New Linkwitz "LX521" speakers.. - Page 7 - 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 13th November 2012, 09:16 PM   #61
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
... The "old" Orion was not true dipole and you could also say the "new" Orion is not CD, that's why there is now an LX521, a true CD dipole up to 7khz+
Is it ??? Unfortunately SL does not publish the VERTICAL spectral data, only the horizontal ones on his site. Anyone has a guess why not?

Simon
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2012, 09:21 PM   #62
dewardh is offline dewardh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolo View Post
Dewardh, would you say much better than the Orion?
No, that would overstate the audible difference (if there is any). Worth noting is that ORION was criticized (when new) not just for the change in polar at the MT crossover, but also for dropping a 4th order crossover right in the middle of the midrange . . . something which was frowned on at the time. The LX521 drops the MM crossover a bit, and makes it 1st order . . . but I doubt that crossover audibility is what drove the change.

What LX521 does, compared to ORION with-rear-tweeter, is cure the tweeter "bloom", which may be important in a room with "live" sidewalls, and improve further ORION's already excellent imaging. I have only heard it in one room (at BurningAmp), and although I have heard ORION in that room as well it was a year ago, when the "W" frame woofer was new . . . audio memory only goes so far. I was much more impressed by LX521 . . . which I take to mean it's at least "some" better .
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2012, 09:42 PM   #63
diyAudio Member
 
grimberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewardh View Post
I was much more impressed by LX521 . . . .
I second that opinion. I had the chance to listen to the Orions in two different occasions and was impressed. The LX521 did more than that, as I kept going back to the room to listen to them again. It felt as if the room acoustics did not matter that much. I just have to build a pair for myself.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2012, 10:48 PM   #64
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewardh View Post

What LX521 does, compared to ORION with-rear-tweeter, is cure the tweeter "bloom", which may be important in a room with "live" sidewalls, and improve further ORION's already excellent imaging. I have only heard it in one room (at BurningAmp), and although I have heard ORION in that room as well it was a year ago, when the "W" frame woofer was new . . . audio memory only goes so far. I was much more impressed by LX521 . . . which I take to mean it's at least "some" better .
Hey Dewardh,

What you are saying is what the original Note was all about. What I would like to know is compared to the Orion would you say the sound was over all less aggressive or less edgy, more natural (hard to find the adjective I'm looking for). When I first lit up the Note, almost 3 years ago, it almost seemed, compared to the NaO II, that something was missing. If I listen to the NaO II for a while and then switch to the Note I still notice this. But extended listening seems to tell me nothing is missing. The Note is over all smoother, attracts less attention to itself. Would this description apply to the difference between the LX521 and the Orion, to the best of your recollection? I am really interested some independent observations of whether this is related to the improved polar response, as suspected, or something else. Since the LX521 is similar in concept it should create a similar effect, maybe more so since the Orion mid to tweeter x-o was 1/2 and octave lower than that of the NaO II. (and my room is not particularly live on top of it.)


Also, about the critisizm of the Orion with LR4 at 1.4k Hz, I don't think that is an issue. In any event, the 1st order with midrange connected with inverted polarity doesn't changethat much. The system phase response is pretty similar to a 4th order with drivers in phase, up to about 6 or 7k Hz.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 12:12 AM   #65
dewardh is offline dewardh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by john k... View Post
Also, about the critisizm of the Orion with LR4 at 1.4k Hz, I don't think that is an issue.
Neither do I, but I'm sure you recall that much was made of it "back then".

But to the real question . . . I just don't know. My "first impression" was that they sounded a little "forward", and one of the other ORION owners there drew a "what he heard" response curve that showed a bit of a midrange hump. After listening a bit more, and listening to the room (both with and without other speakers playing) what had seemed "forward" began to seem simply "present", and I stopped questioning it. Hard to say what that means, though . . . how much is adaptation, how much is expectation. I have the same experience with the band when we move from rehearsal to the various performance venues . . . initially I hear the hall (sometimes overwhelmingly so) but it rarely takes more than a few minutes to filter out that "sound", and then the orchestra sounds like itself again.

In past years, when it has been ORION on display, I could always hear that they were in a much more "live" room than were mine at home. With LX521 that was/is less apparent . . . their "room immunity" is greater than ORION. Their "imaging" is certainly better, more precise and more articulated (I have the same problem finding the right words) than ORION's was in that same (BurningAmp) room. There is much more variation in the "sound" among the recordings in my collection than there is between the two loudspeakers, and of course that also complicates comparison.

I just don't have enough experience with LX521 (and none in my own listening room) to say. I don't feel a compelling *need* to upgrade (crossgrade, whatever) . . . although I may, or may "mod" my ORION to be more "LX"like, but that's just, well, just 'cause . . .
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 02:53 AM   #66
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by dewardh View Post
Neither do I, but I'm sure you recall that much was made of it "back then".

But to the real question . . . I just don't know. My "first impression" was that they sounded a little "forward", and one of the other ORION owners there drew a "what he heard" response curve that showed a bit of a midrange hump. After listening a bit more, and listening to the room (both with and without other speakers playing) what had seemed "forward" began to seem simply "present", and I stopped questioning it. Hard to say what that means, though . . . how much is adaptation, how much is expectation. I have the same experience with the band when we move from rehearsal to the various performance venues . . . initially I hear the hall (sometimes overwhelmingly so) but it rarely takes more than a few minutes to filter out that "sound", and then the orchestra sounds like itself again.

In past years, when it has been ORION on display, I could always hear that they were in a much more "live" room than were mine at home. With LX521 that was/is less apparent . . . their "room immunity" is greater than ORION. Their "imaging" is certainly better, more precise and more articulated (I have the same problem finding the right words) than ORION's was in that same (BurningAmp) room. There is much more variation in the "sound" among the recordings in my collection than there is between the two loudspeakers, and of course that also complicates comparison.

I just don't have enough experience with LX521 (and none in my own listening room) to say. I don't feel a compelling *need* to upgrade (crossgrade, whatever) . . . although I may, or may "mod" my ORION to be more "LX"like, but that's just, well, just 'cause . . .

I quess we are hearing something different with regard to the Note and the LX521. I would not characterize any of my speaker as sounding forward when correctly place.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 04:40 AM   #67
dewardh is offline dewardh  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by john k... View Post
I would not characterize any of my speaker as sounding forward when correctly place.
No way to know how they would sound without hearing them in the same room at BurningAmp, with the same demo material used.

I would not call either ORION or LX521 "aggressive" or "edgy", or either of them "missing something" relative to the other. Nor would I say that either "attracts attention to itself", so I can't attribute more or less of that characteristic to either of them. Maybe, just maybe, in that room, LX521 might be called "more neutral" or "more accurate". I was never happy with the later ORION mods . . . I thought the "W" frame woofer and the associated crossover mods did more harm than good, and after trying the ASP changes (but not the new enclosure or drivers) I switched back. I think I can say that, compared to ORION, LX521 makes it easier to "hear through" to the original, but cannot put a finger on "why". The differences in tone and timbre are subtle, those in imaging and "auditory scene" a bit more pronounced.

Perhaps at some point you will be able to hear LX521 in a familiar-to-you venue, and that will help you with identifying and articulating the problems you hear in NaO and Note . . .
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 08:08 AM   #68
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by john k... View Post
Assuming the sources can be considered as point sources all that matters is the near filed response of each source, the position of the sources, the position of the listener, the source to listener transfer function for each, and how all this sums at the listening position.
Exactly. Welti's SFM uses this for response optimization. It varies parameters of the source and calculates the result at the listening position. At the end you simply have to choose the best parameter set.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 08:12 AM   #69
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Rambert View Post
Is it ??? Unfortunately SL does not publish the VERTICAL spectral data, only the horizontal ones on his site. Anyone has a guess why not?

Simon
Because it looks ugly? To be fair, vertical response looks ugly in most speakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2012, 08:30 AM   #70
lolo is offline lolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
lolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: somewhere by the border..
Quote:
Originally Posted by markus76 View Post
What if I would tell you that I have heard the Beolab 5 too and it was one of the worst listening experiences I've ever had. What does that mean? It means that there is much more to good sound reproduction than "dipole good, boxed speaker bad" or vice versa.

You get directivity by using a cardioid, not a dipole but does it really matter below 500Hz anyway? We're talking about acoustically small listening spaces, right?

How do you effectively absorb the rear wave? That's just not very practical.

The problem is that you're simply defending your belief in dipoles instead of trying to keep an open mind. In case you've missed it, I did a little subwoofer comparison lately and the dipole sub came out on top. So much for calling me biased.
Were the Beo5 setup like Many Lacarrubba does? I heard them in a huge hall, 1m distance. They sounded gorgeous. The same result would probably not happen in a small, untreated room.

Do you use Cardioids in the bass?

As said I do not absorb the rear wave. Impractical yes, impossible no.

Yes, I am defending dipoles and glad we are reaching the same conclusion.
Do you have a link for the sub comparison? I did miss it.
  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 09:23 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