The Advantages of Floor Coupled Up-Firing Speakers - Page 252 - 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 15th May 2013, 12:20 AM   #2511
fas42 is offline fas42  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
fas42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NSW, Australia
Blog Entries: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
For practical and budget reasons multi-channel is the way to go and works great. Pure stereo can do it, but it takes space and money to get the effect.
There are a number of ways, the ear/brain is very forgiving if you give it the right ammunition. Personally, I've found space and money to be unnecessary, focus and fussiness in refining every link in the chain of an otherwise conventional system will also succeed, the only disadvantage of the latter will be that there is a hard limit on the peak level of sound because the voltage rails of the amplifier will not be large enough.
__________________
Frank "All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them." - Galileo
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 07:55 AM   #2512
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
ps. Ad:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundtrackmixer View Post
So it is not just reflections in general, it is reflections with a time component coming from specific directions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graaf View Post
this is my point exactly
What do You think - which is better for audio quality - an incoherent reflection delayed by ca 2.5 ms or a coherent one delayed by ca 6 ms?

not only twice as much delayed but also 6 dB quieter (propagation loss) for the same reason which is sound path being twice as long
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 10:49 AM   #2513
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pano View Post
I don't know at what size this starts to kick in. My listening room is about 3400 cu ft and it's not big enough. I have heard the effect starting in rooms that I would guess at about 5000~7000 cu ft. Wish I knew where the tipping point is, if there is one.
In HiFi shows of the past it was common to have a live band play in an auditorium. The musicians were recorded and replayed over loudspeakers in the same auditorium. This used to be a very convincing exercise. Why? Because the replay could use the same room acoustics as the original.

Most of us don't have a problem with the "girl and guitar" reproduced at home. It fits in our rooms - even if it is "she is here". It becomes a problem if the recorded room acoustics differ too much from what we have in our listening space. I believe that listening to larger ensemble recordings in larger rooms is more convincing simply because of this better fit of recording/reproduction room sizes.

Rudolf
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 11:01 AM   #2514
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Correct and that's why the sound reproduction concept "speakers working as instruments" is pretty limited. Multichannel on the other hand can bring large room acoustics into small rooms.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 12:19 PM   #2515
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Correct and that's why the sound reproduction concept "speakers working as instruments" is pretty limited. Multichannel on the other hand can bring large room acoustics into small rooms.
not just multichannel because :

Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
When the listening room provides artificially added reflections, the presentation can become more "you're there". It's like the front wall of the listening room has been removed and opens into the auditory space of the recording.
not for the first time I can see contradictions in Your posts


Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Real envelopment (LEV) requires additional speakers at the back. The effect is profound and nobody that has heard it would ever argue about the superiority of multichannel over stereo. Obviously a lot of people here haven't heard good multichannel setups/recordings.
LEV is an important factor in QUALITY of auditoria but even then NOT of all of them:
Leo Beranek's paper "Listener Envelopment LEV, Strength G and Reverberation Time RT in Concert Halls" 2010:

Quote:
In all of the non-shoebox halls, the audience seating extends nearly to the ceiling on one or more of the four sidewall surfaces. Thus, energy is removed there before the reverberant field is established
LEV per se is not a requirement for realism whereas ASW/spaciousness is such a requirement
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz

Last edited by graaf; 15th May 2013 at 12:21 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2013, 10:45 AM   #2516
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by graaf View Post
LEV per se is not a requirement for realism whereas ASW/spaciousness is such a requirement
BTW a question - do available multichannel formats allow for perception of ASW ie. the spaciousness of sound sources?
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2013, 11:49 AM   #2517
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Multichannel on the other hand can bring large room acoustics into small rooms.
And the multichannel setup makes the small room even smaller...

Don't get me wrong, I would always recommend a multichannel setup. But the reality, at least in Germany, is: too many people can not place 5 good speakers + subwoofers in their room. They eat up too much space, and although the user might have a great listening system, he has no more space to live. People interested in multichannel ("surround") often bought very small speakers to put on the wall, and that was OK for movies, but definitely not OK for hifi audio.

That is one reason why multichannel audio is nearly dead. Other reasons include the manufacturers, which still think that "multichannel" is a synonym for "home theater" and offer only such speakers. And the electronics is Stereo, too, except of those big A/V amps offered by japanese companies, which are never even considered as an alternative in the HighEnd world.
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2013, 12:40 PM   #2518
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Why would on-wall not be okay for HiFi? I think that was and is a missed opportunity. But don't get me started on how marketing ruined HiFi...
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2013, 12:58 PM   #2519
graaf is offline graaf  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
graaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baseballbat View Post
That is one reason why multichannel audio is nearly dead.
I agree and the situation is not going to change for the same reasons that You have stated

but as You say:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baseballbat View Post
I would always recommend a multichannel setup.
then question is whether a multichannel setup really has any advantages over 2 channel as far as realism of sound reproduction is concerned

or perhaps it is all just about some impressive effects?

just to quote Peter Walker's of QUAD opinion on multichannel:

Quote:
It's just that you don't need these sounds in the back, they're not musically very interesting.
the opinion referred to the multichannel of the 70s ie. quadrophony, of course, but it's a general statement and I think that it holds true with regard to any rear channels
__________________
"high phooey and hystereo" - Yascha Heifetz
  Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2013, 03:55 PM   #2520
DrDyna is offline DrDyna  United States
diyAudio Member
 
DrDyna's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by graaf View Post
I agree and the situation is not going to change for the same reasons that You have stated

but as You say:



then question is whether a multichannel setup really has any advantages over 2 channel as far as realism of sound reproduction is concerned

or perhaps it is all just about some impressive effects?

just to quote Peter Walker's of QUAD opinion on multichannel:



the opinion referred to the multichannel of the 70s ie. quadrophony, of course, but it's a general statement and I think that it holds true with regard to any rear channels
Wiring two rear channels in series with the positive terminals of the amplifier can be fun sometimes
  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 03:04 AM
Floor Standing Speakers. gurpreetsingh Full Range 11 12th June 2012 07:42 AM
side/ rear firing speakers Good/Bad? mcmahon48 Multi-Way 1 6th February 2009 01:28 PM
How far can the driver of a down-firing sub be from the floor? The Paulinator Subwoofers 11 16th May 2007 09:10 PM
Woofer: side firing pair vs front firing? tcpip Multi-Way 13 9th September 2005 03:13 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:51 PM.


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