Right, lets see what community has to say. Does Focal use D'Appolito or is it just inspiration. (Sopra, Utopia etc)
- The reason I am asking is that technically or by definition its not a MTM arrangement since the upper bass unit (bellow the tweeter) is not a midrange unit. Both woofers have a cutoff frequency of 250 Hz (Sopra n2 and n3) while the mid works between 250-2200 Hz.
- Therefore, the "compression" of vertical dispersion from the mid is only suppressed from ceiling reflection but not floor reflection. This is more or less an inverted 2-way in that regard.
- By looking at the it, the tweeter is firing straight forward, the mid slightly slanted down and the bass or woofers slanted slightly upwards.
- If its not D'Appolito, then what, is it just a way to focus the midrange better and creating a better listening window which lifts up or reveal the details better ?
Oneminde
- The reason I am asking is that technically or by definition its not a MTM arrangement since the upper bass unit (bellow the tweeter) is not a midrange unit. Both woofers have a cutoff frequency of 250 Hz (Sopra n2 and n3) while the mid works between 250-2200 Hz.
- Therefore, the "compression" of vertical dispersion from the mid is only suppressed from ceiling reflection but not floor reflection. This is more or less an inverted 2-way in that regard.
- By looking at the it, the tweeter is firing straight forward, the mid slightly slanted down and the bass or woofers slanted slightly upwards.
- If its not D'Appolito, then what, is it just a way to focus the midrange better and creating a better listening window which lifts up or reveal the details better ?
Oneminde
Last edited:
I have sopras as well as some of the first focal utopias to use BE tweeters. The output is really bad in lower listening positions. Low positions are weak in the midbass, lethargic in the mids, and very bright overall. Not unlike focal solo6 Be sound, which I have as well.
Standing up, the utopia sounds great.
Honestly I have no idea about the design philosophy, but I do know that I love the way it sounds in long rooms with low ceilings, but not at all in traditional listening rooms.
Since my utopias were released, many changes have been made, but the tweeter and midrange are actually the same part numbers (I have taken mine apart, compared to my Sopras).
YMMV
If you have Sopras, you should swap V-caps into the tweeter crossover, no question. Really fixes the lazy imaging. Sound goes from sappy to snappy... way more content above 10kHz. Stock crossover sweeps just fine, but sees a ton of compression in the highs underload.
Standing up, the utopia sounds great.
Honestly I have no idea about the design philosophy, but I do know that I love the way it sounds in long rooms with low ceilings, but not at all in traditional listening rooms.
Since my utopias were released, many changes have been made, but the tweeter and midrange are actually the same part numbers (I have taken mine apart, compared to my Sopras).
YMMV
If you have Sopras, you should swap V-caps into the tweeter crossover, no question. Really fixes the lazy imaging. Sound goes from sappy to snappy... way more content above 10kHz. Stock crossover sweeps just fine, but sees a ton of compression in the highs underload.
Is the consensus then that the philosophy has merit but component wise there are benefits at looking at other products ?
I did listen to one of their Utopia last year and did not like what I heard. They sounded weak, flat and without air. Unlike the Marten Coltrain Tenor 2 which use Accuton drivers which HAS details, holographic sound stage and details. But that is drivers not the driver position and overall geometric or acoustic shape which is the topic
I did listen to one of their Utopia last year and did not like what I heard. They sounded weak, flat and without air. Unlike the Marten Coltrain Tenor 2 which use Accuton drivers which HAS details, holographic sound stage and details. But that is drivers not the driver position and overall geometric or acoustic shape which is the topic
You are absolutely right in that the unit above the tweeter is the midrange and the one's bellow are woofers. Besides this, would it be a correct observation that they are blending a TMB/TMW with a MTM in that they want to control the vertical dispersion to the sealing while maintaining normal dispersion to the floor, as in creating a more focused listening window ?
No. The listening window is not focused at all. The ceiling reflections from these speakers are an important part of the sound IMO.
So then what, what is the reasoning behind this ½ way method, sort of blending all sorts of solutions.
1. What I meant by ½ was a blend of TM and MTM.
2. Yeah, I figure that it tames the high frequency dispersion - making it sound more balanced between the mid and high. But the direct effect by that you change the "angle of attack" regarding the lobing. But how good or bad the lobing is, is also down to crossover topology
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.