Linkwitz Orions beaten by Behringer.... what!!? - Page 200 - 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 19th March 2013, 01:35 AM   #1991
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottG View Post
..about 20 minutes for me.

I didn't have a problem with the content of your post, but the format (with the spliced-up quotes) read more like a p!ssing match.

Next time consider just one quote (or maybe two).
Sometimes a p!ssing contest can just be an honest disagreement of thoughts and facts. I guess it depends on your perspective.
__________________
Soundtrackmixer - M.P.S.E/AES/SMPTE member
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 04:35 AM   #1992
dewardh is offline dewardh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundtrackmixer View Post
Just like Hollywood is 3D' ing everything, you can bet they will use Atmos for a "A" list vintage classic title.
Oh great . . . "colorized" sound for the "colorized" movies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 07:30 AM   #1993
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by j.michael droke View Post
Hi there: Found a picture of SRS's version of"OBA". Google-up Orange County Register. They posted a photo of SRS dmonistration system, sems to use 6 computer sized front speakers and 4 pole mounted boxes about .75cf mid room. Great WAF! Looks like this is another market driven hitec gambit. ...regards, Michael
Object based audio is independent of the renderer. Could be a mono speaker in front of you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 07:45 AM   #1994
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundtrackmixer View Post
Not true. The system can be used with any soundtrack from any period. Just like Hollywood is 3D' ing everything, you can bet they will use Atmos for a "A" list vintage classic title.
They will probably do that but honestly it does a disservice to object based audio if they don't do a complete remix or use sounds that can't be handled as objects.

The inclusion of "beds" in Atmos is also a very bad idea in my opinion. It's there for practical reasons but as much as it helps maintaining old workflows, it hinders or slows down adoption of new workflows that would make use of the new possibilities, e.g. accurate reverberation simulation with reflections coming from multiple angles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 08:31 AM   #1995
lolo is offline lolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
lolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: somewhere by the border..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewardh View Post
Oh great . . . "colorized" sound for the "colorized" movies.
Yep.. how funny it is to see how poor an artistic content can bear these new technologies. It's a sad shift from a medium amongst others to... a mean in itself!
As a result, I am not going to the theatre anymore, maybe five times a year total. I used to spend my days in them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 09:42 AM   #1996
Elias is offline Elias  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Where you live
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Ambiophonics overcomes gross HRTF errors?? Instead of delivering everything through 30 it delivers everything through 0. Is that less erroneous?
That is not actually right, the recommended speaker angle is not 0deg but something between 5-15deg.

And yes it is less erroneous. If you take propability distribution of the intended image span angle of stereo recordings, it is more likely the image is within, say, +-10deg than +-30deg. Then it can be said HRTF errors are statistically reduced.


Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
Are you sure stereo itself doesn't sound artificial because of low accuracy of the wave field and inability to deliver pivoting cues? Did you try listening under anechoic conditions, e.g. outside?
Stereo triangle ITD errors are related to erroneous wavefield. Head movements make them more apparent, but they exist also with fixed head. The room is a dramatic ITD error contributor as well.


- Elias
__________________
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 19th March 2013, 10:07 AM   #1997
Elias is offline Elias  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Where you live
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
And don't tell me that mono is better.
Mono is better than stereo triangle in some aspects The wavefront of a single mono speaker is more natural than the wavefront of a stereo triangle, because the velocity vector of propagating wave is unity as in a real sound source.
__________________
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 19th March 2013, 11:11 AM   #1998
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
Mono is better than stereo triangle in some aspects The wavefront of a single mono speaker is more natural than the wavefront of a stereo triangle ...
I understand that. But "better than stereo triangle in some aspects" doesn't make it better on the whole. I'd rather listen to something not perfect while waiting for the next audio revolution.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 11:21 AM   #1999
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
That is not actually right, the recommended speaker angle is not 0deg but something between 5-15deg.

And yes it is less erroneous. If you take propability distribution of the intended image span angle of stereo recordings, it is more likely the image is within, say, +-10deg than +-30deg. Then it can be said HRTF errors are statistically reduced.
Don't know about the statistical distribution of phantom sources but is less HRTF deviation perceptually less severe?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
Stereo triangle ITD errors are related to erroneous wavefield. Head movements make them more apparent, but they exist also with fixed head. The room is a dramatic ITD error contributor as well.
Given the fact that a) virtually no binaural recordings exist and b) the majority of all recordings work with interchannel level differences that are greater than interaural level differences of natural sounds, is it sensible to look at stereo as a binaural reproduction technique at all?
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th March 2013, 01:26 PM   #2000
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Oh come on Elias, velocity vector of propagating wavefront is speed of sound. Sound field formation is wave superposition.

No standards in stereo: Recordings are mixed/monitored with approximate equilateral triangle, and then listened to with remote headphones using a partition, and all sounds better? Just a variation on a theme of how brain responds to two sounds correlated in time and disjointed in space. Really, for everyday listening?



5.x 7.x 9.x sound: Each speaker pair forms phantom image for correlated signals. If one poor phantom image doesn't work well, a bunch of them will?



Imaging performance works best with point source. The degree to which radiating wavefront of speaker projects back to single point for all frequencies, the better the speaker's imaging performance will be. Theory of omnidirectional speaker obviously seeks this goal. Dipole and cardioid in theory also project to point. In theory, some waveguides do, many don't.

Speaker transducers with excited break up modes project back to a distribution of sources that sum to point that is state driven, and thus bounces about in space.

Ripple in frequency response, even in anechoic chamber, with small shifts in microphone demonstrate deviation from point source behavior, and is good starting place for assessing point source character of drivers/speakers.

Clearly the IMP presented more point like source than Behringer or Orion. Test wasn't about timbrel accuracy. Test was about detail of phantom image.

IMP is crappy box, but shading of drivers, and identical drivers gives it better point source characteristics.

Baffle width of Orion, midrange size, crossover point to tweeter, and spacing to tweeter limit phantom image detail. At distances where angular aperture becomes narrow, direct/reflected ratio is poor and room sound buries low level spacial detail in recording.

Behringer has narrower baffle, but crappy box.


Surprising results? Not when the physics are understood.
  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
WTB Linkwitz Orions jrling Swap Meet 0 13th March 2010 05:26 PM
Finally finished my orions srfranci Multi-Way 5 24th July 2009 11:29 AM
My week with the Orions, or 'why do we bother' cuibono Multi-Way 56 26th October 2008 12:51 AM
Can the Dynaudio C1 be beaten by a DIY design obiwan Multi-Way 16 22nd July 2007 10:19 AM
How hard to clone the Orions? Chaucer Multi-Way 46 8th July 2005 02:01 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:00 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