You may want to consider the listing distance. Those professional large monitors are located a little far from the listing position, at least 15 feet away. I think the difference between MTM and TMM is minimal at this distance, especially considering the room effect which dominates the sound quality in real world.
Last edited:
Camplo,
I'm not against the principle. I disliked kinoshita RM4 ( the original from the photo you gave).
The Warp7 i liked.
But... Rm4 are crossed around 640hz ( in the Tad/exclusive version) probably a bit lower with the Kinoshita. The vertical directivity is very narrow and at listening position in thr control room i used them you moved your head 20cm and you had a 'wooosh'. Typical head in a vise.
RM Monitor
Warp7 are crossed at 480hz. The horn is an evolution of the TH4001 and they sounded better to me.
Yours idk what to expect. I repeat only a prototype could tell you.
WARP
I'm not against the principle. I disliked kinoshita RM4 ( the original from the photo you gave).
The Warp7 i liked.
But... Rm4 are crossed around 640hz ( in the Tad/exclusive version) probably a bit lower with the Kinoshita. The vertical directivity is very narrow and at listening position in thr control room i used them you moved your head 20cm and you had a 'wooosh'. Typical head in a vise.
RM Monitor
Warp7 are crossed at 480hz. The horn is an evolution of the TH4001 and they sounded better to me.
Yours idk what to expect. I repeat only a prototype could tell you.
WARP
Hidley's room from 70's with 'compression ceiling' and sofit mounted monitors- like in the picture Camplo posted-( before the switch to Rm7 (mtm) and 'zero environnement' principle).
By the way Camplo, they may have the Westlake badge but are Kinoshita's and are 2x12" not 2x15".
Hidley switched to them as soon as he heard the RM range which is a testimony of their quality ( he owned Westlake at that time). They had a deal and rebranded them. The amplifier used where branded Kinoshita but built in France by JMF...
Typical 'high end' studio gear salad... so much money involved...
By the way Camplo, they may have the Westlake badge but are Kinoshita's and are 2x12" not 2x15".
Hidley switched to them as soon as he heard the RM range which is a testimony of their quality ( he owned Westlake at that time). They had a deal and rebranded them. The amplifier used where branded Kinoshita but built in France by JMF...
Typical 'high end' studio gear salad... so much money involved...
Last edited:
It is my theory that I can tune a large loudspeaker to a short listening distance using phase as long as I am 0 axis on tweeter and within low enough view angle of the woofers involved. I set the threshold to ka=2
TMM with vertical woofers would put the bottom woofer too low...you could still tune this situation to a close and single listening position but because the viewing angle on the bottom woofer will be higher, frequency viewing with too high KA will result in larger variances in FR with position to compound the situation already at hand.
That leaves TMM with horizontal woofers or MTM.
A close listening distance would put pressure on the attribute of comb filtering....The low cross over might mitigate that issue to a non issue.
Last edited:
Room treatment affects the timing of reflections which strongly affect imaging. Decay in this case is room decay not modal decay. In the modal region the modes are discrete and 3-dimensional. Thus, a 1-dimensional EQ cannot correct a 3D mode with a single source, except at a single point.
There are different types of modes mostly dependent on the dimensionality. Room modes are 3D, but a waveguide standing wave is generally 1D. We can correct all aspects of the later, but not the former with a single degree of freedom - standard EQ.
For discrete 3D modes we do generally need "more than EQ" to solve the problems - like multiple subs at LFs with EQ.
If you "fixed the FR with filters," then you also fixed the GD.
In a minimum phase (MP) system that is correct. MP is generally the case, but some things, like diffraction, can be non-MP, in which case there can be GD without FR effects.
I see. I have not really had enough experiences comparing TMM vs MTM, but I don't think we can generalize the superiority one over the other. To me, the worst sounding ATC is SCM45 which comes with 6.5" horizontal woofers, but larger ATCs come with larger horizontal woofers just sound great. Size may matters. maybe...
Its strange to look at but then according to the polar, dual woofers, would have a smaller polar foot print, than single, be it on the horizontal axis. It might be similar to the ~36" wide horn, meant for it. At 300hz, I think the only threat is comb filtering...I know what it sounds like but I don't think its visible in the measurements of rew/horn/virtuixcad? Maybe with VituixCad, in the phase as I move the virtual microphone?
Camplo,
You seem to ignore TMW, MEH (Multiple Entry Horns) or 2.5 way options (like the classic JBL 4435 bi-radial studio monitor) and still seem to be thinking in 2-way terms, while planning a 3-way system.
Using a 15" (or two!) for midrange, covering only 1.5 octaves (100-300 Hz) is not a good 3-way choice, and never has been an optimal design for a "far field" two-way, and a very poor choice for a short listening distance three-way. You will compromise what the monitor should be good for (loud at distance) equalizing it for near field.
A 300 Hz crossover will reduce comb-filtering problems using a pair of horizontal 15" woofers, but the sound quality of the HF will be degraded running so low- hence the 500 (or so) limit generally put on a single 15"/4" diaphragm HF, or the 800 Hz range for a 2x15".
Art
Last edited:
Can you explain what you mean by "degrading"... are you strictly referring to the sound quality of the compression driver? Or in comparison to the the 2 large woofers? It sounds like you are saying the tweeter will run into distortion before the woofers as spl increases....or that its impossible to have good sound quality and cover 300-20khz?
Last edited:
Yes, at high SPL, your HF compression driver (equivalent to a 4" diaphragm) sound quality will be worse at 300 Hz than a pair of 15" run as high as 800 Hz, regardless of polar response.
Pushing a horn much past a decade of operation at high SPL has never been considered "high fidelity", that subjective choice while critically listening has not changed even as drivers have been made that can withstand more thermal abuse.
Pushing a horn much past a decade of operation at high SPL has never been considered "high fidelity", that subjective choice while critically listening has not changed even as drivers have been made that can withstand more thermal abuse.
What compression driver are you using?? I would never run a conventional 4" that low. I use mine @ 700Hz and up. Old school they would take them down to about 500Hz but lower power than typically used today and the driver would be de-ratted on the data sheet depending on crossover points. Alternative would be phenolic higher power lower frequency and much narrower bandwidth as in very limited high end.
Rob
AXi2050(meant to be on a 150hz elliptical tractrix, I pictured it above.)....I think the Sd is little higher than a 4" dome isn't it? 78.82 sqcm is the most accurate number I have.
"Pushing a horn much past a decade of operation at high SPL has never been considered "high fidelity" " - Aiming for maybe 80db friend....
"Pushing a horn much past a decade of operation at high SPL has never been considered "high fidelity" " - Aiming for maybe 80db friend....
Last edited:
?? According to this it's 17.5 cm/6.89" dia. = 240.53 cm^2, so bigger than a typical 8" frame: Axi2050 Axiperiodic Wideband Compression Driver - Celestion
Peaks?! How compressed will your recordings be?