That topic took a fun twist
The minimum footprint challenge
But now it raises a question: WHY opting for multi-way ?
According to few members; there is no musical content to speak of below 40hz. And when aging starts to kick in, you're losing most of your earing capacities for the last octave (15khz or even less)...
So why bother with anything else than a good fullrange set-up?
Just to kick-start this thread, i made a little experiment. We're back to the very basic of music reproduction. Be ready 😛
Here is two mini portable speakers. A Mini Jambox and a Logitech.
As basic as it can get, yes? Now, i think their R&D dept made something enough so anyone can listen music and ''get'' it. I assume that's the minimum frequency range that is required. Makes sense so far ?
Here is the results on my 1/3 octave RTA, 2db step so we have a better view of what is happening. 70cm from mic, +/- 5deg on-axis, no wall/corner low-end gain, pink noise B-weighted.
The minimum footprint challenge
But now it raises a question: WHY opting for multi-way ?
According to few members; there is no musical content to speak of below 40hz. And when aging starts to kick in, you're losing most of your earing capacities for the last octave (15khz or even less)...
So why bother with anything else than a good fullrange set-up?
Just to kick-start this thread, i made a little experiment. We're back to the very basic of music reproduction. Be ready 😛
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Here is two mini portable speakers. A Mini Jambox and a Logitech.
As basic as it can get, yes? Now, i think their R&D dept made something enough so anyone can listen music and ''get'' it. I assume that's the minimum frequency range that is required. Makes sense so far ?
Here is the results on my 1/3 octave RTA, 2db step so we have a better view of what is happening. 70cm from mic, +/- 5deg on-axis, no wall/corner low-end gain, pink noise B-weighted.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
For what i understand of the little experiment, if you have a bandwith of 200hz-10khz: you're good to go.
Maybe because multi way speakers simply sound much better than full range speakers for most people?
Since you brought up the Logitechs, I'll put on a Logitech example as well. Logitech made a speaker system called the Z-5500. They used a single high quality Tang Band W3-593SF full range driver that sells for $25 each and a good quality 10" Tang Band woofer as well (WT-644F). It used 7 TDA7492 amplifiers with a decently big toroidal transformer and the system was actively crossed with a proper baffle step compensation applied.
Guess what, most people criticized on the Z-5500's sound quality when compared to anything remotely Hi-Fi, like $100 bookshelf speakers. To most people, a high quality full range driver couldn't even compete with a bargain bin 2 way bookshelf speaker.
Full range drivers are full range of compromises (pun intended). To most people, full range drivers sacrifice a whole lot to gain something that is unnoticeable or unappreciated by most, especially considering the compromises. Let's see what the pros and cons are
Pro
1. Point source, coherent, linear phase
2. Potentially no crossovers
Con
1. Very poor bass extension, otherwise sufficient treble extension cannot be achieved
2. Very limited bass due to limited linear displacement capabilities. Again cannot be fixed without completely giving up treble.
3. Poor treble performance due to inherent cone breakup that produces ragged treble response, which can't really be completely fixed
4. Very poor off axis dispersion for treble due to the size of the full range driver.
5. Poor treble extension due to inductance. Often compensated through cone breakup, but you're still hearing all the distortion from cone breakup.
6. Limited SPL capabilities, again due to limited displacement capabilities
7. Poor intermodulation distortion performance since one driver is doing full range.
8. If there is no crossovers, then there is no baffle step correction, or breakup suppression, or other response tailoring to fix a full range driver.
And more
A full range driver does NOTHING well. It is just a full range of compromises that may be acceptable to certain applications where sound quality is not a priority.
Say what you want about linear phase and coherence of full range speakers. These are qualities that are subjected to heavy debate whether it makes a sonic difference. My take is that if there are heavy debates whether there is a difference, then even if there is, the difference is too small to matter when there are much bigger improvements to aim for. I can bet you most people will hear the improvement in bass and treble of a multi way speaker over a full range speaker far more easily than the coherence of a full range driver. And I bet they would appreciate the advantages of a multi-way system much much more than the advantages of full range speakers.
Speaker design is a problem of balancing compromises. There is no such thing as a perfect speaker. A good speaker is simply one that has less compromises. People often get stuck on one aspect of performance, and would go to great lengths and greatly compromise a number of other performance factors in order to achieve this. The goal of a crossover-less speaker and/or point source coherent speaker, which naturally leads to full range drivers, is a perfect example of this.
Since you brought up the Logitechs, I'll put on a Logitech example as well. Logitech made a speaker system called the Z-5500. They used a single high quality Tang Band W3-593SF full range driver that sells for $25 each and a good quality 10" Tang Band woofer as well (WT-644F). It used 7 TDA7492 amplifiers with a decently big toroidal transformer and the system was actively crossed with a proper baffle step compensation applied.
Guess what, most people criticized on the Z-5500's sound quality when compared to anything remotely Hi-Fi, like $100 bookshelf speakers. To most people, a high quality full range driver couldn't even compete with a bargain bin 2 way bookshelf speaker.
Full range drivers are full range of compromises (pun intended). To most people, full range drivers sacrifice a whole lot to gain something that is unnoticeable or unappreciated by most, especially considering the compromises. Let's see what the pros and cons are
Pro
1. Point source, coherent, linear phase
2. Potentially no crossovers
Con
1. Very poor bass extension, otherwise sufficient treble extension cannot be achieved
2. Very limited bass due to limited linear displacement capabilities. Again cannot be fixed without completely giving up treble.
3. Poor treble performance due to inherent cone breakup that produces ragged treble response, which can't really be completely fixed
4. Very poor off axis dispersion for treble due to the size of the full range driver.
5. Poor treble extension due to inductance. Often compensated through cone breakup, but you're still hearing all the distortion from cone breakup.
6. Limited SPL capabilities, again due to limited displacement capabilities
7. Poor intermodulation distortion performance since one driver is doing full range.
8. If there is no crossovers, then there is no baffle step correction, or breakup suppression, or other response tailoring to fix a full range driver.
And more
A full range driver does NOTHING well. It is just a full range of compromises that may be acceptable to certain applications where sound quality is not a priority.
Say what you want about linear phase and coherence of full range speakers. These are qualities that are subjected to heavy debate whether it makes a sonic difference. My take is that if there are heavy debates whether there is a difference, then even if there is, the difference is too small to matter when there are much bigger improvements to aim for. I can bet you most people will hear the improvement in bass and treble of a multi way speaker over a full range speaker far more easily than the coherence of a full range driver. And I bet they would appreciate the advantages of a multi-way system much much more than the advantages of full range speakers.
Speaker design is a problem of balancing compromises. There is no such thing as a perfect speaker. A good speaker is simply one that has less compromises. People often get stuck on one aspect of performance, and would go to great lengths and greatly compromise a number of other performance factors in order to achieve this. The goal of a crossover-less speaker and/or point source coherent speaker, which naturally leads to full range drivers, is a perfect example of this.
Last edited:
Full range speakers are good for certain things, like small footprint, that has already been mentioned, so is good for small rooms or for a person who does not want the speakers to dominate the living room, kids running around banging into them which can be expensive, full range can be useful.
Also with the advent of dolby atmos a large number of speakers are required in a fairly small space, small footprint becomes important again.
I used full range for a while but as explained found bass and treble lacking, so supplemented with b&c twt and active sub. In this 3-way situation the free range still sounds good because of the lack of x-over componenets
Also with the advent of dolby atmos a large number of speakers are required in a fairly small space, small footprint becomes important again.
I used full range for a while but as explained found bass and treble lacking, so supplemented with b&c twt and active sub. In this 3-way situation the free range still sounds good because of the lack of x-over componenets
Calling the Z-5500 a high quality fullrange is a big stretch.
Your points may be based on some reality, but you really need to listen to some quality FRs, they may suffer from some of what you say, but not near to th elevel you intimate.
dave
I don't know about multi, but at least 2 ways for sure.
I have very sensitive hearing in the last few octaves. particularly to smooth FR and low energy storage and compression. No full range is going to take my speakers from me.
E
I have very sensitive hearing in the last few octaves. particularly to smooth FR and low energy storage and compression. No full range is going to take my speakers from me.
E
the usual answer, -it depends...
In my opinion it depends on the type of music you listen to. For music with few instruments, acoustic instruments, limited percussions, drums and listening at moderate output-levels, a good full range speaker can be sufficient or even prefered to a multi-way speaker.
it also depends on your listening environment, large or small room. As soon as you have demands for higher volumes or the music played depends on electronic instrumentation and rythms, a multi-way is generally better to handle both heavy bass and treble at the same time. This keeping the distortion levels low.
There are of course exceptions to the above..
In my opinion it depends on the type of music you listen to. For music with few instruments, acoustic instruments, limited percussions, drums and listening at moderate output-levels, a good full range speaker can be sufficient or even prefered to a multi-way speaker.
it also depends on your listening environment, large or small room. As soon as you have demands for higher volumes or the music played depends on electronic instrumentation and rythms, a multi-way is generally better to handle both heavy bass and treble at the same time. This keeping the distortion levels low.
There are of course exceptions to the above..
Last edited:
Man, you opened a can of worms here. I feel much more comfortable here:
What are the Advantages of Full Range?
But it remains an interesting debate, thanks.
Basically agree on what you say about "full range" drivers; however there are some of these who are very useful as midrange drivers.
That's a ( common?) misunderstanding.
Full range or multi way has nothing to do with the scale of music reproduced; a good multi way speaker easily outperforms any "full ranger" on small scale music (at least in my ears...).
Full range is a very poor term to use (unfortunately we are stuck with it), if it were wideband many of the cons listed by bcodemz would vanish and we could get on with designing very good 2 way (or 3 way) systems. Some of the extreme horns designed for getting large frequency range out of a single driver are downright silly
Sure. A tabletop loudspeaker is the pinnacle of this design.
I love the build quality of your threads: but have grown allergic to all the straw used as filler.
I agree with Dave that full range units have got to be of higher quality to offer an experience that's comparable to multy way systems and beside that people have preferences. Whatever makes one happy.
This forum is about the reproduction of music. But what about recording? If one consider music (analogue waves), from recording to reproduction, then full range makes a lot more sense. The most music by far is still recorded using microphones – which are really full range devices. Music instruments that generate very high or low frequency signals electronically causes problems for the full range drivers to reproduce.
Well, it seems the 10 octaves thing is optional for some... But to what extent? For me 9.5 octaves (solid 30hz-20khz or 20hz-15khz) is the minimum for an HiFi system. But it seems that most people can live with 9 or even 8 octaves!
The mini portable devices shown on post #1 are basically 6 octaves speakers. Which i think is considered as the bare minimum for intelligibility.
I remember about the midrange blind test i made last year and i had to widen the bandwith otherwise it was not listenable. We ended up testing on 400hz-6.8khz or so.
I built multi way speakers this time around because I wanted more than a single driver could produce. Specifically in the bass region.
Tang Band 5 inch wide range driver 240-350Hz and up. Wavecor (CSS modified) 7 inch woofer below that. 2 amps with an active crossover.
Works for me. And keeping the Xover out of the mids makes good music to these ears.
Tang Band 5 inch wide range driver 240-350Hz and up. Wavecor (CSS modified) 7 inch woofer below that. 2 amps with an active crossover.
Works for me. And keeping the Xover out of the mids makes good music to these ears.
mcgsxr - pretty much describes what many of us are calling "FAST" - even though I've built and quite enjoyed a few of these over the past several years, I still rankle at that name.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.