Orions sound great because dipole?

[Eva]

Orions sound = dipole directivity + good crossover design

[Calvin]

Hi,

I wouldn´t expect the Orions to play anything less than very well
Good hardware and excellent engineering......That´s what pays off


Dipoles are critical to their positioning towards the backside and how You deal with that sonic energy (using reflecting and damping measures). If one recognizes smeared fuzzy sound it indicates seriously wrong positioning. Nothing else! Someone who doesn´t want to put some effort in this issue, will probabely never become happy with a dipole speaker.
But if done properly the ´detail-resolution´ is higher, i.e details are easier to distinguish, because of the higher proportion of direct sound and the great delay of the reflected sound.
The very early reflections from inside the box that every (!!, because the membrane just optically shields the inside of the box from the outside, while acoustically it is nearly completely transparent!!) box exhibits are those that smear the sound and give the typical boxy character. Too, the negative influence of the early reflections from sidewalls that add in smearing the sound and widen up the focus are greatly reduced. The late reflections from the backwall just add to the spacious impression of sound -if their delay is long enough and their pattern is diffused- that the ear recognizes them as a reverb and not as part of the original impulse.

jauu
Calvin

ps

I don't think dynamic dipoles suffer the same issues that affect ESLs.

That´s right...ESLs distort much less, have higher bandwidth and allow for at least sufficient SPL levels for any kind of music material (admittedly above 200Hz though) If 110dB@4m from 1 panel, with less than 0.3% of mainly K2 distortion isn´t enough......what is?

[gainphile]

All this talk about Orion wants me to spend some money but honestly are they a good value (at $8000) ? Let's say... can I get 80% of Orion sound at 1/8 the price ?

[poptart]

I think Linkwitz has zero acoustic treatment in his room for the rear energy or anything else. I believe his philosophy is that a well designed speaker should work well in a "normal" untreated room, but he thinks that all speakers (dipole, conventional, omni) should be placed well into the room away from walls. As far as dipoles being better because of higher direct to reflected ratio, well you can get the same ratio with any speaker and a dead room. Taken to an extreme you are now listening in an anechoic chamber and nobody likes that. I would guess there are a range of direct to reflected ratios that sounds good to people and outside of this is unatural, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if this was also the same range as a normal room because that's the type of ratio we're used to hearing. Your friend sounds normal when he speaks to you in your room right? He is not a dipole. I think he's more of an omni

gainphile: Linkwitz himself says the plutos (omnis) do that. Maybe not quite your ratio of $ to performance but same idea. That would seem to answer the question "orion sounds good because of dipole?". He reckons the two very different speakers sound so similar because of uniform off axis response. All this info and a lot more is available on his website, it's well worth the read. If you don't like reading here's the first part of a general talk he gave. You have to keep finding the next part on the list to the right http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC-sxvNzC8I

[gainphile]

I actually have a pluto and myriads of OB speakers

But I wish SL designed Orion with less expensive stuff

[Jonasz]

gainphile: Monte Kay's RS-based design can probably come close.

http://www.mfk-projects.com/rs_dipole.htm

[pacificblue]

Originally posted by gainphile
But I wish SL designed Orion with less expensive stuff

Wouldn't that make them less desirable?

[SimontY]

Originally posted by serenechaos
Hence, the "soft focus," that loses detail.
That some people like, and "rave" about,
and some people read, and repeat...
Personally I was very dissapointed, and like my wife said, you can't hear things anymore on recordings you know well--
This makes for a zero WAF in my house.

I think you're jumping to conclusions a bit regarding this detail issue. I have actually heard the same 3 drivers in a ported box speaker and on an open baffle. They sound much more detailed on the latter. So the detail is being lost elsewhere, possibly all those cheap op-amps

Mine are passive so far.

Originally posted by David Gatti
Also, I have hunch that those who love dipoles are classical music buffs, whereas pop/rock fans prefer monopoles.

Actually I listen to pop, rock and jazz mainly. Hardly any classical.

Have you heard open baffles? The main thing people seem to notice is the absence of colouration in the bass and how realistic drums sound, and the dynamics. This benefits electronic music and rock more than classical, maybe much more!

My current speakers are dipoles, a transformer circuit is used to increase bass by 6dB at driver resonance and there are no op-amps or active EQ in the system. It sounds good.

Simon

[serenechaos]

The "soft focus" loss of detail comment was a general statement about open baffles.
After listening to a dozen or more in the same day, they all exhibited it, as did all dipoles.
There are few ported boxes I like either, very few.
The orions were the closest to "listenable," I'm guessing due to good drivers and crossover/notch filters, but the lack of detail, and the "bouncy" sound, the extra delayed sound coming off the back wall mixing with the sound from the front, I found annoying, and drove my wife out of the room in seconds...

[Calvin]

Hi,

again: don´t blame the dipoles, blame their rotten positioning!

jauu
Calvin