It has nothing to do with resolution and format.
You are partly right here. But I have a lot of classical recordings incl. guitar. I also have been to a lot of classical concerts incl. classical solo guitar.
My own experiences is way back. It was two Bruel and Kjær 4011 a Soundtracs Jade-S 48 channel console
and Studer 827A tape recorder. Traditional mic setup. One pointing to the bridge and one to the middle of the fretboard.
I've worked extensively with Peerless 2" driver and SEAS L16RN-SL.
Use of Peerless driver down to 200Hz is nonsense. IMD performance is horrific. Even with 1000Hz 24dB/oct crossover point distortion from transients is apparent when driven even close to live for acoustic music.
The SEAS driver on other hand has exemplary distortion performance within intended bandwidth, up to a bit past 1kHz when driven with high power transients.
I've tested all this.
Cutting this driver at 200Hz is a complete waste of its use. It's design was tweaked from bigger SEAS drivers for use by "SL" in his Pluto design.
Trevor Marshall's design is garbage.
Much better to lay SL's Pluto on floor with tweeter pointing up.
I've stuffed my DSP based Pluto Clone, using L16RN-SL and Peerless 2" drivers in room corners, and imaging is no better than when used in my preferred near field set up, but virtually entire image appears outside of the room. Not a problem for me when listening to symphony, but not so good for intimate jazz and such. SPL at greater listening distance is more limited. Casual listening is nice, but isn't why I go to concerts, and isn't why I enjoy great recordings, or why I'm so heavily vested in my setup.
With Pluto clones laying down and tweeters jammed into corners pointing up, imaging is degraded. Image height is totally smeared. Granted, I've got acoustic tile ceiling, fully carpeted floor, and well furnished room.
When I listen to boombox in empty room while painting it, this is enjoyable too, but is completely casual listening with nearly constant movement. When I clap my hands in empty room the "boinking" slap back sound jumps out of corners, and fills room briefly with this decaying echo. Music on boombox with spaced out transients has same effect applied, and becomes tiresome interference to listening with intent, instead of painting. It doesn't change much when boombox is place in corner, somewhere along wall, in center of room, up on ladder. Boink.
Still, I keep open mind, that certain rooms, with right treatment (level of furnishings), may produce generally acceptable sound field for some people.
A farmer may get a certain satisfaction wrestling a pig to market. With a crippled horse, he will shoot it and be done with it, the only satisfaction being knowledge that it was the right thing to do.
Use of Peerless driver down to 200Hz is nonsense. IMD performance is horrific. Even with 1000Hz 24dB/oct crossover point distortion from transients is apparent when driven even close to live for acoustic music.
The SEAS driver on other hand has exemplary distortion performance within intended bandwidth, up to a bit past 1kHz when driven with high power transients.
I've tested all this.
Cutting this driver at 200Hz is a complete waste of its use. It's design was tweaked from bigger SEAS drivers for use by "SL" in his Pluto design.
Trevor Marshall's design is garbage.
Much better to lay SL's Pluto on floor with tweeter pointing up.
I've stuffed my DSP based Pluto Clone, using L16RN-SL and Peerless 2" drivers in room corners, and imaging is no better than when used in my preferred near field set up, but virtually entire image appears outside of the room. Not a problem for me when listening to symphony, but not so good for intimate jazz and such. SPL at greater listening distance is more limited. Casual listening is nice, but isn't why I go to concerts, and isn't why I enjoy great recordings, or why I'm so heavily vested in my setup.
With Pluto clones laying down and tweeters jammed into corners pointing up, imaging is degraded. Image height is totally smeared. Granted, I've got acoustic tile ceiling, fully carpeted floor, and well furnished room.
When I listen to boombox in empty room while painting it, this is enjoyable too, but is completely casual listening with nearly constant movement. When I clap my hands in empty room the "boinking" slap back sound jumps out of corners, and fills room briefly with this decaying echo. Music on boombox with spaced out transients has same effect applied, and becomes tiresome interference to listening with intent, instead of painting. It doesn't change much when boombox is place in corner, somewhere along wall, in center of room, up on ladder. Boink.
Still, I keep open mind, that certain rooms, with right treatment (level of furnishings), may produce generally acceptable sound field for some people.
A farmer may get a certain satisfaction wrestling a pig to market. With a crippled horse, he will shoot it and be done with it, the only satisfaction being knowledge that it was the right thing to do.
why into corners?
"no better" = not worse?
what do You mean by "entire image appears outside of the room"?
You mean that all virtual sound sources appear far behind the front wall and the side walls??
again - why into corners??
>1 kHz upfiring in the corners? 😱
very weird setup to say the least, I think it just couldn't work
again - I think it just couldn't work, what a weird experiment
well, interesting, perhaps You could start a new thread "listening to a boombox in a an empty room" or perhaps "wrestling a pig to market" 🙄
My Pluto Clone speaker purely omnidirectional to >2kHz.
Speaker with tweeter jammed in corner = tweeter in corner pointing at ceiling = up-firing.
Works like crap compared to normal near field setup = "no better"
Yes, your experiment is kind of weird.
This horse is dead for me.
Bye.
Speaker with tweeter jammed in corner = tweeter in corner pointing at ceiling = up-firing.
Works like crap compared to normal near field setup = "no better"
Yes, your experiment is kind of weird.
This horse is dead for me.
Bye.
my experiment? 😕
c'mon! 😀 Do I really recommend things like You did??
No, I don't
stop being silly please 🙂
Audio Pro have made a flooder: I haven't seen that before.
Audiopro level Qube
Audiopro level Qube
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
yeah, it´s been mentioned already once or twice in this thread, the new Shahinian Larc is another example of a FCUFS design of this kind
Interesting stuff here as weel (damn I should use this time, to go down in my toolshop at make my flooder omnis)
Citation X and Eico HFS-2 Speaker Systems
Citation X and Eico HFS-2 Speaker Systems
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Originally Posted by weltersys
, you recognize reflected sound as "accurate sound reproduction", I perceive the same as additional reflections added to the original recording.
The addition of additional reflections by my bias is one more step removed from an "accurate sound reproduction" akin to slow or ringing transient response.
Art
, you recognize reflected sound as "accurate sound reproduction", I perceive the same as additional reflections added to the original recording.
The addition of additional reflections by my bias is one more step removed from an "accurate sound reproduction" akin to slow or ringing transient response.
Art
Elias;3515398 Anechoic chamber for you said:
What it did to my recordings proves it is flawed. Or I will say it this way - if this design is supposed to make recordings sound this way, it is a flop to me.
Then you cannot tell me that the design was not good, and it was not properly set up. You were not there, I was. The guy that designed the speaker is far more knowledgeable about speakers than you are, and certainly knows how to properly set up a system - that I can attest to.
Listening to live music, and a recording of that live music is entirely different. You listen to recordings on your system, but you have no idea what they SHOULD sound like - you have no perspective.
+1,000,000,000,000.
And when those additional reflections smear detail, blunts transients, and stretches and diffuses the images, that a pretty profound alteration to me.
they sound altered ONLY when they are altered which is explained extensively in the book by Floyd Toole
unfortunately in case of a conventional system they are almost inevitably altered
what it - the particular FCUFS system which might be flawed - did is what You liked/disliked when You heard it
it is purely subjective, and purely specific
no proof at all with regard to any hypothetical FCUFS configuration's flaws by design
whereas other people in this thread - not just me - attested that FCUFS system properly set up (which means unlike a Linkwitz Pluto stuck in na corner upsode down etc.) doesn't necessarily sound like You describe, so I tend to think that what You described was a matter of some flaws in the particular implementation of the design
my perspective is the real thing, which is in fact the only perspective available in practice for most listeners
I like realistic sound and realistic sound reproduction is what HiFi is all about.
The real thing, not the sound of particular speakers is the true measure of quality.
I let myself to ask You once more - would You agree with Linkwitz's opinions that "people who only listen to loudspeakers and thus always compare loudspeakers are poor judges of accuracy" and that "unbiased listeners have no difficulty recognizing accurate sound reproduction, even with hearing damage or with hearing aids"?
face it Soundtrackmixer - being a highly experienced professional You are biased
that's normal, please read Toole's book, page 119: "Audio professionals may have their own preferences - it’s all right, they are just different"
yeah, it is all right indeed, but it is not right to impose Your bias on everybody here as a sort of universal true measure of quality because it is NOT - it is just Your bias
that's normal, please read Toole's book, page 119: "Audio professionals may have their own preferences - it’s all right, they are just different"
yeah, it is all right indeed, but it is not right to impose Your bias on everybody here as a sort of universal true measure of quality because it is NOT - it is just Your bias
I can't figure out why Soundtrackmixer is still on this thread defending his multichannel vision and arguing page after page. This hasn't resolved anything and no souls where turned towards multichannel systems. (that I know of)
Soundtrackmixer, why not start your own thread about the merits of multichannel?
Maybe this thread will finally get somewhere if there is room to discuss AND share experiences of the floor coupled speakers. You have done the sharing of your vision already so time to move on I'd say.
Soundtrackmixer, why not start your own thread about the merits of multichannel?
Maybe this thread will finally get somewhere if there is room to discuss AND share experiences of the floor coupled speakers. You have done the sharing of your vision already so time to move on I'd say.
Last edited:
I found vintage flooder, by Sandeman, from 1929 !
An implementation where a loud speaker and a room work as a system 😀
An implementation where a loud speaker and a room work as a system 😀
Attachments
Last edited:
