Linkwitz Orions beaten by Behringer.... what!!? - Page 53 - 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 23rd February 2013, 02:32 PM   #521
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Maryland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willakan View Post
Paying $99 for a $15 discount on one paper? Forgive me if I don't see the economic appeal for most people.
So you'll gladly open your wallet to Siegfried Linkwitz, but you won't pay for an annual membership to the Audio Engineering Society (AES)?

I encourage you to join the AES. You might actually learn something useful about Audio Engineering.

What's with the Guru worship? Reading the posts here, one would think Siegfried Linkwitz is the Second Coming of Christ.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 02:39 PM   #522
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Greenm01. Keep it polite or do not post. This is a warning.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 03:15 PM   #523
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by scott wurcer View Post
Do the electronics actually degrade the measured performance? Not clear on what you mean. I too have friends that need cost effective recommendations, SY's Behringer DAC/DSP crossover sounded fine to me (I think it had Jan's mod though).
It did- the simple passive RC version.
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 03:16 PM   #524
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Maryland
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
It did- the simple passive RC version.
Please post the measurements, or provide a reference.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 03:21 PM   #525
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewardh View Post
There's rather more to it than that, I think. In the original ORION design SL targets constant power response more than constant directivity (which is a means, not an end). He wanted to avoid baffle step, and that led to dipole bass "all the way down". He already knew (from previous designs) that dipole bass sounds better (more natural) down to and well below the Schroder frequency (which is not itself a "fixed" number but depends on the listening room). He wanted to avoid a separate (sub) woofer, and the dipole bass unit integrates better with the rest of the speaker when co-located.
You should take the time to read the link I posted. Directivity and power response are basically one in the same. If you want to talk about power, he missed that equally. The dipole mid is down 4.8dB relative to a 4Pi monopole. With a front tweeter only the tweeter in the crossover region isn't 4Pi but it is more than 2Pi so power response goes from -4.8dB to some where between 0 and -3dB for the tweeter. So there is some where between a 1.8 to 4.8 dB discontinuity in the power response in the crossover region. Probably around 3dB in reality, due to the tweeter bloom. . And again, if power response was the issue a dipole woofer was the wrong choice. The mids operate in a 4Pi where as the woofer in 2Pi. Thus there is a 3dB loss in power at the bottom. A monopole woofer would be a better power match to a dipole mid based on power response. That dipole bass sound better is a stretch as well. Good bass can be obtained with any type of woofer provided the woofers are set up and positioned correctly. It's more that dipoles act like multiple sources with different positions. A pair of speaker with dipole woofers basically acts a 4 low frequency sources. I pointed all this stuff out years ago Tweeter integration, Power matching, but as usual it was taken as SL bashing and no body paid attention.

Quote:

At the MT transition the original incarnation handled the transition reasonably well from a power response perspective, with the tweeter's "bloom" to the sides balancing the loss of the dipole rear lobe.
No. Not really. See above.

Quote:

That worked surprisingly well in many rooms, and I regard the single tweeter ORION as the most successful of the ORION variants overall because of that. It is still a great sounding (one of the best you can own) speaker, and all the "open baffle" benefits are still there as well.
I would agree that the rear tweeter can be detrimental to power response, but it is essential to having a reasonable balance in the reflected sound from the wall behind the speaker. I found the original Orion to sound dull. Now adding a rear tweeter helps that but SL never did that right ether. He just slapped it on. It needs to be attenuated to have to correct balance. Do you want to know why? Don't ask. I'm not telling.

Quote:

What was not properly accounted for, and what became the impetus for the later (with rear tweeter) variants, and ultimately LX521, was the effect of the change of direction of first reflections on the perception of "localization" and "spaciousness" . . . what SL came to call the "Audio Scene".
Call it what you like, it was an obvious flaw from the get go and one I addressed with the original NaO, again only to be blown off because nobody bothered to listen, until SL decided it was necessary. Gees SL flip flops on this stuff more the the dummies in Washington. What a joke.

Quote:

Even many of us who challenged the "not dipole all the way up" character of the design did not, to my recollection, articulate the "why" of that objection particularly well. Adding the rear tweeter to ORION only partially corrected the directionality of the reflected field problem, and it brought back the power response problem that the original ORION had avoided, and raised equalization issues that led to unending, and never completely successful, "fixes".
As I pointed out above, the original Orion never came close to having the power response correct. And adding the rear tweeter, which as I recall was not supposed to be attenuated, just made the power worse. Ultimately that brought in the HP shelf which is another joke. The correct fix with the rear tweeter is to keep the on axis response flat and provide the proper attenuation of the rear tweeter to get the spectral balance of the entire sound field balanced which is how I approached it in the original NaO. There were still power problems, but overall it was superior to the Orion.

Quote:

Correcting that simply could not be accomplished in a 3-way design, and however soon and however badly SL wanted to change we can't know . . . what we do know (and he has acknowledged) is that the "legacy effect" delayed his switch to 4-way, and to some extent colored the design of LX521 (the hybrid crossover). My personal feeling is that it would have come much sooner had it not been for the "commercialization" of the ORION design and the contractual (and other) obligations that came with that.
Well we all know the 4-way design of NaO Note preceded SL's thinking with the LX521, and the reasoning for my taking that route was in the flaws of the Orion which I had pointed out, and my own failure to adequately correct them with the 3-way NaO II. That the Note demonstrated a 4-way design could accomplish the goal of more uniform power response/directivity probably gave SL the impetus to follow suite.

For the sake of completeness let be list the items I found lacking in the original Orion which have be addressed over the years.

1) Poor midrange/tweeter integration (power response), > in part due to the crossover being too low;

2) Lack of a rear tweeter, > spectral imbalance between front and rear radiation;

3) Lack of lower midrange impact, thin sounding,> incorrect midrange EQ;

4) Overly complex, brute force active crossover desig, > no circuit optimization.

It didn't take a lot of time to see these things. You just had to look at the design objectively, emphasis on design, not designer. You can spin them anyway you like. Make up what ever terminology you want. Over the last 10 years really only items 2 and 3 were addressed in the various updates to the Orion. That SL chose to use the same PCB for the LX521 rather than start with a truly clean sheet of paper demonstrates that it just another tweak. I just can not take SL seriously any more. Hell, I don't even take myself seriously anymore!
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 03:23 PM   #526
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenm01 View Post
Please post the measurements, or provide a reference.
I think Jan has it on his website- it originally appeared in AudioXpress.

www.linearaudio.nl
__________________
You might be screaming "No, no, no" and all they hear is "Who wants cake?" Let me tell you something: They all do. They all want cake.- Wilford Brimley
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 03:43 PM   #527
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Personal remarks removed. Any more will earn sin bin time for the offenders. Last warning.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 04:17 PM   #528
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Maryland
Default ABX Linkwitz Orion Behringer Slides

Ask and thou shalt receive! I posed the original PowerPoint presentation on my Google Drive, which includes polar plots for both Orion and Behringer.

I didn't attach the slides here, considering the presentation contains high resolution images that exceed the file size limit of this site.

Enjoy!
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 04:19 PM   #529
sumacSK is offline sumacSK  Slovakia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Prague
Send a message via ICQ to sumacSK
not sure if anyones interested, but here: Behringer B2031P (Stránka 1) - Reprosoustavy - Audioweb.cz you have some measurements of the passive version of behringers and also measurements after some cossover mods..
  Reply With Quote
Old 23rd February 2013, 04:44 PM   #530
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
The performing artist (the "real" one) doesn't have a preference. He just wants the listeners to feel happy.
The product manager has an agenda: He wants the "selling" sound.
The man at the mixing desk does, what he is comfortable with, or what is his "hallmark".
So where should the "good" sound come from???
A combination of all their input and end goals. Simple as that.
__________________
Soundtrackmixer - M.P.S.E/AES/SMPTE member
  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 03:20 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