Today I finished my diy speakers (a kit that I bought here). In the pic you can see one sitting on top of the old floorstander until my diy stands are finished. I chose these Minimonitors as a replacement for my floorstanding 2-way speakers that don't sound right in my current living room (boomy bass). And having owned them for 20 years this month, I thought it was time for an upgrade. Not in size but in sound quality.
Now, these minimonitors have a baffle surface that you can more than cover by a single sheet of standard size paper (A4) and yet they sound much "bigger". Apart from a much better bass, what really strikes me is that the sound doesn't seem to come from the speakers at all. With your eyes closed it would be hard to point out where they are.
With hindsight, the sound from my old speakers always seemed to stick to them, e.g. a voice that should be in the middle coming at you from left and right instead of from the middle (yes, connected in-phase).
The only difference is the speakers, so it must be them responsible for the change. These speakers may be small but are by no means cheap and the sound quality definitely reflects that.
This made me wonder: what in speakers makes the sound "stick" to them?
Now, these minimonitors have a baffle surface that you can more than cover by a single sheet of standard size paper (A4) and yet they sound much "bigger". Apart from a much better bass, what really strikes me is that the sound doesn't seem to come from the speakers at all. With your eyes closed it would be hard to point out where they are.
With hindsight, the sound from my old speakers always seemed to stick to them, e.g. a voice that should be in the middle coming at you from left and right instead of from the middle (yes, connected in-phase).
The only difference is the speakers, so it must be them responsible for the change. These speakers may be small but are by no means cheap and the sound quality definitely reflects that.
This made me wonder: what in speakers makes the sound "stick" to them?
Attachments
Hi,
There are loads of issues related to poor sound quality : response, distortion,
colouration being the main three, that prevent a speaker from imaging properly.
rgds, sreten.
There are loads of issues related to poor sound quality : response, distortion,
colouration being the main three, that prevent a speaker from imaging properly.
rgds, sreten.
Thanks for the response, no doubt all issues you mention play a role in my old speakers (ATL 705 Pro) not imaging very well.
While building the Minimonitors I was impressed with the quality of materials and components used, but at the price I shouldn't be surprised.
I can't help but think that the build quality of the old speakers is flimsy in comparison to the Minimonitors and that the drivers and filter components are of lower quality. This no doubt has the degrading effect on the sound quality, esp. imaging, that is now obvious to me.
I knew well designed diy speakers offer better value for money than manufactured speakers, but I was't expecting such a big difference.
As a kit, they're roughly double the price of the (manufactured) old speakers, but they sound a multiple of that better. Long live diy!
While building the Minimonitors I was impressed with the quality of materials and components used, but at the price I shouldn't be surprised.
I can't help but think that the build quality of the old speakers is flimsy in comparison to the Minimonitors and that the drivers and filter components are of lower quality. This no doubt has the degrading effect on the sound quality, esp. imaging, that is now obvious to me.
I knew well designed diy speakers offer better value for money than manufactured speakers, but I was't expecting such a big difference.
As a kit, they're roughly double the price of the (manufactured) old speakers, but they sound a multiple of that better. Long live diy!
Reticent midrange response and poor dispersion should be strong reasons for a non expanding image.
The room also has a lot to do with it. Until you experience what some room tuning can do you just can't believe it. Now, the OP is comparing two speakers in the same room. Of course, the dispersion and phase relationships are what interacts with the room.
Had to google the meaning of "reticent" first, but yes, it's appropriate to the 705 Pros in my current living room. Midrange isn't prominent and as a result they seem to suffer a bit from the phenomenon sometimes described as "Taunussound" (google that!, you may need to be able to read German, though).
This is a product of damping the driver's motion (i.e. ruinously "over-damped").
When this happens, often with very stiff suspensions and lots of "stuffing" near the driver, the depth perspective goes. It also effects lateral positioning, "pulling" sounds except dead center to the right or to the left (depending on the panning of that sound/image).
Try reading the comments on this page (with regard to "stuffing"):
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/75940-my-fostex-fe-108ez-project-part-2-a-2.html
Last edited:
Actually a "reticent" or lower spl mid-range, compared to the average spl, tends to enhance depth, which *decreases* the sensation of sound "sticking to the loudspeakers". (..though for best effect it requires that "shelved" response up through the upper mid-range and lower treble.)
I think box size and aspect ratio plays into this.
Factors like shallow boxes with relatively large baffles compared to the driver.
What you are hearing in your old speakers is the box itself. It is vibrating like an acoustic guitar, creating it`s own localized noise.
A silent box sounds better.
Factors like shallow boxes with relatively large baffles compared to the driver.
What you are hearing in your old speakers is the box itself. It is vibrating like an acoustic guitar, creating it`s own localized noise.
A silent box sounds better.
Just curious about what the mechanisms of imaging are. The new speakers perform better on all aspects than the old speakers, but the single biggest improvement is imaging, and that difference is, without exaggeration, huge.
This might very well be an important factor here. I just took out the woofer and had a look inside. The speaker is made from particle board and the baffle is a mere 18 mm thick. Dampening material seems to consist of some thin slabs of generic foam rubber, sparingly used. This can't be a very stiff box.
The minimonitors are made from 22 mm and 30 mm (baffle) thick MDF with 4 mm thick bitumen mats and Pritex foam on the inside. That box is probably as silent as they get...
What about under damped? The 705 Pros definitely don't look like they're over-damped...
Attachments
many very coarse simplifications here
though most are true, individually still small aspects of the problem
each of them seperately would not get you very far
though most are true, individually still small aspects of the problem
each of them seperately would not get you very far
It is common rule of thumb: smaller speaker images better, bigger speaker produces lower frequencies (We are talking about the same driver here).
To get a good image you must not hear ANYTHING else other than the undistorted sound wave, and the undistorted soundwave must arrive completely and timely to your ears.
Bigger speaker has its own box sound. Large panel vibration, delayed ported bass response, front panel reflection.
Most of image information (from recording) is in the midrange up. Many 2-way floorstanders have to sacrifice this for better low frequency extension.
And the quality of the drivers (coupled with proper crossover) are of utmost importance for top sound. Because you don't want to hear the cone or the driver mechanics. Passive crossover design is very complex. Most of the time you will hear many benefit from running active crossover (ADD: related to soundstage).
I heard there's relative volume and delay cues that influence imaging.
Sit in front of one speaker, then adjust the balance (left to right) so you can hear both evenly. Do you now get the same stereo image as when you sit in the middle, with the balance reset?
I've (subjectively) found the answer is no. There must therefore be some other factor (than relative volume of each speaker) that affects imaging. I suspect it's a slight time difference between the two speakers playing the same instrument.
When the sound waves from the speaker travel outwards (assume omnidirectionality for now), the waves come across an interface between the baffle edge and the air. This causes diffraction if it's a sharp edge, resulting in a secondary output from the cabinet. A wider cabinet will have a longer delay time, which may begin to interfere with the delay times required for good imaging.
Chris
Sit in front of one speaker, then adjust the balance (left to right) so you can hear both evenly. Do you now get the same stereo image as when you sit in the middle, with the balance reset?
I've (subjectively) found the answer is no. There must therefore be some other factor (than relative volume of each speaker) that affects imaging. I suspect it's a slight time difference between the two speakers playing the same instrument.
When the sound waves from the speaker travel outwards (assume omnidirectionality for now), the waves come across an interface between the baffle edge and the air. This causes diffraction if it's a sharp edge, resulting in a secondary output from the cabinet. A wider cabinet will have a longer delay time, which may begin to interfere with the delay times required for good imaging.
Chris
There's almost EVERYTHING wrong with these speakers, I'd guess! 🙂
Too much woolly reflex bass and out-of-phase midrange leakage from the reflex tube, wobbly cabinets, indifferent crossover, bad placement. Lots of peaky resonances around 1-2kHz, it's the nature of peaky 130mm units which need a trap around 1kHz. Ignores the golden ratio dimensions for uncoloured cabinets too, which is 5:8:13 roughly.
A big speaker in a small room always sounds terrible, of course. Anything below 50 Hz is really just BOOM! Speed of sound being 330m/s you can work it out for yourself.
Most modern speakers have so much electrically induced bass, you can't place them near a wall. You end up listening in the near-field of the speaker with the speakers in the middle of the room. Someone has gotta rethink the whole thing. We need speakers we can live with. Time the flush-mounted closed-box bookshelf speaker came back, IMO. All that lovely 6dB gain from the wall! 😉
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Too much woolly reflex bass and out-of-phase midrange leakage from the reflex tube, wobbly cabinets, indifferent crossover, bad placement. Lots of peaky resonances around 1-2kHz, it's the nature of peaky 130mm units which need a trap around 1kHz. Ignores the golden ratio dimensions for uncoloured cabinets too, which is 5:8:13 roughly.
A big speaker in a small room always sounds terrible, of course. Anything below 50 Hz is really just BOOM! Speed of sound being 330m/s you can work it out for yourself.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Most modern speakers have so much electrically induced bass, you can't place them near a wall. You end up listening in the near-field of the speaker with the speakers in the middle of the room. Someone has gotta rethink the whole thing. We need speakers we can live with. Time the flush-mounted closed-box bookshelf speaker came back, IMO. All that lovely 6dB gain from the wall! 😉
@ chris, I'm also inclined to think diffraction contributes. It has two signatures that don't relate to the signal: it's fixed delay (with some frequency dependence) and its level dependence.
On the other hand, I'm of the mind that the greater the delay of the second source the better, and will involves less of the midband frequencies, and will be slightly lower in level.
Jay, if I understand what you are suggesting, front panel reflection keeps the sound in half space for a time where diffraction and the potential for room reflections are less.
On the other hand, I'm of the mind that the greater the delay of the second source the better, and will involves less of the midband frequencies, and will be slightly lower in level.
Jay, if I understand what you are suggesting, front panel reflection keeps the sound in half space for a time where diffraction and the potential for room reflections are less.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.