The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers

[poptart]

Originally Posted by graaf

Toole also asserts that horizontal early reflections are not detrimental to quality of sound reproduction.

Yes that's in there as well. Some very interesting graphs too of first reflection audibility vs time. It's not so cut and dry as early=bad or early=good, there's a shape to the graphed early->late data that is not at all a straight line. More like a check mark. Direction of reflection is also something he focuses on, especially that sound coming from the sides contributes much more to his term "spaciousness" than sound from the front/back/ceiling/floor. Multichannel is his endpoint, but most of the information in the book is about one or two channel testing at harman.

[graaf]

Originally Posted by poptart

Direction of reflection is also something he focuses on, especially that sound coming from the sides contributes much more to his term "spaciousness" than sound from the front/back/ceiling/floor. Multichannel is his endpoint, but most of the information in the book is about one or two channel testing at harman.

there was also government/EU sponsored research project in Europe:

"Eureka Archimedes Project", developed between Bang & Olufsen of Denmark, KEF Electronics Limited of the UK and The Acoustics Laboratory of the Technical University of Denmark.

its conclusion was the same:
"reasonably flat power response laterally, is ideal behavior." and "vertical reflections (from the floor to the ceiling) tend to upset our perception"

BeoLab 5 from Bang & Olufsen is the outcome of this project conclusions,
interestingly it's in many ways very similar to ideal speaker according to Toole's Harman research papers, not only from the point of directivity but also bass equalization and so on

best
graaf

[LineArray]

Originally Posted by graaf

and? what is the point?

don't You know that it is the main topic of the thread?
so everyone can expect it to come into play all the time

"Room treatment and equalisation for optimum ceiling flooder setup."

Would then be a good title too ...


I'd like to explain, what my different "angle of view" is about,
having made lots of different speakers over the years, which had
been placed in different rooms, used by listeners with different
habits. Since i am someone who moves from time to time,
there have been also different rooms i lived in myself.

Speaker and room make up a system, that much is clear.
From the viewpoint of a speaker designer, the speaker's variables
are far more under design control than the properties of the room,
where the speaker under question will be placed.

This holds except for those cases in the professional area, where
the listener/user is able and willing to modify the room drastically
for its listening room purpose.

For the majority of cases, the loudspeaker has to cope with
listening rooms which have a main purpose as living room.
(e.g. wives live there and other often audio disturbing circumstances ..)

This results in the design goal for a loudspeaker to be as robust
against changing room conditions as possible on the one hand,
and to be flexible/equalizable for those variables changing inevitably
with different rooms. If the need for equalization can be mainly reduced
to the bass range, were modal bahaviour and room gain comes into play,
we have reduced the problem quite lot.

My question to every speaker design is:
How universal is this design due to changing listening room conditions ?

Since the ceiling flooder is highly dependent on a specially prepared
room, it has low universality and is - TO ME - not interesting.

It would become interesting if it can be made applicable in a great
variety of room conditons. The proposals i made into that direction,
did not seem to arise much interest from your side.

But the longer this thread runs, the more you have to admit, that there
has to be special room treatment and that equalizing is desirable.
This has taken a lot of time and lots of posts.

Of course the ceiling flooder concept WILL NECESSARILY need a high amount
of room dependent equalisation and maybe adjustable frequency dependent
dispersion as well - to make it cope with different rooms.

If made a commercial product or a diy concept to be shared by others,
you would e.g. need optionally ceiling reflectors for rooms with
absorbtive ceilings. What about ceiling height ?

My current line array design can be placed in nearly every room without
equalizing above 120 Hz. You adjust the subwoofer(s) according level and
position in room and thats it.

It does not care about floor carpets or ceilings beeing absorptive and is
quite benign concerning distance and structure of neighboured walls as well.
Have the side walls 70cm away or 3m, it does not care very much.
The distance to the rear walls is an issue and has to be > 1.2 m,
then they are ready to work.

That is my currrent - surely not the final or perfect - result of
experience with different speaker designs making up a part of the
speaker/room system.

Best Regards

[graaf]

Originally Posted by LineArray

"Room treatment and equalisation for optimum ceiling flooder setup."

Would then be a good title too ...

perhaps, but it was not my intention to exclude other solutions

Originally Posted by graaf

What do You think? Any suggestions? Ideas? Your own unusual setups?

now flooder is the main topic or one of the main topics and my point is that as such it is expected to come into play without blinking ""

Originally Posted by LineArray

Since the ceiling flooder is highly dependent on a specially prepared
room

? not at all

perhaps You mix the flooder as such with specific (perhaps optimal) Beveridge placement setup?
but it works fine also in other placement options, actually I never had opportunity to try Beveridge placement, I hoped that someone else would have.

my initial idea was exactly opposite to "specially prepared room":

Originally Posted by graaf

The second aim was to build loudspeaker least visually obtrusive, loudspeaker that would be practically invisible in the listening room (which in my case at the time was also a living room).

typical living room

Originally Posted by LineArray

The proposals i made into that direction,
did not seem to arise much interest from your side.

but only because of practical considerations - what You proposed appeared very complex to me, unsuitable for DIY community in which most of us don't have required technical background nor technical equipment to implement such ideas

it were fine ideas though for someone more professional

Originally Posted by LineArray

But the longer this thread runs, the more you have to admit, that there
has to be special room treatment.

?? where? when?
if You mean my posts regarding optional deflectors or absorbers in the very vicinity of the flooders - they were all "IF", "optional" suggestions - in my experience with the flooders I had no need to implement any deflectors or absorbers

Originally Posted by LineArray

and that equalizing is desirable

even if - is it a problem? most of us use some form of equalization

Originally Posted by LineArray

Of course the ceiling flooder concept WILL NECESSARILY need a high amount
of room dependent equalisation and maybe adjustable frequency dependent
dispersion as well - to make it cope with different rooms.

of course high amount, adjustable ad so on

How can You be so sure? Contemporary typical living rooms are rather standardized, we live in an age of Ikea and the likes

Originally Posted by LineArray

If made a commercial product or a diy concept to be shared by others,

check my first post - nowhere and never my aim was a commercial product or even "my diy concept" to be shared, I have no such aspirations because I lack expertise - a fact I have made absolutely clear in my first post

it was just an intuitive idea for TIY - TRY IT YOURSELF
trying it costs nothing - even single driver speakers for mini system would sometimes do to check the idea as such

Originally Posted by LineArray

you would e.g. need optionally ceiling reflectors for rooms with
absorbtive ceilings.

What about ceiling height ?

what about it? why speculate?
El'Ol checked this at His own home, where he has ceiling very unlike to mine, and everything was fine

there are architectural standards - norms - for apartment buildings - You would not find an absorbtive ceiling in a normal living room
and the ceiling height would normally be no less than 2.65 m IIRC

Originally Posted by LineArray

My current line array design can be placed in nearly every room
(...)
Have the side walls 70cm away or 3m, it does not care very much.
The distance to the rear walls is an issue and has to be > 1.2 m,

nice! from audiophile perspective

but 0.7 from side walls and 1.2 from rear wall IS an issue in a typical living room of a music lover

not to mention decor and esthetics considerations, they (the speakers) are quite big

flooders are meant to be practically invisible in the room

thank You for sharing Your thoughts

best regards!
graaf

[LineArray]

Yes, maybe we have to distinguish between

"Home music lovers, audiophools and professionals."

I am an audiophool concerning purpose of the room and
listening habits. The current dipol line array design is
adjusted for an audiophool like me and not meant to
be "invisible". Do not forget subwoofer placement.
One has to suffer for audio, otherwise it is no fun.

It is meant to yield performance best possible in a
non professional environment. The concept can be
shared by other audiophools.

If aligned for the "average appartment" the ceiling flooder
may work for many home music lovers living in
comparable rooms. And it has high WAF because invisible.

So everything is fine.

[graaf]

ok!

I'll be off for a couple of days

Happy Easter to all those who celebrate it!

graaf

[Rudolf]

Originally Posted by graaf

?? I am not sure what You mean

So I am not sure what you meant in the first place. But than my error came first.
If you agree to "horizontal directivity should be constant in any case, and vertical dispersion shoul be narrow" - doesn`t that fundamentally contradict your flooder concept? I was under the impression that you were beaming something to the ceiling. That would not be "narrow vertical dispersion" in my vocabulary.

what does constant directivity mean to You?

What Geddes is showing in figure 9 of his "Directivity" paper. Whereby it would not be mandatory that the response has rolled off 6 dB at 45°.

You are kidding, right?

Not kidding, but obviously misunderstanding. If there is no huge vertical component in the dispersion of your construction - why do you call it a (ceiling) flooder than?
Could you possibly give a small diagram of the intended dispersion pattern?

Rudolf

[ThorstenL]

Hi,

Originally Posted by LineArray

For the majority of cases, the loudspeaker has to cope with listening rooms which have a main purpose as living room.
(e.g. wives live there and other often audio disturbing circumstances ..)

This results in the design goal for a loudspeaker to be as robust
against changing room conditions as possible on the one hand,
and to be flexible/equalizable for those variables changing inevitably
with different rooms. If the need for equalization can be mainly reduced
to the bass range, were modal bahaviour and room gain comes into play,
we have reduced the problem quite lot.

This is a remarkably succinct coverage of the reasons why people from Floyd Toole and Earl Geddes through Heiner Martion, Holger Fromme and Romy the Kat (and not to forget little old me) make their speaker systems to have as tightly controlled directivity and as consistent and flat directivity index as the design budget and domestic considerations (not everyone likes Holgers and Heiners trumpets of Jericho in their front room) allow.

Originally Posted by LineArray

Since the ceiling flooder is highly dependent on a specially prepared room, it has low universality and is - TO ME - not interesting.

Ditto.

As concept it will no doubt be of interest to some audiophiles and diyer's, but it needs to come with strict instruction on suitable rooms, ceiling height & constitution, floor constitution and other treatment, kind of the opposite of what I'd call a "room compatible loudspeaker".

Now I pretty much understand why his lordship is SOOOO over the moon with the concept and wishes to evangelise, I think I will leave the thread now to itself, as there is little more point in the debate, for me at least.

Ciao T

[markus76]

Originally Posted by poptart

Markus, vlc plays flac flawlessly on my machine. Not sure what issues you're referring to.

I only checked the OGGs. Looks like VLC applies too much gain in the digital domain. I found iTunes having similar problems. Unfortunately I don't know of a way to monitor OS X's internal remixer correctly. Cabling is Mac mini > optical out > AVR

Best, Markus

[markus76]

Making progress, VLC had the default volume at 200% (of what?). Setting it to 100% (is that no gain?) moves the volume fader to about 25% to the left. Max. volume is 400% - does that make any sense? Couldn't find any information on how VLC handles volume settings.

Anyway, back to the files: I don't hear anything that would be out of the norm. For a comparison it would make sense when the files would switch from processed to original a couple of times.