The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers

[graaf]

Originally Posted by el`Ol

Maybe 6.5" drivers are just not beamy enough.

yes - I suspect this and You being to close in Your room to the stereo base

[LineArray]

Originally Posted by el`Ol

...
I listened to DDD, MBL, Duevel, Podium Sound, Goebel, but all stereo and with different music in different rooms. But I think all of them had less focus than the Carlssons.
Mostly when I go to concert I sit some distance away from the musicians, but in the cases when I get a seat close to them I find there is clear source localization. But in principle I don't find it very bad when I sit further away.
As said the conditions were very different, but from what I heard I liked the imaging of the Duevel least because of the flatness and wideness. This speaker was far ahead of the "exots" in most other respects, however.

It is interesting and meets my experience, that a speaker good at
certain aspects may although not be good at imaging.

I agree with localization, when sitting near to the musicians but even
at concerts i normally prefer a little distance for "overview" ...


@graaf:
Concerning the ceiling flooder i think it is a bit strange to rely
on the frequency dependent beaming of a fullranger ...

I could imagine making a ceiling flooder from an array of mini
widerangers which is Xoed with a time delayed woofer.

The woofer would cover the modal to transitional range of the room
say up to 500 Hz and the widerange array would cover the "rest".

Radiation pattern (electronic phase control ?) would be aligned
to minimize sound directly radiated to the listener and could
be made more frequency independent compared to a fullranger.

Maybe a waveguide could do the job too ...

(There was this strange Lowther cabinet ...)

Not my cup of tea but would be a more "puristic" implementation
of the idea.

But your reporting points to your setup is already optimum ...

[el`Ol]

Originally Posted by graaf

yes - I suspect this and You being to close in Your room to the stereo base

With the HX201 it was better not to be so far away. For good (not too diffuse) imaging it seemed to be essential that the ceiling reflection had a nice impulse response, and it degraded with too much distance.
I admit I haven't made this test with the HX160 in my workshop. And in my listening room a much higher distance wouldn't have been possible anyway.

[graaf]

Originally Posted by LineArray

Concerning the ceiling flooder i think it is a bit strange to rely
on the frequency dependent beaming of a fullranger ...

well, it's a strange box

it is an approach of making strenghts out of weaknesses

but is the alternative less crazy?

think of it:
an array of mini widerangers plus a time delayed woofer plus perhaps electronic phase control or maybe a waveguide

geeez, I give up!

my flooder is meant to be a simple DIY project for every music lover

Originally Posted by LineArray

(There was this strange Lowther cabinet ...)

yes, the Ace
It was nice

Originally Posted by LineArray

Not my cup of tea but would be a more "puristic" implementation
of the idea.

well, can there really be anything more puristic than single driver in a simple small box?

best regards,
graaf

[graaf]

You may search Gramophone's Archive with "Sonab" or "Carlsson":

Gramophone Archive

login to view the articles as PDFs

enjoy!

best,
graaf

[LineArray]

I meant "puristic" due to coincidence with a certain concept.

The approach you go is "simplistic". That is something
different to me. A simplistic implementation is not
necessarily bad, if one can show the implementation
to coincide with that concept in mind.

If the concept is to have sound reflected via the ceiling,
there would be implementations that fullfill that concept
more or less.

I am a friend of discussing concepts and implementations
successively because concepts as well as religions often
cause excitement for those who stand for them.

The conformity of a given implementation to a concept
- or a specification - can be discussed with far less
emotional effort. This is because is does not matter for
the discussion, whether the participants support the
concept or not.

If you say it is OK to let the ratio of direct vs. ceiling
reflected sound be dependent from the dispersion
characteristics of your special driver in use,
i am fine with that.

Someone else would use a different driver in a different
room. Is the implemention of "someone else" then
conformimg to your concept as well ?

If yes: What is your concept ?
If no: See above.

See the problem ?


To ask a different question:

Would you assume for your concept that a constant power input
to the room (independent from frequency) belongs to the concept?

If yes: Can you please show us how you achieve that in your implementation ?

If no: Why does the power need not be independent from frequency when using
your concept.

Please do not hide behind literature. I'd like concrete answers
concerning your favoured concept and your specific implementation.

Because this is what other participants in this thread at least try
to do: Bringing in their favourite concepts and their experience in
implementation.

Advocating concepts and mixtures of concepts based on literature
is nice, but when it comes to a decision for a certain concept
(or ones favourite mixture of concepts, no problem)
and committing to it, then we enter the realm of implemention.

An implementation can always be challenged by questions like
"In how far is this or that aspect of the concept conformed ?"

I cannot see you answer those questions or at least trying.
I can only see you hide away ...

[markus76]

Originally Posted by LineArray

What is your concept ?

That's a question I carry around with me since post 1.

[LineArray]

A common answer of people who do not like dealing with
details is:

"Im a concept designer (or architect). I do not care about
implementation because this is below my intellectual scope."

Unfortunately the (small) subset of buildings or technical
constructs which work well on this planet, has been designed
by people either knowing the details of implementation and
recent technology very well or at least by those able to
cooperate with specialists who are aware of
the details.

[markus76]

Geddes loudspeakers?

[el`Ol]

Originally Posted by LineArray

(or architect)

No Gaudis still among us.