Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Planars & Exotics

Planars & Exotics ESL's, planars, and alternative technologies

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 April 2012, 12:33 AM   #131
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
I love to experiment. So in the interest of the Neo 10, I've gone back to using it with the help of dsp as a mid tweet in a sealed cabinet (The same thing can be done for open baffle). Right now, I have a ruler flat(And I mean ruler flat!) response from 300 hz to 18khz on axis at 1m. There are good and bad ways of getting a flat response using DSP, and I feel that I've found the best way. A way that puts zero stress on the driver. The sound is totally astonishing to say the least! Hypnotizing..Very Quad ESL like. Before anyone questions the practicality of what I am doing, if you compare the Neo 10 to a typical electrostatic mid tweet element, the radiating area is extremely small and acts pretty much like a point source. Very much like the central element of a Quad ESL, which is what I'm trying to emulate.
The neo 3's are going to be implemented in an open back, planar magnetic headphone experiment. It may work, or it may not work. My preliminary testing shows that it measures?? ruler flat from 700hz to almost 20hz. What happens above that is a total mystery. You need a $20,0000 dummy head to get accurate readings in that range, so my above 700hz judgments will be purely subjective. I will probably send them to tyll Hertsens for measurements when I am done. The thing that will probably kill this experiment is the unit to unit upper frequency variability of the Neo 3. Let's wait and see...
Seth
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2012, 08:41 AM   #132
Toaster is offline Toaster  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: South East England
Interesting stuff. What are the details of your sealed box implementation Remlab? Any advice on air volume, shape and filling density etc?
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2012, 09:23 AM   #133
CV is offline CV
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
As an aside, does anyone feel that the Neo10 is lacking somewhat at very low levels? This was my initial, possibly unfair impression after some very rough and quick experimentation. Could have been the system it was tested in as well.

I certainly found it a very impressive driver otherwise.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th April 2012, 06:48 PM   #134
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Rochester, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remlab View Post
There are good and bad ways of getting a flat response using DSP, and I feel that I've found the best way. A way that puts zero stress on the driver.
Would you care to share your method?
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2012, 12:32 AM   #135
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
First of all, I have to reiterate that DSP is the only practical way of achieving this goal.
As for the box, I'm using the smallest Dayton cabinet. It's a perfect fit for the Neo 10. Since I'm also reproducing the high frequencies with this driver, It's extremely important to kill the back wave as much as possible. Completely filling the interior with stacked bonded Logic panels is by far the best sounding way of doing this. I tried acoustic foam, but it sounds terrible in comparison.
Now for the DSP. Your going to need a DCX for primary signal processing and a DEQ to swab the deck afterwards. First, set your mic at 1m on axis. Then set DCX on parametric and center the frequency at 9.06 khz. Set the level at -9.5. The Next part will be to tailor the Q to your specific situation. My setting is .7 . Fine tune the level and Q to get it as flat as possible before resorting to the DEQ to make the final adjustments. If you want, you can add more parametric settings and try fine tune the response that way instead of using a DEQ, but the interactions between the different parametric points probably makes that route to complex and unpredictable to get really accurate results. You will have to raise the 16k and 20k levels up pretty high after the parametric adjustments to get the extreme highs back, but that is optional. A Quad ESL central panel(Of which I am humbly trying to emulate) has little if any extreme highs, and it's considered one of the, if not the best sounding loudspeaker ever made.
Seth
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2012, 02:17 AM   #136
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
Quote:
Originally Posted by InclinedPlane View Post
But I thought the rising response would work in my favor if the highs are going to disperse narrowly, no?
No. Maybe a rise of two or three db would be good, but not twelve.
Seth

Last edited by Remlab; 18th April 2012 at 02:23 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2012, 10:16 PM   #137
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
Proraum Vertriebs-GmbH | Startseite
If you have not already seen this, you can go to "Pro20D" in the download section on this site to get more raw data on the Neo 10.
Seth

Last edited by Remlab; 18th April 2012 at 10:21 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2012, 11:29 PM   #138
Toaster is offline Toaster  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: South East England
Thanks Remlab. I downloaded all that stuff a while back and based my experimental baffle on their 'head' unit for the Neo 10 and Neo 3. Very useful since it shows the raw driver responses on their baffle and also the responses with their crossover. I did ask them if they'd supply the crossover alone, but- not unreasonably- it was the whole kit or nothing. Much as I like the Neo 3, I do prefer the RAAL 70-10D overall, although there is a very appealing transparency the Neo 3 has which can make the RAAL sound a bit over emphatic at times. On the other hand the '3 can sound a bit too relaxed... It's not really an apples to apples comparison though, since the small RAAL needs to be crossed over higher than the Neo 3, which compromises the power response of the '10, particularly in the vertical plane. For the '10 I'm probably going to try something along the lines of Planet 10's 'mid TL' as used in the Tysen design.

Last edited by Toaster; 18th April 2012 at 11:34 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2012, 11:49 PM   #139
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toaster View Post
Thanks Remlab. I downloaded all that stuff a while back and based my experimental baffle on their 'head' unit for the Neo 10 and Neo 3. Very useful since it shows the raw driver responses on their baffle and also the responses with their crossover. I did ask them if they'd supply the crossover alone, but- not unreasonably- it was the whole kit or nothing. Much as I like the Neo 3, I do prefer the RAAL 70-10D overall, although there is a very appealing transparency the Neo 3 has which can make the RAAL sound a bit over emphatic at times. On the other hand the '3 can sound a bit too relaxed... It's not really an apples to apples comparison though, since the small RAAL needs to be crossed over higher than the Neo 3, which compromises the power response of the '10, particularly in the vertical plane. For the '10 I'm probably going to try something along the lines of Planet 10's 'mid TL' as used in the Tysen design.
I spoke to Igor about those measurements. He told me that in the first part of the measurements section regarding the Neo 10, they used some type of sealed box for the measurements and then in the last part, they used the actual baffle from the kit..
Seth
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 06:28 AM   #140
Remlab is offline Remlab  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mission Viejo Ca
Quote:
Originally Posted by CV View Post
As an aside, does anyone feel that the Neo10 is lacking somewhat at very low levels? This was my initial, possibly unfair impression after some very rough and quick experimentation. Could have been the system it was tested in as well.

I certainly found it a very impressive driver otherwise.
The best way to test that premise is to do what I did. Flatten it out completely and listen to it full range..
  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
F/S (3) BG NEO:10 Planar Magnetic Panels rubicon Vendor's Bazaar 1 31st December 2011 05:39 PM
BG Neo 10 (Neo10) vs. Alcons RB401, SA8535, ESS AMT, or Beyma's TPL-150 tiefbassuebertr Multi-Way 1 6th December 2011 12:54 AM
BG NEO 10 pair as new inertial Swap Meet 20 31st January 2009 06:20 PM
Bg neo 10 measured inertial Multi-Way 12 7th October 2008 05:42 PM
BG neo 10 measured inertial Planars & Exotics 0 30th September 2008 09:00 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 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