Beyond the Ariel

[Markhk]

Lynn previously teased us with "There is a possibility of a OEM version of 100 dB/metre ribbon specifically designed for studio monitors, with a suggested 1.5~2 kHz crossover. Stay tuned for more news on this front."

I wondered if he had an update for us?

[herm]

I'm trying to find a source for the 18 Sound drivers.

Here's a couple links to retailers (US only)

US Speakers

Studio 34

Real Pro Audio

Loudspeakers Plus

I have no experience with any of these dealers. Also, none of them
seem to carry the 12NDA520.

Anyone know where to buy them?

herm

[mige0]

Hi

Re: Beaming, and RAAL Post #760

Here's my rather lengthy opinion: Best sounding tweeter on the planet*

From the RAAL page (70-10):

The CSD looks really breath taking.
Are there any measurements on harmonics (2nd 3rd and higher ) at at least 90dB of more?
Any guess what the max-SPL at crossover frequencies could be?
Any FR that shows the 100kHz claimed?

Greetings
Michael

[chrismercurio]

If you send your inquiries directly to RAAL, I am sure they will respond. I have sent them emails and they are prompt and happy to answer.
C

[Paul W]

herm,
Speak with Dave at Loudspeakers Plus. He special ordered the 10NDA520s for me (and now I notice he carries the 10 in his line). Pleasant guy...he drop shipped directly from the Miami distributor to me so very quick delivery.
Paul

[Lynn Olson]

Originally posted by chrismercurio
If you send your inquiries directly to RAAL, I am sure they will respond. I have sent them emails and they are prompt and happy to answer.
C

I have spoken with RAAL on the phone - they are located in Serbia, and it's a one-man shop, so I tried to keep things brief and to the point. The owner designs, builds, and supports the customers, so any time on the phone or answering e-mails takes away from build and new-design time.

Like many other vendors - Radian, 18Sound, etc. most of RAAL's sales are into the OEM market. Also, like many other vendors, when phone and e-mail support are factored in, DIY sales are probably a net loss for the vendor.

I know about this first hand: I was the system engineer at a Portland computer store for three years, and it takes just as much support and hand-holding for a couple hesitantly buying their first computer as it does for an entire school district buying 300 machines. Actually, the school district takes LESS support, so they know what they want, while the first-time buyer isn't sure they want a computer at all.

It looks just the same for a driver vendor: a DIY'er pondering a US$800 purchase requires much more hand-holding, reassurance, and psychoanalyzing than a high-end manufacturer buying $50,000 worth of drivers. The most important thing to the manufacturer is the delivery schedule and quality control: they've already made up their mind about the driver, and don't have to be talked into it. The onesy-twosy buyer, though, can get into a major existential crisis about the purchase, and is filled with doubt, uncertainty, and all sorts of conflicting advice from magazines and forums like these.

My conversations with vendors mostly discuss specifications and whether or not an already-existing OEM product would fit the design spec I'm seeking. I'm very reluctant to ask any driver vendor to design something for me - I'd much rather buy something off the shelf, since I have no way of assuring the required sales volume (unlike an OEM vendor that's signed a purchase agreement).

If there is an OEM version that fits the need - in this case, we're speaking of a 100 dB/metre ribbon that can be crossed at 2 kHz and still have low distortion at studio-monitor sound levels - then it comes down to whether or not this can be sold into the DIY market without irritating the existing OEM customer.

This is out of my hands: it is between the driver vendor and OEM purchaser, and involves Non-Disclosure Agreements that I haven't signed. It is entirely up to RAAL whether to make a product like this available to the small and high-maintenance DIY market. If this forum floods RAAL with scores of e-mails, I wouldn't blame the vendor if they get annoyed and shut down the entire DIY aspect of their webpage. I might do the same if I were in their position.

Please, tread lightly, guys. In the larger scheme of things, the DIY community is a barely discernable blip for manufacturers that are already running on thin margins. The really serious high-end manufacturers are not flying Lear Jets and driving BMW 7-Series cars.

[Ray Collins]

Insightful...hopefully this will instill prudence.

Ray

[chrismercurio]

I have addressed this in an earlier post with respect to a different manufacturer, but perhaps not with the same breadth or depth. If you would enlighten us all at about the question below it would be much appreciated.

Beaming, and RAAL Post #759
With the implementation of such a large driver for the midrange, how does one avoid beaming at higher frequencies? ie, when the frequency propagated is smaller in wavelength than the driver diameter.


Thanks for your time Lynn and I respect your position on the issue,

C

[jzagaja]

Someone may be interested to see RALL 140-15D waterfall.

[Lynn Olson]

Originally posted by chrismercurio
I have addressed this in an earlier post with respect to a different manufacturer, but perhaps not with the same breadth or depth. If you would enlighten us all at about the question below it would be much appreciated.

Beaming, and RAAL Post #759
With the implementation of such a large driver for the midrange, how does one avoid beaming at higher frequencies? ie, when the frequency propagated is smaller in wavelength than the driver diameter.


Thanks for your time Lynn and I respect your position on the issue,

C

Yes, my systems beam. The Ariel does too, with a 3.8 kHz acoustic crossover, and a MTM with 5.5" drivers. Not what you're going to find in Loudspeaker Design Cookbook or most of the DIY sites on the Internet.

Like all speaker designers, I have a set of priorities, ranked from "most-important" to "nice, but not essential", to "don't care", to "actively avoid at all costs". These are not picked at random; they relate to my sonic preferences, not a focus group, or corporate design mandate. I'm aware that in subjective sonic terms, I'm out of step with the high-end audiophile mainstream, and probably even more out of sync with the old-school Altec and JBL horn enthusiasts.

Driver coloration is the real issue for me: both the "additive" coloration that is there all the time, and the more subtle "subtractive" coloration that means certain tone colors and dynamic expression is flattened out (think of what MP3 compression does to sound). The reasons for "additive" coloration are fairly straightforward, resonances that appear in the CSD display, harmonic distortion, especially higher-order terms from the 3rd on out, and IM distortion from out-of-band components that are not well-controlled by the crossover.

"Subtractive" coloration is equally real, but the reasons are not as easy to find. Masking from distortion and stored energy is an obvious source, but there are technical problems that are more subtle and do not readily yield to measurement. Being faithful to the dynamics of the original, and fidelity to fleeting and subtle tone colors - this is where nearly all "mainstream" low-efficiency speakers fall down.

I put a controlled polar pattern fairly far down on the list, compared to getting the drivers to behave well. If I did "mainstream" designs, you'd see a 3 or 4-way with a 12-inch woofer, 4-inch midrange, and tweeter drivers, LR4 crossovers, very massive box with beautiful wood finish, etc. etc. These are the same speakers you see at the CES or RMAF. There are no shortage of speakers like this, at all price points. No thanks.

I enjoyed the Ariel when I designed it in 1992, and still do. But I've heard things since then that have gotten my attention. I like what these new systems do well, and don't like what they don't do well.

I like the effortless dynamics of both the Oris/Azurahorns with Lowther/AER drivers, but don't like the residual horn and whizzercone coloration. Similarly, I like the effortless dynamics and in-the-room quality of the Bastani Apollo, but don't care for the exotic driver treatment and requirement for off-axis listening. I like the 3D quality of the Linkwitz systems, but don't care for the extensive active equalization and multiple transistor high-powered amps.

I've heard systems that have very careful polar-pattern design, and other systems with really terrible polar patterns (easy to tell just by looking at the size of the drivers and the frequency range they cover). Frankly, I find no correlation with sound quality - there are wonderful, average, and terrible speakers in each group, and the controlled-directivity do not, as a group, sound better than speaker systems where it is not an important design factor.

The whole buzz about directivity reminds me very much of the linear-phase fad in the late Seventies. It matters, yes, but it isn't as important as many writers would have us believe. Driver sonics come first for me; everything else is secondary to that.

But that is only speaking for myself. People in the hifi biz train themselves to hear different things: some people are quite sensitive to absolute phase, and cannot tolerate phase reversal, so they have a phase switch they flip with every track they listen to, choosing the subjective best on a recording-by-recording, or track-by-track, basis. Other people are really wired into micro and macro dynamics, and can only accept horn systems, or at the least, systems with studio-monitor dynamics. The most recent wrinkle are people who are very sensitive to polar patterns - they're picking up stereo-image cues many of us don't hear.

It's easy to claim that everyone hears the way you do - making the same assertion as the horn-dynamics, absolute-phase, ultra-damped cabinet, linear-phase, electrostat-sound, and East Coast vs West Coast Sound enthusiasts have made before (going backward through the last forty years of speaker fads). Maybe so, maybe not.

Do I discount polar patterns? No, I don't. It's another thing to consider in the overall design. But I don't let it control the design; it's just another factor to be weighted into the overall sum of considerations. For now, at least, I like the sound of big-diaphragm midranges - very much. They bring back happy memories of the easy, relaxed sound of the best 1950's speakers. I was a kid back then, but remember what music was popular - classical and what was called "pops" - and the way things sounded, with all-vacuum-tube electronics and recordings mastered on Ampex 350-series machines.

Am I one of those retro guys that wants to bring back Bozak and Stephens Tru-Sonic? Although I think that's a great idea - and a terrific business opportunity for somebody - that's not what I want to do. Let others get into collecting or making reproductions.

I'm much more interested in the ideas and set of esthetic values that are part of all designs, from all cultures, from every historical period. I can have the sound of a big-diaphragm midrange without making an exact copy of a JBL, Altec, or Bozak 15-inch driver, just as I can design an all-transformer-coupled all-triode amplifier without shopping in Akihibara for a Western Electric 92A.

Even if I had the US$20,000 asking price, I'd rather find out what makes the 92A an interesting design and then re-invent it in modern terms. I'm neither a collector nor a historical purist.

I'd like to re-invent some of the best qualities (well, I hope I can) of the 1950's-vintage speakers - but without copying them wholesale. Every era has its esthetic, particularly loudspeakers, which are optimized for the electronics and musical tastes of the era when it was designed. Big midranges have a certain quality that I want to explore - and a dipole should bring it to full expression, since there are no cabinet colorations to cloud and confuse the sound. The converse is true as well - with no cabinet to disguise things, the drivers have to as good as possible.

I expect this will be an interesting journey.