Linkwitz Orions beaten by Behringer.... what!!? - Page 94 - 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 28th February 2013, 11:10 PM   #931
diyAudio Member
 
Melo theory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Gulfport fl.
The way I look at it is this. We are trying to create the illusion of a reconstructed soundfield out of two points in space. Now I am very much on the side of measurements and the exactness of scientific proof.....I know this to be true because whenever I read a review It takes everything I have in me to hold back the roll-eyes and sometimes rage!

Having said that, I do understand that psychoacoustics is involved, (how we perceive information) its because of this fact, it becomes more than science, it is now experience....hence opinions. I mean the IMP won folks. Are we afraid that all we have learned is for not? I am as much flabbergasted as the next guy but we have to talk about it. I'm so confused over the results that I think it's a conspiracy
I wish Gary would come back and discuss this.....but maybe he's afraid of too much questioning and negativity. It does get exhausting.
__________________
I LIKE YOU
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2013, 11:48 PM   #932
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
I think he has nothing to be embarrassed about. The technical approach will get you to the target if done correctly- but setting the target is just as much art as science. This isn't an amplifier we're talking about, with a single valued output for a single valued input, a completely cut and dried bit of engineering- the "accuracy" term is a lot dicier for transducers in rooms.

What should be accurate to what? Are you trying to reproduce the exact soundfield around the listener's head that existed at the microphones (it can't just be at the earholes for a head that's not clamped)? I don't believe that you can. The best that a set of transducers can provide in a room is an illusion, and there's a LOT of conflicting literature about what it takes to do that. Toole has one approach, Linkwitz has another, you have another, Ken Kantor has yet another... What you all share is enough grounding in rigorous engineering to accurately hit the targets you set. What you don't share is the same target, and I submit that NONE of your targets are "accurate," and all provide an excellent illusion in one way or another. The illusions differ, but illusions they all are, and absent a major change in the way soundfields are sampled, encoded, and reproduced, I don't see how anyone can reasonably speak of "accuracy" in the context of speakers in a room.
Excellent post and I glad I read it because I logged on to post something very similar. Focus on Illusion.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 12:02 AM   #933
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melo theory View Post
The way I look at it is this. We are trying to create the illusion of a reconstructed soundfield out of two points in space. Now I am very much on the side of measurements and the exactness of scientific proof.....I know this to be true because whenever I read a review It takes everything I have in me to hold back the roll-eyes and sometimes rage!

Having said that, I do understand that psychoacoustics is involved, (how we perceive information) its because of this fact, it becomes more than science, it is now experience....hence opinions. I mean the IMP won folks. Are we afraid that all we have learned is for not? I am as much flabbergasted as the next guy but we have to talk about it. I'm so confused over the results that I think it's a conspiracy
I wish Gary would come back and discuss this.....but maybe he's afraid of too much questioning and negativity. It does get exhausting.
I for one don't place much on the fact that the IMP won is a setup that was basically design for it to win. Maybe Earl can chime in here. I don't know how it works with the AES but, having presented numerous scientific papers at conferences and published even more in journals, my experience is that conference papers are not peer reviewed. Journal articles are. Conference papers which are deemed significant contribution are often selected for peer review and then appear in journals. Lesser significant papers fall by the way side.

So does the AES work the same way? If so, did the paper ever make it to journal status? And, does it really matter? And, after all the years, just what is it that we have learned, speakers that sound good sound good? After all, audio is like watching TV is a room lined with mirrors. Hey, I like that. I may have to add it to my signature.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 12:03 AM   #934
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Yes there is psychoacoustics involved, we understand a great of that, so its science not "illusion". Are there things left that avoid quantification - yes. Are they dominate factors? Hardly. The bottom line to me is that loose listening tests and expert opinions have more variance in them than what we don't know about the relationship between objective measures and subjective judgments. Add to that the book that I was talking about and its claim of an almost completely disconnected relationship between reality and personal judgment (i.e. statistically it has been shown that the more convinced someone is that they are right more likely they are to be wrong) and I simply have to throw out the subjective.

But you are all entitled to you opinions (as useless as they are).
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 12:18 AM   #935
diyAudio Member
 
Melo theory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Gulfport fl.
Earl, what do you link of SL's claim that even power response is most benificial to creating beleivable AS? (the reason he added a tweeter to the rear of the Orion)
This is not the case when using horns or waveguides....using a BSC filter.
__________________
I LIKE YOU
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 01:51 AM   #936
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melo theory View Post
Earl, what do you link of SL's claim that even power response is most benificial to creating beleivable AS? (the reason he added a tweeter to the rear of the Orion)
This is not the case when using horns or waveguides....using a BSC filter.
Adding a rear tweeter to a dipole does not make the power response more uniform. It actually make is worse. There are other reasons for adding the rear tweeter.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 02:04 AM   #937
diyAudio Member
 
Melo theory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Gulfport fl.
When I say power response I mean energizing the room evenly through the entire frequency spectrum like a true omni would do.

Let's just compare an omni to a box speaker in that regard. The box speaker will require BSC, that means more energy is present in lower frequencies as far as illuminating the room.
__________________
I LIKE YOU
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 02:55 AM   #938
bwaslo is offline bwaslo  United States
diyAudio Member
 
bwaslo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Cinciinati, OH
Something about the test being discussed has bugged me and I think I've finally realized why. Ignoring for the moment that the test was judged only on the ability to produce a believable "audio scene" (as has been mentioned already) -- what about the fact that it was based on playing only three tracks of music? If more tracks, of different types and recorded in different environments, were used, would the results have been different should the listeners have begun to (hypothetically, now!) recognize all the tracks always sounding similar on some of the speakers? Kind of like the criticism of "direct/reflecting" speakers --that they apply a fixed reverb/ambience effect, one that can't be turned off?

Last edited by bwaslo; 1st March 2013 at 03:03 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 03:14 AM   #939
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
... and I simply have to throw out the subjective.
You do, yes. You've stated that for years and it's what works for you and for most of your customers. That's great. It's your approach and your goals. It works for you.

But I do not have to throw out the subjective, nor does anyone else "have to." In the end, I have to like the way it sounds. That's the point of a home system, the final determinant. If it's an IMP or an Orion or an Abbey or a Bose, I have to like they way it sounds, it has to meet or exceed my expectations. Good engineering and design are greats way to get there, but they are not the reason to be of the speaker.

I really think that most of us have the same, or very similar, goals. We just get there by different paths.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 03:20 AM   #940
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwaslo View Post
-- what about the fact that it was based on playing only three tracks of music? If more tracks, of different types and recorded in different environments, were used, would the results have been different <snip>
A very good point. What do you think? You sat not far from the three judges at the Dayton speaker contest a few years back. I was obvious to us very quickly how a speaker sounded. Few changed character much with the second or third track (some did, tho).

If we had taken the highest scoring three and spent more time with them, would we have changed our minds? I really don't know.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  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 12:30 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