ZDL - Page 4 - 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 14th December 2010, 12:47 PM   #31
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Thanks Elias for this contribution. Dominik was in contact with the designer of the Naultilus at that time i think.
I agree that this 17msec "time gap" is hard to reach. Nevertheless i like the result much
that the Stoll speakers present.
I have already stated that the ZDL has no aspiration to be "the best" loudspeaker.
When you have not heard the Stoll speakers it is hard for me to describe how they sound.
I can only say that it is a pleasant experience so i will follow this road to the end.
What i will do with the "around diffraction" issue i can not say but i have started to experiment with damping in the back. This detail is not aproved by Dominik though. He prefers the minimalistic baffle option without damping in the back. In fact the tweeter he uses in his bigger monitor ( i try to find a picture ) has a bullet shaped extention that absorbes the backwave of the tweeter to a certain degree.
Thanks Elis also that you have reveiled the tweeter you measured.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2010, 12:53 PM   #32
Rudolf is online now Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
Yes the around diffraction is reality. ...
The tweeter I used with that wavelet graph was Peerless dome with 100mm round front plate.
Sorry Elias,
your "around diffraction" could be reality, yes. But isn't it only an assumption as long as you have not proved it by experiment? Can we see the same kind of measurement, but now with some means to effectively prevent "the wave travelling around the backside of the tweeter"?

Rudolf
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2010, 12:58 PM   #33
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Here is the tweeter that Stoll uses in the bigger monitor i am talking about.
I think the midrange dome is the same then in the smaller nearfield monitor.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Swans TN28.jpg (99.9 KB, 667 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th December 2010, 04:14 AM   #34
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sacramento
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Here is part one of the localisation experiments :
http://www.essex.ac.uk/csee/research...3D%20audio.pdf
Hello Joachim,
Your ZDL effort will be interesting to follow. I searched near field in DIYaudio and found your thread.
In an effort to take the headphones off my head and move the phantom image from between my ears and create an illusion of the performance on stage in front of me I have set up a pair of speakers at 1.84 meters from my seat. The phantom image and sound stage are amazing. I followed your procedure of adjusting the toe in to maximize the phantom image with better than expected results.
Thanks for your posts.
DT
All just for fun!
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th December 2010, 08:31 PM   #35
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Here is the tweeter that Stoll uses in the bigger monitor i am talking about.
I think the midrange dome is the same then in the smaller nearfield monitor.
Hi,

From Zaphaudio :

Quote:
Hi-Vi TN28 ($17) - Bonus points for a neat looking top mount design. Minus
points for energy storage at 8kHz. Tested in a typical configuration on top
of an enclosure. High F5 at 1.6kHz will melt your ears if crossed over too
low. Poor performer overall.
rgds, sreten.
__________________
There is nothing so practical as a really good theory - Ludwig Boltzmann
When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - Abraham Maslow
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2010, 08:01 AM   #36
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
I posted a wrong information.The bigger Monitor i have talked about here is not a Stoll product.
Second, sreten, the information you posted here is not very helpfull, it feels even depressing. You have not even measured the tweeter yourself and post the opinion of another person. The designer must have had good reasons to use it and it can behave totally different under conditions that are not similiar to the Zaph measurements.
Please do not put up more junk like this on this thread. It may even harm the reputation of the designer and without that you heard or measured that speaker ever.
On a more general issue i will not do any more comentary on the Stoll monitor and the bigger monitor. The only experience i have with those products is listening to them under familiar conditions and i liked what i heard. That experience insired me to do something similiar here. I have no idea about the working of both products so please let us discuss my work here. As i said, what i am doing here is not a straight copy. What i wanted to comunicate is, that the ZDL conzept is not my original idea.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2010, 11:16 AM   #37
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
I have now permission from Martina Schoener ( Garrard, Loricraft ) to tell you what the big midfield monitor is. It is a L`Art du Son No.5 and Martina had input concerning the tonal balance. There is also provission to tune the bass to the room.
That speaker was played on the Klangbilder 2009 in Vienna.
The tweeter is not the Swans although it looks similiar to me. My mistake.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2010, 09:24 PM   #38
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joachim Gerhard View Post
Second, sreten, the information you posted here is not very helpfull, it feels even depressing. You have not even measured the tweeter yourself and post the opinion of another person. The designer must have had good reasons to use it and it can behave totally different under conditions that are not similiar to the Zaph measurements.
Please do not put up more junk like this on this thread. It may even harm the reputation of the designer and without that you heard or measured that speaker ever.
.
Hi,

This is a classic example of shooting the messenger, if you don't like
what I posted its not my fault, its the best information I have available,
and if you want to denigrate my motives that is your problem not mine.

There is nothing depressing about real information. How you use that
information (available on Zaphs site, I would not have quoted Zaph
if the back up information was not there) depends on your usage.

If you want to call it "Junk" then what is this thread about ?

rgds, sreten.
__________________
There is nothing so practical as a really good theory - Ludwig Boltzmann
When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - Abraham Maslow
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2010, 10:12 PM   #39
diyAudio Member
 
Joachim Gerhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Hi Sreten !
I did several mistakes here. First i said the bigger monitor is a Stoll product. It is not.
It is a LŽArt du Son product. Then i said it is a Swans tweeter, it is not.
I apologise for that and i hope that you accept my apology.
I also regret the use of quite strong language. I simply felt cornered and that feeling was not pleasant. It was a spontaneous reaction.
What i stand too is that i only trust my own measurements. I simply do not know how the Zaph measurements have being done in detail.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2010, 11:11 PM   #40
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Hi,

Zaph's measurements are as good as it gets for internet information,
and far more reliable* than manufacturers published curves generally,
except for the cases he states the manufacturer has good specs.

A great source source for real CSD's, distortion, responses and parameters.

More than one person has noted stuff designed according to Zaphs
measurements sounds better than using their own measurements,
the obvious implication being some measurements are "better".

rgds, sreten.

Noting the caveat driver consistency can be a moving target.

*Certainly far more consistent for comparative analysis.

Zaphaudio.com , there are other test sites but its the best ....
__________________
There is nothing so practical as a really good theory - Ludwig Boltzmann
When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - Abraham Maslow

Last edited by sreten; 16th December 2010 at 11:14 PM.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:48 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