Bg Neo 10 and Neo 8

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
Greg
In my acoustically bright room, the controlled dispersion of the Neo 10 run as a mid tweet works quite well. Like I mentioned before though, the dispersion of the neo 10 is much better than that of even the smallest electrostatic device. But it still definitely needs to be listened to on axis..
Seth
 
Last edited:
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
Remlab said:
Greg
In my acoustically bright room, the controlled dispersion of the Neo 10 run as a mid tweet works quite well. Like I mentioned before though, the dispersion of the neo 10 is much better than that of even the smallest electrostatic device. But it still definitely needs to be listened to on axis..
Seth
Click to expand...

"Dispersion" white paper by Roger Sanders..
Dispersion White Paper
 
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
studiotech said:
Meh....

Some of it is good and some is marketing to sell his style of speaker. To say that his planar dipole only sends ONE sound to the rear and then it bounces around enough to sufficiently attenuate it that ours brains ignore it is BS.

Greg
Click to expand...
In regards to that particular statement, I totally agree with you. Oversimplifying a concept to get the message across to laymen can cause a lot of confusion( It can also help sell your product..)..
 
studiotech

studiotech

Member
Joined 2004
Wishing the Neo8S was out last year. I would have used 4 per baffle and put them in a ring AROUND the Raal kind of like a virtual coax. Just got a pair to test. Much improved low range over the regular Neo8. I will be using them in a 3 way, fully active studio monitor project this summer. Raal 70-20XR, Neo8S and Scan Speak 10".

Greg
 
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
After listening to the Neo 10's as a mid tweet for a while, I have come to the conclusion (through deduction) that lower crossover points introduce audible intermodulation distortions(This is probably what you were hearing, Greg) to the upper frequencies. I found that the higher you raise the crossover point, the less the upper frequencies are affected by this mildly "zingy" artifact. In fact, with the higher crossover point, the zingyness totally disappears, with the highs being incredibly pure sounding. So ultimately the Neo 10 can be used either as a "controlled dispersion" mid tweet crossed over at above 600hz, or in a more conventional fashion from 300hz to around 3.5khz but no higher..
Here is an excellent description of TIM in loudspeakers..
http://www.neumann-kh-line.com/neum...9025D8C4F126AD8C12578B2003A71E9?Open&term=TIM
Seth
 
Last edited:
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
Remlab said:
After listening to the Neo 10's as a mid tweet for a while, I have come to the conclusion (through deduction) that lower crossover points introduce audible intermodulation distortions(This is probably what you were hearing, Greg) to the upper frequencies. I found that the higher you raise the crossover point, the less the upper frequencies are affected by this mildly "zingy" artifact. In fact, with the higher crossover point, the zingyness totally disappears, with the highs being incredibly pure sounding. So ultimately the Neo 10 can be used either as a "controlled dispersion" mid tweet crossed over at above 600hz, or in a more conventional fashion from 300hz to around 3.5khz but no higher..
Here is an excellent description of TIM in loudspeakers..
Intermodulation Distortion
Seth
Click to expand...
I hooked my 50 watt tube amplifier up to the Neo 10's just to make sure that it wasn't the solid state amplifier causing the "Zingyness" problem in the upper frequencies. I'm going to listen again to them for a few days with a 300hz high pass filter to rule that possibility out. They probably should have been hooked up to the tube amp all along. This amp should love the Neo 10's purely resistive 8 ohm impedance. Let's see what happens..
 
Last edited:
S

skorpion

Member
Joined 2004
If you look at Zaph's Neo10 test and Proraum's Neo8S frequency measurement (link in my earlier post) they are surprisingly similar.

Given your statement about the Neo10's bass capability, Greg, wouldn't it be possible to cross a parallel pair of Neo8S at 300 Hz, sharp at 48 db/oct. I would think so.

/Erling
 
S

skorpion

Member
Joined 2004
I certainly suspect there would be some resonance ringing in the U cabinet. But the main quarterwave resonance I suspect would lie somewhere around 150 Hz judging U-length from pictures to be say 20 inches. That would be avoided by crossing at 325 Hz.

Referring back to my own post above about crossing Neo8. I am probably wrong. Information says that the radiating surface of a Neo10 is about 5 times as great as the Neo8s's. So I suppose that the Neo10 is markably more fit in the lower ranges.

/Erling
 
R

Remlab

Member
Joined 2011
skorpion said:
I certainly suspect there would be some resonance ringing in the U cabinet. But the main quarterwave resonance I suspect would lie somewhere around 150 Hz judging U-length from pictures to be say 20 inches. That would be avoided by crossing at 325 Hz.

Referring back to my own post above about crossing Neo8. I am probably wrong. Information says that the radiating surface of a Neo10 is about 5 times as great as the Neo8s's. So I suppose that the Neo10 is markably more fit in the lower ranges.

/Erling
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this situation, don't you also have resonances at 1/2 , 3/4 , 1 , 5/4, 3/2 , 7/4 , 2 and so on?
 
S

skorpion

Member
Joined 2004
There will certainly be resonances but amplitude-wise the first quarter-wave resonance (peak and dip) I think will dominate over the others to a large extent. I also think the the U- (or we could say TL-) excitation will be dependent on speaker parameters as well as pure dimensional measures.

/Erling
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom