Glad to hear it. Mine keep surprising me, especially orchestral and glad I kept stuffing and listening. When the string basses go deep enough, it sounds just right. No boominess, just a nice woody resonance of the bass itself. Forgot what it sounds like, it has been so long since I've had capable speakers.
probably a week away from firing up these F6s (I hope). Starting to look forward to them playing with the Halcyons.
-tom
Last edited:
I’m also following the Rasmussen Hamlet with interest. i was thinking about a stand mount speaker kit (Philharmonic BMR, GR-Research X-LS Encore, CSS Criton, etc.) and now Joe has this Hamlet coming.
One thing I’d like to understand better. This applies to Halcyon and Elsinore/Hamlet. The spacing of the tweeter from the mid-bass driver is something that Planet-10 Dave is always bringing up. Danny at GR Research goes to great lengths to make this distance as close as possible. Joe gives an explanation for why this isn’t always the best approach, but I frankly didn’t understand it. By using a separate cabinet for the Halcyon mid-bass, Curt was forced to keep the distances a little apart. I’d like a better understanding of that whole phenomenon. In Curt’s case, you could argue that the “tweeter” is actually a full-range driver so the whole point is moot. (?). Anyway, with the new posts on the Hamlet, including a sort-of discussion of this topic, it has me wondering. If anybody has a good answer or a good source, I’d be most interested.
One thing I’d like to understand better. This applies to Halcyon and Elsinore/Hamlet. The spacing of the tweeter from the mid-bass driver is something that Planet-10 Dave is always bringing up. Danny at GR Research goes to great lengths to make this distance as close as possible. Joe gives an explanation for why this isn’t always the best approach, but I frankly didn’t understand it. By using a separate cabinet for the Halcyon mid-bass, Curt was forced to keep the distances a little apart. I’d like a better understanding of that whole phenomenon. In Curt’s case, you could argue that the “tweeter” is actually a full-range driver so the whole point is moot. (?). Anyway, with the new posts on the Hamlet, including a sort-of discussion of this topic, it has me wondering. If anybody has a good answer or a good source, I’d be most interested.
Last edited:
Let’s see if i can explain this in a way it is understandable.
First let’s note that the Elsinore has been in development for some 15 years. Much real-world cut & try has ended up with Joe having a very well received design. Starting from a decent starting point the design has been slowly refined to where it is now. Sort of like the Edison approach. The Elsinore suffers and benefits from its momentum.
Every loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises. It is that set that determines whether a speaker is suitable for any individuals particular use.
In the Halcyon, the spacing could be, as Curt stated, much better, closer and that a revison would have him doing that. And the midTweeter seperation is not due to the mid-enclosure. The use of cardboard tube, which is quite thin), getting the drivers closer together is certainly doable.
Now a midTweeter is a compromise. The choice of a good FR means that we can push the XO point very low, but some would say we ar egiving up dispersion and extension up top. In some cases that is true. I ask, given how old many of us here are, can we even hear high enuff for us to even be perceiving the region where a difference would be noted. A generalization has to be made with caution given the large range of units available for this role.
But. The closer we get to that magic quarter wavelength driver centre-to-centre (thank you Tom Danley for your work), the closer we get to s situstion where the drivers and physically and likely acoustically coincident. At higher frequencies they only way we can get close to this ideal is a coax, and given the small wavelengths one still needs time-delay to get the 2 drivers coincident.
Once you get to that coincidence, many of the issues with crossovers go away. Also down that low the ear/brain cares less. A typcal dome or ribbon is typically crossed over right where the ear is most sensitive to it. As one approaches the quarter wave spacing the job of making the XO disappear becomes easier.
The hand waving that Allen suggested is valid because Joe uses the Lipinski as (further) justificationgot a good review. That is a red herring as well as hand-waving. When i first saw the Lipinski i thot it was strange looking as well. The little geometry trick that Joe used becomes more or less moot when one gets to real listening distances. So they detailed response from Joe does show his thinking and his choice of compromises gets you to the driver spacing used. Whether another designer would choose that set of compromises is a choice.
That Hamlet uses the same spacing as Elsinore i found quite shocking. Now one has to rethink how Elsinore is arranged — something i have already done, including 1st draft sketches of a box with 4 midBass and a midTweeter with all the drivers close enuff to get that quarter-wave spacing. A development on our already well-proven A12pw MTM. Passive XO can probably be based on the same one as used in the MTM, the net woofer sensitivity remains the same, so a first pass would be halve the caps and double the inductors in the bass leg.
This design was inspired by one of Joe’s comments about why he choose 4 woofers.
There is no perfect or best speaker. There are too many compromises and many different usage situations that make that impossible.
dave
First let’s note that the Elsinore has been in development for some 15 years. Much real-world cut & try has ended up with Joe having a very well received design. Starting from a decent starting point the design has been slowly refined to where it is now. Sort of like the Edison approach. The Elsinore suffers and benefits from its momentum.
Every loudspeaker is a very large set of compromises. It is that set that determines whether a speaker is suitable for any individuals particular use.
In the Halcyon, the spacing could be, as Curt stated, much better, closer and that a revison would have him doing that. And the midTweeter seperation is not due to the mid-enclosure. The use of cardboard tube, which is quite thin), getting the drivers closer together is certainly doable.
Now a midTweeter is a compromise. The choice of a good FR means that we can push the XO point very low, but some would say we ar egiving up dispersion and extension up top. In some cases that is true. I ask, given how old many of us here are, can we even hear high enuff for us to even be perceiving the region where a difference would be noted. A generalization has to be made with caution given the large range of units available for this role.
But. The closer we get to that magic quarter wavelength driver centre-to-centre (thank you Tom Danley for your work), the closer we get to s situstion where the drivers and physically and likely acoustically coincident. At higher frequencies they only way we can get close to this ideal is a coax, and given the small wavelengths one still needs time-delay to get the 2 drivers coincident.
Once you get to that coincidence, many of the issues with crossovers go away. Also down that low the ear/brain cares less. A typcal dome or ribbon is typically crossed over right where the ear is most sensitive to it. As one approaches the quarter wave spacing the job of making the XO disappear becomes easier.
The hand waving that Allen suggested is valid because Joe uses the Lipinski as (further) justificationgot a good review. That is a red herring as well as hand-waving. When i first saw the Lipinski i thot it was strange looking as well. The little geometry trick that Joe used becomes more or less moot when one gets to real listening distances. So they detailed response from Joe does show his thinking and his choice of compromises gets you to the driver spacing used. Whether another designer would choose that set of compromises is a choice.
That Hamlet uses the same spacing as Elsinore i found quite shocking. Now one has to rethink how Elsinore is arranged — something i have already done, including 1st draft sketches of a box with 4 midBass and a midTweeter with all the drivers close enuff to get that quarter-wave spacing. A development on our already well-proven A12pw MTM. Passive XO can probably be based on the same one as used in the MTM, the net woofer sensitivity remains the same, so a first pass would be halve the caps and double the inductors in the bass leg.
This design was inspired by one of Joe’s comments about why he choose 4 woofers.
There is no perfect or best speaker. There are too many compromises and many different usage situations that make that impossible.
dave
Let me add that given how the Elsinore got where it is, Joe needed to apply as much of the work done on Elsinore to Hamlet.
The spacing looks OK on Elsinore, weird on Hamlet.
It should work as well and be very similar in voicing to Elsinore so that is good.
dave
The spacing looks OK on Elsinore, weird on Hamlet.
It should work as well and be very similar in voicing to Elsinore so that is good.
dave
Thanks, Dave. Unfortunately, most of what you said went over my head.
This is stated as a given. That is what I’d like to see explained. I don’t know anything about the “magic quarter wavelength”. How would I learn about that, in kindergarten english?
This is stated as a given. That is what I’d like to see explained. I don’t know anything about the “magic quarter wavelength”. How would I learn about that, in kindergarten english?
It is the point at which 2 physically spaced drivers start to appear to be one.
A trick nailed down by Danley with his Synergy Horn and just filtering into the speaker building mindset. Given the virtual impossibility of doing the same with a cone/dome so rarely, if ever, entered people’s vision.
dave
A trick nailed down by Danley with his Synergy Horn and just filtering into the speaker building mindset. Given the virtual impossibility of doing the same with a cone/dome so rarely, if ever, entered people’s vision.
dave
Watch the following video of a new 2-way being developed by Danny Ritche, the transfer function plots and his explanation will help clarify the concepts being discussed by P-10 Dave -
(I cued it up at 3m59s for you)
Introducing! The XLS-Bravo! - YouTube
Thanks, mp9. That helped. I’d still like to see some quarter wavelength theory, but that made sense.
BTW, how did you cue it up at a particular time?
BTW, how did you cue it up at a particular time?
Last edited:
Quarter wavelength spacing is one of the tools used in the process of maintaining controlled directivity, or constant directivity. Using quarter wavelength spacing isn't the only way to pay sufficient attention to this issue. It recognises one of the fundamental concerns with a crossover, and that is the fact that the drivers are not coincident.
I've drawn two situations (attached). The first shows a spacing and frequency which is at a quarter wavelength. Wave polarity is show in dotted/solid lines and these do not completely overlap over the 180 degree vertical span. Compare to the second image with wavelength spacing where you can see cancellations.
I've drawn two situations (attached). The first shows a spacing and frequency which is at a quarter wavelength. Wave polarity is show in dotted/solid lines and these do not completely overlap over the 180 degree vertical span. Compare to the second image with wavelength spacing where you can see cancellations.
Attachments
A friend pointed me to a iPhone app audio analysis toolset called AudioTools. I've been meaning to play with it and finally sat down and did some in-room pink noise measurements. The caveats: 1.) it is been a long time since I did any measurement let alone a review of the theory of measurements; 2.) I have no idea how well calibrated the mic is for the software but I was assured it is decent enough.
Given that, attached is the FFT of in-room measured pink noise at the listening position using peak hold w/ 1/3 octave smoothing. I was pleasantly surprised by the overall response except the dip around 510Hz has me curious if I have the MarkAudio drivers hooked up backwards. I would expect the null to be deeper if it were the case. Also, I physically traced the wires and thought it was good but always had doubt in my brain.
Tomorrow, I'll swap the polarity and remeasure to see but in the meantime, thoughts on the driver phase? On overall performance?
Given that, attached is the FFT of in-room measured pink noise at the listening position using peak hold w/ 1/3 octave smoothing. I was pleasantly surprised by the overall response except the dip around 510Hz has me curious if I have the MarkAudio drivers hooked up backwards. I would expect the null to be deeper if it were the case. Also, I physically traced the wires and thought it was good but always had doubt in my brain.
Tomorrow, I'll swap the polarity and remeasure to see but in the meantime, thoughts on the driver phase? On overall performance?
Attachments
Last edited:
Pretty good. You can see the “vintage” top end.
Your ceilings greater than 8’?
Which mic did you get… i have there kit. LARSA?
dave
Your ceilings greater than 8’?
Which mic did you get… i have there kit. LARSA?
dave
Using the iPhone mic. My audiophile friend said it was good enough until I felt like I wanted to invest in a reference mic.
The ceiling is greater than 8', vaulted with a slope to the upper floor. What tells you that in graph? ( I know there is a correlation but my RAM seems to be more random and less accessible these days).
And, yes, I can see the "vintage" roll-off but these 48 year old ears don't hear it. 😉 The top end sounds just as sparkly as the previous Dynaudios I had.
The ceiling is greater than 8', vaulted with a slope to the upper floor. What tells you that in graph? ( I know there is a correlation but my RAM seems to be more random and less accessible these days).
And, yes, I can see the "vintage" roll-off but these 48 year old ears don't hear it. 😉 The top end sounds just as sparkly as the previous Dynaudios I had.
The Dayton umm-6 is a great mic for under 100.
What do you have as far as acoustical treatments in the room?
What do you have as far as acoustical treatments in the room?
some drapes on the patio door... seriously, that's it. Everything else is hardwood floors, painted drywall, lots of windows yet I've been very happy with the sound.
8’ ceilings typically create a 75-85 Hz peak, yours is lower, and one can se ethe slope og the ceiling in the breadth of the peaky bit.
That charachteristic is loved by many, there but not in your face.
dave
AudioTools has a calibrated mic with built-in preamp and calibration specifically for lightning port. The cheap one is $229 IIRC. Really easy to use.
dave
dave