The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers - Page 177 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 5th October 2012, 03:59 AM   #1761
CLS is online now CLS  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Taiwan
About the size of (HF) image, I also had some observations.

A triangle (again), can be one of the following situations (and between):

1. Very gently tapped (or even brushed?) -- the image would be fuzzy, like a smokey cloud without clear contour, quite large in a hard-to-define size.

2. Moderately hit -- there'd be bright tiny solid 'core' showing up on that 'cloud'. The first impression would be a very tiny image, but the 'cloud' does exist and firmly attached to the 'core'.

3. Hit hard -- the bright solid core grows in size considerably, to a degree that can be slightly larger than other physically bigger instruments. Also it seems stepping forward somewhat. At this moment the 'cloud' is largely supressed and not as easily identified as other situations.

I think the HF transient makes the image small still apply, as the situation 2 can have a higher attact/sustain ratio than 3 in these cases.


However, on the other hand, sustaining sounds (without obvious attack) can have very different image sizes, too.

For example, a flute (with very much HF portion) can sound very big -- as big as my DML panel in a recording I found. Considering the distance, that view angle is just too exaggerated. But it's not the same as the 'cloud with a core' model as the triangle, the sound of a flute is a whole, the texture is very uniform within the area. In other recordings, it can be a smaller size but still bigger than the physical (visual) impression.

Another example is trumpet. It's usually arranged at the further part of the orchestra, and almost always sounding solid and small (very loud, though).

Quite complicated in the acoustics of musical instruments. Or maybe I mixed up too many factors here...
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 04:17 AM   #1762
CLS is online now CLS  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Taiwan
to Graaf,

I can't find a convenient postion to elevate the flooder tweeters. The available space around that area is indeed limited.

On the equipment rack, I think it'd be too close to the (black) mini-monitor and the edge of DML panel.

I've briefly tried putting them on the central sub. Sitting slightly lower than normal, my line of sight would be about the same height with WG's up-firing mouth. And the WG's were pushed against the TV and emitting toward the DML panel. Maybe because of this, there'd be some interferences... I'm not sure.

Compared with the normal setup, the overall presentation is somewhat congested. Narrower, shallower, smaller overall. I don't like it.

Ah, I ran out of space for options. The 12" WG is not small and can't be tucked anywhere. If it's elevated and still behind the OB, I guess there'll be no benefit, or a risk of interfereing with rear wave of mid...
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 06:37 AM   #1763
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLS View Post
my line of sight would be about the same height with WG's up-firing mouth.
...
Compared with the normal setup, the overall presentation is somewhat congested. Narrower, shallower, smaller overall. I don't like it.
I see but what interests me most is whether the images were positioned higher? Was it like in the case of:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CLS View Post
the WG'ed tweeter on the top of mid-OB.
?

Was it that:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLS View Post
HF sounds would be floating pretty high, above the listening position. Kind of odd.
?

In other words was there anything odd about soundstage height, unnatural elevation, sound sources floating beneath the ceiling etc. when the tweeters were on top of the sub?
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 07:15 AM   #1764
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Uzhgorod
One idea again) to critic.

If we do not have sidewalls available for such placement, and not place for SSS in the room (out of walls) , but we do have free front wall.

Put soffite mounted 3 speakers in front wall, central speaker - to dealy for 9 ms. Will that give the same sense of depth as reflected 9 ms sound?

Of course side walls reflection still will have to be dealed and treated.

Last edited by Charcoal; 5th October 2012 at 07:26 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 08:43 AM   #1765
CLS is online now CLS  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally Posted by graaf View Post
...

In other words was there anything odd about soundstage height, unnatural elevation, sound sources floating beneath the ceiling etc. when the tweeters were on top of the sub?
Short answer is no.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 11:01 AM   #1766
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLS View Post

I've briefly tried putting them on the central sub. Sitting slightly lower than normal, my line of sight would be about the same height with WG's up-firing mouth. And the WG's were pushed against the TV and emitting toward the DML panel. Maybe because of this, there'd be some interferences... I'm not sure.

Compared with the normal setup, the overall presentation is somewhat congested. Narrower, shallower, smaller overall. I don't like it.
You mean You put them on the <80 Hz sub just next to each other? without any angular separation really?

and still there was a soundstage? somewhat congested, narrower etc. but a soundstage?

then it seems that information above 3 kHz doesn't carry the essential information in Your system as far as soundstaging is concerned, spaciousness - yes, extension of the soundstage - yes, but localisation strictly speaking - apparently no, interesting
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 12:22 PM   #1767
Elias is offline Elias  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Where you live
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charcoal View Post
One idea again) to critic.

If we do not have sidewalls available for such placement, and not place for SSS in the room (out of walls) , but we do have free front wall.

Put soffite mounted 3 speakers in front wall, central speaker - to dealy for 9 ms. Will that give the same sense of depth as reflected 9 ms sound?

Of course side walls reflection still will have to be dealed and treated.

For three separate speakers for stereo using matrix, there are multiple of alternatives for matrix coefficients too.

See Gerzon and e.g. AES Preprint: "An Optimum Linear-Matrix Stereo Imaging System"


In order to simulate SSS with three speakers, the three speakers should be placed in an angle much wider than normal stereo triangle. Maybe 120 deg.

See also some diyaudio threads on 3 speaker stereo.
__________________
Liberate yourself from the illusion of two speaker stereo triangle
Dipole Bass vs Monopole Bass Stereophonic Sound from a Single Loudspeaker 3 Speaker Linear Stereo Matrix Wavelets
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 12:25 PM   #1768
Elias is offline Elias  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Where you live
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
In order to simulate SSS with three speakers
This is quite funny, because SSS is a simulation of a three speaker stereo in a room

Why would you want to simulate the same thing twice to arrive to the starting point ? Maybe for the purpose of reinventing the wheel perhaps Just use either or !
__________________
Liberate yourself from the illusion of two speaker stereo triangle
Dipole Bass vs Monopole Bass Stereophonic Sound from a Single Loudspeaker 3 Speaker Linear Stereo Matrix Wavelets
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 12:27 PM   #1769
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charcoal View Post
One idea again) to critic.

If we do not have sidewalls available for such placement, and not place for SSS in the room (out of walls) , but we do have free front wall.
You can design an SSS for the front-wall placement - no problem
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th October 2012, 12:46 PM   #1770
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Uzhgorod
I would like in-wall palcement. That is why that idea arrived. No dufraction at all.

If to do ON-wall SSS - I suppose side speakers should be turned little bit forward. angle will depend where you sit.

Elias, my front wall is 5 meters - quite broad traingle is possible.

Last edited by Charcoal; 5th October 2012 at 12:50 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using a diffuser cone for up-firing speakers tspringer99 Multi-Way 19 23rd July 2014 02:04 AM
Floor Standing Speakers. gurpreetsingh Full Range 11 12th June 2012 06:42 AM
side/ rear firing speakers Good/Bad? mcmahon48 Multi-Way 1 6th February 2009 12:28 PM
How far can the driver of a down-firing sub be from the floor? The Paulinator Subwoofers 11 16th May 2007 08:10 PM
Woofer: side firing pair vs front firing? tcpip Multi-Way 13 9th September 2005 02:13 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2