Yes, yes and yes. And specular reflection from the front wall, especially if it is less than a Meter behind, but even up to two Meters, is not good . . . I think diffusion is better than absorption for the front wall, but it's got to be one or the other.
Attention needs to be paid to the wall/ceiling junction as well, especially at the wall/wall/ceiling corners, which become point-source (re)radiators. I sometimes wonder how much of the perceived "height" of image comes from those reflections.
I just find it hard to believe that there's any significant difference between that "mismatch" with a dome and a small cone. Until you get into throat-loaded horns (and all the compression non-linearities that entails) all drivers (except for electrostatics and some magnetic drive planars) are "mismatched" to the air by orders of magnitude . . .
I'm not sure if effective diffusion is really practical in a small listening room:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
In/on-wall is probably more practical.
Indeed. That's why I don't think that anything omni is a good idea unless one wants realism "on the cheap".
Sure Markus, go and say that to the guys at MBL..
Good one
But I do believe that those guys at MBL did not target small rooms where you can "see" the corners/junctions acoustically. You need space for those things to breathe.
Inexpensive is good, unless one has money to burn on multiple speakers and digitally synthesized "ambience" that is no more (and often less) "realistic".
"The room" is pretty much a given (few speakers are weatherproof, and few of us want to do our listening outdoors), so why not "adjust" and use its properties to our advantage?
Sure Markus, go and say that to the guys at MBL..
Yeah, something went wrong with those guys
Good one
But I do believe that those guys at MBL did not target small rooms where you can "see" the corners/junctions acoustically. You need space for those things to breathe.
"Breathe" like in "concert hall"?
I've seen people burning a lot of money on dipoles too. How to get "realism" is a good question but unfortunately there isn't a good answer (yet).
Nice idea but given the differences in recording and mixing techniques I don't see how such a one size fits all approach can result in optimal sound reproduction. Furthermore, how exactly do we need to adjust a speaker in order to use the room's poperties to our advantage? Each time I'm trying to answer that question I do not see how a dipole speaker could be the answer.
For Bob Richards: Have you ever heard the "spoken word" recording "I am sitting in a room"?
I Am Sitting in a Room - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We "studied" this in a college class (Electronic Music) and it illustrates the increasing room resonances as each generation of recording is repeated. You don't have to listen to the whole thing
I Am Sitting in a Room - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
We "studied" this in a college class (Electronic Music) and it illustrates the increasing room resonances as each generation of recording is repeated. You don't have to listen to the whole thing
I did that too, back when I had Maggies with the "true ribbon" tweeter . . . they were just too bright otherwise. But there are better ways to address the negative effects of excessive high frequency reflections without losing the benefits of reflection in the mids . . .
A 2" FR lacks the surface area for the needed low end boost in a dipole, unless you have about 20 drivers on a side which will wosen comb filtering paticularly if not being low passed at 6-7 khz.
Last edited:
I "experienced" that effect just last night . . . I was walking on the UCB campus talking on my cell phone (I'm so ashamed
) and passed under a covered walkway (at the Music Building of all places) and the reflection of my voice from the roof made me stop . . . my wife could hear it even over the phone as I walked back and forth from under the "ceiling" . . .Why do you consider an Omni so inferior to a dipole ?! An omni like pluto sure sounds more realistic than simple boxed monopoles . And as per comparison between pluto and orion by SL himself, these two speakers sound quite similar. Actually pluto can sound like orion at a closer listening distance making omni preferrable to dipole in a small room.
Last edited:
Adjustable rear tweeter? But what's so desirable about very early, very loud front wall reflections?
I don't. I consider both inferior
They do sound more realistic than high(er) directivity speakers but they also sound like this:An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
...instead of that:
Where do you get "very early, very loud" ? ? ?
If the single "between the speakers" specular reflection is diffused or absorbed then the reflections are twice reflected, multidirectional and delayed by at least 15-20 milliseconds . . . and individual reflections are generally 10-12 dB down, often more. The resulting diffuse sound field is much more satisfying than multi-channel synthetic reverb from a couple more point source speakers.