the reverberant field which will be smoother than the direct on-axis field.

I never had stands that tilted back. It must have been an optical illusion.

Closer than six feet and you will get near field issue, beyond 8-10 feet and they are direct versus reverberant field issues.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 03:21 PM   #72
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
Closer than six feet and you will get near field issue, beyond 8-10 feet and they are direct versus reverberant field issues.
Sounds like a reasonable explanation for Patrick's near field issues. The Summa shows a rather deep and broad dip at 4kHz on the 0 axis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 03:58 PM   #73
Key is offline Key  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
There're all types of spatial illusions that can be achieved with stereo but none that is universal across the whole (re)production chain (circle of confusion again).
Not sure what you mean by "universal". If you mean repeatable and consistent I am pretty sure you are wrong.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 04:22 PM   #74
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Key View Post
Not sure what you mean by "universal". If you mean repeatable and consistent I am pretty sure you are wrong.
Have you ever made an A/B comparison of two different loudspeakers in the same room binaurally recorded? Or record the same speakers at different positions within the same room. Try it. I promise you won't be so sure anymore that there's much tolerance for a universal set of recording/loudspeaker/room parameters leading to consistent spatial qualities across all domestic listening spaces.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 04:24 PM   #75
Key is offline Key  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
This is one of the areas where I do think you can fool yourself with A/Bing. Certain things are much more audible when you have a contrast and don't give proper time for acclimation. And in room recordings do not correlate to what people perceive sorry.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 05:01 PM   #76
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Key View Post
Certain things are much more audible when you have a contrast and don't give proper time for acclimation.
How does "acclimatization" work? If you know that then you know more than the Tooles and Blauerts of this world altogether. If you don't do A/B, listening impressions will be meaningless on an objective level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Key View Post
And in room recordings do not correlate to what people perceive sorry.
Maybe you misunderstood my last comment. I'm talking about binaural recordings of loudspeakers in domestic listening spaces for evaluation purposes. Bbinaural recordings exactly reflect what people would perceive.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 05:11 PM   #77
Key is offline Key  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
How does "acclimatization" work? If you know that then you know more than the Tooles and Blauerts of this world altogether. If you don't do A/B, listening impressions will be meaningless on an objective level.
Don't get me wrong a lot of what I work on with sound involves me programming different scenarios and then setting up a switch to be controlled with a midi controller at the listening location. I use A/Bing for sure. I think every mixer should use it as well when making adjustments similar to the way someone color correcting would jump back and forth between his adjustments to see exactly what is happening to the signal. BUT I have set up situations where the signals being fed into the room differ measurably vastly and giving myself a few seconds for the sounds to perceptually shift into place and given that they are level matched the perceived results are in every conceivable way is the same. These are situations where if you were sticking mics I am pretty sure the sounds that get picked up would differ drastically but somehow you perception just sorts all of this out and there really is no effective difference.

Quote:
Maybe you misunderstood my last comment. I'm talking about binaural recordings of loudspeakers in domestic listening spaces for evaluation purposes. Bbinaural recordings exactly reflect what people would perceive.
I have just found this to not be true. The binaural head will not reject late arrival times but your brain will. Now playback the binaural recording and the late reflections are hard coded onto the recording and you simply can't ignore them where in the real room you would.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 05:19 PM   #78
diyAudio Member
 
Patrick Bateman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Sounds like a reasonable explanation for Patrick's near field issues. The Summa shows a rather deep and broad dip at 4kHz on the 0 axis.


Hmmm, they're cross-fired; I even built a jig out of wood so that I could set the room up perfectly, since running around with a tape measure is arduous.

By firing forward, I meant that there's no tilt.

Oh well, this is all a bit off-topic; back to our regularly scheduled programming.

  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 05:26 PM   #79
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post


Hmmm, they're cross-fired; I even built a jig out of wood so that I could set the room up perfectly, since running around with a tape measure is arduous.

By firing forward, I meant that there's no tilt.

I misunderstood. Then the issue is purely one of near field and direct/reverb ratio. When sitting too close you are too much in the near field and the response of the direct field is not smooth and the direct/reverb ratio is higher. As you move back, the near field issue resolve and the direct/reverb ratio goes down. Clearly with a Summa the reverb field is the smoother response that the direct near field.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd January 2010, 06:10 PM   #80
gfiandy is offline gfiandy  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
gfiandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cambridge UK
Hi,

Inspired by Earl's graphics I decided to see if those of us who don't have access to expensive softare could format up data in excel to present polar responses in a more meaningful way.

Below are my current graphs. I will not pretend it is easy to creat these but it is possible.

So what does the graph tell us, well probably that the CODA III was not KEF's finest hour; but hopefully you can see how the polar response vairies accross the band. (I used the CODA III as I happend to have the measurements available as I working on an old pair and it is old enough that no one is likely to complain about me displaying it )

Regards,
Andrew
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CODA II POLAR.JPG (109.1 KB, 149 views)
File Type: jpg CODA III Normalised.JPG (108.1 KB, 139 views)
File Type: jpg CODA III POLAR FLAT.JPG (103.9 KB, 137 views)

Last edited by gfiandy; 23rd January 2010 at 06:12 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cambridge Azur 840C CDP White Paper on Jitter ? AbeCollins Digital Source 1 7th October 2008 04:06 PM
Tempest white paper Jye Subwoofers 3 12th January 2008 12:06 AM
Harmon Sub Placement White Paper richie00boy Subwoofers 6 23rd July 2007 07:31 PM
Heat Sink White Paper jackinnj Solid State 1 9th May 2004 04:03 PM
Audiolab/TAGMcLaren topology white paper ojg Solid State 0 29th July 2003 04:52 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2