Well both yes and no. While I tried to do it I most likely failed due to the very physological reason I mentioned above. I was impressed by the Audio Pro monitor and had expected something similar as I was interested in good near-field monitors. When that expectation was not met I was disappointed. Would I have entered the store with no expectations things mights have turned out differently.
Either way I would say the data here is inconclusive to draw any definitive conclusions. Would I have listened to those speakers in the same setting as the monitors and in that mood the result may have been very different indeed. I will always try to keep my eyes open.
One thing that was very noticable however was the tweeter/woofer level matching in the speakers I tried. It obviously differed by several dB's since I could easily pick it out from time to time. While the monitor was active crossed all the others were passive designs. Most likely all of them would have benefitted from going active and then adding a powerful sub (and probably an EQ). It is my belief that that could possibly turn a few of them excellent!
/Magnus
Well, the mechanisms are very different and very complex in both cases. Electronic distortion is also frequency dependant (increasing with frequency in all global feedback designs, possibly being high at low frequencies due to thermal feedback/modulation), level dependant and so on.
Note that even the simple THD plots provided by JBL, Beyma and appearantly Seas too (got to have a look at their site again) is little more than a laugh. It is not nerely enough to charactarize the total system distortion. While it is difficult to relate "paper distortion" to sound quality the thing is that there seems to be very little interest in even trying to do so. Bottling snake oil and running flashy ads likely give greater return.
UrSv,
I have been looking at the PHL drivers and at first glance they seem to having tried to marry the best features of both hifi and pro drivers. But I couldn't even find a fq response chart on their site and turned my attention elsewhere.
I'll keep an eye open!
Hey - it seems that this thread have been taken over by the Nordic tribe!
You know what vegetarian cannibals eat?- Swedes
Ok, that was a bad one...
Hey Chef, you need to keep your EARS open
Seriously though, your findings at the lab is interesting and something I believe in as well. That is with some material and with a good set up, the reproduction can be soo good that you can fool people believeing they listen to the real thing.
Many people say this is not the case, most likely becasue they have not been exposed to a rig or set up good enough.. and once you let those words out of your mouth you will forever be called a audiophile snob.
BTW, I agree with your last lines in your post no40.
/Peter
Seriously though, your findings at the lab is interesting and something I believe in as well. That is with some material and with a good set up, the reproduction can be soo good that you can fool people believeing they listen to the real thing.
Many people say this is not the case, most likely becasue they have not been exposed to a rig or set up good enough.. and once you let those words out of your mouth you will forever be called a audiophile snob.
BTW, I agree with your last lines in your post no40.
/Peter
Oh, so that is the trick? Wait, I can ... hear ... things .. now...
I can safely admit that I have been fooled by several Pink Floyd recordings at home. In one of the last tracks on CD #2 of "The Wall" there is someone knocking on a wall or something. I listened to that song quite loud on a Friday afternoon once (normally I don't particulary like that part of the record) and I was convinced that it was my neighbour knocking on the wall in order for me to lower the volume. It took a few runs before I realized things...
Similary, on another 'Floyd record (The Final Cut IIRC) there are seagulls in one song. Sitting at the desk I looked out the window somewhat surprised 'coz normally the gulls don't go here.
Well, they didn't...
Regarding the visual impact on perceived sounds that is a very well known fact in surround sound and ambisonics. We had an excellent lecture by a very clever British guy and for example the visual clue that an airplane is passing above can make up for the lack of an actual speaker there in cinema surround systems. Focusing on one person speaking in a loud crowd is another example.
/M
Peter,
what kind of speakers do you use/like? I will have a look at that Seas driver you mentioned. I remember listening to the Odin design/kit with Seas Excels a few years ago at a friend and they sounded really good. But then I got disappointed with them at HiFi Kit (although still I found them among the best there). Certainly my standards have shifted through the last years but I am not yet to rule out the Seas stuff. Will have another listen soon again.
/M
what kind of speakers do you use/like? I will have a look at that Seas driver you mentioned. I remember listening to the Odin design/kit with Seas Excels a few years ago at a friend and they sounded really good. But then I got disappointed with them at HiFi Kit (although still I found them among the best there). Certainly my standards have shifted through the last years but I am not yet to rule out the Seas stuff. Will have another listen soon again.
/M
Swedish Chef said:
Hey - it seems that this thread have been taken over by the Nordic tribe!
- Swedes
Ok, that was a bad one...
I don't get it. Also a bunch of other things you said about those things that make noise.
Seems like pro drivers have large sd and short x-max. But most people here like low sd and high x-max. I do get confused about terms Q and damping, and bunch or other stuff, mostly the terminalogy, but not the concepts I hope. I like drivers with high sd and low x-max or I thought I did, so i build speakers with Eton 8-800 as midrange. Dispersion is bad and I wish I had dome midrange or horn, maybe.
Also why does everyone at diyaudio.com have cats? Does everyone at audioroundtable.com have dogs? I might not no much about speakers, but if this is true then the people with the dogs will probably be correct about pro speakers because the dog is clearly a superior pet. The THD is of an average dog is atleast half that of an average cat.
Magnus,
I prefer stiff drivers with low distortion iow. Seas excel and Accuton mostly.
The best I´ve heard at HiFi kit would be a dynaudio kit many moons ago, and lately (a couple of years ago or so) I auditioned the 5" MTM Excel and the SS A4. Clearly prefered the Excel kit. That said I still believe that the room at HiFi kit is not very good for judging speakers in the first place. Especially since I prefer a set up with the speakers well out from the walls in order to really get a grip on the potential.
I´ve never heard a really good system with speakers up against a wall.
/Peter
I prefer stiff drivers with low distortion iow. Seas excel and Accuton mostly.
The best I´ve heard at HiFi kit would be a dynaudio kit many moons ago, and lately (a couple of years ago or so) I auditioned the 5" MTM Excel and the SS A4. Clearly prefered the Excel kit. That said I still believe that the room at HiFi kit is not very good for judging speakers in the first place. Especially since I prefer a set up with the speakers well out from the walls in order to really get a grip on the potential.
I´ve never heard a really good system with speakers up against a wall.
/Peter
hi all!
Good discussion.
magnus-im in agreement with you.
Sticking to drivers/systems based on a truth system
Rather than a consumerist $$$$$$$ system based on snake oils
... you end up looking at prosound in the home,simply because of the FACTS,measurements,and specifications rather than reviewers sweet describing words that dont vonvey much to me! Those words would only mean something to me-if i was there listening with them to all the same systems
Cheers!
Good discussion.
magnus-im in agreement with you.
Sticking to drivers/systems based on a truth system
Rather than a consumerist $$$$$$$ system based on snake oils
... you end up looking at prosound in the home,simply because of the FACTS,measurements,and specifications rather than reviewers sweet describing words that dont vonvey much to me! Those words would only mean something to me-if i was there listening with them to all the same systems
Cheers!
With apologies to those who were already aware of this:
To touch on the subject of high Sd, low Xmax versus low Sd, high Xmax, to grossly oversimplify the whole subject, the former approach is the way to go for high SPL at low distortion levels. Because of the way that a conical driver operates, as you increase the amplitude of the cone displacement, you increase THD. For any given SPL at any frequency, you will always have to move the driver further if you reduce the radiating area, even/especially if you do not change the loading on the driver.
'Hifi' drivers are designed for high Xmax with low Sd because the designer wants wide dispersion (not possible with larger drivers that start to control their own pattern) and reasonable WAF. The funny thing is that in a domestic environment, wide dispersion is probably the last thing we want.
To touch on the subject of high Sd, low Xmax versus low Sd, high Xmax, to grossly oversimplify the whole subject, the former approach is the way to go for high SPL at low distortion levels. Because of the way that a conical driver operates, as you increase the amplitude of the cone displacement, you increase THD. For any given SPL at any frequency, you will always have to move the driver further if you reduce the radiating area, even/especially if you do not change the loading on the driver.
'Hifi' drivers are designed for high Xmax with low Sd because the designer wants wide dispersion (not possible with larger drivers that start to control their own pattern) and reasonable WAF. The funny thing is that in a domestic environment, wide dispersion is probably the last thing we want.
tbla,
well the thing with ATC is that at least when I had a look at them they seemed reluctant to sell single drivers rather than complete speakers and they didn't provide much data for the drivers either. Thus they weren't exactly DIY friendly. Maybe that has changed since and in that case - do you have a link?
While they might be very good speakers (I have not heard them myself) just as well as the B&W Nautilus stuff Abbey Road use, very few DIY:ers (myself included) are willing or capable to spend $10,000-$50,000 for a pair of ready-made speakers. And that goes for the JBL K2 too!
/M
well the thing with ATC is that at least when I had a look at them they seemed reluctant to sell single drivers rather than complete speakers and they didn't provide much data for the drivers either. Thus they weren't exactly DIY friendly. Maybe that has changed since and in that case - do you have a link?
While they might be very good speakers (I have not heard them myself) just as well as the B&W Nautilus stuff Abbey Road use, very few DIY:ers (myself included) are willing or capable to spend $10,000-$50,000 for a pair of ready-made speakers. And that goes for the JBL K2 too!
/M
Peter,
I just had a brief glance at the distortion for the Seas Excel W22 you mentioned and did a quick comparison with the classic JBL 2206 12'' woofer and the newer 2012 10'' midrange woofer.
The distortion for the Seas driver really is very low (0.3-0.2% THD @ 7W input and 96 dB @ 1m). The JBL 2206 has a distortion of roughly 1-0.3% THD in the same range but at 60W power and 112 dB @ 1m. The JBL 2012 is about the same.
I would be very surprised if the distortion for the JBL:s did not drop rapidly at lower power levels. And the 2012 in a front loaded horn would yield an additional sensitivity of maybe 4-6 dB.
Clearly there are a number of different distortion mechanism at play here. Please note that I am an electronics guy and not a speaker guy and by far no expert but still I can think of a few sources. Cone displacement distortion/magnetic motor distortion could probably be expected to drop with reduced power input. Same goes for mechanical suspension distortion to some degree, maybe not for the difference in forward <-> backward movement. I have no clue about the level dependance for cone breakup distortion.
So the bottom line is that we really need a lot more measurement data to draw any definitive conclusions. As an engineer mainly being active in medical instrumentation/RF engineering where you measure anything and everything I find the lack of measurement data in the audio field very frustrating!
Cheers
/Magnus
I just had a brief glance at the distortion for the Seas Excel W22 you mentioned and did a quick comparison with the classic JBL 2206 12'' woofer and the newer 2012 10'' midrange woofer.
The distortion for the Seas driver really is very low (0.3-0.2% THD @ 7W input and 96 dB @ 1m). The JBL 2206 has a distortion of roughly 1-0.3% THD in the same range but at 60W power and 112 dB @ 1m. The JBL 2012 is about the same.
I would be very surprised if the distortion for the JBL:s did not drop rapidly at lower power levels. And the 2012 in a front loaded horn would yield an additional sensitivity of maybe 4-6 dB.
Clearly there are a number of different distortion mechanism at play here. Please note that I am an electronics guy and not a speaker guy and by far no expert but still I can think of a few sources. Cone displacement distortion/magnetic motor distortion could probably be expected to drop with reduced power input. Same goes for mechanical suspension distortion to some degree, maybe not for the difference in forward <-> backward movement. I have no clue about the level dependance for cone breakup distortion.
So the bottom line is that we really need a lot more measurement data to draw any definitive conclusions. As an engineer mainly being active in medical instrumentation/RF engineering where you measure anything and everything I find the lack of measurement data in the audio field very frustrating!
Cheers
/Magnus
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.