Measured monopole and dipole room responses - Page 12 - 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 2nd October 2012, 11:31 PM   #111
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Earl, did you follow the Fazenda papers in JAES?
I can't say that I have, but I do get JAES and I usually read papers that interest me, but I skip those that look like "old news". What do they say?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 12:34 AM   #112
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Could you please describe that test in detail (location of sub and listener, type of test signal, method of equalization, blind or sighted listening, etc.)?
Subs equalized outdoors for the same target response through the passband of 40-120 Hz using a DBX Driverack PA, Smaart Magnitude response, one a small bass reflex, the other a bandpass box.

I was the listener and builder of both cabinets.
I am sighted.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 01:22 AM   #113
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: philadelphia
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltersys View Post
Subs equalized outdoors for the same target response through the passband of 40-120 Hz using a DBX Driverack PA, Smaart Magnitude response, one a small bass reflex, the other a bandpass box.

I was the listener and builder of both cabinets.
I am sighted.
The exact curve of the frequency reponse particularly the roll off of the bottom end, that is the Q is what reflects the transient response...and to me seems very difficult to replicate by equalization in two different subs having different loading....unless very sophisticated means are used. Simmed or modelled FR curves might not be as close to real world radiated sound from the woofer.

Unless the Q and also the LF extension, after equalisation of the two differently loaded or not subs is exact, the subjective sound perception is bound to differ, due to differing Q of the system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 01:49 AM   #114
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
So you are saying that the Fourier transform is not valid? Because if it is then the two systems with identical FR with have identical transient response.
I never mentioned the Fourier transform being invalid, though perhaps you could elucidate your proposition that two different cabinet designs equalized for identical FR would have identical transient response.

One can equalize a Wurlitzer jukebox to have the same response as a sealed woofer, but they won't sound the same to my ears.
And obviously, a horn loaded woofer's transient would lag by the path length difference, though it's frequency response could easily be equalized the same as a sealed box.
Perhaps you are more sensitive to HOMs and I'm more sensitive to LF differences, to each his own .

Art
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 06:49 AM   #115
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
So you are saying that the Fourier transform is not valid? Because if it is then the two systems with identical FR with have identical transient response.
Two systems with very different impulse responses can have exactly the same magnitude response.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 06:54 AM   #116
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltersys View Post
Subs equalized outdoors for the same target response through the passband of 40-120 Hz using a DBX Driverack PA, Smaart Magnitude response, one a small bass reflex, the other a bandpass box.

I was the listener and builder of both cabinets.
I am sighted.
And then you put them in a room and listened A/B? Where did you place them in the room and where was the listening position (was it always exactly the same)? Did you also take in-room measurements at the listening position?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 07:10 AM   #117
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
I can't say that I have, but I do get JAES and I usually read papers that interest me, but I skip those that look like "old news". What do they say?
They look at low frequency reproduction not only from the perspective of magnitude response but they also look at the influence of modal decay. There seems to be a modal decay threshold that greatly influences the perceived quality.
They also looked at different sub configurations and how they perform. The systems reducing modal decay (like CABS) performed best.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 08:04 AM   #118
6.283 is offline 6.283  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Black Forest
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
They look at low frequency reproduction not only from the perspective of magnitude response but they also look at the influence of modal decay. There seems to be a modal decay threshold that greatly influences the perceived quality.
They also looked at different sub configurations and how they perform. The systems reducing modal decay (like CABS) performed best.
I find those papers pretty interesting. Unfortunately, they did not include any gradient woofer system in their tests like a dipole or cardio. Since they excite less modes and to a different degree, there is less energy in the room to decay to begin with. That doesn't change the decay properties of the room but the threshold is potentially reached faster.
Here is the link to the abstract:

AES E-Library Subjective Preference of Modal Control Methods in Listening Rooms
__________________
2Pi-online.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 08:15 AM   #119
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6.283 View Post
I find those papers pretty interesting. Unfortunately, they did not include any gradient woofer system in their tests like a dipole or cardio. Since they excite less modes and to a different degree, there is less energy in the room to decay to begin with. That doesn't change the decay properties of the room but the threshold is potentially reached faster.
I partly agree.

The problem with dipoles is their very, very low efficiency below Fequal. How to get 20Hz or even 10Hz at movie reference level (115dB SPL) out of a dipole?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2012, 08:27 AM   #120
6.283 is offline 6.283  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Black Forest
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
The problem with dipoles is their very, very low efficiency below Fequal. How to get 20Hz or even 10Hz at movie reference level (115dB SPL) out of a dipole?
No question, they just cannot deliver that. So take a cardio or add a CBs around the lowest room mode.
__________________
2Pi-online.de
  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
Omnipole, monopole, dipole and...nopole?? terry j Multi-Way 25 1st July 2007 03:28 AM
Getting Dipole bass out of a monopole subwoofer Hara Subwoofers 18 14th July 2006 12:55 AM
Dipole vs monopole, balls or not ... ? Jussi Multi-Way 11 4th May 2006 03:38 PM
DBX vs BSS vs 24/96 for Dipole/Monopole combo..... gavinson Multi-Way 0 29th November 2005 12:07 AM
Dipole speaker with monopole rear firing midbass? GuyPanico Multi-Way 4 12th November 2005 02:49 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:33 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