what ? "less dispersion (beaming starts earlier), reduced upper bandwidth" please can explain ?tnx
The way you were talking before, you'd think you'd already covered the topic of directivity and how we use it to increase SQ. As I said
This is what some of the smart people around these parts have come up with...Its not 100% entirely different than what the major manufactures came up with ....Remember this post Lol....Now if you start talking about how 15"s can't do midrange we are going to do a big circle...
I think the only competition is a smaller driver, as you seem to appreciate....in a horn or waveguide..... As long as this smaller driver can keep up within the Horn/waveguide....its all fair game...Oh I forgot Cardioid, which to me, is like an acoustical lens, where the horn and waveguide are more mechanical.
With a wide dispersion you put more pressure on the room to perform...if the room was any good it wouldn't need treatment. We aren't talking about so much subjective SQ as absolute or scientific SQ, as in replicating the signal in a 1:1 input output ratio, Increasing directivity increases Direct energy to the listener. Thus SQ goes up. Everybody knows that...Everybody. Directivity is a benefit that can out weigh the little squigglies you tried to signify previously. I tried to tell you, you no understand. It is a matter of considering the end result within your listening room, vs what you might see in an anechoic measurement. Like a maglight set to wide beam....a wide dispersion sound signal will "Light up" the room....what the room has to say (reflective energy)....is distorted by time and amplitude vs frequency/time. By narrowing the beam, the listener gets more signal directly from the driver, vs the walls of the room. Looking at subjective SQ, some people love Open baffle. Theres so many give and takes that you really can't hold anyone too accountable for their choice of approach depending expectation. Based off of some recent discussion on the topic, I would imagine that the difference between wide dispersion vs narrow would be less noticeable in a room that was so big that it was Diffuse in LF. Basically the closer you get to Anechoic, the less the effect would be perceived. Good luck with that, in your living room.
I think the only competition is a smaller driver, as you seem to appreciate....in a horn or waveguide..... As long as this smaller driver can keep up within the Horn/waveguide....its all fair game...Oh I forgot Cardioid, which to me, is like an acoustical lens, where the horn and waveguide are more mechanical.
Last edited:
well we speak about woofer NOT horn and is dispersion.... We dont have problem in living room 🙂
Last edited:
You can put a Purifi driver in a horn or waveguide. Or you can match a Purifi Driver to a waveguide or horn. Either of those options would be choice and this Is a thread discussing Purifi woofer speaker builds.... In particular, matching a Purif Driver with a top performing Compression driver would be a great team. The game is to create a tailored directivity as low as possible. A compression driver on a waveguide can only play so low, the top quality 15" is able to play high enough to mate to compression driver on a waveguide. The increase in performance from Purifi is welcomed, and hoping that woofers larger than 15" will be able to be used as a midrange as a result. I think its been done already, but I think Purifi can increase the performance of the end result.
I think those of us who understand where the real SQ is, are likely watching the fireworks, but somewhat bored until the large shells go off at the end of the show....Gotta save the best for last ya know....a 10" is coming out next? Oh wow, ya don't say.... Milk Milk....... lemonade, around the corner......with an emphasis on milk.
I think those of us who understand where the real SQ is, are likely watching the fireworks, but somewhat bored until the large shells go off at the end of the show....Gotta save the best for last ya know....a 10" is coming out next? Oh wow, ya don't say.... Milk Milk....... lemonade, around the corner......with an emphasis on milk.
Last edited:
there isn't a PURIFI 15" you are speak about blackhole please stop this non sense
I'm talking about how best to use Purifi Drivers...
There isn't one....yet....there will definitely be one...I bet you a set of them, there will be....I just hate waiting. But money has to be made.
There isn't one....yet....there will definitely be one...I bet you a set of them, there will be....I just hate waiting. But money has to be made.
Now that you've got my creative juices flowing, I reminded that it is said that 15" has an incredible amount of headroom for midrange....So if the Purifi improves performance of the 15", as its done with the lesser efficient drivers...Then one would be able to cross over, Higher, to the compression driver/waveguide and achieve a higher DI at crossover with a smaller waveguide.
We are (atleast were previously) talking about directivity.... Amplitude is another topic but also important to SQ....
We are (atleast were previously) talking about directivity.... Amplitude is another topic but also important to SQ....
Those little speakers
is there more to this? He accidently said high distortion speakers but he was sorta right
15" is a woofer period ,that's physic law of size .....beaming and breakup will never go up well
that's why is invented tree ways.... 😀
Attachments
Video: people are looking for and expecting distortion😢. At least good to see the impact of distortion getting recognised amongst experts🙂
What is quite hard? Do these 20w and 8w alps have any headroom or no? What levels are you listening at? 60db? What distance are listening at? You leave out a lot of important details, seem to be missing them too... Funny
this is funny, we know from you that kef scanspeak dynaudio morel seas all build wrong stuff
😀
We actually talk about it how basically manufacturers take advantage of the customers ignorance.... I think I know where you fit into this...but different horses for different courses. Like said before... There's so many different pros and cons, when manipulating some of the variables on loudspeaker design....
There's a reason why you don't see a lot of the speakers that you just named in mastering monitors... ya know, mastering monitors, the speaker built for high sound quality, used by professionals. Lol
Think of it like this.... sensitivity can be looked at as systems way of saying "I like to do this". Energy either gets turned into sound, or distortion. A high efficiency system is turning less signal into distortion.
The cracks show when asking for full representation of Sound Quality... neutral representation 20hz-20khz, with transient peaks remaining within linear performance, at realistic volumes....the Imax theater displayed undistorted peaks as high as 123db... If you arent trying to achieve that level of sound quality. A smaller system will do.
You also keep for getting that midrange is down to ~120hz.... where do you think that woofer in the 3 way is crossed over??? Not to mention, no one is saying that a 3 ways are bad... I use a 3 way, 15" midwoofer and 18" subs....compression driver tweets...3 way ☺️
high sensitivity does not equal low distortion. Think of a motor with a shrunk linear stroke: higher sensitivity but elevated distortion is the result.
The only common factors I can think of this late hour are high Sd which has its pros and cons and/or using super high saturation steel to increase the B field in the gap. Reducing Mms is a mixed bag since the driver gets less mass controlled and more sensitive to the non linear suspension.
As we have shown, it is perfectly possible to do ultra low distortion with low sensitivity. According to Hofmann’s Iron Law this results in small boxes that go deep.
Nothing wrong with high sensitivity and that can be done with low distortion also. We have no philosophy favouring. low sensitivity. We just only have 24 hours a day like everyone else. let’s see what the future brings.
The only common factors I can think of this late hour are high Sd which has its pros and cons and/or using super high saturation steel to increase the B field in the gap. Reducing Mms is a mixed bag since the driver gets less mass controlled and more sensitive to the non linear suspension.
As we have shown, it is perfectly possible to do ultra low distortion with low sensitivity. According to Hofmann’s Iron Law this results in small boxes that go deep.
Nothing wrong with high sensitivity and that can be done with low distortion also. We have no philosophy favouring. low sensitivity. We just only have 24 hours a day like everyone else. let’s see what the future brings.
I never thought you would favor that. Wide dispersion creates distortion, thats the elephant in the room. So unless the smaller drivers are being used in waveguides, Dome tweeters and small woofers alike. There is no focus on controlling directivity. Distortion is, any variation from the source....Reflections are a variation....wide polars create more of them. If your ideas of SQ don;t revolve around IR fidelity within a Room, then we are not likely arguing the same points. Higher directivity leads to a sharper IR, that is all... How you get there, is up to you.
Headphones go deep with low distortion, with very small drivers, its been done lol....Please be specific as in frequency, spl, and distance.
Headphones go deep with low distortion, with very small drivers, its been done lol....Please be specific as in frequency, spl, and distance.
I never meant to say that the sensitivity component by itself, equated to lower distortion. Though I think its a part of the recipe. Its the higher Efficiency that would lead to less distortion. I did say that energy either gets turned into sound or distortion....Efficiency ratings are a thing. Of course this still is not the whole picture that needs to be correct, but it is a very important one.
By everybody you must mean you. I've never seen listener preference studies, or even audio meets where this is categorically true. Also, your statement about reflections mucking up the sound directly conflicts with listener studies that actually have been done, where some reflection is preferred. I get that you like high DI, but you really are overstating the case for its universal superiority.
PS: MANY studios use monitors closer to typical hifi than the 15" two-ways you post.