Shoot out: JX92 MLTL vs. REINS DIPOLE MK IV

[reins]

Hi all,

I did a shoot out between James Griffin's JX92 MLTL with Fountek Ribbon tweeter and my home brew Dipole system (see picture).

First impression of the Jordan: not bad, reasonable bass extension, the two-way system seems makes a better impression as the full range Jordan.

But in comparision to the Dipole system: The MLTL has only a flat soundstage. Meanwhile the Dipole system has a deep 3 dimensional soundstage. The singer stands slightly behind the speakers. And the bass extension of the dipoles ....

Both pairs are not trackable, so one cannot tell which speakers are playing except from the sound.

Finally winner on all kategories except WAF: REINS DIPOLE MK IV

Stephan

[pikkujöpö]

Hi

Nice dipoles.What drivers are you using ?

I noticed you have experienced jx92s in open baffles.How did you like the midrange compered to MLTL.

[jzagaja]

When reproduced binaural signals made myself in small jazz club I've noticed that more reflections by using:

1) Stereolith/Beveridge arrangements
2) Omnis by placing speakers firing up
3) Dipoles

makes more real like impression this means spacing and instruments size. Absolutely no arrangement even binaural/headphone can create exact real imaging . Headphone is not bad but front/back location is a problem and the sound still requires externalisation. I haven't tried Double Stereo Dipole (DSD, 10 deg) and cross talkers.

For the experiment I've used Jordan JXR6 single point driver. For 1) triangle was 200/150 (span/distance). Room 5,2x2,5m. Microphone 10mm electret 25mV/Pa - HRTF up to concha included (capsule placed in ear).

Conclusion: room reflection (some optimisation necessary) amplify the natural reverberation of a recording venue.

[Jim Griffin]

Reins,

For the record my MLTL Jordan with a ribbon design is discussed in this thread:

Jordan with a Ribbon MLTL

On my MLTL version I'm using an internal line length of 46.5" vs. either of Greg Monfort's 31" or 48" long MLTL designs. You appear to be using the 31" long design in the MLTL Jordan speakers that you built. Hence, with the 46.5" version of this design the bass extension you achieve about 10 Hz lower bass extension vs. the 31" version.

Clearly, a dipolar design offers a different in-room presentation vs. a monopolar speaker. The listening room integration differs so much that I suspect that it is an apples vs. oranges comparison when you hear a dipolar design vs. a monopolar design. Dipolar speakers inject significant rear wave energy into the room so their presentation may or may not accurately reproduce the recorded media. It also depends on how the rear wave is dispersed within the room. Some listeners may enjoy the extra ambience of dipolar speakers, while others may deplore this effect on the recorded material.

Furthermore, the drivers in each of these speaker designs are so different I'm not sure that you really have a basis for a valid comparison. Plus a two way speaker design compared to a three way design would usually favor the design with more drivers.

I'm pleased that you have some good points to make about the Jordan MLTL design. We are talking at least a 15" diameter bass driver in your dipolars vs. the 4" JX92S driver.

While you prefer your dipolars vs. the Jordan MLTL, other listeners may choose the other speaker as they may have a different set of values compared to your preferences.

Finally, as we know WAF is a significant factor in many speaker choices so whether a speaker the size of your dipolars would be acceptable in your domestic situation is a joint decision.

Jim

[soongsc]

If the speakers are located exactly as shown in the picture, the speakers behind the big ones have a disadvantage that as the wave travels forward, the speaker in fron causes additional diffraction and reflections that mess up the image. Additionally, speakers that differe more than a feet or two excite different room modes which also makes a difference during listening.

[reins]

Originally posted by Jim Griffin

While you prefer your dipolars vs. the Jordan MLTL, other listeners may choose the other speaker as they may have a different set of values compared to your preferences.

Finally, as we know WAF is a significant factor in many speaker choices so whether a speaker the size of your dipolars would be acceptable in your domestic situation is a joint decision.

Jim

Jim,

Excuse me for mixing up your first name.

I think it is obvious that the comparison is highly unfair
I agree fully on all your points! Nevertheless the clear result for me is if one has the room and the money don't mess around with small drivers. (btw. the drivers of the dipole aren't twice the price of the MLTL)

Stephan

[reins]

Originally posted by pikkujöpö
Hi

Nice dipoles.What drivers are you using ?

I noticed you have experienced jx92s in open baffles.How did you like the midrange compered to MLTL.

Drivers:
HT: 2 Seas H1212 in Orion+ configuration
Mid: Usher 8137k
Bass: Lambda Dipole 15"

Active crossover with 4 UCD180 per side

Jorden vs. Usher: the most obvious difference is in female voices. The Jordan has some nice effects on them.

Originally posted by soongsc
If the speakers are located exactly as shown in the picture, the speakers behind the big ones have a disadvantage that as the wave travels forward, the speaker in fron causes additional diffraction and reflections that mess up the image. Additionally, speakers that differe more than a feet or two excite different room modes which also makes a difference during listening.

The mid panel of the dipoles is in the same plane as the MLTL. Originally I placed the Jordans on the other side of the room. Result stays the same.


Stephan

[Javachip]

Forget about the speakers. How much do you want for the race car track?

[reins]

Originally posted by Javachip
Forget about the speakers. How much do you want for the race car track?

Oh sorry, not for sale. Its owned by my daughters

[gpapag]

Originally posted by jzagaja

Conclusion: room reflection (some optimisation necessary) amplify the natural reverberation of a recording venue. [/B]

This is also my experience with my current speakers (full range cones, firing up through a conical reflector).

I have read somewhere (don't remember where) that comb effect can increase the sence of space volume of recordings. May be this is what actually happens with my cone reflectors.

Regards
George