BTW I know rigid cones can work well. Seas Excel Mag for instance, I prefer these to the nextel coated paper. And the Jordan JX92S is a really marvelous driver that changed my preconceptions of full range drivers(and the ones that I'd heard and previously and was ambivilent toward were predominately paper fullrange). I also have no problems with the various rigid diaphragm tweeters.
Some seem to be slightly flexible though for example you can easily bend the Seas Mag cones.
Its really just those all Accuton systems that I've heard which are quite unnatural and lacking.
Some seem to be slightly flexible though for example you can easily bend the Seas Mag cones.
Its really just those all Accuton systems that I've heard which are quite unnatural and lacking.
I agree with dlr above; also with some materials consistency over time might be an issue.
As for the Accutons, the outstanding characteristic is the ceramic cone of course, but I did not attribute the dynamic issue I heard with them to the cone, but assumed cheerfully that it was a motor/surround issue.
As for the Accutons, the outstanding characteristic is the ceramic cone of course, but I did not attribute the dynamic issue I heard with them to the cone, but assumed cheerfully that it was a motor/surround issue.
tinitus wrote:
I have to admit that I'm very close to the thoughts of Marc in its posts n°32 and 33. One quote that keep my interest is:
No, the C220NT6 has a Qts of only 0.18 and low VAS. Unibox sealed simulations didn't end with enough bass spl. I will go to something like 20-25liters 50/55hz tuned, certainly almost completely filled with light dacron/polyfil except the area close to the vent and with a lot of my acoustical diodes.
I have to admit that I'm very close to the thoughts of Marc in its posts n°32 and 33. One quote that keep my interest is:
I was also asking myself about the differences between other metal drivers and the accuton I listened to. I assumed that the pistonic motion did not make all about the superiority of the accuton. For me what is astonishing with the accuton is what someone name "deep black background" which I never heard before with none of the other drivers. Then I compared the caracteristics of aluminium, magnesium and ceramic. Beside the superior rigidity of the ceramic this material allows a much greater sound propagation (9000m/s vs approx. the half for the other metals). This huge sound propagation could perhaps explain in itself this "deep black background" which I feel to be the ability to perfectly discriminate all the frequencies a driver propagates thus rendering all the harmonics closer to their truth.
It seems perhaps more likely that the deep black quality is caused by the driver's losses, which cut off the low level signals. This would cut out all the incidental noise from the musicians, the recording chain, and low level sustains. It would also account for some of the comments regarding dynamics.
Curmudgeon wrote:
On Dave Ellis site (Ellis 1801) I have read that discussing about break-up modes, one mechanical engeener from SEAS team said that nor the Q nor the fr place are depending on the signal level.
In fact it's exactly the contrary. This deep black quality allows us to hear all the informations in a perfect way at whatever spl we listen.
It is my experience that Thiel/Accutons are very "dry" sounding drivers
Its also true that dry sound can be very engaging in a way that "some" details and rythmik stand out and becomes more clearly heard
BUT it is also my experience with very dry sound that other details related to room informations and ambiense and also to some degree sonics, are alltogether attenuated ... in worst cases which can be related to the design and xo those important details can be almost completely absent
All this results in the famous very precise and smooth sound
But I am not sure if that is the real "truth"
And polycones are almost the same thing
Its also true that dry sound can be very engaging in a way that "some" details and rythmik stand out and becomes more clearly heard
BUT it is also my experience with very dry sound that other details related to room informations and ambiense and also to some degree sonics, are alltogether attenuated ... in worst cases which can be related to the design and xo those important details can be almost completely absent
All this results in the famous very precise and smooth sound
But I am not sure if that is the real "truth"
And polycones are almost the same thing
Intrinsically Accuton drivers aren't "dry". In fact they don't "lack" AND don't "add". They are very accurate to the signal feeding them at the moment the speaker is well designed. The truest harmonics I heard even and especially at low spl and complex music. Nothing to do with some design's artifacts highlighting details.
BTW I am currently purchasing two Focal Be tweeters instead of the previous C13/6 choice.
God will my speakers sound harsh and unbalanced!
I must definitely be a
BTW I am currently purchasing two Focal Be tweeters instead of the previous C13/6 choice.
God will my speakers sound harsh and unbalanced!
I must definitely be a
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramblings
Did I say "entire passband" somewhere?
The "storage of energy" is a property of the speaker as a whole, and also includes motor and dampening system, and also the shape of the cone.
In some cases it can bring breakup effects to acceptable or inaudible proportions. Whether it is a simplification depends on the context. Any over generalization should be objected.
In case of second-order linear resonsances of minimal phase systems, notch filters can completely take away resonances.
DSP to control room corrections is no analogy for DSP to control speaker breakups.
I've heard the Avalon (multiple times), Kharma, Usher, Lumenwhite, Venture and quite some DIY projects, all with their own characteristics and balance. Some sound thin, some sound smooth. It largely depends on the filtering.
I know some ATCs as well, and these are mainly speakers with a lot of slam and drive. I like them a lot, I could happily iive with them, but they have their own drawbacks.
I don't object your experiences with the designs that you've heard (for most I've heard I do agree), but I think your statement is an over generalization.
"Guilty, unless proven otherwise"? I can imagine that with your bad initial experiences, you put your money/effort/belief in a "safer" place initially. I also fully support your opinion that you still have to hear the first proper-sounding Accuton-based design. But whether it informs us about the units, about the designer, or about you, or a combination, is still to be determined.
Maybe first get those paper newspaper out of your ears?
Marc
ShinOBIWAN said:
Did I say "entire passband" somewhere?
The "storage of energy" is a property of the speaker as a whole, and also includes motor and dampening system, and also the shape of the cone.
ShinOBIWAN said:
In some cases it can bring breakup effects to acceptable or inaudible proportions. Whether it is a simplification depends on the context. Any over generalization should be objected.
In case of second-order linear resonsances of minimal phase systems, notch filters can completely take away resonances.
ShinOBIWAN said:BTW Signal processing used in such extremes does more harm than initial problem. Can I mention room correction again?
DSP to control room corrections is no analogy for DSP to control speaker breakups.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I've heard the Avalon (multiple times), Kharma, Usher, Lumenwhite, Venture and quite some DIY projects, all with their own characteristics and balance. Some sound thin, some sound smooth. It largely depends on the filtering.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I know some ATCs as well, and these are mainly speakers with a lot of slam and drive. I like them a lot, I could happily iive with them, but they have their own drawbacks.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I don't object your experiences with the designs that you've heard (for most I've heard I do agree), but I think your statement is an over generalization.
ShinOBIWAN said:
"Guilty, unless proven otherwise"? I can imagine that with your bad initial experiences, you put your money/effort/belief in a "safer" place initially. I also fully support your opinion that you still have to hear the first proper-sounding Accuton-based design. But whether it informs us about the units, about the designer, or about you, or a combination, is still to be determined.
ShinOBIWAN said:
Maybe first get those paper newspaper out of your ears?
Marc
Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramblings
The breakup effects cause intermodulation products. Science tells us intermodulation is non-linear.
Absolutely!
In the same way, paper is sensitive to humidity, changing the properties of drivers as well.
As for Q, I'd like again to stress that there is a huge difference between breakup, and driver-Q. The Qms of a C2 220 is 0.22, that is very low.
I've heard very appealing examples with all kind of cone materials.
This is a very valid argument for speaker selection.
For my own design, I use LR2 for the C220 as well, but this forces me to a low crossover point. The C220 sound terrible if for instance used up to 1kHz, lifeless, stressed, harsh etc. If the crossover stays below about 250Hz, it becomes a very dynamic unit with punch and life.
It's just a matter of listening to a unit in isolation in combination with an intended filter, to get an idea of its realistic operating range. I think this (easy) practice is hardly executed by most speaker designers.
Marc
dlr said:
The breakup effects cause intermodulation products. Science tells us intermodulation is non-linear.
dlr said:
Absolutely!
dlr said:
In the same way, paper is sensitive to humidity, changing the properties of drivers as well.
As for Q, I'd like again to stress that there is a huge difference between breakup, and driver-Q. The Qms of a C2 220 is 0.22, that is very low.
dlr said:
I've heard very appealing examples with all kind of cone materials.
dlr said:
This is a very valid argument for speaker selection.
For my own design, I use LR2 for the C220 as well, but this forces me to a low crossover point. The C220 sound terrible if for instance used up to 1kHz, lifeless, stressed, harsh etc. If the crossover stays below about 250Hz, it becomes a very dynamic unit with punch and life.
It's just a matter of listening to a unit in isolation in combination with an intended filter, to get an idea of its realistic operating range. I think this (easy) practice is hardly executed by most speaker designers.
Marc
I'm confused that picture makes no sense whatsover...
For a start he's holding that bat all wrong and he should widen his stance for better leverage.
If you look closely you can see the woman is wearing a name badge with the words 'Accuton Employee' on there. I recognise that fella with the stick, he's the chap who lost his hearing due to spending a few hours subjected to new sonic torture.
For a start he's holding that bat all wrong and he should widen his stance for better leverage.
If you look closely you can see the woman is wearing a name badge with the words 'Accuton Employee' on there. I recognise that fella with the stick, he's the chap who lost his hearing due to spending a few hours subjected to new sonic torture.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramblings
Breakup itself is linear. It may exacerbate other distortion aspects. All drivers exhibit IMD, even those that appear to have near-perfect FR. If a driver could be made "perfect" and have no breakup, it would still have IMD. And consider that Siegfried Linkwitz is of the opinion that IMD levels in piston drivers are not significant enough to be of concern as well, if I recall his position correctly. Whatever change in IMD may be introduced by the breakup amplification pales in comparison to the rest of the distortion components in any case. IMD is almost a moot point in piston drivers.
Breakup can increase harmonic distortion and motor distortion through amplification of those products that coincide with the breakup. The problem with breakup is not that it is not linear, it is linear, but that non-linear motor distortion related to voice-coil displacement and harmonic distortion from signal content having low order harmonics that coincide with the breakup cannot be controlled without feedback and even then it's not going to perfect, especially the at the upper end, since driver directionality will become increasingly important. Hard cones would just be more problematic.
The only thing that can be done with a hard cone that has a really bad breakup is to trap it and cross it low. Even then, all motor non-linear distortion that coincides with the breakup will be amplified. Hard cones are the worst offenders in this area.[/QUOTE]
Most "paper" drivers are composites such that the typical changes of relative humidity aren't going to be a problem. It's not a concern for most in-room situations. I would never be concerned with that aspect.
I was not addressing driver Qts in any way. My reference to Q was that of the breakup peaks.
As have I. However, the best have never had hard diaphragms for any of the drivers.
Dave
marche said:
Breakup itself is linear. It may exacerbate other distortion aspects. All drivers exhibit IMD, even those that appear to have near-perfect FR. If a driver could be made "perfect" and have no breakup, it would still have IMD. And consider that Siegfried Linkwitz is of the opinion that IMD levels in piston drivers are not significant enough to be of concern as well, if I recall his position correctly. Whatever change in IMD may be introduced by the breakup amplification pales in comparison to the rest of the distortion components in any case. IMD is almost a moot point in piston drivers.
Breakup can increase harmonic distortion and motor distortion through amplification of those products that coincide with the breakup. The problem with breakup is not that it is not linear, it is linear, but that non-linear motor distortion related to voice-coil displacement and harmonic distortion from signal content having low order harmonics that coincide with the breakup cannot be controlled without feedback and even then it's not going to perfect, especially the at the upper end, since driver directionality will become increasingly important. Hard cones would just be more problematic.
The only thing that can be done with a hard cone that has a really bad breakup is to trap it and cross it low. Even then, all motor non-linear distortion that coincides with the breakup will be amplified. Hard cones are the worst offenders in this area.[/QUOTE]
Most "paper" drivers are composites such that the typical changes of relative humidity aren't going to be a problem. It's not a concern for most in-room situations. I would never be concerned with that aspect.
I was not addressing driver Qts in any way. My reference to Q was that of the breakup peaks.
As have I. However, the best have never had hard diaphragms for any of the drivers.
Dave
Intermodulation distortion is not nonlinear, it's simply spruious tones appearing as the result of multiple tones giving rise to sum and difference products in a non-linear medium/transfer function. In other words the nonlinearity has to exist for intermodulation to happen. The nonlinearity is a pre-existing condition.
Hey guys... long time no see!!!
A few things that I found with my old C94 + C23 Accutons:
From experimenting around I found that using active crossovers instead of passive had a big effect on those "compression" effects. With active crossovers the speakers are actually pretty dynamic, but I guess that depends on your musical preferences. I'm not a big fan of PA-style musicality and dynamics anyway.
Their dispersion is really excellent, completely unlike the spotlight effect that you often get with fabric dome tweeters. Bearing that in mind, it's important to pay extra attention to the baffle design - preferably curving it generously to reduce resonances that are caused by diffraction. Placing the drivers off-centre would be ineffective because the off-axis and reflected sound is still affected. And the clarity of the off-axis sound is one of the key benefits of hard cone speakers IMO.
A few things that I found with my old C94 + C23 Accutons:
From experimenting around I found that using active crossovers instead of passive had a big effect on those "compression" effects. With active crossovers the speakers are actually pretty dynamic, but I guess that depends on your musical preferences. I'm not a big fan of PA-style musicality and dynamics anyway.
Their dispersion is really excellent, completely unlike the spotlight effect that you often get with fabric dome tweeters. Bearing that in mind, it's important to pay extra attention to the baffle design - preferably curving it generously to reduce resonances that are caused by diffraction. Placing the drivers off-centre would be ineffective because the off-axis and reflected sound is still affected. And the clarity of the off-axis sound is one of the key benefits of hard cone speakers IMO.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ramblings
It's a matter of defining what is inluded in the term "breakup". For me this includes the wave propagation in the cone, the bounce against the ring, and the effects on the motor. One cannot decouple those effects.
Of course there are other sources of intermodulation, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. Breakup effects give rise to intermodulation due to the effects you've described yourself. The breakup effect also gives rise to harmonic and transient distortion, the last one being non-linear as well.
Marc
dlr said:
It's a matter of defining what is inluded in the term "breakup". For me this includes the wave propagation in the cone, the bounce against the ring, and the effects on the motor. One cannot decouple those effects.
Of course there are other sources of intermodulation, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. Breakup effects give rise to intermodulation due to the effects you've described yourself. The breakup effect also gives rise to harmonic and transient distortion, the last one being non-linear as well.
Marc
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.