Are rock bass less acurate or do the rock makes bass uper than a Grand orgue (typically > 50 hz for rock but often less for Piano or Grand orgue)? If dipole do less bass, is it not because of the lake of surface (need more surface, not x 2 woofers vs 1 sealed, but 4 open Woofers vs 1 sealed ? Is not a question of transcient response and total Q ? form of the low End Slope ?
1.5-2 meters (minimum) from (diffusive) front and side walls, and a relatively "dead" (absorptive or transparent) back wall.
"Accuracy" is essentially meaningless for synthetic sound . . . it's all about the producer's intent. With electric (rock) bass there is typically no "original sound" that one is trying to reproduce . . . one is instead trying to produce in the listening room a sound similar to that which was produced in the studio or performance venue. It's just a substantially different task from a "high fidelity" reproduction of an acoustic event. Consider HT as the extreme example of this . . . a Blu-ray sound track is not created by hanging a lot of mics in a movie theater to capture the sound as presented there, and neither does a movie sound track represent actual "real life" sound.
It is always about getting from the recordings that we have to the sonic experience that we want to have, and there are just too many variables involved to say that any one kind of loudspeaker is universally "best".
Yes I agree with that. I always scratch my head when I read thread inDIYA about bass reproduction and rooms... mainly by lake of knowledge (in acoustic like in english speaking). My understanding with bass and wave lengh about it is bass are always problematics. I just play with mods and listening position but I really try to understand the blending between room, design and placements of speakers and listeners... Today I am enable to tell you in ABX test wich subjectivly sound best between all technologies : planar, OB, semi OB, cardioid, gedee, multiple horns design... That's fascinated me in relation to things which seems more complex... but I love that & not easy for money to taste them all !
In final, listen to the Grand Orgue at Notre Dame Paris... How could we reproduce a 18 hz without the length of the main nave...
But sorry for the two cents (I have to read more more and surely write less)
In final, listen to the Grand Orgue at Notre Dame Paris... How could we reproduce a 18 hz without the length of the main nave...
But sorry for the two cents (I have to read more more and surely write less)
Last edited:
These impulse responses are starting to help me understand. Can they be used to generate frequency responses under the same conditions? That would help dumb the problem down to the point where we might be able to say "dipole bass isn't worth the hassle below x Hz" ...yes I know in this particular listening room, with this listening position, this speaker orientation...
Essentially two ways . . . either pressurization (think automobile cabin, where you can hear 18 Hz just fine), or a dead/transparent back wall that does not produce mode-producing reflections. A third (somewhat more "technical") option is mode canceling (delayed and inverted) rear subwoofers to null out the reflections, in most of the listening area anyway.
Thank you,
The first is unknown to me but make me think at a lot of reflexion and boomy signature (because my poor understanding).
The second is the one we all want (need many skill & knowledge, impossible in collective houses (buildings) because the noise, and a WAF approval if in the living room)
The last is inverted wave cancelation (my understanding) and maybe is a trap because the inverted wave is not exactly acurate because the rooms and furnitures, not sure DSP help?
Well no way with an OB or ESL/Magneplanar / AMT ribbon if the front wall is closer that 1,5 meter (60 inches)
The first is unknown to me but make me think at a lot of reflexion and boomy signature (because my poor understanding).
The second is the one we all want (need many skill & knowledge, impossible in collective houses (buildings) because the noise, and a WAF approval if in the living room)
The last is inverted wave cancelation (my understanding) and maybe is a trap because the inverted wave is not exactly acurate because the rooms and furnitures, not sure DSP help?
Well no way with an OB or ESL/Magneplanar / AMT ribbon if the front wall is closer that 1,5 meter (60 inches)
Last edited:
...I guess what I was after was the unequalized responses at the listening position. Which configuration is that for? The last one where the speakers are rotated 45 degrees?
If so, then the dipole looks flatter <100Hz. However, each response follows room modes <50Hz, so maybe that's the right place to crossover to a monopole and just pick your favorite method of dealing with them.
If so, then the dipole looks flatter <100Hz. However, each response follows room modes <50Hz, so maybe that's the right place to crossover to a monopole and just pick your favorite method of dealing with them.
yes. In fact the impulses were obtained by applying an inverse FFT to the frequency response. If you look below the impulse plots you will see a smaller figure with the frequency response of the woofers compared to the ideal response.
[edit] I see from your next post you found it. Yes, that plot is for 45 degrees rotation. And in that figure it is the cardioid which has the best response below 100 Hz.
Last edited:
While the first part is somewhat marginally true (dipoles actually excite more modes than monopoles, which is why they tend to have smoother response in the modal region than similarly-placed monopoles) everything after the "and" is simply blather.
For one thing I've never seen a degenerate placement-constricted multisub system (what you call "dipole woofers") actually produce as smooth a response in the modal region (say, 40-150 Hz give or take depending on room volume) as properly-executed monopole multisubs. Better than so-called "full range" speakers, true, because the DPCMS does at least approximate multiple (albeit poorly-placed) monopole sources. But not as good as doing it right in the first place, and also much more of an eyesore in the room than multisubs concealed along its periphery.
Last edited:
False.
I'll have to take you at your word that you've never heard a good dipole woofer in a good room, but that hardly means that they don't exist, or that a bunch of bass drivers scattered around a room (in a "properly executed" fashion, whatever that means) is, or is likely to be, any "smoother" or otherwise better. Deliberately exciting more resonances in a quest for "smoother" (but almost certainly muddier) response sounds silly on the face of it (to me). But if that's what you like, then go for it.
Read some of the discussions between Drs. K and G on this forum about "dipoles" and modal excitation, and you'll learn something.
So, you want to be on record that your idol Mr. Linkwitz's own setup of his Orion speakers at Axpona in ATL a few years ago was not up to snuff?
I don't think that's the case. But still the upper bass was only good by comparison to the "full range" speakers at the show.
It's clear you've not kept up with modern advances in bass reproduction for small rooms. Your loss.
Then stick with monopoles, because your dipoles do the exact same thing in the modal region, except that placement is constrained and they're eyesores because they're large structures that have to be placed well out into the room.
A practical example of mixin mono/omnipole woofer to dipole mid. My xo is now at 130Hz LR2.
Here are responses at 0¤ and 60¤ (blue) and 180¤ and 120¤ (red)
We can see that between 100 and 250Hz rearside radiation is lower than frontside (cardioid pattern) but the differece is only 3dB. Again above 3000Hz there is monopole tweeter with LR8 xo.
Front and rear radiation are not mirror images also because time-alignment of two mids is matched to the frontside, xo 800Hz LR4.
Here are responses at 0¤ and 60¤ (blue) and 180¤ and 120¤ (red)
We can see that between 100 and 250Hz rearside radiation is lower than frontside (cardioid pattern) but the differece is only 3dB. Again above 3000Hz there is monopole tweeter with LR8 xo.
Front and rear radiation are not mirror images also because time-alignment of two mids is matched to the frontside, xo 800Hz LR4.
Attachments
Update.
After living for a week with monopoles below 80hz I like these better. I only use 2 subs (the speakers are capable of 4x subs). Even then they are more impactful and project higher authority compared with 4x dipoles. Much more realistic bass drums etc.
Next I will modify the speakers to have 4x monopoles running. This should shake the house when needed. Will post pics later.
After living for a week with monopoles below 80hz I like these better. I only use 2 subs (the speakers are capable of 4x subs). Even then they are more impactful and project higher authority compared with 4x dipoles. Much more realistic bass drums etc.
Next I will modify the speakers to have 4x monopoles running. This should shake the house when needed. Will post pics later.
Good to hear mate. I'm about to try some sealed Lab12s bellow my 12" ripoles to see how that goes. Looking forward to being able to play it loud with ease…not that I've heard any strain from the Eq'd ripoles…could just be psychological…but theres a sense of comfort and possibly audible ease from having the added headroom and knowing the bass won't give out if you ever feel the urge to really turn up the wick.
I have nothing against dipole bass, in fact I think they are great. But always.... that missing first octave bothers me !
My dipole subs are always eq'd at 20hz or lower so it's not the speakers alone but how it interacts/unable to pressurize the room at lowest frequencies.
My dipole subs are always eq'd at 20hz or lower so it's not the speakers alone but how it interacts/unable to pressurize the room at lowest frequencies.
Are you using the bass bins in your speakers (the 4 ways?) in monopole, or using dedicated subs in their place?