Mark's health isn't great, which is no secret, although he's doing well in the circumstances I believe.
Mark did not design the crossover, although he did lay down where he wanted it to be. However, there is very little distance between the acoustic centres in the z axis (front - rear plane). I can't give out further details though.
No it isn't, that is you making incorrect assumptions and putting equally incorrect words in the mouth of other people. As alluded to above, the crossover region was required by Mark for a number of reasons specific to this model in order to realise a particular set of performance characteristics and various other goals that had been requested of it. In different models (even in variations of this speaker) using the same drive units, the crossover frequency and type can be and is completely different, in line with the requirements set out for them in turn. What is used is what is needed to achieve these requirements.
Last edited:
Scott, thanks for the generous insight. Makes plenty of sense to me and I thought it might put to bed the conspiracy theories but obviously I was wrong 😀
Not sure I am putting the words in anyone's mouth, so I will quantify my above words that those are my opinion only.
But the fact wide band drivers were used and that there were many choice for crossover points. (Ok, I made an assumption two wide range drivers would have much more freedom than a conventional midwoofer and tweeter).
So I am interested what goals/objectives were to be achieved using such a crossover point with wide band drivers.
I only meant to post this news article as information and to promote awareness. Regardless of the technical choices made - and their reasons - I wish everyone involved in this project the greatest success! I hope to see these products in hi-end stores in NYC so I can hear them. They seem apartment friendly and certainly I know these speakers look to be crafted with the best intentions towards musical enjoyment.
I also hope everyone struggling with heath issues (sad to hear!) recover soon.
I also hope everyone struggling with heath issues (sad to hear!) recover soon.
No offense, but surely all you need to know is that the choices were made with certain goals/objectives in mind, and leave it at that. These are likely business decisions made by people who have considerable technical knowledge about audio-related matters, and as such the technical merits of their choices does not require your approval or the approval of anyone else on this site. It would be different if they were asking for technical advice from people here, but they are not, so why not just leave it at that and simply wish them well in their endeavor. After all it's not as if the people involved have no experience designing, constructing, and producing audio related gear. Sheesh! 🙂
Phil, et al - my only comment re the crossovers would be that your italicized "business decisions" in above post might be interpreted as "when the bean-counters decide to say a few pence here and there on parts costs" . I'm pretty sure that's not the case here.
Scott: whether you chose or relish it or not, I think it's too late to avoid the esteem some of us have for the body of your work to date.
Scott: whether you chose or relish it or not, I think it's too late to avoid the esteem some of us have for the body of your work to date.
You're right, Chris, in that I wasn't using 'business' in that sense. I'm speculating here, of course, but I meant it more in the sense of market-based decisions grounded in a seller' s concrete experience of what kind of features, emphasis, or 'sound' might be appealing to different potential audiences (though a broader sense of 'business' would indeed also include the considerations you mention as well). Either way, the grounds for making their decisions are, to coin a phrase, none of our 'business'. 😀
>>> Scott: whether you chose or relish it or not, I think it's too late to avoid the esteem some of us have for the body of your work to date.
Eh, Scottmoose is only as good as his last cabinet design.
Just kidding, many thanks for your generous contributions thru the years.
Eh, Scottmoose is only as good as his last cabinet design.
Just kidding, many thanks for your generous contributions thru the years.
IMO, if members here starts to embrace the "none of our business" mentality, I doubt the diyaudio forum would flourish as it is now. I believe the freedom to ask questions together with those willing to discuss it is what made this forum special.
It is perhaps my previous postings were done in a less friendly way and if so I apologize for that. But at the heart of my previous posts is a simple question that asks what is the advantages for the 2.4k crossover chosen for two wide/full range drivers. I have seem two extreme ends for wide/full range speakers like Bastanis crossing at 10k and Fast designs crossing very low. But not sure I have seem a 2.4k crossover point for wide range drivers.
Here is a recent video of Mark Fenlon on the Sota and he looked quite good. So lets hope that he has many more years of designing drivers and speakers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrFtYGzj-zE
BTW, Markaudio is a local brand and I wish them every success. In fact, I am looking for a bookshelf speaker and the Sota might be on my target list. I just audition the Sonus Faber Olympia and its not to my taste, the Sotas are actually cheaper than the Olympia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrFtYGzj-zE
BTW, Markaudio is a local brand and I wish them every success. In fact, I am looking for a bookshelf speaker and the Sota might be on my target list. I just audition the Sonus Faber Olympia and its not to my taste, the Sotas are actually cheaper than the Olympia.
ChuckT,
Hazarding the risk of being wrong on multiple counts, let me try and answer your query on the choice of crossover point. 🙂
One of the considerations that might be at play is the off-axis behavior of the loudspeaker. Off-axis performance is also important for many customers/applications. As the cone size increases, drivers tend to beam more (frequency drop occurs more going off-axis and this affects the "sound"), smaller cones generally have better dispersion characteristics but lower power handling capability. A 11 cm cone will start beaming approximately around 3.1 KHz, and it is probable that the off-axis performance at say 30 degrees or 60 degrees will show a drop at frequencies lower than 3.1KHz. So, even if the wide-band driver can play higher up in the frequency range, the designer might choose to cross relatively lower so that the smaller driver with better dispersion characteristics can pick up.
It is possible that the mid-tweet of the Mark Audio SOTA speaker under discussion is capable of playing lower than 2.4 KHz, but again the modelling done by the designers gave them a preferred balance of power handling capability, tonal characteristics, and off-axis performance at that XO point.
Of course there are probably other factors at play. And whatever I have stated above are possible considerations, and in no way I am implying that these were the actual reasons for the design choice.
You might have come across the phrase "No loudspeaker is perfect, and loudspeaker design is all about choosing your (set of) compromises" - in other words whatever works best for your and/or your target customer group.
Peace.
Edit: Since MA SOTA is local, maybe you can give the speakers a listen and give us your impressions? Would be good to know, especially given the design team. 🙂 And thanks for sharing the video - great to see Mark smiling! The Mark Audio SOTA speakers in the background look nice too.
Hazarding the risk of being wrong on multiple counts, let me try and answer your query on the choice of crossover point. 🙂
One of the considerations that might be at play is the off-axis behavior of the loudspeaker. Off-axis performance is also important for many customers/applications. As the cone size increases, drivers tend to beam more (frequency drop occurs more going off-axis and this affects the "sound"), smaller cones generally have better dispersion characteristics but lower power handling capability. A 11 cm cone will start beaming approximately around 3.1 KHz, and it is probable that the off-axis performance at say 30 degrees or 60 degrees will show a drop at frequencies lower than 3.1KHz. So, even if the wide-band driver can play higher up in the frequency range, the designer might choose to cross relatively lower so that the smaller driver with better dispersion characteristics can pick up.
It is possible that the mid-tweet of the Mark Audio SOTA speaker under discussion is capable of playing lower than 2.4 KHz, but again the modelling done by the designers gave them a preferred balance of power handling capability, tonal characteristics, and off-axis performance at that XO point.
Of course there are probably other factors at play. And whatever I have stated above are possible considerations, and in no way I am implying that these were the actual reasons for the design choice.
You might have come across the phrase "No loudspeaker is perfect, and loudspeaker design is all about choosing your (set of) compromises" - in other words whatever works best for your and/or your target customer group.
Peace.
Edit: Since MA SOTA is local, maybe you can give the speakers a listen and give us your impressions? Would be good to know, especially given the design team. 🙂 And thanks for sharing the video - great to see Mark smiling! The Mark Audio SOTA speakers in the background look nice too.
Last edited:
Yes, I believe power handling and off-axis performance might be one of the key factor in deciding the 2.4k xo.
I have not seem the Sota in any of the audio shops yet, not sure they would accept an audition at their office and they are fairly out of my way. But I will keep a look out at the audio shops.
I found a measurement of the Viotti, there is a quite a dip in the 2k region, curious.
Bookshelf Speaker Reviews: MarkAudio-SOTA Viotti One Bookshelf Speaker Reviewed
Many loudspeakers are "voiced" with a dip between the 1-3KHz - Google is your friend if you are interested. 🙂
Thanks for sharing the review - looks like the Viotti's acquit themselves well overall.
They've actually been around a little while, but launching a new brand is by nature a slow process. They've been reviewed in a few places new, inc. Enjoythemusic & Hi-Fi+ & have gone down well to date.
Yes, it was required from the outset to voice the speakers akin to Harwood's approach, attenuating some output in the upper midrange to increase the subjective depth perspective etc., and further separate them, sonically, from the usual cone & dome 2-way. There is nothing particularly curious about amplitude shaping -variations of this particular theme been done since the 1970s at least. It can be done electrically in a variety of ways, either with the crossover itself or by using multiple extra components in the form of a low Q broadband notch. Both approaches are perfectly valid; which is appropriate depends on the specific circumstances and requirements of the speaker in question, along with the inherent driver responses (both units) on & off vertical + horizontal axis, ease of drive of the finished system, the target filter slopes & electrical circuit Qs etc.
Yes, it was required from the outset to voice the speakers akin to Harwood's approach, attenuating some output in the upper midrange to increase the subjective depth perspective etc., and further separate them, sonically, from the usual cone & dome 2-way. There is nothing particularly curious about amplitude shaping -variations of this particular theme been done since the 1970s at least. It can be done electrically in a variety of ways, either with the crossover itself or by using multiple extra components in the form of a low Q broadband notch. Both approaches are perfectly valid; which is appropriate depends on the specific circumstances and requirements of the speaker in question, along with the inherent driver responses (both units) on & off vertical + horizontal axis, ease of drive of the finished system, the target filter slopes & electrical circuit Qs etc.
Definitely not. 😉 Having to pace myself a bit, but got a few things up my sleeve. One specifically designed for Dave in particular...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.