Controlled vs wide dispersion in a normal living room environment..

[Remlab]

After years of being frustrated with my loudspeaker/ living room interface, I have come to the conclusion that wide(or even moderately wide) dispersion loudspeakers are not a good thing in untreated "normal" living rooms. When I go to audio shows, I notice that the wide dispersion speakers almost always sound bad if the room is left untreated. The latest example was the otherwise amazing Revel salon 2 at the Newport show. I couldn't wait to get out of the room. All the wide dispersion speakers sounded that way unless they had sidewall treatment. On the other hand, a speaker like the Revel Salon 2 (Or a Radialstrahler, for that matter) in a correctly treated, dedicated, living room is almost unassailable. If you can't treat the room(As in wife?), do whatever else you can to bypass it( i.e., by controlling dispersion)..(By the way,this post is meant mainly for newbies)

[Melo theory]

Well, the problem with most speakers is that they are omni at low and mid-bass, then directional at mids and highs. This gives an unnatural presentation.
So, I think either they have to be completely directional, or completely omni.
Which is hard to do for either case.
I'm in the linkwitz camp myself. I believe in even power response.
If the FR is split into directional and omni, we will need baffle step correction and that messes up the power response. Then the reflections won't be copies of the original, only copies of the lower half of the spectrum.
If we keep an omni far enough from the boundaries, and sit closer to the nearfield, the reflections shouldn't muddy the original, only add spaciousness.

[Remlab]

Yes, bass is omnidirectional (except in a dipole figure of eight), But if you can adjust the bass level to equal the power response of the controlled high frequencies, you can make a bad situation(waf) a lot better. Sitting in the near field is what I had to do for many years. I really got tired of that limitation..
I think a power response that evenly and gradually slopes down, sounds best with a flat(On axis) measuring speaker, and a flat, even power response sounds best with a speaker who's on axis response gradually slopes down(The one that Linkwitz favors. 2db per decade slope.) This is in a normal living room situation of course. Both a flat on axis response and a flat power response is just way to much high frequency energy for a normal(untreated) living room to handle.

[Melo theory]

Yeah, dipoles are great. They avoid sidewall reflections while maintaining even power response.
I don't think it's possible to adjust bass and midbass to maintain even power response without compromising the direct FR.
I like a downward slope as well because it adds distance to the image.
As for the nearfield, I think it gets fatiguing after a while because I need to hear the room for a natural soundfield.
The reason for this is that I am accustomed to the sound of my room, so when a system presents a soundfield that differs from what I am accustomed too, it sounds foreign to me.

[markus76]

Originally Posted by Melo theory

Well, the problem with most speakers is that they are omni at low and mid-bass, then directional at mids and highs. This gives an unnatural presentation.
So, I think either they have to be completely directional, or completely omni.
Which is hard to do for either case.
I'm in the linkwitz camp myself. I believe in even power response.
If the FR is split into directional and omni, we will need baffle step correction and that messes up the power response. Then the reflections won't be copies of the original, only copies of the lower half of the spectrum.
If we keep an omni far enough from the boundaries, and sit closer to the nearfield, the reflections shouldn't muddy the original, only add spaciousness.

Two things: recordings are commonly mixed with speakers that are "omni at low and mid-bass, then directional at mids and highs". What happens when you play back such a recording over constant directivity speakers?
Secondly how far is "far enough from the boundaries"?

[Remlab]

The widest dispersion speakers on the market(other than radialstrahler types), compared to their own bass frequency wave propagation, are, relatively speaking, directional anyway.

[Saturnus]

Forgetting bipolar (or multi-polar) speakers are we?

[mondogenerator]

another ouroboros thread. How many of us are really able to listen in the far field anyway? For many particularly in the UK, listening room size dictates the listening field. With OB its even worse a scenario. So as interesting as the subject is, its simply out of the realms of possibility for quite a few folks. This would explain the classical use of wide pattern radiation and room treatment, which seems to fit better to the modest living spaces we have in the UK. (unless your a multimillionaire)

[Remlab]

Originally Posted by Saturnus

Forgetting bipolar (or multi-polar) speakers are we?

OK, I kind of(lazily)lumped those in with Radialstrahler types. It should have been the other way around, since they are more prevalent..

[Remlab]

"Farfield" is a relative term too, I guess. Here's my limited dispersion setup. Neo 10 dsp'd flat at 60", on axis(Of course). All monopole..