New Linkwitz "LX521" speakers.. - Page 14 - 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 17th November 2012, 12:47 AM   #131
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottG View Post
(..and now JohnK is going all "active", or at least providing that opportunity, which probably wasn't something he had originally envisioned.)

Can't let that slide by without a comment. Please recall that the NaO II has been offered in both hybrid and fully active since 2006. It's not a "now" thing. The "NOW" thing is that I'm going digital. And that's not so much for performance but cost. Plus, digital makes it easy to issue update (even though I generally don't issue them very frequently). I still stand by my position that most of the hype about fully active is just that. There are pluses and minuses on both sides. Choose your poison!
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.

Last edited by john k...; 17th November 2012 at 12:49 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 12:48 AM   #132
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melo theory View Post
Well, the BG neo3 planar dipole tweeter has been used for a long time on these baffleless speakers. Which I think is a better solution anyway.
Having been there and done that I would disagree.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 12:59 AM   #133
ScottG is offline ScottG  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by john k... View Post
Can't let that slide by without a comment. Please recall that the NaO II has been offered in both hybrid and fully active since 2006.
..Doh, didn't know that.

But it was "a thing", no?


I think it's only been fairly recent with a much larger array of good inexpensive solid-state amp kits and cheap ready-made class D amps that active becomes more of a factor with respect to value (and as a result - actual use). 6 years ago.. not so much. It would be interesting to see SL's base sales/purchaser numbers (over the past 12 years).
__________________
perspective is everything

Last edited by ScottG; 17th November 2012 at 01:04 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 01:44 AM   #134
diyAudio Member
 
Lynn Olson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Northern Colorado
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottG View Post


He has protested multiple ideas (though not in any major respect), and yet (in several instances) later on incorporated them in one fashion or another.

Oddly the one constant isn't what he is often known for.

Most people think "dipoles" with SL. The real constant isn't that at all - rather "active" crossover. I don't think that will ever change.

(..and now JohnK is going all "active", or at least providing that opportunity, which probably wasn't something he had originally envisioned.)

-got's to be flexible.



I think the "hot topic" aspect of this build is a *potential* shift from the wider-baffle Orion format to this new narrow baffle format. Perceptually it might leave those who have invested heavily in the Orion design saying: "what?" (..I don't think it will happen with this design, but alterations to it down the road may well be declared "better" than the Orion.)

On top of that there is the oddity of the top baffle shape (..hmm, wonder if Canadians will go all the way with it and just cut-out a Maple Leaf?)
I first met SL at the Las Vegas CES show in the early Nineties, back when he was the designer of the Beethovens. I was surprised the Beethoven's had a sonic balance similar to my loudspeakers, with balance that favored vocal and orchestral music. We had fun discussing the differences in our approaches - he's more comfortable with complex loudspeakers than I am, and gives less weight to arcane audiophile issues like capacitor and amplifier coloration.

His designs have evolved in the direction of more complexity since the Beethoven days - stacks of amplifiers, and pretty heavy equalization in the active crossover unit that the dipoles require. I've gone in the other direction - not as far as the full-range driver crowd, but certainly chasing down every part in the passive crossover, signal path in the amplifier, and the I/V converter in the DAC.

Compared to the Beethoven's, which had a pretty lush, warm sound, SL's newer speakers are drier (tonally) but also more spacious sounding (as you would expect from dipoles). But I can hear the op-amps in the crossover/EQ unit and the solid-state amps and that's not for me.

But the subjective spectral balance is still very much SL, which is a lot more musical than the edgy, hard sound that dominates the commercial high-end business. The real dividing line is how you feel about transistor amps and op-amps; if you're cool with them, SL's your man.

I haven't heard John K's speakers, so I have no idea how they're balanced, but there's certainly plenty of good engineering there.

Last edited by Lynn Olson; 17th November 2012 at 01:56 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 03:17 AM   #135
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: philadelphia
Quote:
Originally Posted by gainphile View Post
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.
How extended is the rear radiation of the mid range drivers used in dipoles by SL and JohnK ? I am very hesitant to believe that the rear radiation from the two midrange drivers of the LX521 is uniform as high as 7K, before the 2 tweeters kick in.

The magnets on the rear of the drivers would never allow the higher frequencies to be radiated at the same magnitude leave alone the polar pattern as the front side radiation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 07:52 AM   #136
lolo is offline lolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
lolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: somewhere by the border..
Sure, but it's very, very difficult to get true dipole behaviour above 3-4k. You get sort of a "dipolar" response but not true figure of eight. You would need an incredibly small tweeter back to back on a really narrow baffle to achieve that. But.. at the end of the day the rear wave is meant to be diffracted anyway. As long as you get some sort of cancelation at 90..

I'd rather have a true dipole in the low highs, this you can probably clearly hear, and the LX probably achieve that compared to the Orions. One interesting thing would be to compare a 45 toed in Orion next to an LX521. Despite all qualities the Orions have, I myself never been totally happy with the tweeter going so low, especially after hearing the B&G RD-75.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 08:24 AM   #137
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
SL and JK's arguments for going 4 way with a narrow baffle are very persuasive. But I was wondering if the theory holds true when using true dipole planar mids and tweeters like the BG Neo10 and Neo3 (or other ribbonesque tweeter)? Assume the baffle narrows appropriately.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 08:29 AM   #138
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
lolo, I completely concur.
As far as I understand it, the "problem" of the Orion never has been the figure 8 per se, but the bloom of the tweeter radiation pattern. And that mainly regarding the frontal hemisphere.
So what we should be adressing in the first place is not a front-back symmetry, but constant directivity in the front of the loudspeaker.
Since directivity can't be kept constant ad infinitum, we should make sure that it at least increases with frequency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
Sure, but it's very, very difficult to get true dipole behaviour above 3-4k. You get sort of a "dipolar" response but not true figure of eight. You would need an incredibly small tweeter back to back on a really narrow baffle to achieve that. But.. at the end of the day the rear wave is meant to be diffracted anyway. As long as you get some sort of cancelation at 90..
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 08:37 AM   #139
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfdoddsy View Post
SL and JK's arguments for going 4 way with a narrow baffle are very persuasive. But I was wondering if the theory holds true when using true dipole planar mids and tweeters ...
There is no "theory" demanding 4 ways. If we had a 1" device, which could move litres of air, a one way dipole would be no problem. It is just the technical limitations of cone/dome drivers which demands a 4 way for "perfect" dipoles.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2012, 09:14 AM   #140
Elias is offline Elias  Finland
diyAudio Member
 
Elias's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Where you live
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolf View Post
Since directivity can't be kept constant ad infinitum, we should make sure that it at least increases with frequency.
I object this point !

There is no psychoacoustic requirement for increasing directivity with freq for sound reproduction in a small room. I think it should do just the opposite, smoothly decrease with freq. In other words, the radiation pattern should get wider with incresing freq.


- Elias
__________________
Liberate yourself from the illusion of two speaker stereo triangle
Dipole Bass vs Monopole Bass Stereophonic Sound from a Single Loudspeaker 3 Speaker Linear Stereo Matrix Wavelets
  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 09:30 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