I'm less of a note follower and more of a timbre follower - more on the field recording side of enjoying sound than the sing-a-long-a-Max tune type person. I think that's where the low noise floor of good in-ear monitors and immediate plumbing of that sound into your ear comes in and beats speakers for me - more detail of the texture and inner components of a sound.
True, it depends largely on how the recording is constructedMost recordings are not made with a spaced stereo pair so reproducing any other recorded sound on spaced stereo speakers is a kind of arbitrary construct. Close micing is the norm or no mic at all - DI'd. Then you construct the stereo image as you want in the studio/computer.
I think that would always be weird but hopefully corrected in the mixSo when listening and wanting high fidelity, you should really expect to be hearing instruments as if your ear is up close where the microphone was placed. That often is slightly wierd when the sound is coming from speakers .
I hadn't considered that, could be true, but taken to it's logical conclusion they should use little in ear buds, maybe they do....When you're producing something, although you may make many judgements on a spaced stereo pair of monitors, engineers check the final mix on all sorts of set-ups including headphones. In fact there are many producers/engineers who will use headphones as monitors for the final mix precisely because that is likely how it will be listened to today. I would hazzard a guess that mixing for headphone listening may well be either the norm these days or at least extremely common.
That explains a lot 😉 Little acoustic jazz either I'm guessing 😎I should stress that I don't listen to classical, where spaced microphones are more common but even then you get mics over certain orchestra sections and mixed in.
Most recordings are not made with a spaced stereo pair so reproducing any other recorded sound on spaced stereo speakers is a kind of arbitrary construct.
Yet we DO have a functioning mathematical model for reproducing stereo with coincident mics and spaced stereo speakers, but NOT one for non-coincident mics and spaced stereo speakers. Hmmm....
if you give up raw spl efficiency then a great passive crossover speaker can be had.
you can tune it for deep powerful bass ( 35hz) and fantastic midrange and treble but the tradeoff will be about 6 db of spl @ 1w /1m and alot of tuning time
you can tune it for deep powerful bass ( 35hz) and fantastic midrange and treble but the tradeoff will be about 6 db of spl @ 1w /1m and alot of tuning time
With the affordability of watts these days - and provided complex impedance reactivity is with the subject amplifiers' comfort zone - the "net sensitivity / efficiency" could be less important than the X-max of whichever driver is the weakest link in that regard.
That explains a lot 😉 Little acoustic jazz either I'm guessing 😎
No, I'm a music lover too 😀
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Does a future made from all-active speakers free driver manufacturers from some of their constraints and allow them to design and offer even better drivers ? For example, active driving by modern (read: capable) amplifiers means no worries about weird impedance curves, driver sensitivity mismatches etc. If this allowed for better drivers that would be interesting. And with DSPs in the mix there would be even more freedom for the driver manufacturers. What might be possible ???
I think it might be the opposite. Drivers will try to optimize. A good driver actually one that requires the least equalization everything being equaled.
They could concentrate on distortion instead of frequency responseDoes a future made from all-active speakers free driver manufacturers from some of their constraints and allow them to design and offer even better drivers ?
They better concentrate on reducing the retail prices of the high end stuff, if you ask me, or I'll be forced to produce my own, hahaha.
They better concentrate on reducing the retail prices of the high end stuff, if you ask me, or I'll be forced to produce my own, hahaha.
🙂
They better concentrate on reducing the retail prices of the high end stuff, if you ask me, or I'll be forced to produce my own, hahaha.
The question is does anyone buy it? I doubt anyone can DIY a driver as good as even the worst driver on the market.
Somewhere here there is a guy from somewhere in Asia who is building a wideband driver from scratch
Found it! Don't know what's happened to the earlier pictures??
Custom DIY 6.5" Fullrange Driver
Found it! Don't know what's happened to the earlier pictures??
Custom DIY 6.5" Fullrange Driver
Last edited:
99.99999999999% of the time passive speakers sound better. Unless we're talking about Bang & Olufsen Beolab 90, but even so. Passiveis here to stay. Probably forever. Digital can't produce real music.
Somewhere here there is a guy from somewhere in Asia who is building a wideband driver from scratch
Found it! Don't know what's happened to the earlier pictures??
Custom DIY 6.5" Fullrange Driver
I didn't know having access to a machine shop qualified as "DIY". Most DIY garage can't even cut a round hole to fit a driver.
Then you learned something today 😛I didn't know having access to a machine shop qualified as "DIY".
Then you learned something today 😛
Cheating is alive and well .. I learned.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- Is there any Future for high-end PASSIVE multi-way