Do they? Since I don't recall reading this anywhere before, I have just mosied over to the Voxativ and AER websites and perused their raw driver pages, and I cannot find a single instance where either claim a usable response (or even mention the figures) of '10Hz - 50KHz' so if, at your leisure, you could indicate where this is claimed, it would be most interesting. Because it sounds like something that, once again, you have invented and are pretending other people have said.
From your comments I can see you are not at all impressed with the DLVX8.
**its all right...**
No. Youtube videos are at best lousy for evaluating systems since it's an unknown driver in an unknown enclosure fed by an unknown system in an unknown room, that has been recorded using an unknown microphone by an unknown person of unknown ability (or lack thereof), encoded using unknown hardware and software, compressed into low quality (if it wasn't already) and uploaded to youtube, which then has to be replayed using a completely different system. Not exactly a stellar set of conditions for drawing representative conclusions. However, if you are familiar with the genre you can usually pick up on some macro characteristics (forget anything even remotely approaching anything else), and I for one can't hear anything special about them at all -just another generic 8in whizzer-cone wideband in a what appears to be a box randomly nailed together (not very tightly) from some old boards, stuck in an acoustically bad room. But that's OK: you're the one listening to them, and as I said several weeks ago, if you like it, that's what counts.
Last edited:
Do they? Since I don't recall reading this anywhere before, I have just mosied over to the Voxativ and AER websites and perused their raw driver pages, and I cannot find a single instance where either claim a usable response (or even mention the figures) of '10Hz - 50KHz' so if, at your leisure, you could indicate where this is claimed, it would be most interesting. Because it sounds like something that, once again, you have invented and are pretending other people have said
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Busted..
as i walked away from the computer,,I had second thoughts if I should modify those numbers,,, and sure enough, BUsted.
OK ,, well its true neither claim 10hz
HOWEVER.
Both claim 20hz AND neither gives much in charts, etc.
Miniscule tech info..
AND if you read carefully, both sites have snakeoil all throughout the descript.
Futher AER does state **80khz* highs.
Just saying, as i read their sites,, red flags all over the place.
Hyped.
Are they excellent drivers?
Yes,
But at mega G's.??
I;ll pass.
The Davidlouis no doubt is extremely close if notb equal to either.
Especially beats Vox's toliet paper thin cone models..
The only Vox I'd be interested in is the wood cone, identical cone to DaviDLouis.
Thanks
for the correction
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Busted..
as i walked away from the computer,,I had second thoughts if I should modify those numbers,,, and sure enough, BUsted.
OK ,, well its true neither claim 10hz
HOWEVER.
Both claim 20hz AND neither gives much in charts, etc.
Miniscule tech info..
AND if you read carefully, both sites have snakeoil all throughout the descript.
Futher AER does state **80khz* highs.
Just saying, as i read their sites,, red flags all over the place.
Hyped.
Are they excellent drivers?
Yes,
But at mega G's.??
I;ll pass.
The Davidlouis no doubt is extremely close if notb equal to either.
Especially beats Vox's toliet paper thin cone models..
The only Vox I'd be interested in is the wood cone, identical cone to DaviDLouis.
Thanks
for the correction
if you like it, that's what counts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am now convinced that i need to stop trying to convince.
The evident fact we all have different ears, wants, maybe even dif imaginative constructs in listening sensitivity..
I always thought everyone could hear as I listen.
So I guess there is no such FR as The Holy Grial.
ahhh and to think I really believed in this recent discovery.
WEll let me take down my temple of worship.
btw we have a member here who has heard the DLVX8,,, he says iits OK nothing great...
So there ya go, what do I know...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am now convinced that i need to stop trying to convince.
The evident fact we all have different ears, wants, maybe even dif imaginative constructs in listening sensitivity..
I always thought everyone could hear as I listen.
So I guess there is no such FR as The Holy Grial.
ahhh and to think I really believed in this recent discovery.
WEll let me take down my temple of worship.
btw we have a member here who has heard the DLVX8,,, he says iits OK nothing great...
So there ya go, what do I know...
I am now convinced that i need to stop trying to convince.
The evident fact we all have different ears, wants, maybe even dif imaginative constructs in listening sensitivity..
I always thought everyone could hear as I listen.
That is.
We are all differents, focus on different things. And natural hearing ability are able to increase through learning and training. Not even talking transfering feelings to words...
And yes there is no point trying to convince anyone. At best you can convince someone to try a real life test but even then if you shared your own observation you are already influencing the outcome.
Some even won't be convinced by scientific evidence and theory which explains some behavior/facts you can observe and repeat.
Last edited:
I'm not so sure...I am now convinced that i need to stop trying to convince.
The evident fact we all have different ears, wants, maybe even dif imaginative constructs in listening sensitivity..
I believe you have a part of the spectrum sounding right, so right that you can connect with it.. If you take this speaker apart you may not find the same sound again for a while, because it is very difficult to learn to control speaker/room building so you can make it sound the way you decide it needs to.
It's normal to dress up the sound with a response that covers over the distortions that the speaker and room have.. until you find the way to remove the problems. After that we should all hear it right, because it is not the music that makes a different sound. No matter whether we have hearing differences or not, it is not the speaker's job to sound different.
Excelent post.
Multi way/low sens/xover speaker fan-ATICs, will most likely never consider a FR as a possiblity, and thats THAT!
Staunch in their ignore-ance
They chose to ignore FR even exists.
I was borna seeker and tweaker.
Which is why I did in fact finally stop looking over DaviDlouis for 2-4 years!!!! and take the plunge into the FR realms of music.
It was only after the Seas Thor upgade disaster, + many other influnces like my tech's dismissing the Thor's performance .
Etc etc.
So I took the plunge and went all out to figure out what these rather unusual, if not weird and strange FR were all about.
After ohh about 6 purchases, I hit on the DLVX8.
Glad I did not go with other manufacturers,
cause I know its the DL top line that really comes very close(perfect?) to how I expect a speaker should perform in midrange.
The Philips 162/163 T8 and Millennium both exhibit life like vocals as if the artist is right there singing in the room.
A high end FR will not only do this magic, but takes it one garde futher and expands this realism, this soundstage, opens the image.
2 of the best sounding midweeters, beaten fair and sqaure by FR technology.
Its my firm conviction (I am a dogmatic) FR technology is the Speaker of the 21st Century Discerning Audiophile
I just don't subscribe to either or, whatever flaots your boat mantra.
90+% of audiophiles still to this day have not heard any FR speaker, Ever in their entire hobby.
This is my gripe.
Apparently marketing sells, and Stereophile seems to operate from a rather tall mountain top with the worlds biggest bull horn.
Following the crowds usually gets one into trouble.
Poor choice in speakers is proof of this idea.
FR fans will always represent justa tiny niche in the speaker market.
I get that.
In asia things are quite different.
But to win those of the other camp over to FR, is not going to be easy, and may take some decades of EDU.
Which is why I plan to many more YT videos.
My next series of uploads will be the New Frankenstein VX8+ VX6 + assists.
Our speaker system is only limited by our creativity.
Last edited:
They do, and don't, respectively. The first is technically true, insofar as since they don't set any specific +/- dB figures for those frequencies, they can claim what they like. I've gone on record before (many years ago) about expensive driver manufacturers failing to provide much data. However, their customers by and large don't seem to care, so they obviously know their own market and nobody is obliged to buy them.
Limited information; in fairness, AER provide more than DavidLouis / MeloDavid / whatever-they're-calling-themselves-today if you look at the pdf data, albeit the scaling isn't great. The 80KHz reference is not a statement that the driver provides usable output to that frequency: it merely (and no doubt correctly) notes that there are some resonant modes operating out to that point; the FR plots they provide clearly show the drivers well down > 20KHz.
Not around here they aren't. Have you seen multiple threads here praising them? Or even referencing them? If you use the forum search facility, you'll see they hardly get a mention.
They might be. I can't say I've liked the AERs I've heard.
So does pretty much everybody here it would appear, although being priced at the higher end of the market they inherently are low-volume production units, so in fairness to both manufacturers they're unlikely to get as much commentary on this forum for that reason.
It might be, it might not. Without actually testing them, none of us will ever know.
You've been in touch with their suppliers for details of the cone geometries, materials, adhesives, suspensions etc. then?
It's not 'identical'. What you mean is 'it looks similar'.
Last edited:
One of "the best sounding" midwoofers I ever worked with (good from 80Hz to 6kHz) has a paper cone so thin and flabby I get scared pushing it to check for voice coil rub. Yet it sounds really clean. That clean where you think spl is a bit over background music level yet when someone starts talking to you you only see lips moving.
Mozartfan, Sorry to disagree with your view but... i'am exactly what you describe as multiway aficionados ( 3way, even use dsp/multiamp for more than 10years...and consider more ways for next loudspeakers!).
That said that doesn't stop me to have multiple iterations of FR as i already pointed to you...and like them for what they are!
You imply people haven't heard or used FR if they are into multiway which isn't a truth from my experience and people i see.
You had bad experience with Thor ( which isn't a surprise as there was a flaw in the design: even if Joe D'Appolito is a respected designer it didn't made him faultproof and this is what happened: a fault at design stage...), that doesn't say the principle is wrong.
I keep on saying you haven't lived with good ones.
Dogma is against my religion: it only keep your eyes closed to the rest of the world and doing so you miss a lot of interesting things which can be inspiring.
Different paradygm.
AllenB, i've got example people can be acustomed to issues and consider them as the norm.
I still have some 'preset' to correct some mixing rooms and artist's homestudio as i performed mastering for them: same basic issues on all tracks.
That said that doesn't stop me to have multiple iterations of FR as i already pointed to you...and like them for what they are!
You imply people haven't heard or used FR if they are into multiway which isn't a truth from my experience and people i see.
You had bad experience with Thor ( which isn't a surprise as there was a flaw in the design: even if Joe D'Appolito is a respected designer it didn't made him faultproof and this is what happened: a fault at design stage...), that doesn't say the principle is wrong.
I keep on saying you haven't lived with good ones.
Dogma is against my religion: it only keep your eyes closed to the rest of the world and doing so you miss a lot of interesting things which can be inspiring.
Different paradygm.
AllenB, i've got example people can be acustomed to issues and consider them as the norm.
I still have some 'preset' to correct some mixing rooms and artist's homestudio as i performed mastering for them: same basic issues on all tracks.
A lot of drivers do. As nandappe has suggested, a FR without a proper box will not do ny bass, and 20 Hz is very rarely hit by any FRs (and they usually suffer midTop) and also be very few multiways.
And the room plays a big role.
More often we see Fo up as the bass response. Anyone who has designed any boxes knows that is also a fib (without knowing what box).
dave
It seems mr motzart is also raving about his multi-way, just talking about how he like the midRange out of his FR… using a FR as a mid has been touted for decades or longer.
A good FR, with gecent controlled top, used with solid bass support (ie as a WAW) uses this same idea, but given that the best FRs are continuing toi get better control of the chaotic portion of their response, continuing to push towards the FR “holy grail”.
dave
I must have missed what the technical design flaw in the Thor is?
http://www.madisound.com/loudspeaker_specifications/audioXpress Thor Review.pdf
http://www.madisound.com/loudspeaker_specifications/audioXpress Thor Review.pdf
Not understanding TLs, the box was reduced to ⅔ the volume the sims said they should be and then he made a measuement mistake (only measure 1 woofer in the line, essentially doubling the tested volume, leading to incorrect support of that choice.
The suggested replacements used the full power of MJK softwre and not eh quite weak Augspurger alignmnet table.
That is the original article i believe, the first picture shows him making that measurement error (2nd driver is shorted essentially removing it from the line.
dave
The suggested replacements used the full power of MJK softwre and not eh quite weak Augspurger alignmnet table.
That is the original article i believe, the first picture shows him making that measurement error (2nd driver is shorted essentially removing it from the line.
dave
Short version is that Thor is acoustically undersized, although assuming an Augspurger type alignment which is optimised for low gain & a relatively flat impedance it's not catastrophic in that narrow context. It's more of a problem however when most builders / buyers expected something with a bit more output a la some of the '70s era TLs typified by IMF. Which is what many of them did.
That was compounded by the crossover. Joe is a great designer (chronic understatement) but when Thor was designed 20 years ago, midbass drivers of this type were a relative rarity. Moreover he had to keep in mind this was a kit design, that (even as a nominal flagship) still needed to be relatively affordable, which put some limits on just how complex the filter could be. Those midbass drivers are very good for what they are but -and it's a big 'but'- there is a reasonable consensus that they're only useful up to about 1.6KHz if you want to get the best from them. Joe's filter shaped the response to the target, no question, & from that perspective it's a very elegant design, but there are other issues at work. The Thor low-pass uses a single series inductor & an LCR on the midbass driver's main bell-mode as the low-pass, giving the desired rolloff, but it doesn't appear to be sufficient to prevent it causing audible HD amplification in the operating band. To do that, you'd need to drop the filter frequency, target LR4 or higher order slopes, and have a bottomless notch on the main cone mode to break-circuit and prevent it amplifying that distortion in the passband.
That was compounded by the crossover. Joe is a great designer (chronic understatement) but when Thor was designed 20 years ago, midbass drivers of this type were a relative rarity. Moreover he had to keep in mind this was a kit design, that (even as a nominal flagship) still needed to be relatively affordable, which put some limits on just how complex the filter could be. Those midbass drivers are very good for what they are but -and it's a big 'but'- there is a reasonable consensus that they're only useful up to about 1.6KHz if you want to get the best from them. Joe's filter shaped the response to the target, no question, & from that perspective it's a very elegant design, but there are other issues at work. The Thor low-pass uses a single series inductor & an LCR on the midbass driver's main bell-mode as the low-pass, giving the desired rolloff, but it doesn't appear to be sufficient to prevent it causing audible HD amplification in the operating band. To do that, you'd need to drop the filter frequency, target LR4 or higher order slopes, and have a bottomless notch on the main cone mode to break-circuit and prevent it amplifying that distortion in the passband.
Last edited:
Yes, the left hand of the images you attach Allen is the original filter Joe designed for Thor. The other appears to be one of several later filter designs others created that attempted to fix the issues a number (in fairness, not everybody) were experiencing with it. IIRC several reported them to be an improvement & that one certainly looks promising; I've not studied the 3rd party filter designs in any detail though as we're going back a quite a bit now.
Last edited:
I don't want to push this too far OT, but FWIW:
Re the HD distortion amplification, as I recall this has been discussed at length on other threads (& elsewhere); it's something a few of us do & is also noted on the Hificompass thread. Accuton sometimes apply variations in the distortion measurements on their data sheets.
As for usable bandwidth, YMMV as always. With a ruddy great let-go point at ~4.8KHz, causing a big spike in HD3 at about 1.6KHz - 1.7KHz as you can see from John's / Zaph's measurements, that's about as high as I'd be comfortable taking it (and as far as Thor et al goes, it seems that others ran into that issue; I see Zaph also noted that's about the limit he'd set with this driver). So that's in my view the 'safe' option, but obviously others will have a different take. I'm just stating what issues I know were encountered with the original design (which IIRC acoustically is asymmetric LR4 at about 2.2KHz), and what I would do / others have done to address them.
Re the HD distortion amplification, as I recall this has been discussed at length on other threads (& elsewhere); it's something a few of us do & is also noted on the Hificompass thread. Accuton sometimes apply variations in the distortion measurements on their data sheets.
As for usable bandwidth, YMMV as always. With a ruddy great let-go point at ~4.8KHz, causing a big spike in HD3 at about 1.6KHz - 1.7KHz as you can see from John's / Zaph's measurements, that's about as high as I'd be comfortable taking it (and as far as Thor et al goes, it seems that others ran into that issue; I see Zaph also noted that's about the limit he'd set with this driver). So that's in my view the 'safe' option, but obviously others will have a different take. I'm just stating what issues I know were encountered with the original design (which IIRC acoustically is asymmetric LR4 at about 2.2KHz), and what I would do / others have done to address them.
Attachments
Last edited:
Working through what I was suggesting, we're saying the same filter is wanted.. even if it is for different reasons. 1600 only needs to be down 6dB to set that harmonic at -18dB. Besides, I don't think it's as if you're going to listen to these on axis.
Here's Joe's on-axis woofer slope.
Here's Joe's on-axis woofer slope.
