New Linkwitz "LX521" speakers.. - Page 11 - 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 15th November 2012, 01:40 PM   #101
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
As a sidenote... Recording engineers. How many of them listen to the live event only through headphones? How many really attend concerts and get out of their dead walls? Why should they be right, and us wrong?
To answer you questions, I only use headphones for tracking and QC, not mixing. I also have a season subscription to the San Francisco symphony, and attend quite a few jazz concerts every year.

We should be right because we are paid to be right. If we are wrong, then we would not have any clients. We mix and master the recordings you hear, so we know what they sound like BEFORE that has been done.


Quote:
There is a chapter on Toole's book about reflexions. Engineers hate them, but listeners found them enhancing the experience. Do we work with sound or do we enjoy ourselves? If the goal is to reproduce what they had in mind mixing, all we need to do is get a pair of Genelec and a LEDE room. Is that the way to pure audio Nirvana?
When you are mixing, you don't need enhancements(reflections) - it hinders us from truely hearing what is on the file or tape. We need to hear the music clearly without a room tone to color it up.

I have not been in a single studio(and I have been in many) that used Genelecs are their primary monitoring system. I use Dunlavy's, ATC, and PMC's in my rooms. Now I do use Genelec's for creating tailored for HT film soundtracks.

Studio control rooms have gotten far more sophisticated acoustically than simple LEDE rooms. Keep in mind - a control room and your listening room have different functions, and different requirements.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2012, 01:42 PM   #102
Toaster is offline Toaster  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: South East England
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
if you are talking about CD only, maybe yes. Otherwise SL has played with various unpublished designs a while before that, the L-07 had rear tweeters and small mids to keep a good directivity back in the 80'.
The Audio Artistry line was dipole only til 1.5k, that was..15 years ago.
Sure, it's CD in this context that I'm referring to. I'm very aware of SL's designs, particularly the Audio Artistry range. I've been interested in dipoles for years and have the AES preprint of Celestion's work that led to the SL6000, for example. I think I have an AES preprint of SL's on dipoles too...
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2012, 01:56 PM   #103
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elias View Post
In addition you'll need big table in front of you below your nose to generate heavy midrange and treble comb filtering. And a swivel chair with wheels so your head is in constant movement and phantom image jumping all over the place.
All of the studios I have been in(including my own) have custom shaped acoustical panels surrounding the desk to obsorb those reflections.

When I am mixing, my head is not in constant movement - but my hands are.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2012, 02:36 PM   #104
lolo is offline lolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
lolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: somewhere by the border..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundtrackmixer View Post
We should be right because we are paid to be right. If we are wrong, then we would not have any clients. We mix and master the recordings you hear, so we know what they sound like BEFORE that has been done.

When you are mixing, you don't need enhancements(reflections) - it hinders us from truely hearing what is on the file or tape. We need to hear the music clearly without a room tone to color it up.
I was not saying you do a bad job, but we may well need a new paradigm.

As a pro, what would you recommend? Are you trully satisfied with the way music is usually presented?
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2012, 03:48 PM   #105
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
I was not saying you do a bad job, but we may well need a new paradigm.

As a pro, what would you recommend? Are you trully satisfied with the way music is usually presented?
What people don't understand is we have far less influence on the final mix than the producers and marketing people have. That new paradigm would be that we do have the say so on the final mix - because we have created it.

Instead of mixing to get the best sound period, we are mixing basically for low rez sources like MP3 and radio. We are getting raw recordings that are far to hot, and lack any dynamics. Once it is like this, there is nothing one can do to make the recording sound any better. I personally will not work on a recording that has squashed dynamics. I have also quit doing work for the major labels as well - as once you finish a mix, you never know what it will sound like after it is mastered.

There is some light though. With so many mixing and mastering guys refusing these compromised recordings, we are starting to see things change. I just hope this continues, because things could not get worse than it had been.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2012, 01:28 AM   #106
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: philadelphia
Default Passive wide baffle OB

Has anybody had a chance to compare Martin's passive wide baffle OB designs to the ones by SL and JohnK.

Without resorting to brute force equalization to compensate for the dipole rolloff, Martin's designs are quite an elegant solution to full range dipole sound up until about 3KHz ( that I believe can be radiated from the rear of 3-4" FR drivers, that Martin uses). Of course there is always an option to add a rear tweeter to Martin's OB designs, to further extend the dipole pattern.

Does the narrow panel OB have a distinct audible superiority over the wide baffle OB that has the immense advantage of no equalisation need and also passive crossover implementation is desired
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2012, 01:54 AM   #107
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
The wide baffle combined with small FR speaker would result in poor dispersion way below 1khz. My guess it would fall apart around 500-600hz.
__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2012, 07:35 AM   #108
lolo is offline lolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
lolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: somewhere by the border..
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundaatma View Post
Has anybody had a chance to compare Martin's passive wide baffle OB designs to the ones by SL and JohnK.
I have played with various wide baffles and cheap digital crossovers, one year of constant tweeking never brought me anywhere close to the Orions. It was fun though and an eye opener. once you switch to narrow baffles there is no way back..

Last edited by lolo; 16th November 2012 at 07:39 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2012, 08:05 AM   #109
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bucharest
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundaatma View Post

Does the narrow panel OB have a distinct audible superiority over the wide baffle OB that has the immense advantage of no equalisation need and also passive crossover implementation is desired
As already mentioned: if you're after well behaved dispersion up to higher up in frequency, then yes, a narrow baffle is better.

The "no equalisation needed and passive crossover" advantage of a wide baffle is a relative thing IMHO:

- if you use a relatively large midrange, say 7" (or an array, as I do), you can get away _without_ having to actively boost the lower midrange and still cross at 250-300Hz based on the natural roll-off of the midrange. You would only need a (passive) notch to equalize the dipole peak - easy to do and actually easier on a narrow baffle, because it happens at a higher frequency, thus no big bulky passive components needed (the lower you get, the more mH and uF you need).

- on the bass, you can use a passive circuit to boost the lower end - search for the T-Bass circuit of Graham Maynard here on the forum, it _really_ works great: I use one Eminence Alpha 15A per channel with no active boost down to around 40Hz in a shallow U-Frame.

- the one thing that might give you headache in a fully passive configuration, especially with a narrow baffle, is the sensitivity mismatch between bass and midrange, with the bass typically being lower. You can work around it by using more bass drivers, but I think at this point an active crossover is better (but not with brute force equalization). EDIT: or you use the hybrid crossover design approach of JohnK (passive crossover + active EQ to match sensitivities)

HTH
__________________
I don't believe in audio believings.

Last edited by bzfcocon; 16th November 2012 at 08:10 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2012, 11:03 AM   #110
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
I've done the big baffle OB system as well. 4 SLS woofers, SS 21W8554 mid, SB acoustic 29RDC tweeter. They are quite impressive, BIG image, totally different sounding that narrow baffle, "point source" dipole like SL's or my other speakers. Derived from my love of the Dayton Wright XG10 ELS, which I regret having ever sold.

Click the image to open in full size.

I really don't agree with the passive approach. The speaker above still requires considerable EQ in the bass region. It could be done passively but I feel that is just a waste of amp head room. Hybrid or all active makes more sense to me.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.

Last edited by john k...; 16th November 2012 at 11:07 AM.
  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
"Reverse" Linkwitz Transform Relaxin Analog Line Level 9 23rd August 2012 02:19 PM
What makes an amplifier "bright", "warm", or "neutral"? JohnS Solid State 51 13th December 2009 06:42 PM
70cm tall, 3 way, diy speakers based on 10"/4"/1" japanese ken brown drivers. facundonu Multi-Way 34 9th March 2009 04:59 AM
Linkwitz "Transform" Circuit Help Shike Solid State 10 5th April 2008 11:44 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:28 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