For myself I discovered that hard coherent reflections from walls and ceiling messes up phase, smears the soundstage and alters FR. A low DI device does this for a wider FR but it remains a problem. The use of diffusers in the right places make the reflections non-correlated to the source and as such lessen the importance of controlled DI in general. Sole absorpion is not the way to control reflections, but a mixture of diffusion and absorption and if possible bass trapping is.
A lower DI does this to a higher degree than Higher DI... period. The less you mess up phase, smear the soundstage and alter FR, the more it is anechoic chamber like which is undesirable to Mabat 🙂
None of this calls for, or even justifies, the use of an extremely beaming device. There's no reason why a better controlled directivity speaker shouldn't be better in the same situation, with the same room treatment. It's just an absurd logic.
You are basically saying that one should desire the same level of clarity, through out the reproduction instead of having a clarity slowly lower as frequency lowers, even though clarity is higher overall than a lower DI device..... because that is the result.
So if we are talking a big beaming horn and a common constant directivity waveguide.... Clarity 0-10 scale, might be 9 at 10khz slowly dwindles to 6 before loosing directivity on the big horn... But the clarity on the CD waveguide is 5 from 10khz to just before loosing directivity, still a 5.....
And because clarity never changes, that is better, even though clarity is higher over all on the beaming device.
This is the case when looking at what I've seen done... and choosing constant clarity over a slowly changing clarity that is higher overall...isn't exactly logical but I get it I guess...
So if we are talking a big beaming horn and a common constant directivity waveguide.... Clarity 0-10 scale, might be 9 at 10khz slowly dwindles to 6 before loosing directivity on the big horn... But the clarity on the CD waveguide is 5 from 10khz to just before loosing directivity, still a 5.....
And because clarity never changes, that is better, even though clarity is higher over all on the beaming device.
This is the case when looking at what I've seen done... and choosing constant clarity over a slowly changing clarity that is higher overall...isn't exactly logical but I get it I guess...
How is your "clarity" defined? I suspect that an anechoic chamber would give you the best "clarity" possible. If that's the case, than you simply have completely different goals than me.
Lets keep it simple and use the Clarity metric of REW 🙂
Personally I would say
Clarity - a lack of marks, spots, or blemishes.... Anechoic would render the highest clarity of course
Personally I would say
Clarity - a lack of marks, spots, or blemishes.... Anechoic would render the highest clarity of course
Clarity is a common enough word isn't it... Just take it as a metric of deviation from the signal, where the less deviation there is, the more Clarity there is...
First we need it and now its Useless.... you are all over the place
We need Clarity to measure the speaker, you already said that. Just because our rooms aren't anechoic chambers doesn't mean a level of clarity isn't desirable still.... The worse case situation of low clarity would be what, an echo chamber? Who wants that!
Last edited:
Nobody wants to use a extremely beaming device. I would not want to use the opposite, either.
As camplo said, in this case the only thing that is better is a wider sweet spot, very good for multiple listening positions.
Are you considering that Mabat considers your 3d printed horn "a extremely beaming device"???
And what about the balance of the power response? With a strongly beaming device you simply lose high frequencies, coloring all the reverberant sounds. There's nothing you can do about it, other than moving closer to an anechoic environment overall (improved Clarity, as camplo says)...
There's just no way to justify a beaming device. In any circumstances.
Last edited:
I read that as; high frequency becomes more accurate... and there's nothing you can do about it....lol
Calling a Higher DI system an anechoic chamber experience is like saying a lower DI system is an Echo Chamber experience... what sense does that make? None
Remember, you have to be able to tell when you are talking in ultimate's vs being reasonable.
Remember, you have to be able to tell when you are talking in ultimate's vs being reasonable.
OK, I don't find the JMLC horns reasonably beaming, OK? 🙂
And I'll kindly keep that conviction, based on all my experience.
And I'll kindly keep that conviction, based on all my experience.
By stating this, you dismiss an awful lot of well regarded speakers. In theory, you may be right but that is not how the majority of music lovers experience their sound. The ear is forgiving and get used to the setting quite quickly.