Member
Joined 2009
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/193689-build-thread-ardor-point-source-monitor.html
I just made these. Do they qualify as omni? 😀
Haven't seen anyone claim that yet. Only you claim to have made one that works. Your posts seem to get well off the point as of late and full of ambiguity. I'd ask you to just be direct and state your point whatever "it" is. If you don't want to say anything, well then don't. 😉
Dan
Last edited:
these are NOT omni enough to be called omnis even from pragmatic, non-idealistic perspective
such speakers are legitimately called polydirectional (by Dick Shahinian, maker of similar speakers)
not really, it is also my claim, and of el`Ol, and OllBoll to name just few
as to the first claim - it is claimed all along in this thread that "it cannot work, it cannot work, it cannot work" ad nauseam
it looks a lot like a claim that "we know everything about it and therefore we can say it cannot work", doesn't it?
Graaf, I would be hesitant to put words in the mouths of others, but it seems to be a theme you have. So the collective of you could in fact shed light on why they are not more popular I'd think. Or at least you and Tinitus could/should. Perhaps it could be helpful. If you make a claim please back it up with something more than anecdotal evidence. That would be helpful. Seems to me that the claim of this thread is that 'omnis are unpopular'(and it's evident that they are not popular) and there was an inquiry as to "why?". We should try to keep on it IMO as it's a good topic. As opposed to arguing what you and Tinnitus believe others believe.
I never saw that 'cannot, cannot' claim either. Apparently Graaf and Tinitis have? It's quite possible someone has made that claim once heck maybe even twice in the thread, but I certainly haven't had any overriding tone of that sort of talk. Personally I like the idea in some ways and have some objections to it as well. My best guess would be emotional investment has something to do with your collective perception of the thread, because reading and writing the posts doesn't make me feel, think, or believe that way at all. Not even close in any remote fashion. To me the 2 of you have made numerous bizarre posts that are often off topic, misconstrued replies. And I don't think either of you are too stupid to understand what's been written. Not even close. It seems you two are emotionally invested in the 'superiority of omnis'(my assertion as to your collective bizarre replies based apparent evidence you are putting forth), or my posts certainly would not provoke the responses they have. They haven't but from you two.
I've heard omnis and their virtues and vices, though not all of them in every way imaginable. And no I've never built one.🙄
Shall we move on or word volley? I'm done to be honest.
Now to redirect in a better direction: Graaf and Tinitus, tell us why you think omnis are not more popular and support it.
Dan
I never saw that 'cannot, cannot' claim either. Apparently Graaf and Tinitis have? It's quite possible someone has made that claim once heck maybe even twice in the thread, but I certainly haven't had any overriding tone of that sort of talk. Personally I like the idea in some ways and have some objections to it as well. My best guess would be emotional investment has something to do with your collective perception of the thread, because reading and writing the posts doesn't make me feel, think, or believe that way at all. Not even close in any remote fashion. To me the 2 of you have made numerous bizarre posts that are often off topic, misconstrued replies. And I don't think either of you are too stupid to understand what's been written. Not even close. It seems you two are emotionally invested in the 'superiority of omnis'(my assertion as to your collective bizarre replies based apparent evidence you are putting forth), or my posts certainly would not provoke the responses they have. They haven't but from you two.
I've heard omnis and their virtues and vices, though not all of them in every way imaginable. And no I've never built one.🙄
Shall we move on or word volley? I'm done to be honest.
Now to redirect in a better direction: Graaf and Tinitus, tell us why you think omnis are not more popular and support it.
Dan
Graaf, how would you define the Omni loudspeaker? A set of minimal specs would be nice. So we can know when we are getting your goat.
Dan
Dan
How many engineered omni speaker projects have been presented here? Maybe one of you should do one?
it could be also very helpful and very nice of You to read what we have posted here before any further commenting
I wonder what makes You think that our observations are just anecdotal and Your observations and of Markus eg. are something more than anecdotal?
because I cannot see anything more than that in this thread, anything more that anecdotal evidence from us vs anecdotal evidence from You,
WITH ONE IMPORTANT QUALIFICATION - You haven't listened to anything like a flooder, yet You feel right to criticise it anecdotally 😉
yes, You are right, apparently WE are not "too stupid to understand what's been written"
yet You feel right to comment on what You haven't listened to
this is not right, is it?
neither guys from NASA nor Blauert nor anyone else that You have quoted investigated such a speaker and it' behaviour in a typical room
again, please read the thread
again, read the thread
Last edited:
I've read posts where you 2 state reasons why you think Omnis are not more popular. They agree with mine except for some nonsense that you spewed that 'audiophiles prefer and unnatural sound of forward firing speaker' and a couple other similar outbursts. I didn't even jump down your throat for such a ridiculous statements. That's the anecdotal stuff I'm talking about. On the data, I'm failing to see our disagreement but still there's arguing. So I was looking for a clear, concise disambiguation of your issues. Maybe there was data we disagreed on. Last few posts it seems you and Tinitus have some issue with what I've said. It's difficult with Tinitis b/c of his purposeful ambiguity to figure out what he's saying though. Pardon my inability to understand the argument when I haven't disagreed with any data backed discussion. I thought maybe you 2 could clarify where we differ on the data. The floor is still open for that if you would cordially like to explain.
I've heard a FRer face up on the floor--is that what your flooder is? I've never claimed your flooder stinks or anything. Don't really know what it is, but the only specs I've seen you list can't be serious especially when you are using a Fostex driver. There's plenty of good data available done in a controlled fashion for anyone to figure out what they are looking for. Especially after you hear it for yourself. If you'd like to state your definition of Omni(b/c I don't know of a perfect one w/o limits) so no one unknowingly offends you, the floor is again yours. You can even clearly explain your flooder if you wish. I'm guessing that's your investment. he he
If I've stated an observation, I've backed or can with experimental data. That's my point. We can all do the back and forth until we want to downgrade each others credit rating, but it's pointless. If you disagree with my data or experience, say why and site. No one gets downgraded. 🙂
Toole's evidence that you pseudo-sited agrees with what I've sited. You seemed to not like what I sited though even though you wanted to site similar data. I can't see an argument. I missed where Toole studied or sited a study that advocated your flooder as the way to go.
Dan
I've heard a FRer face up on the floor--is that what your flooder is? I've never claimed your flooder stinks or anything. Don't really know what it is, but the only specs I've seen you list can't be serious especially when you are using a Fostex driver. There's plenty of good data available done in a controlled fashion for anyone to figure out what they are looking for. Especially after you hear it for yourself. If you'd like to state your definition of Omni(b/c I don't know of a perfect one w/o limits) so no one unknowingly offends you, the floor is again yours. You can even clearly explain your flooder if you wish. I'm guessing that's your investment. he he
If I've stated an observation, I've backed or can with experimental data. That's my point. We can all do the back and forth until we want to downgrade each others credit rating, but it's pointless. If you disagree with my data or experience, say why and site. No one gets downgraded. 🙂
Toole's evidence that you pseudo-sited agrees with what I've sited. You seemed to not like what I sited though even though you wanted to site similar data. I can't see an argument. I missed where Toole studied or sited a study that advocated your flooder as the way to go.
Dan
Hi folks,
I can see why omni is not more popular with the diy crowd.
Surely Omni's are not that popular because the majority are not exposed to them. Fear of the unknown and traditional dogma.
Generally people are pretty conservative when risking or investing their time and money and regular box speakers are what most people know, even for DIY it is the risk of investing in something people are not exposed to or familiar with.
How do you trouble shoot an omni when you don't know how good the concept can sound in the 1st place?
For the average joe regular box speakers are typically pushed against a wall and often have decorations such as plant pots put on top of them. Omni's need space and the drivers sit on the top! WAF = less than normal speakers!!!
That doesn't stop the diy crowd but I believe the majority of the time DIYers are trying to recreate an expensive ideal speaker from existing experiences (regular box speakers) or they build dipole open baffles because they have the romance of simplicity and are extremely easy to build (or at least a basic one is). Dipoles OB's appeal because they are fashionable at the moment (along with constant directivity waveguides for good reason) easy to build and come with the promise of boxless presentation. Dipole = promise of imagined Electrostatic like presentation on the cheap. Cheap and easy to start (low DIY skills required, easy to fettle), still fairly exotic, apparently easy to build = lots of people having a go.
For an omni what drive units do you use?
To do it well from my understanding for normal drive units the speaker has to be a small point source to work properly, you need even power response, they need to sound exactly the same into a broad angle.
Either have to compromise your design at the crossover (such as bass mid drive units beaming) or accept high frequency colourations and limited power output from a fullrange with a waveguide.
However you really need to go active so that you can a treble drive unit with very broad dispersion that can cross low enough without distortion to avoid beaming. Such a drive unit does not exist that suits a point source omni in a passive configuration (lose a lot of DIYers at this point) because the only drive units suitable are lower sensitivity than the bass mid's so you want more gain in the treble for the low crossover point required to avoid beaming or low frequency distortion from a normal tweeter working too low.
Alternatively you need for a ridiculously powerful amp to drive a small point source speaker with a complex lossy crossover. Who wants to put a few hundred watts into a small low sensitivity speaker with modest bass output? As we know DIYers are often valve/tube amp enthusiasts too.
To do it properly (i.e not produce a second rate result that may put people off the concept) it really needs to be a small point source, needs active operation to facilitate the sensible use of low sensitivity treble drive unit which can operate comfortably a few octaves below its working range with broad dispersion maintained through most of its working range.
The speaker needs decent space around it, however it won't be powerful or dynamic enough to drive a really big room at high volumes or suit users who insist on sitting a long distance from the speakers who still want to hear pin point imaging. Several reasons there to put off a lot of users.
Listen to Linkwitz's Pluto at close quarters with decent quality recordings set up properly you will hear one of the best loudspeakers you will have ever heard. Close enough to the speaker you will hear the typical pin point pin sharp imaging of the best mini monitors (yes that false razor sharp image clarity most of us enjoy from Hi-Fi stereo, myself included) to the n'th degree.
Move back and you will hear a more relaxed presentation, more akin to a real life concert, scratch that more akin to most real life sounds.
Either way the speaker is crisp, clear, open, tight, smooth, very detailed not veiled or blurry (up with reference level box speakers and the best Electrostatics) with a boxless presentation. Other speakers will play louder, other speakers will be better at macro dynamics at monster volume and suit large rooms better. However for a smaller room (set up properly -listener and speaker) or close quarter listening in a larger room they are utterly brilliant.
Set up properly you do not hear hall effects, obvious reflections like crappy dsp effects stuff added to a recording, you shouldn't hear it as garnish or extra sauce or whatever embellishments.
Consider my opinion biased, I'm converted, after living with box speakers and high quality ESL's Pluto offers qualities of both. At least I am converted to the omni concept when it comes to the Pluto, which is considered an omni.
I can see why omni is not more popular with the diy crowd.
Surely Omni's are not that popular because the majority are not exposed to them. Fear of the unknown and traditional dogma.
Generally people are pretty conservative when risking or investing their time and money and regular box speakers are what most people know, even for DIY it is the risk of investing in something people are not exposed to or familiar with.
How do you trouble shoot an omni when you don't know how good the concept can sound in the 1st place?
For the average joe regular box speakers are typically pushed against a wall and often have decorations such as plant pots put on top of them. Omni's need space and the drivers sit on the top! WAF = less than normal speakers!!!
That doesn't stop the diy crowd but I believe the majority of the time DIYers are trying to recreate an expensive ideal speaker from existing experiences (regular box speakers) or they build dipole open baffles because they have the romance of simplicity and are extremely easy to build (or at least a basic one is). Dipoles OB's appeal because they are fashionable at the moment (along with constant directivity waveguides for good reason) easy to build and come with the promise of boxless presentation. Dipole = promise of imagined Electrostatic like presentation on the cheap. Cheap and easy to start (low DIY skills required, easy to fettle), still fairly exotic, apparently easy to build = lots of people having a go.
For an omni what drive units do you use?
To do it well from my understanding for normal drive units the speaker has to be a small point source to work properly, you need even power response, they need to sound exactly the same into a broad angle.
Either have to compromise your design at the crossover (such as bass mid drive units beaming) or accept high frequency colourations and limited power output from a fullrange with a waveguide.
However you really need to go active so that you can a treble drive unit with very broad dispersion that can cross low enough without distortion to avoid beaming. Such a drive unit does not exist that suits a point source omni in a passive configuration (lose a lot of DIYers at this point) because the only drive units suitable are lower sensitivity than the bass mid's so you want more gain in the treble for the low crossover point required to avoid beaming or low frequency distortion from a normal tweeter working too low.
Alternatively you need for a ridiculously powerful amp to drive a small point source speaker with a complex lossy crossover. Who wants to put a few hundred watts into a small low sensitivity speaker with modest bass output? As we know DIYers are often valve/tube amp enthusiasts too.
To do it properly (i.e not produce a second rate result that may put people off the concept) it really needs to be a small point source, needs active operation to facilitate the sensible use of low sensitivity treble drive unit which can operate comfortably a few octaves below its working range with broad dispersion maintained through most of its working range.
The speaker needs decent space around it, however it won't be powerful or dynamic enough to drive a really big room at high volumes or suit users who insist on sitting a long distance from the speakers who still want to hear pin point imaging. Several reasons there to put off a lot of users.
Listen to Linkwitz's Pluto at close quarters with decent quality recordings set up properly you will hear one of the best loudspeakers you will have ever heard. Close enough to the speaker you will hear the typical pin point pin sharp imaging of the best mini monitors (yes that false razor sharp image clarity most of us enjoy from Hi-Fi stereo, myself included) to the n'th degree.
Move back and you will hear a more relaxed presentation, more akin to a real life concert, scratch that more akin to most real life sounds.
Either way the speaker is crisp, clear, open, tight, smooth, very detailed not veiled or blurry (up with reference level box speakers and the best Electrostatics) with a boxless presentation. Other speakers will play louder, other speakers will be better at macro dynamics at monster volume and suit large rooms better. However for a smaller room (set up properly -listener and speaker) or close quarter listening in a larger room they are utterly brilliant.
Set up properly you do not hear hall effects, obvious reflections like crappy dsp effects stuff added to a recording, you shouldn't hear it as garnish or extra sauce or whatever embellishments.
Consider my opinion biased, I'm converted, after living with box speakers and high quality ESL's Pluto offers qualities of both. At least I am converted to the omni concept when it comes to the Pluto, which is considered an omni.
