You could, but you also should deliver measurements of a large area of seats. And of course show waterfall diagrams. Can you?
I did this for a DBA everywhere in the web. You have just to use Google.
I can ask you for evidences for people preferring an "enveloping" bass, too. It is contrary to my (and others) experience.
You should listen to a DBA in a home theater environment. Maybe you change your mind then. I built, measured and listen to several. I know what I'm talking about.
Last edited:
..the irony is:
Earl consistently supports a NON-"enveloping" play-back experience.
Also, the way he uses multi-subs is NOT in the manner that Greisinger advocates - in fact I'd say its counter to what Greisinger advocates. So as it turns-out: he is actually being consistent (..despite what he's stated).
..weird, huh?
Earl consistently supports a NON-"enveloping" play-back experience.
Also, the way he uses multi-subs is NOT in the manner that Greisinger advocates - in fact I'd say its counter to what Greisinger advocates. So as it turns-out: he is actually being consistent (..despite what he's stated).
..weird, huh?
I'm kind of surprised that no one has pointed-out the absolutely horrible non-linear distortion lower than 100 Hz with high-levels, and the beyond horrible non-linear distortion at 50 Hz or lower regardless of output level. (..talking about the Kiiaudio speaker.)
-they also had the opportunity to substantially improve on the directive quality at higher freq.s, but just chose to use waveguide Seas tweeter. *weak "sauce"* IMO.
-they also had the opportunity to substantially improve on the directive quality at higher freq.s, but just chose to use waveguide Seas tweeter. *weak "sauce"* IMO.
Last edited:
ScottG - I have no idea what you are talking about as I do not support non-enveloping playback. And my bass technique is quite a bit like what Griesinger suggests.
Do you guys just make up stuff to support your position? There is little point in having a discussion with someone who does that.
Do you guys just make up stuff to support your position? There is little point in having a discussion with someone who does that.
Could you elaborate?
As for the DBA variant if multi subs vs the Geddes variant, one thing worth noting is that a Geddes style arrangement can work in any room but DBA puts extreme constraints on room shape, openings, and even furnishings. So regardless of merit in ideal conditions, DBA is impracticable in most rooms.
.."envelopment" as Greisinger uses it in a small-room context is effectively the "banishment" of the small room context.
Specifically to achieve a "you are there" context, not a "they are here" sound.
The "they are here" sound is what Earl has continuously argued for.
At low freq.s Earl wants a very uniform response through-out the room by distributing multiple subs to "load" the room - activating modes (and not activating modes) in a manner that doesn't leave substantial "dips" and that don't have large "peaks" (..he's trying to avoid modal "grouping").
Earl specifically does this so that you have a consistent pressure/spl-level for multiple locations through-out the room. Basically a more linear response for multiple listeners.
Greisinger on the other hand isn't terribly concerned about multiple listeners (..though I'm sure the wider/longer the "sweet-spot" the more he would prefer it).
Rather Greisinger is specifically looking to achieve a time variance from the listener's ears. A lead or lag horizontally, but if possible - also forward/reward of the listener.
His method ALSO involves multiple subs: at least two, but preferably 4 or more.
His method ALSO involves subs that are a summation of L and R.
HOWEVER, Greisinger is NOT positioning subs so that they are "random" to drive modes in a particular manner.
Instead he is positioning subs relative to the listener - if just two: approaching the listener's +/90 degrees.
THEN he is adjusting the phase (about 90 degrees) to setup that time variance. (I think he's also doing some particular monophonic summing as well, not just a base L and R - to improve the effect.)
This largely sets-up a time variance horizontally, but he'd also like to have some variance forward/reward. To do that:
He would prefer at least 4 subs however, perhaps something like +/- 80 degrees and +/- 120 degrees (..again, relative to the listener).
Those extra subs should help with forward/reward delay.
..as for a DBA or double bass array - I've not really looked into it. Sorry.
Specifically to achieve a "you are there" context, not a "they are here" sound.
The "they are here" sound is what Earl has continuously argued for.
At low freq.s Earl wants a very uniform response through-out the room by distributing multiple subs to "load" the room - activating modes (and not activating modes) in a manner that doesn't leave substantial "dips" and that don't have large "peaks" (..he's trying to avoid modal "grouping").
Earl specifically does this so that you have a consistent pressure/spl-level for multiple locations through-out the room. Basically a more linear response for multiple listeners.
Greisinger on the other hand isn't terribly concerned about multiple listeners (..though I'm sure the wider/longer the "sweet-spot" the more he would prefer it).
Rather Greisinger is specifically looking to achieve a time variance from the listener's ears. A lead or lag horizontally, but if possible - also forward/reward of the listener.
His method ALSO involves multiple subs: at least two, but preferably 4 or more.
His method ALSO involves subs that are a summation of L and R.
HOWEVER, Greisinger is NOT positioning subs so that they are "random" to drive modes in a particular manner.
Instead he is positioning subs relative to the listener - if just two: approaching the listener's +/90 degrees.
THEN he is adjusting the phase (about 90 degrees) to setup that time variance. (I think he's also doing some particular monophonic summing as well, not just a base L and R - to improve the effect.)
This largely sets-up a time variance horizontally, but he'd also like to have some variance forward/reward. To do that:
He would prefer at least 4 subs however, perhaps something like +/- 80 degrees and +/- 120 degrees (..again, relative to the listener).
Those extra subs should help with forward/reward delay.
..as for a DBA or double bass array - I've not really looked into it. Sorry.
Last edited:
Your last post gets things wrong. What Griesinger and I are trying to achieve are exactly the same thing, a decorrelated LF signal at the ears. We do it differently, but my technique is much closer to Griesinger than DBA, that was my point. DBA is basically the exactly opposite of what both Greisinger and I do.
And there is absolutely zero evidence that either technique is preferred, contrary to the outlandish claims being made for DBA. "I listened, I liked it, therefor most people will prefer it." What an arrogant claim.
And there is absolutely zero evidence that either technique is preferred, contrary to the outlandish claims being made for DBA. "I listened, I liked it, therefor most people will prefer it." What an arrogant claim.
This shows a complete misunderstanding of my position. My rooms are highly reverberant at high frequencies - far far more than most listening room since almost no sound absorbing material is used. This creates a highly spacious sound with multiple later lateral reflections. "Envelopment" in Griesinger's terms only applies to the LFs and stems from a high degree of uncorrelated sound at the two ears. A highly correlated sound at the two ears, like that from DBA, will not have "envelopment". Maybe it is "fast", whatever that means, but it is not what I seek to achieve.
The they-are-here or you-are-there impression is not one that I give to the recording, I am not the producer, it is one given by the artist. That one can be created better than the other is simply a fact, but that in no way implies that I seek to produce one over the other. I seek to produce what was on the recording, nothing more, nothing less.
While it is true that a DBA has its restrictions, they are not so strict as most people think. A DBA can work with a reduced set of drivers in a rectangular room and it even works in L-shaped rooms with an additional delay. And furnishing is not a big problem for its function either.
- DBA with reduced driver set (in german)
- DBA in a L-shaped room (in german)
A friend of mine has a reduced DBA running in a room under the roof which is partially open. It works very well.
Of course there are still rooms where even the reduced DBA's are not applicable. In such cases Earl's method is preferrable.
Where have you learned to quote?
I said that all people that tried a DBA (and I know of) preferred the directed bass wave over their previous multi sub configuration. And there are plenty of DBA's here in Germany in the home theater scene.
Do you ever listened to a DBA? I guess not. So you are talking about things you don't know.
And regarding "arrogant". I never met a person that is so convinced of his achievements as you. You react like a offended child when someone criticizes your creations. You even don't consider that others could be right.
I don't argue with you anymore. It is a waste of time.
Last edited:
No.
You have consistently advocated that an impression of space provided by the recording is rather pointless, and that you prefer the impression of "they are here".
-anything else is just plain bullsh!t.
You clearly think that you are adding spaciousness with your emphasis on contra-lateral reflections, but they are simply to low in intensity and time to have much effect. Again, try going back and reading Toole's book - with actual authorities from others (including Blauert).
..how about an actual quote:
"3. Envelopment at high frequencies
In the frequency band between 300Hz and 3000Hz envelopment is determined by a combination of fluctuations in the IID and the ITD. This fact was discovered independently by the author and Blauert. Blauert notes in [7] and [8] that fluctuations in IID have slightly different perceptual properties than fluctuations in ITD. He concludes that different brain structures are involved in the two perceptions. Envelopment at frequencies below 300Hz is determined almost entirely by fluctuations in the ITD."
Note: the author in this instance is David Griesinger.
Note: ITD is inter-aural TIME DELAY.
Yes, he took your quote out of context and subverted it to discount your statement.
He does that A LOT. Quite fond of the "straw-man" argument.
Yes, I think you are right - it certainly is a waste of my time. (..Last time I gave him actual references from a reference - it wasn't "what he wanted", therefor his argument was to stop arguing.)
..it's very different when you move into the commercial world.
The problem is that sales volume in "hi-end" is so low and that marketing costs (..particularly dealer distribution) are so high that you end up with exceedingly expensive products (almost regardless of the performance).
To be fair though, the Kii is doing something fairly rare (if not unique) with their delay-derived semi-cardioid.
There have been a few in the "Pro" market that have also done this.
The "kicker" is that there are some problems with this design, but that can be said of almost any design.
If they'd limit their low-freq. bandwidth to about 80 Hz, they'd have much better non-linear performance.
If they'd actually spend some time developing a good waveguide for their tweeter of choice, they'd have better performance off-axis within a certain horizontal "range".
Thank you. And I begun to think that I'm the only person who has a problem with his style of discussion.
Best not to ask such a question immediately after a misquote.
This question was directed to me in error, but I'll answer nonetheless. I actually have heard one. It sounded great, but I wouldn't say it was better than my multi sub system and my room certainly looks better as it's a living room and not a cave. (The DBA had a decided cost advantage, with Dayton drivers compared to Aurasound and black paint instead of bespoke veneered cabinets.) That system was also IMO let down by unimpressive mains, the diy Statements design with midranges in tunnels. Perhaps with better mains I would've been blown away by every aspect of that system.
Last edited:
Which misquote do you mean?Best not to ask such a question immediately after a misquote.
The question was directed to Earl. I reread my post and don't see any error. Did I miss something?
The main advantage of a DBA is the near zero variance over the whole room with near zero decay. And it can be integrated invisibly. I believe you that it didn't sound much better than your system in the sweet spot.
It really becomes interesting when using very high SPL. The tactile feedback which is perceived from the front is what it makes so special. It is comparable to the bass from an open-air concert which is directed, too. Additionally music, picture and bass are perceived from the same direction. Everything integrates perfectly. I don't see any logical reason to aim for an "envolving" bass when >90% of all other events are located at the front.
You're right, looking at reviews and tests, and Putzey's reputation for reliability, the Kii looks like a good speaker product although the price is too high for reasons you mention.
However, from the POV of DIYer, it's shows interesting possibilities in the light of Barleywater's post No. 3 this thread and the reference there:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/269936-cardioid-sum-monopole-dipole-speakers.html
So, if a DIYer wanted to clone this thing, he/she could probably do it for 1/5th the price, (may be less), using UCD modules and power and following Barley's example for DSP.
I think the hard part would be getting up to speed on the acoustics requirements before any attempt is made to design. On the other hand, with xrk's technique of building fast, cheap, foam board speakers preliminary experimentation might not be too costly.
The technology for building a cardioid has been available for a long time....it's just that few have chosen to pursue it. Olson published the paper detailing how to do it in the JAES back in '73. It's called "Gradient Loudspeakers" and you can buy it from the AES. Quite interesting if you're into this sort of thing, though most of that info is available elsewhere.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.