The great Floyd E Toole's extensive loudspeaker testing and research, "all point in the same direction: that wide-dispersion loudspeakers, used in rooms that allow for early lateral reflections, are preferred by listeners especially, but not exclusively, for recreational listening."
This was accomplished (Toole's assessment) with conventional loudspeakers with wide radiation patterns and smooth frequency magnitude response. The electrostatic dipoles in this test did not score well. A wide radiation pattern can be achieved with a simple box speaker; open baffle dipole, cardiod, and omni is not required.
Just about any well designed loudspeaker with a smooth even power response will sound good in a room with early reflections. Of course the AS will sound different, but suspension of disbelief is required in any regard.
It's really just a matter of preference: which fake acoustic simulation do you prefer? Do you prefer Timex vs Rolex? Do you prefer Malbec vs Shiraz? Do you prefer to spend several thousand dollars on a loudspeaker design to stroke your own ego (and influence your impressionable friends), or a few hundred dollars on a mass produced commercial product to achieve something subjectively that scores just as good, if not better, in a double blind listening test by audiophiles?
Or do you simply enjoy building stuff and tinkering for the sake of DIY? I sure do, but I'm not deluding myself into believing that I'll find the Stereo Holy Grail in my living room. And folks should be educated and not easily influenced by a Guru who has a significant financial interest in every new design they issue that will again be your "last speaker."
Last edited:
In practice, it seems to me that once the technical problems are worked out, imaging just falls in place naturally. I think Dough Self mentioned in one of his books, we try to keep what we do wrong to a minimum.
I remember Mr. Klippel warned me about a problem we had with our drivers after a scan, he said it sounded quite annoying; I tried a treatment that theoretically would solve the problem but never tested it in the lab while listening to it sounded not so different. Well, after fine tuning the amplifier, I removed the treatment and discovered how bad the situation was. Really shocked me.
good idea
modding , 'tuning', or 'voicing' can cause real big problems if done without knowing why or what cause the problem to begin with
change just one thing after that 'mod', and everything can go downhill very fast
and then you may not even know why
you just pull your hair and cry, 'what happened now'
and the desperate modding starts all over again
Relates to what statement exactly ?
I am not sure if these are all rhetorical questions now.
Anyway, I try to find the "solution" that best works for me in my room. If that works for other people as well, great.
And solution can be replaced 1:1 with illusion. That's what it is. We just try to convey it as perfect as possible.
If only.. Large electrostats have horrible off axis response and are usually not very flat on axis either. "Traditional" speakers do not disappear, at least this is my experience.
Yes, just me armchair pontificating. I am feeling very naive for purchasing both Orion ($150) and LX521 ($175) construction plans.
Anyone interested in purchasing my license(s)? I never got around to building the speakers, although I've auditioned Orion.
I have no doubt SL is serious and passionate about his art/craft. I have no doubt he's a brilliant Electrical Engineer. But, most of the claims SL makes about his open baffle dipoles are incredibly subjective (with a lot of hand waiving) and not backed up by rigorous independent testing. Most positive review originate from folks who've already Drank the Cool-Aid and made a significant financial and emotional investment.you are not serious are you..?
If I had known about this AES report I would have never considered purchasing the license(s).
That would be incredibly expensive (for me) not worth the time and investment. If a pair of Behringers can present a more convincing AS to 19 audiophiles why should I bother?
Last edited:
Well, than keep the plans, buy the Behringer, live with them for a while and go to a concert. Then, you can decide. I myself will also buy the Behringer, out of curiosity. Did you see John K comments on the test?
You can do even cheaper than the Behringer, choose two nice small FR driver, put them on a pipe firing up, listen in near field. It's shocking, worth max 150$. So what? Wouldn't throw the Orions based on that!
You can do even cheaper than the Behringer, choose two nice small FR driver, put them on a pipe firing up, listen in near field. It's shocking, worth max 150$. So what? Wouldn't throw the Orions based on that!
Last edited:
I would recommend measuring and equalizing the Behringers with a parametric equalizer, or you can use my FREE open-source FIR algorithm.
I'm never said the Orion/LX521 are bad speakers. Simply: I don't believe the hype (I've heard the Orion myself in person), particularly in light of the AES report. I'm also turned off by SL's grandiose and unqualified claims, his sale of construction plans that should be open-source hardware (free) if his good intentions are genuine. If SL had no financial interest at stake he would release his designs under a Create Commons license and publish real measurements. There would be no exclusive manufacturing and distribution deals (SEAS drivers and Madisound) But no, there's too much money at stake here.
Yes hilarious ...
Green , you seem bitter about something and it appears to have nothing to do with the sound of the orions ...
As to eq, if you have to throw away the speakers and start again, eq is not necessary when done right , it kills dynamics , your noise floor and you will always have poor image sizing and uneven growth.
Yes i heard its great when done digitally , my experiences have not proven so...
Green , you seem bitter about something and it appears to have nothing to do with the sound of the orions ...
As to eq, if you have to throw away the speakers and start again, eq is not necessary when done right , it kills dynamics , your noise floor and you will always have poor image sizing and uneven growth.
Yes i heard its great when done digitally , my experiences have not proven so...
Last edited:
About a decade ago I organized a shootout between various small studio monitors to update three commercial production facilities. The winner replaced combo Auratones and some forgotten model of large JBLs driven with Brystons. Other than those red Tannoys and a small Roland, the other competitors are now forgotten. Producers intimately familiar with the sound of their studios and the voices they worked with daily chose the Behringer Truth. It shocked me but the price was right and they were both self-powered and internally protected. As far as I know they're still in use two shifts a day.
Yes, I'm bitter at myself for being naive and not doing proper engineering due diligence (the AES report) before purchasing expensive construction plans. My own fault for falling prey to audiophile hyperbole.
This sums it up fairly well.
Ok, time to step off the soapbox. Enjoy your hobby.
Last edited:
As to eq, if you have to throw away the speakers and start again, eq is not necessary when done right , it kills dynamics , your noise floor and you will always have poor image sizing and uneven growth.
Yes i heard its great when done digitally , my experiences have not proven so...
wow, talk about one big generalization. I accept 'in your experience', after all I take you at your word.
Not even sure what uneven growth means but hey, the rest was enough to make it not worth while trying to work it out.
I agree with your fundamental point however, the less you need (due to proper design) the better of course. As we are talking the orions and the behringer (the active one I presume) then we are in the active realm?
Kills dynamics pfft. Depending on the unit, it's capabilities and the quality of the set up all taken as given then you tell me 'what' kills dynamics?
I'll tell you. When the signals/frequencies all arrive at different times, from the tweeter to the sub. That's what kills dynamics. That along with uneven intensities of those arriving signals.
Time align them (depends on the unit being used), match all the frequencies in time and amplitude. You'll have more dynamics than you ever thought possible.
Now fix the speaker room interface, eq in this case as it is the one under discussion, AND salt it to your own personal taste in it's presentation to you. No more of this 'plonk it down and you get what you get brother' in terms of perceived FR at the LP.
Lack of dynamics and poor imaging size....you could not have chosen phrases more opposite from the comments I get if you attempted to.
I don't think this is a fair assessment of the person
SL like many other can commercialise his product as he choose! And he'd been very generous with the design etc. The plans are priced very reasonably.
He never even patented LR crossover fwiw !
@Terry J,
Obvious we are exposed to different experiences, are you disputing or asking? not sure from your response.
Please name the active setup you are discussing, no need to throw out academic situations as to setup and alignment. As to the orions, they were poorly designed from first sight, i did not need to hear them, i did the due diligence on that one 25 years ago, but this is audio, so good to me , may not be good to you.
I can respect what others like, once it is not passed off as the only way ....
My perspective is that eq does not work, it may make a bad speaker sound acceptable, but it will never match a good speaker.Behringers are bad, Genilic's are OK, as pro monitors, yet like the venerable NS10's studios live by them because most who work their dont have ears, they work with what they know and what works for them, it's the difference between a guitar player and one taught to play the guitar..
regards,
Obvious we are exposed to different experiences, are you disputing or asking? not sure from your response.
Please name the active setup you are discussing, no need to throw out academic situations as to setup and alignment. As to the orions, they were poorly designed from first sight, i did not need to hear them, i did the due diligence on that one 25 years ago, but this is audio, so good to me , may not be good to you.
I can respect what others like, once it is not passed off as the only way ....
My perspective is that eq does not work, it may make a bad speaker sound acceptable, but it will never match a good speaker.Behringers are bad, Genilic's are OK, as pro monitors, yet like the venerable NS10's studios live by them because most who work their dont have ears, they work with what they know and what works for them, it's the difference between a guitar player and one taught to play the guitar..
regards,
Nothing personal here. I'm not even suggesting the designs are inadequate; I know the Orion/LX521 and Pluto (sitting in my living room) sound good. But, there is no audio Holy Grail, stereo is a compromise, and the Orion/LX521 are not the end-all-be-all as advertised.I don't think this is a fair assessment of the person
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan
Of course, and that validates my point in regard to commercial interests. Lets not hide behind the guise of benevolent benefactor to audio.
Much of the technical literature posted on SL's website, specifically in regard to the superiority of the open baffle dipole, is subjective hand-waiving. Last time I checked I didn't notice any objective Orion/LX521 measurements posted.
The AES Report contracts this statement.
SL said:
More subjective BS:
SL said:
...pure fluff.
I'm sure many naive audiophiles have fallen for this language. I sure did... but I'm thankful I did a little homeowork before dropping several thousand dollars on drivers and outdated analog crossovers and filters.
Well, for the $325 (two instruction manuals) I could have purchased the Behringer Truth monitors - or more cool MiniDSP gear.
Last edited: