Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Well I suppose the shallow vs. steep argument will just go on and on
Well I suppose the shallow vs. steep argument will just go on and on
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 7th December 2017, 07:24 PM   #331
Charles Darwin is offline Charles Darwin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Birmingham, UK
I'm not sure the 'I am there vs They are here' dichotomy actually exists, at least not for me.

The best stereo can provide in my experience is the audio equivalent to an open window into the recording space regardless if that space is a real hall or studio-crated.
I've never heard a stereo go beyond that regardless of them being omni directional or controlled dispersion. The only thing that changes is the amount of spatial detail from the recording venue (real or studio-produced) that is audible before it gets swamped by spatial information from the listening room.
To my ears controlled dispersion always wins out in that game. In practical terms that means to me that I can turn up controlled dispersion speakers to a higher volume than omnis before subtle spatial cues from the recording disappear in the mess reflected within my listening room.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2017, 07:53 PM   #332
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
gedlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
There are, no doubt, differences in preference, but I would not conclude that "unlike most of "ordinary listeners"" like what you like.
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2017, 08:06 PM   #333
youknowyou is offline youknowyou  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
youknowyou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
I think that Floyd, once again, makes a good point here. Sound absorption on a wall is anything but effective broadband. To me one must avoid the VER with source directivity as that is the only real solution to this problem.
well, I use 2x4 12 inch thick safe and sound. its absolutely effective.
__________________
Dad's speakers: Amphion one18/ Genelec 1037b/ ESL57/ JBL LSR32/ JBL 4430/ Tannoy RED 15 inch/
Mine: Tannoy Berkeley/Harbeth SHL5+

Last edited by youknowyou; 7th December 2017 at 08:09 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2017, 08:07 PM   #334
youknowyou is offline youknowyou  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
youknowyou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by gedlee View Post
Thanks, but you said "Toole studies are out to lunch in my experience" and I took offense at this as Floyd is by far the most knowledgeable person on this subject that there is. You just cannot write off his claims.

Even in his publications links above, he admits that VER "widen" and blur the image, although this does not seem to bother him. It bothers me. That doesn't make either of us wrong, just different.
SQ is greatly diminushed at the LP if the early reflections are not -15db within 20ms. isnt it a consensus in any studio in the world?

I really question his methodology in testing such things. how long are the test. did he made blind test removing and then inserting the side panels? how large are the rooms? ect
in small rooms, removing the side panels is by far a detriments.
__________________
Dad's speakers: Amphion one18/ Genelec 1037b/ ESL57/ JBL LSR32/ JBL 4430/ Tannoy RED 15 inch/
Mine: Tannoy Berkeley/Harbeth SHL5+

Last edited by youknowyou; 7th December 2017 at 08:16 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2017, 09:49 PM   #335
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
gedlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Consensus in "any studio" does not mean that it is fact, and in-fact, Toole's results would contradict your claim. That's the point. He is very clear about his methods and you would need to review and critique them directly before it was fair for you to claim that they are wrong.

I have read Floyd's and others procedures and my big complaint is that they usually do not use studio recordings and "imaging" as a quality parameter is not included. To me that biases the results, but beyond that his methods are impeccable.

I declined to participate in Dave Clark's blind subjective tests of Mr. Linkwitz speakers reported somewhere here at DIY (he wanted to compare the dipoles with my speakers) because only "field" recordings were to be used. To me this invalidated his tests and would bias the results towards the dipoles.
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th December 2017, 10:55 PM   #336
oivavoi is offline oivavoi  Norway
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by youknowyou View Post
SQ is greatly diminushed at the LP if the early reflections are not -15db within 20ms. isnt it a consensus in any studio in the world?

I really question his methodology in testing such things. how long are the test. did he made blind test removing and then inserting the side panels? how large are the rooms? ect
in small rooms, removing the side panels is by far a detriments.
Again, you are clearly not familiar with the things you are criticizing. Toole is basing his claim partly on his own experiments, but also to a significant degree on the work of others. Here’s what he writes on one of the few studies to date that explicitly investigated how reflections impact imaging:
Click the image to open in full size.

You are free to criticize that experiment, of course. Are the results valid for earlier reflections as well? Maybe not. But I really think people should stop rubbishing scientific work without knowing anything about what the experiments entailed.

Last edited by oivavoi; 7th December 2017 at 11:01 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2017, 12:34 AM   #337
mark100 is offline mark100  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by oivavoi View Post
Again, you are clearly not familiar with the things you are criticizing. Toole is basing his claim partly on his own experiments, but also to a significant degree on the work of others. Here’s what he writes on one of the few studies to date that explicitly investigated how reflections impact imaging:


You are free to criticize that experiment, of course. Are the results valid for earlier reflections as well? Maybe not. But I really think people should stop rubbishing scientific work without knowing anything about what the experiments entailed.
Thank you, good paper...

My first thoughts were, ok, everyone points to the same center under either test, but I wonder how wide is the perception of the "beam" they are pointing to ... does that differ....
...you know, like looking at the center of a laser vs a floodlight...I can point to the same spot for both....
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2017, 12:57 AM   #338
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
gedlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
oivavoi

Thanks - I had thought about making the last point in Toole's discussion, the one about how the reflections tend to be modifications not absorption. It's a very important point. This is what happens to spectacular reflections at grazing angles.

The rest remains fairly concrete, but still a little bit concerning. "Less than ideal forward firing directivity. Sounds like they were using not-great loudspeakers.
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2017, 03:32 AM   #339
youknowyou is offline youknowyou  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
youknowyou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by oivavoi View Post
Again, you are clearly not familiar with the things you are criticizing. <snip>
you seem to not understand something here.

the room where Toole base his conclusion is 24 feet wide. this is totally irrelevant when it comes to small room acoustic. and ive said from my first post in this thread that in small rooms, side walls are a source of early reflection.

in Toole room, the side walls are so far away from the LP that the early reflections may not be even considered early reflections. I fnd it very weird he doesn't show a waterfall plot of before and after treatment. he only states that the closer wall from say the right speaker, the early reflection arrive at 9ms, and the other 23 ms. he doesnt state how many db less within 9ms? why? a early reflection, by definition is a reflection that is not not say -10/-15db within 20ms AT THE LISTENING POSITION. those reflections are detrimental. in very small room, the early reflection may be only -5db within 20ms, that means the early reflection play along the source (speakers) almost as loud as the source.

in small room, which I specified in my first post, say a room of 12 x 14, you can be sure that the side walls reflections are not attenuated enough as they are so close to the LP and from the source (the speakers). You can also find in that study that Toole mention how damaging the ceiling and floor bounce is... why do you think? pretty evident.

if you have a 24 feet wide room, and my point was about small room, you may be able to get away without side wall treatment.

in studio, the rule is if your LP is about 3 or 4m (iirc) away from the back wall for example, the back wall is not considered a early reflection source anymore, and so no treatment is needed.

so the empty statement done in this thread like side wall reflection are beneficial is truly inadequate, a generalisation that is simply not true in all context.
__________________
Dad's speakers: Amphion one18/ Genelec 1037b/ ESL57/ JBL LSR32/ JBL 4430/ Tannoy RED 15 inch/
Mine: Tannoy Berkeley/Harbeth SHL5+

Last edited by youknowyou; 8th December 2017 at 03:48 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th December 2017, 03:33 AM   #340
boswald is offline boswald  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Well I suppose the shallow vs. steep argument will just go on and on
I also was bothered by that description. Why not say "we used two rather different speakers blah blah blah"? It is a bit like calling a bike a rather poor pickup truck. Doesn't make it a bad bike.

Last edited by boswald; 8th December 2017 at 03:51 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Well I suppose the shallow vs. steep argument will just go on and onHide 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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2 + 1, variable state bi-amping VS steep low pass subwoofer emosms Analog Line Level 0 16th February 2016 07:50 PM
Shallow mid-range enclosure inside a 3-way?? too shallow?? Kooshball Multi-Way 8 4th November 2012 12:40 AM
Suppose I should have introduced myself first. J_Starner Introductions 2 19th May 2006 02:41 PM
pc xo : steep crossover slopes advantages and drawbacks Nemophyle Multi-Way 2 14th September 2005 01:25 AM
Inexpensive 8" driver with steep top-end roll-off The Paulinator Multi-Way 1 6th June 2003 08:25 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2017 diyAudio
Wiki