the inference was there.
and if "break in" introduces changes that make an audible difference(not subtle) then yes i do feel it speaks to the quality/durability of the component wattage irrespective.
and if "break in" introduces changes that make an audible difference(not subtle) then yes i do feel it speaks to the quality/durability of the component wattage irrespective.
Measurements will definitely help understand what you are hearing. People have dedicated their lives and millions of dollars researching the subjective implications of objective measurements. They found a clear relationship between the frequency response of the loudspeaker and people's subjective perception of the sound. As it turns out, when you don't tell them the price of the speaker, neither do they know what speaker they are listening too, all listeners prefer flat on-axis response. What this means is you don't have to rely on my subjective opinion or someone else's subjective opinion. All you have to do is look at the frequency response. Audiophile magazine reviewers probably don't like the fact that their opinion is no longer valued or needed.
It is great that you plan to do measurements. With a bit of EQ, you can certainly improve the sound of your Alpairs.
True, they can, when done well.
Partially true. Source please. As in the actual source -not a general book title, but the exact passage and page number, so we can all receive the benefit of the wisdom contained therein, and critique it in a constructive fashion.
Without providing context, this means nothing. I for one can generally tell the difference, blind, between a cheap 2in wideband driver and a large, somewhat more expensive model. Sweeping generalisations can be subsequently misinterpreted, or misapplied.
Not true. To cite but one instance, tell that to the BBC researchers, BBC engineers et al. It can (can) be true. Equally, in other situations, it is not true. Hence the reason for the so-called 'BBC / Gundry dip'. Unsupported sweeping generalisations of this nature do nobody any favours and undermine your own argument. The aforementioned for example can be especially valuable in nearfield listening in smaller spaces.
This can be true, but the knowledge required to understand measurements, how to interpret them vis-à-vis their relationship to general presentation, and what their limitations are / can be is not something that can be acquired overnight.
Not true. I can look at a speaker with a ruler-flat frequency response graph, and without any other information, I could not tell you why it might sound like shattering glass. Nor could you, or anybody else for that matter. You may be able to speculate, but no more if all you have is a frequency response graph. So the question remains -why does said speaker sound like shattering glass? Is it an issue with the speaker, or is the listener delusional? The latter may be the case, but so may the former. Such as if somebody put a 1st order high pass on a Vifa XT25 at, oh, let us say 2KHz. There is nothing to stop somebody from creating a multiway speaker with a ruler flat response by doing just that. And it will sound lousy, because the XT25, despite having an exceptionally flat response down to ~600Hz has rocketing distortion levels below about 2.5KHz due to its small radiating area (amongst other things). This does not show up on a frequency response graph, ergo, claiming that is all you need to look at to form an opinion on the performance of a loudspeaker of any description is complete nonsense.
Quite so, if they're done well.
No, he might alter the sound in a direction favoured. Equally, he might not. EQ is a useful additional tool, but is not without its own drawbacks.
Last edited:
I don't think such a passage exists, Scott. Even if it did, I don't know where it is nor do I care to find it. If you want to gain the knowledge, you must put in the hours. I read Toole's book and his papers on the subject. And I found that his conclusions agree very well with what I hear. I would highly advise anyone interested in audio reproduction to read Toole's "Sound Reproduction." It is available on Amazon for less than half the price of some of the drivers being recommended in this thread. The best investment you'll make in audio.
As a summary, you could read Toole's presentation given as a keynote speech at the 2001 AES convention in NYC: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_28_r.pdf
It is a presentation and should be easy to follow.
Here is another article from Toole that may be worthy of your time:
http://www.infinityspeakers.com/images/inf/tech/audio_art_science.pdf
You can also read Sean Olive's blog. Here's a post where he summarizes the relationship between subjective impressions and objective measurements:
Audio Musings by Sean Olive: Part 3 - Relationship between Loudspeaker Measurements and Listener Preferences
This blog contains a lot of good information. Olive also created an equation that can predict listener preference to a high degree of accuracy based on objective measurements. It is explained in Toole's book.
All this information is out there for anyone who bothers to look. I merely had to type some words into Google to get this information.
i can confirm that an alpair driver is a very good start. I heard the smaller version wich sounds very good and has decent bass, but it's corner loaded so you need to take that in consideration.
I did build a ported box arround an 10M and got very deep bass and a better sound than 99.99% of the speakers i heared (and i heared quiet a few good speakers). But it's an own (adapted) design made with trial & error, wich is more difficult than using a tested premade plan like the frugelhorns. Those frugelhorns do work very well and are easy to build.
I did build a ported box arround an 10M and got very deep bass and a better sound than 99.99% of the speakers i heared (and i heared quiet a few good speakers). But it's an own (adapted) design made with trial & error, wich is more difficult than using a tested premade plan like the frugelhorns. Those frugelhorns do work very well and are easy to build.
i side with Scottmoose ruler flat response is not something that most "muggles" prefer. 9 out of ten end users aren't going to like their speakers until bass and treble are augmented well above midrange content simulating a loudness "contour" a speaker that is ruler flat but can take a ridiculous amount of eq and still come off sounding effortless would be chosen over it's contenders hands down
What is the basis behind this conclusion? Personal experience? Well, my personal experience is different. All my friends and family do recognize when resonances are eliminated and a neutral response is presented. There you go.
Certainly, the scientific data and experiments suggests that a neutral response is preferred by the mass public.
Anyway, I've provided some evidence to back up my personal opinion. I would again advise LemonFuzzy to keep his ears open. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Do your own measurements, experiment and see what you like.
the grundy dip is a form of loundness contour.
and as of yet i have not seen any data or research paper that presents a veritable conclusion that's why the research is still being conducted to this day.
and as of yet i have not seen any data or research paper that presents a veritable conclusion that's why the research is still being conducted to this day.
Alas, I am in fact aware of the majority of all of said. I have read most (and a whole lot more beside), and have owned Toole's book since its release (amongst many others). There are not, perhaps, all that many advantages to being a PhD, but one of them is that it makes very sure your research, referencing and presentation is of a verifiable standard. You are now talking my stock in trade. If you make sweeping generalised claims, you are obliged to properly support them. A casual reference to a book or website with a bald claim that it provides an evidential basis for a statement, while also slipping in some frankly patronising asides on what I can only assume to be the badly mistaken assumption that you are speaking from a position of greater knowledge and / or familiarly is not adequate, or anything like. I am not doing your work for you by second-guessing and trying to find something that might fit your claims, which is what you are essentially instructing everyone to do, and incidentally, introduces leading bias. A fundamental precept that all my students have hammered into them from the outset is that statements must be supported if they are to have any validity whatsoever. If they do not support them, they fail. If you want to make claims and lecture other people from an assumed authoritative stance, then you do it properly, or you don't do it at all. You have not supported any of your statements above, nor addressed the points I raised in my critique, which I shall summarise below:
-Measurements are useful if done well, with full, or at least a reasonable understanding of the advantages and limitations of the measurements themselves, the equipment, and the methodology employed.
-There is a close relationship between FR and perception. However, to present this in a manner that implies it to be the only factor is completely inaccurate and misleading, as several of the works you cite clearly state. For example, see Toole on non-linear distortion: F. Toole Sound Reproduction: Loudspeakers and Rooms (Oxford: Focal, 2008) p.451-452 which describes but one example of why frequency response alone is not a sufficient guide to the qualitative aspects of 'sound reproduction' (play on words intended), while also making a good case that the 'traditional' measures of harmonic and intermodulation distortions are in themselves 'almost meaningless'. (Ibid)
-Claiming that people cannot tell the difference between differently priced speakers without providing any context whatsoever is meaningless and in the majority of cases completely inaccurate, as anybody who, for example, listens to a quality recording of the 1812 Overture on a VOTT A5 and then on a $20 3in wideband driver at a fixed distance and SPL will rather rapidly point out.
-Listeners do not automatically favour a flat on-axis response, as the BBC illustrated 40+ years ago (to cite but the most obvious / famous example) by introducing a shallow (typical maximum 3dB) broadband shelf between ~ 1KHz - 4KHz for specific circumstances, especially nearfield listening in small spaces. This is regularly used by many designers to this day, for the same and related reasons. There may also be physiological reasons why an individual may favour something other than a flat on-axis response curve, such as chronic hearing related conditions -matters which cannot be casually dismissed or ignored. Likewise, there can be design considerations in drive units (irrespective of type) which necessitate their having something other than a ruler-flat on-axis response.
-'All you have to do is look at the frequency response' is a completely inaccurate and misleading statement, ignoring potential savage distortion effects from a host of causes to name but the most obvious issue.
Last edited:
Scott, please, lets not talk about whether we both have Phds or not. It has nothing to do with the extent of my knowledge or yours on this subject, unless your Phd happens to be in the area of acoustics. This is an audio forum. I am not going to waste my time putting in references. I provided links and they should be sufficient for our discussion. Now, I will argue your points.
Agreed. But in the context of the drivers being recommended, the measurements have already been done, to a sufficient amount of rigor, in my opinion anyway, that we can start to deduce some conclusions from them. In my opinion, looking at the measurements of the Vifa TC9 compared to the published specs of the Alpair 10, the TC9 is quite a bit more well behaved. It is not perfect, but it is a much better start.
Toole states that non-linear distortion is not a factor in well-designed loudspeakers. In his experiments, he found no correlation between non-linear distortion and listener preference. Neither did Olive. On the other hand, linear distortion, i.e., non-flat frequency response is a large factor in determining listener preference.
My claim was that when the price of the speakers was not revealed, listener preference gravitated towards a flat frequency response. This has been shown through experiments. As it happens, I own the bass cabinets of an Altec VOTT and I have some 300 Hz tractrix horns and also constant directivity horns. The VOTTs can't be beat in a competition for loudness. But, much to my astonishment, I found they sounded extremely similar to the tiny KEF Q100s when their on-axis response was about the same and the SPL was about the same. In a side-by-side comparison in my room, it was hard to give a preference.
The point remains that starting with a neutral frequency response is the first criterion. If you want to fill an auditorium, you probably need the VOTTs, in a small room, not so much.
I am not aware of this BBC research. Can you provide a link or point me to a place where I can read about it? Regarding your second point, did you ask LemonFuzzy if he had hearing loss? Why then should anyone assume that a non-flat response should be preferred?
Again, neither the Alpairs nor the Vifa TC9 have these issues, do they? Why talk about them? Also, in your recommendation of the Alpair, did you consider these issues? Aren't you ignoring the most important perception related factor when recommending the Alpair?
The OP asked a question. Please stay on topic and don't make the thread "my driver's better than yours." Last warning.
I appreciate all the information, but currently and with all due respect im not particularly interested in PA equipment and it's applications.
One day I will be building a PA system for some small outdoor parties. I will post a thread then and welcome your advice at this time.
Kind regards
Lemon
One day I will be building a PA system for some small outdoor parties. I will post a thread then and welcome your advice at this time.
Kind regards
Lemon
Lemon, I was doing my best to stay on topic and make suggestions to you so that you can get the best out of your drivers. My view point is that essentially, if you do not subscribe to the MA drivers, then you are not allowed to voice your opinion in this forum.
I would encourage you to do your own measurements and investigations. Most importantly, listen to what you are hearing. Reach your own conclusions about what you like and see how your listening experience can be improved.
There is a certain irony here, given that MA walked away from diyAudio specifically because it felt it was being hounded out. Whatever one feels about that perspective (I pass no comment either way), it is not exactly a situation consistent with the claim that people who dislike them are prevented from voicing their opinions. Such opinions have in fact been aired at considerable length in a number of threads over the past couple of months.
I concur that personal research and tailoring to specific requirements can be most valuable; likewise listening. That's why a large number of the enclosures I design for people here are fairly easy for the user to adjust to their particular requirements.
I concur that personal research and tailoring to specific requirements can be most valuable; likewise listening. That's why a large number of the enclosures I design for people here are fairly easy for the user to adjust to their particular requirements.
Its all very well spitting your dummy out because of problems with customers.
However, as a vendor myself selling PCB design software I have seen all that customers can throw at you.
People saying they didn't receive items when the recorded delivery says otherwise.
People swearing blind they cant understand how to use it to get a refund when its simply a matter of laying components and joining the dots.
This is why many companies have special depts. to deal with customer problems.
I have to admit there have been times where I could have thrown in the towel and walked away. Its much easier to work for someone else than work for yourself.
These days with severe competition it is hard enough to make money anyway.
Anyway back on topic.
I feel I was on topic with my comments.
The OP was talking about building a loudspeaker system.
The Fanes I mention while high power I also use at home and they sound excellent.
I have 2 cabinets one with 2 off Fane Sovereign 250-TC and another cabinet with 2 off Fane sovereign 200-LT.
Both speakers are full rangers.
They are both quite cheap ~£50 and ~£60.
I got mine from www.bluearan.co.uk who are very competitive on price.
Last edited:
Yes it somewhat frustrating at times! Oh well, I'll not let small quarrels tarnish the very helpful majority!
Thanks very much! I'll certainly keep these other drivers on my notes as later on I'm sure I will experiment.
Regarding my build.
I have a few offers from local cabinet makers to cut the materials for the speaker boxes all reasonable prices. So they should hopefully be done by next weekend (around the same time all my other equipment will be arriving) exciting times! I'll keep you all updated.
Luke
Very exciting times, Luke. Good for you!
I have no doubt whatsoever that this is going to be a very fun and satisfying process for you, despite everything else.
-Paul
I have no doubt whatsoever that this is going to be a very fun and satisfying process for you, despite everything else.
-Paul
I don't have time to comment on all of the responses etc. But there is some interesting information over the last few pages.
I will review this all and give it more thought when time permits.
Thanks for your input. I will give some of these cheaper drivers a go just for the sake of curiosity. Nothing to loose!
Take care when building your own cabinets.
I have a couple of times almost put a screw through my hand.
Another newbie problem I had was tightening the speaker bolts.
I had a phillip's screwdriver on the screw head and a spanner on the rear nut.
I pushed on the screwdriver and it slipped going straight through the cone !
Luckily I managed to fill the hole with epoxy and the speaker lasted at least another 5 years.
Glue and screw is a good strategy too. The glue will stop bracing vibrating with the speaker.
I now always cover my cabinets in thin carpet, its easy to bend and work with and gives a neat job.
I finish off with the usual cabinet furniture, plastic corners, recess plate on the back or side, speaker grills and castors to make the cabinet easy to move.
Have fun !
I have a couple of times almost put a screw through my hand.
Another newbie problem I had was tightening the speaker bolts.
I had a phillip's screwdriver on the screw head and a spanner on the rear nut.
I pushed on the screwdriver and it slipped going straight through the cone !
Luckily I managed to fill the hole with epoxy and the speaker lasted at least another 5 years.
Glue and screw is a good strategy too. The glue will stop bracing vibrating with the speaker.
I now always cover my cabinets in thin carpet, its easy to bend and work with and gives a neat job.
I finish off with the usual cabinet furniture, plastic corners, recess plate on the back or side, speaker grills and castors to make the cabinet easy to move.
Have fun !
- Status
- Not open for further replies.