Which sums up your obnoxious attitude. You seem to be under the impression that you have the right to impose your opinions on other people and dictate to them what they should or should not do. You are sadly mistaken. You do not have any such right. There are those who at this point would justifiably tell you to get over yourself. There are rules on this forum, one of them being that you are not entitled to publically insult anybody and everybody who does not adhere to your personal opinion or criteria.
A gentle reminder to all members of the thread title. No more personalities, behave or you ride the pine. No further warnings.
Sounds familiar Jeff. 🙂 I'm no fundamentalist either. I'm currently listening to two setups, one with the old FF85wk in Dave's uFonkens, and the other one of my own commercial 2-way designs with low / steep passive filters, full impedance compensation, bit of HF Eq, the works. It is, er, rather 'flat' in terms of its FR. I like and enjoy both, albeit for different reasons. The latter was actually designed for small studios who wanted a modest sized floorstander for use as a monitor or for evaluating mixes. The first pair was built for a rather well-known Scottish fiddle-player.
Right. And when you factor rooms into the equation, things can and do get screwed up even more. This doesn't automatically make for poor or unenjoyable sound. Which is generally the point. Some people believe that forensic faithfulness to the recording is the sole object. Fair enough. But what most artists would want above all is for the listener to enjoy the fruit of their work. If the two are combined, great. They are not mutually exclusive. If not, then so be it, because nor do they have to be synonymous (unless claimed to be so).
That's two of us. I value both, while keeping their limitations in mind.
Last edited:
For CHN-70. Factory data (Earthworks M30 in anechoic chamber on IEC baffle using LMS) scaled and laid over top XRK's
dave
Understand you defend one of yours preferred brand but.
Where did that factory data come from planet10, it's certainly not the same as in datasheet attached below.
By showing these data as credible is a statement you also approves the data measured on this thread, which you else has struggled a lot against
.In datasheet nothing written about specific niche and the new factory data plot doesn't reflect point 2 see below, the old one do
.Extracted from datasheet, see attached picture:
use by audio end-users who want a high performance driver at a lower cost. The main features of the CHN70 are:
1 - Full Range operation (45Hz to 20kHz in box)
2 - Natural sound (near flat response)
3 - Long throw power-train design (Mech Xmax = 4mm 1 way)
4 - Heavy duty pressed steel frame, damped design
5 - Easy surface mounting installation
Sorry the account canceled, agree about time to drop the issue.
Attachments
TC9FD factory (lite red,purple, black) vrs XRK data.
dave
I think you scaled this wrong. The low frencuency tail on the Vifa plot has an F3 around 700hz.
Bob, then what was the point of your earlier post where you talked about your personal impressions about the CHN70 and A7.3? This thread is about objective measurements. I have some personal impressions too. What good is it to someone else who has a completely different room and may have different tastes?
Also, can you tell us more about the "niche Japanese market?" What were the design goals for the driver? And why is it being sold in the US for which it was clearly not designed for? And why does it get recommended to newcomers in the full range forum? My next question could be: why don't people who sell cabinets for these drivers, and the drivers themselves, disclose their business affiliations when recommending drivers in a non-commercial forum? But let's skip that for the moment.
You can listen to or prefer any driver you like, but don't do it under the impression that this is what the general public prefers. You want to listen to a tilted up response with shrill, shouty highs, by all means do so. But do not claim that others want this also.
People prefer full range drivers mainly for their simplicity. Designing crossovers is not easy. It requires knowledge of measurements and how to interpret them. It requires knowledge of electrical components and how they interact with each other. Most importantly, it requires time and patience, and a methodical approach. Not all of us want these things. So, we choose a compromise solution of using full range drivers. Pop a driver into a cabinet and cue the music. But let's not turn a blind eye to the extremely obvious shortcomings of most full range drivers. With these things in mind, why would you not pick the Vifa TC9? It is the logical solution. Nice clean, relatively flat and smooth response. Copper shorting ring to reduce distortion. And an $11 price to boot. What's not to like?
I've measured the TC9 in my living room in a small cardboard box. Here's how the data compares to what the manufacturer is showing.
Attachments
Last edited:
Allow me to add some fuel to the fire. 🙂
I have a pair of the Vifas TC9s and use them. They came recommend by a friend.
They measure and sound just about like what I have seen in the official specs and measurements I've seen here. I use them as mid/tweeters on Open Baffle.
When I used them in my listening room in North America, I did not care for them at all. Too shrill, too rough. They sounded about like the graph looks. "These are not for me" I thought, and put them away.
But now that I have them in a completely different listening environment
they sound rather nice. They even measure a little better.
What changed? Baffle size changed, but also acoustics and listening distance changed significantly. Maybe they are a little more off axis than before, but I don't think by much. I can understand why some people might hate them - and others like them. Certainly I changed my opinion of them in a different environment.
I have a pair of the Vifas TC9s and use them. They came recommend by a friend.
They measure and sound just about like what I have seen in the official specs and measurements I've seen here. I use them as mid/tweeters on Open Baffle.
When I used them in my listening room in North America, I did not care for them at all. Too shrill, too rough. They sounded about like the graph looks. "These are not for me" I thought, and put them away.
But now that I have them in a completely different listening environment
they sound rather nice. They even measure a little better.
What changed? Baffle size changed, but also acoustics and listening distance changed significantly. Maybe they are a little more off axis than before, but I don't think by much. I can understand why some people might hate them - and others like them. Certainly I changed my opinion of them in a different environment.
I imagine particularly good with Patti Smith's Waiting Underground? 😀
I know all to well how they are used. My statement stands.
All drivers have compromises. The biggest compromise with multiway drivers is that you have to use more than 1 of them (ie the ubiquitius cone + dome) and introduce a cross-over which way more often than not subtracts huge amounts of the musical information.
dave
The data is the data. The only error using Photoshop to stretch the MA chart over yours is that the line of the curve becomes fatter.
Gaving been taken in an anechoic chamber using a mic with greater dynamic range and better electronics will give the MA graph higher signal-to-noise.
That it is so ragged is down to being raw data with no smoothing.
The curve i used is from that graph that i already had on my computer. If you'd like i can take the exact curve from the above posted MA graph and do it again in case the version of my factory data is not the same version of the graph. It is time consuming thou and i'd rather not.
dave
Thanks for the commentary, Pano. I want to pick up on a couple of points you made.
1. "Too shrill, too rough." Your standards are clearly quite high, as they should be 🙂. In this group of drivers, they arguably measure the best.
2. "They sounded about like the graph looks." I would agree. The graph is not flat or smooth compared to, say, the Vifa XT25. But it is certainly better than some of the other drivers in the comparison, wouldn't you agree?
Your scaling is way off - the bass knee was at 150Hz in the MA graph. Here it seems to be 800Hz. That is the problem with scaling in Photoshop with no reference tick marks.
Not at all. I don't care about the data. But i do care about XRK using the argument that except for the CHN, his data mirrors the factory data so his must be right. I have done CHN and TC9D so far. IMO neither show XRK's data mirroring factory. I will slowly do the others tosee how they fair.
You can judge for yourself.
dave
The CHN-70 factory vrs XRK data using the exact curve as XRK posted in post #459.
dave
It's interesting how the MA data even without smoothing fails to show the dips at 600Hz and higher frequencies that appear in my data and the Japanese measurenent.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.