Hi, I try to understand why the granada g2 loudspeaker is so tall.
It must be to support the drivers in some way. But the tweeter doesn't need it, the midrange at that wavelength doesn't need it, Is it the bass? The bass has a much shorter path to the backside than all the way to the top.
Please enlighten me 🙂
It must be to support the drivers in some way. But the tweeter doesn't need it, the midrange at that wavelength doesn't need it, Is it the bass? The bass has a much shorter path to the backside than all the way to the top.
Please enlighten me 🙂
Attachments
It defies logic but then again, the topology of so many speakers appears to be clue less. Take for example the large Watt speakers, which have horrible vertical polars as a result.
Increases the output on-axis.
When a wavefront transitions from half space (a baffle) to 360 degrees, you get a drop in output on axis, aka "baffle step."
When a wavefront transitions from half space (a baffle) to 360 degrees, you get a drop in output on axis, aka "baffle step."
Did you even look at what kind of speaker it is? Since the speaker is a full active dsp setup with an amp channel for each driver and it would only get a marginally increase in spl (~0,5dB), the gain is no objective.
It's simply a design feature, to make the speaker unique in shape and size and to lay emphasis on the craftsmanship and to justify the price since it makes it a lot more impressive.
It's simply a design feature, to make the speaker unique in shape and size and to lay emphasis on the craftsmanship and to justify the price since it makes it a lot more impressive.
why not 🙂
nowdays there are so many new OB manufacturer with so many ideas on their head. not sure how it's sold
classic design from PureAudioProject is ever lasting
nowdays there are so many new OB manufacturer with so many ideas on their head. not sure how it's sold
classic design from PureAudioProject is ever lasting
+0,5dB is inaudible, maybe noticable in an A/B comparison - but not in the range the half space baffle extension actually 'works'. Do you even know what half space and full space means? You can't even create a full space situation in a realistic living enviroment.
Hard to say what the intent is but the raked top section should provide a smoother vertical off axis response for the midrange and tweeter.
Why is it so tall? Granada Loudspeaker
To keep out customers without sufficient wealth (not enough money, not big enough rooms
To get more attention at audio showrooms
To get more visual prestige
etc.
So, typical high-end audiophile saga. I failed to see any measurements of response in the web. Basically, it's not too bad design, and copied by many. On-axis response might be pretty good, but directivity smoothness is lost above say 600Hz because of too wide baffle. This means that it is very sensitive to positioning in the listening room. And so many audiophiles will just love it, because they can easily hear the sound/image changing!
Many similar type efforts have been seen
Jamo.com | R 909
https://www.pureaudioproject.com/
OBL-15
To keep out customers without sufficient wealth (not enough money, not big enough rooms
To get more attention at audio showrooms
To get more visual prestige
etc.
So, typical high-end audiophile saga. I failed to see any measurements of response in the web. Basically, it's not too bad design, and copied by many. On-axis response might be pretty good, but directivity smoothness is lost above say 600Hz because of too wide baffle. This means that it is very sensitive to positioning in the listening room. And so many audiophiles will just love it, because they can easily hear the sound/image changing!
Many similar type efforts have been seen
Jamo.com | R 909
https://www.pureaudioproject.com/
OBL-15
Last edited:
So much negativity for a design that nobody has even attempted to understand?
If you separate the facts from the assumptions it becomes easier to see that there could be benefits to such a design.
This is only an issue with wide baffles without large round-overs / chamfers. That is not the case with this design.
If you separate the facts from the assumptions it becomes easier to see that there could be benefits to such a design.
This is only an issue with wide baffles without large round-overs / chamfers. That is not the case with this design.
Last edited:
It would help a lot in this regard if the output and the chamfers were similar to the rear.
Please remember that this loudspeaker is "dipole". I suppose that the midrange (or fullrange in Granada original) are "open back" as well, and G2 has two tweeters, obviously the other one radiating on the backside.
Do you understand the radiation basics concerning dipole pattern? Baffle width determines the shortest pathlength where front- and backside wavefronts meet and interfere, Chambers don't change that, but they do have a minimal effect above this dipole range. Easy simulation with The Edge shows this. To make midrange and tweeter to have smooth dipole pattern as well, much narrower baffle is needed!
And the question was about height of the baffle (tall), and that detail is way off as well, but it's effect on sound (radiation) is minimal.
And about my "answers", please remember the price for a pair is 75.000$ which is of course much less than the Feastrex version costing 125.000! The Lotus Group's Granada G2 | Stereophile.com
Do you understand the radiation basics concerning dipole pattern? Baffle width determines the shortest pathlength where front- and backside wavefronts meet and interfere, Chambers don't change that, but they do have a minimal effect above this dipole range. Easy simulation with The Edge shows this. To make midrange and tweeter to have smooth dipole pattern as well, much narrower baffle is needed!
And the question was about height of the baffle (tall), and that detail is way off as well, but it's effect on sound (radiation) is minimal.
And about my "answers", please remember the price for a pair is 75.000$ which is of course much less than the Feastrex version costing 125.000! The Lotus Group's Granada G2 | Stereophile.com
Attachments
The chamfers are quite shallow so I doubt the back wave will be too messy but I understand the asymmetrical nature of the design and the issues. But with this there is also some widening of the front wave compared to the rear wave is there not? I would argue that diffraction in the back wave off axis response is less detrimental than the front wave and maybe it is a compromise that was intentional. I doubt it will cause big problems with the cancellation to the sides but I don't know how to model folded back "wings" at a shallow angle, maybe there is software that can?
I don't see how the extended and sloped baffle above the tweeter could not help to support the vertical axis at the listening position? Can you tell me why you think it would make no difference at all or make it worse?
Yes, the price is insane, but that's a free market for you. If it doesn't work out his business will fail, I guess...
I don't see how the extended and sloped baffle above the tweeter could not help to support the vertical axis at the listening position? Can you tell me why you think it would make no difference at all or make it worse?
Yes, the price is insane, but that's a free market for you. If it doesn't work out his business will fail, I guess...
Last edited:
Other members here have given the answers: BEM software does an excellent job here. But I doubt if the design process has involved any BEM analysis...
As to that sloped baffle above the tweeter: It does a decreasing job up to more or less one wavelength of the lowest frequency of the tweeter, say half a foot max. Try The Edge for yourself, I'd say.
As to that sloped baffle above the tweeter: It does a decreasing job up to more or less one wavelength of the lowest frequency of the tweeter, say half a foot max. Try The Edge for yourself, I'd say.
Edge can't handle edge chamfers or rounding, but eg. VituixCAD can. BEM modelling would be super, but one should know the backside structure too...
IMO it is safe to say that listening window response is ok, but wider off-axis and power response are a big question. 2X12" dipole woofers are ok, but make a challenge for positioning. Extra height above the tweeter is mainly for eyes.
IMO it is safe to say that listening window response is ok, but wider off-axis and power response are a big question. 2X12" dipole woofers are ok, but make a challenge for positioning. Extra height above the tweeter is mainly for eyes.
Yes, that's correct. Plus, you will probably find it not very comfortable with the second plane removed (which would be the floor).