Recordings/Loudspeakers are 4D TIME MACHINES !!!
With studio treatment you strip off their originality , what's left is a replaceable gimmick called music with no identity no more . Same happens now worldwide with WEF and transhumanism ideology!
The ghost in the machine tries to be the master , don't let that dog out
With studio treatment you strip off their originality , what's left is a replaceable gimmick called music with no identity no more . Same happens now worldwide with WEF and transhumanism ideology!
The ghost in the machine tries to be the master , don't let that dog out
Idk the power handling of the 142a but I took it all the way to 120db/3 ft which was around 400 watts it also didn't show signs of power compression and I was giving it 10s to cool
Off between sweeps so it can take some serious power and not go poof. When I did the sweeps with the driver backwards magnet out I felt the magnet and cone and they were both warm but not hot 5.4 inch vc is serious business lol
Big VCs are great for dynamics and reliability. They have their drawbacks, which are reduced stiffness and greater given mass. Most people don't need the SPL capability, but running a mid in a small sealed chamber without much heat dissipation will make the VC heat up fast, especially in a horn loaded design. The only times I've come close to killing a driver was running them in small sealed midbass applications. Unless you can provide some kind of heat sinking to the VC, it will at very least cause power compression and make the heat pile up fast.
As with xmax, having alot more keeps the driver in its linear range for the lowest possible distortion. Same holds true for a large VC - lots of room for power and dynamics.
As with xmax, having alot more keeps the driver in its linear range for the lowest possible distortion. Same holds true for a large VC - lots of room for power and dynamics.
Yeah, I'd be more interested in measurements than subjective opinion. Your opinion will change as a result of exposure and expectations. Measurements are much more reliable...
Judging accuracy by ear? I wouldn't trust that lol
Camplo, it sounds like you were coming from ASR. Anybody wanting measurements can buy the drivers and measure anything he wants. Bliesma measurements can be found on Hificompass.
If anyone describes the impression from the sound, I understand it as subjective evaluation, I do not not see it as some undeniable truth. Yet it has still the value. So why to disregard anyone's subjective evaluation all the time? Measurements + subjective evaluation in this hobby, speaker design, are two undetachable things.
The main problem with the measurements is that it is not easy to find the correlation with the subjective qualities.
There are cases, where it is not as easy as "this has lower distortion = this sounds better".
One example for all. Satori TW29RN and DN, they both have elevated top end >10kHz by ~3dB. One would think this would sound too bright, adding artificial detail and air. But no, it does not, it does actually sound fine. As the opposite, T34B and a lot os hard dome tweeters have mildly declining top end, as many of hard dome tweeters, yet they all usually sound more detailed and accurate sompared to Satoris.
I think it take much more to judge and evaluate the sound and make correlation with the measurements then just making spinorama, distortion measurements etc.
Measurements are great design tool, comparison tool, diagnostics tool....but speakers are meant to play the music and we percive it by our senses. We are all different, though my observation says that my subjective impressions often correlate with subjective impressions of other diyers. I mean the sound character of certain drivers.
I am not defending various useless speaker reviews. I defend the opions of people who measure and listen, fine tune, and listen, compare and listen, measure again, etc.
I do not want this forum to become ASR. We do not have to like or appreciate every subjective opinions, but let's not disregard it.
If anyone describes the impression from the sound, I understand it as subjective evaluation, I do not not see it as some undeniable truth. Yet it has still the value. So why to disregard anyone's subjective evaluation all the time? Measurements + subjective evaluation in this hobby, speaker design, are two undetachable things.
The main problem with the measurements is that it is not easy to find the correlation with the subjective qualities.
There are cases, where it is not as easy as "this has lower distortion = this sounds better".
One example for all. Satori TW29RN and DN, they both have elevated top end >10kHz by ~3dB. One would think this would sound too bright, adding artificial detail and air. But no, it does not, it does actually sound fine. As the opposite, T34B and a lot os hard dome tweeters have mildly declining top end, as many of hard dome tweeters, yet they all usually sound more detailed and accurate sompared to Satoris.
I think it take much more to judge and evaluate the sound and make correlation with the measurements then just making spinorama, distortion measurements etc.
Measurements are great design tool, comparison tool, diagnostics tool....but speakers are meant to play the music and we percive it by our senses. We are all different, though my observation says that my subjective impressions often correlate with subjective impressions of other diyers. I mean the sound character of certain drivers.
I am not defending various useless speaker reviews. I defend the opions of people who measure and listen, fine tune, and listen, compare and listen, measure again, etc.
I do not want this forum to become ASR. We do not have to like or appreciate every subjective opinions, but let's not disregard it.
Last edited:
The simple answer to the above is you then fall in the trap "more expensive is always better". The sound character of a multiway filtered system is by and large determined by its x/o and application. Clear examples are the Kii3, the more affordable Genelec models or Dutch & Dutch 8C. All regarded as the cream of the crop, yet not a single exotic or uberexpensvie driver is in sight. Its is specs, specs and specs. Earl Geddes equally considers properly designed compression drivers to be a "commodity".
You change the topic. The part you quoted is about my view on subjective opinions and how I treat them. I think it was clear I consider them just a part of the whole story, so why do you argument with "more expensive is always better"? From my experience I would rephrase it "....often better".
I do not discuss the quality of the design and crossover work, come on, we are not teenage beginners, we all know what matters.
Genelecs, Kii, D&D, and let's not forget KH Neumann and KEF. Yes, their design work is admirable, yet I hear a lot of people not liking the sound at all. Please understand I do not propagate any voodoo, snake oil, over expensive full range drivers or any weird speaker concepts, I think that is quite clear from my comments and designs. I can do good measuring waveguided 2way anytime, with some experience it is quite easy nowadays, but to make it sound good is different story.
So please please no cheap arguments like "....fall in the trap "more expensive is always better"". Nobody says that here, so you do not need to make this argument.
I do not discuss the quality of the design and crossover work, come on, we are not teenage beginners, we all know what matters.
Genelecs, Kii, D&D, and let's not forget KH Neumann and KEF. Yes, their design work is admirable, yet I hear a lot of people not liking the sound at all. Please understand I do not propagate any voodoo, snake oil, over expensive full range drivers or any weird speaker concepts, I think that is quite clear from my comments and designs. I can do good measuring waveguided 2way anytime, with some experience it is quite easy nowadays, but to make it sound good is different story.
So please please no cheap arguments like "....fall in the trap "more expensive is always better"". Nobody says that here, so you do not need to make this argument.
So it is in the drivers, and not in the system design, x/o points, voicing of the x/o? Dream on.
I see no reason why it is not a combination of all of the above, each has it's contribution. A good driver cannot overcome a poor system design, but combine them together and you are on to something.
Again, cheap, oversimplified argument. I did not say anything even close to it. It seems you think drivers do not matter.
And sorry for my basic english, it is my second language. From your arguments it seems to me I fail to express my view and opinions properly and that I look like pure subjectivist, without any experience.
I do not push anything to anyone, I just explain my view, supported with my hands on, ears on, measureing, designing,... experiences with a lot lot drivers and designs. I do not blindly follow and admire the marketing of the brands you mentioned. Come on, DXT, SB17, Seas tweeters Genelec uses, there are really better options. They are just companies and they need to make profit.
I consider both measurements and listening important, and the words are just the way to share the impression. That is my way. Anyone who fully focusses on just one of them, the measurement only, is the one who is blind.
Last edited:
Your English is quite good, actually better than many "native" English speakers here
A sonic event as witnessed by the ears/CN VIII/brain, when described by language is considered "subjective" , but if described by numbers/graphs is considered "objective"
But with recent advances in neuroscience, linguistics and the advent of Large Language Models, it has made me reconsider what it means to be subjective or objective.
Words or numbers, they are both translations, as we try to understand.
Petr has a website where he takes meticulous measurements of his designs. If readers want to skip the adjectives they can always jump straight to the graphical interpretation-
www.pkaudio.cz
Descartes said cogito, ergo sum, (Latin: “I think, therefore I am)
Maybe in C21 we realise sentio, ergo sum (Latin: “I feel, therefore I am)
But with recent advances in neuroscience, linguistics and the advent of Large Language Models, it has made me reconsider what it means to be subjective or objective.
Words or numbers, they are both translations, as we try to understand.
Petr has a website where he takes meticulous measurements of his designs. If readers want to skip the adjectives they can always jump straight to the graphical interpretation-
www.pkaudio.cz
Descartes said cogito, ergo sum, (Latin: “I think, therefore I am)
Maybe in C21 we realise sentio, ergo sum (Latin: “I feel, therefore I am)
Last edited:
Agree.
Well it is true that 90% of the sound quality of a speaker is determined by the frequency response, on and off axis... the whole radiation pattern.
But once we have gotten the spinorama performance right, other things come into play. And some of those things we do not fully understand. It is not that we can't measure these aspects, it is that we do not know which combination of 300+ measurable attributes contribute to a specific subjective perception.
Yes, and many people think they are being objective when they gaze at a 6-pack set of plots and draw a conclusion based on how the graphs look. A subjective visual assessment is trusted as "objective" and a subjective auditory assessment is not trusted because it is "subjective". But in truth, both are qualitative subjective assessments.