You are mixing up anechoic vs in-room response, again. You are using words "Flat FR on axis" without referencing whether it is anechoic or in-room response. Flat frequency response may be anechoic or in-room.
What is preferred as "subjective ideal/neutral" in-room response is measured as downward slope above 1 kHz - simply as that. That ideal in-room response can be measured with simple equipment - noise and spectrum analyzer, just as tonyEE did. That ideal downward in-room response will be brought by flat anechoic response with slopping power response of the loudspeaker. No one prefer flat power response.
... or by using tweeters without waveguide (which usually have higher sensitivity than woofers) and shaping the tweeter response with adequate design of the tweeter filter.
Of course, waveguides have their strengths in controlled dispersion, making easier woofer-tweeter integration and better in-room response.
That's also an option of course, but I specifically referred to 'flat in room response', and taming, or taking advantage of a rising response in the tweeter's top octave, both on- and off-axis, which tends to sound 'too hot' and fatiguing.
This way, depending on the tweeter (including the dome + surround) and the waveguide, you could even couple a 90 dB tweeter to a 94 dB woofer.
I'm talking about passive crossovers and the (electrical) HP of the tweeter + wg would evidently have to be adjusted to the increased output
This way, depending on the tweeter (including the dome + surround) and the waveguide, you could even couple a 90 dB tweeter to a 94 dB woofer.
I'm talking about passive crossovers and the (electrical) HP of the tweeter + wg would evidently have to be adjusted to the increased output
You may have got that from someone who read more into it than there is. Joe expressed an interest in the next waveguide having more current properties. The one you showed is simply the version leading to that.
There are several options to play with, depending on the tweeter in question.
A SEAS TD/TF27 type tweeter (with a similar faceplate) can usually be mounted directly to a Visaton 148R.
If you don't flatten the response completely, you can easily gain 3-4 dB at the low end. Obviously at the price of a slightly higher crossover point.
The SEAS + 148R touches 100 dB at 2 kHz (2.83 V), so flattening to 94 dB is feasible.
A SEAS TD/TF27 type tweeter (with a similar faceplate) can usually be mounted directly to a Visaton 148R.
If you don't flatten the response completely, you can easily gain 3-4 dB at the low end. Obviously at the price of a slightly higher crossover point.
The SEAS + 148R touches 100 dB at 2 kHz (2.83 V), so flattening to 94 dB is feasible.
Last edited:
Speaking of the voicing in Anechoic is pointless. So when I say Flat on Axis, it is implied that I'm talking about in room because I also included Power response! There is no power response in an Anechoic chamber... so when I said for example "flat on axis with flat power response" you should have known that this has to be about in room response.
What is preferred is non of my concern. We can talk about it, what people have shown a trend to prefer, but in my opinion its about as useless as talking about what Genre of music people prefer. At the end of the day I am going to go with what I prefer, not what someone else prefers.
This what the experts say;
The ideal power response is not guaranteed by starting with a Flat anechoic response because two things are still in play, Room, and DI.
What you will not typically have with a Flat DI speaker in an untreated room, is a balanced Burst Decay. In my own words, I think this is the main culprit driving people away from a Flat on axis voicing at the listening position. You say "No one prefer flat power response" but you seem to forget that there are other ways to achieve a Sloping Power Response Other than by Sloping FR. You say "No one prefer flat power response" but you seem to forget that there are other ways to achieve a Sloping Power Response Other than by Sloping FR.
This is 1/3 smoothing of an listening position measurement. I don't consider this my best work its just what I gathered, playing around and testing at the time in a untreated room. Looking at the Burst Decay, the general decay is pretty balanced from 400hz and up. There is no serious sloping going on with the FR. The response was no Bright or Shrill or non of the adjectives used to negatively notate the experience. It sounded great and the HF is especially detailed as in the best I have ever heard which I attribute to HI Di reached as it climbs moving up spectrum.
In general this entire discussion misses context.
The whole idea comes from Toole.
But in that case it's EXTREMELY important not to put his research out of context.
Which is something a lot of people seem to forget.
Most people prefer a nice and even power response IN GENERAL, when also the room IN GENERAL, is adequate.
To be perfectly honest, that's not something so amazing te realize.
Because if we average all kinds of stuff (which is what "in general" means), we end up with these kind of things.
Fact is, that it also means that there are outliers, since the normal is only the average of the extremes.
I know plenty of rooms where a nice an flat power response sound really horrible.
That's not the speakers fault, but just that the response of that room is just not all that great.
However, I would still always design for something flat and even.
Reasoning being is that it's much easier to add salt and pepper afterwards.
It's much more difficult to hide flavor when something is already far to salty or spicy.
This is particularly true for speakers with a directivity that's all over the place.
But again, there are always scenarios to think about where that's not the case.
At that point, people are missing the point 😉
Which is exactly what I noted in my posts, huh? I measured the default in room response to be that way without equalization.
Which, btw, made me a Golden Ear Audiophile as I set up my room correctly strictly by ear and experience.... Imagine! I was still in my mid 20s and already knew what I was doing -audio wise.
In an earlier post I pointed out that electrostatics and electromagnetic panels tend to be two way.... but it got lost in the noise about equallization.
I've always wondered about wide bandwidth ribbon tweeters like the ones in use in the Elac Carina series. Someday I might pop for a used pair of BS243.
Of course, you could say that MOST panel and mini monitors are not truly "full" range...
...but the Mofi Source Point 10 are full range, huh? Coax and two way... those seem like they can play pretty loud too and deep.
So, to answer the OP... yes, there are full range two way speaker designs that can play loud and clean.
I've always wondered about wide bandwidth ribbon tweeters like the ones in use in the Elac Carina series. Someday I might pop for a used pair of BS243.
Of course, you could say that MOST panel and mini monitors are not truly "full" range...
...but the Mofi Source Point 10 are full range, huh? Coax and two way... those seem like they can play pretty loud too and deep.
So, to answer the OP... yes, there are full range two way speaker designs that can play loud and clean.
Last edited:
No, it is not implied.
If you are measuring on-axis in-room response - what on earth are you measuring?
If you use gating - it is anechoic response (at least for high, mid and part of basses).
If you don't use gating - it is room power response.
So what?
Analyze this sentence: "I designed my loudspeaker for flat anechoic response and also for downward in-room power response!"
...but there is frequency response in the anechoic chamber!
Nobody knows what you are saying. You invented your own language, which although written in English words, is incomprehensible, because you are altering to your needs the meaning of technical terms which have been defined long time ago.
Last edited:
Maybe I didn't understand your post.
You wrote this:
It is wrong to equalize in-room response to be flat. But if you came to the same conclusion after listening the flat in-room response, then it is OK.
Last edited:
My gut tells me you are really butt hurt. You must be confused.
lol so basically you agree with me but maybe there is a language barrier? If you read what you wrote you will find certain things are implied lol.
There are two ways to result in a downward in-room power response. Rising DI Directivity from the loudspeaker and Acoustic Treatment. So if you have a Flat Anechoic measurement, with either or both of those conditions, typically, there is no reason to not expect a Sloping power response. Did you want to talk about the exceptions? I have not considered them as I am only thinking about domestic/studio type spaces but maybe I am missing something. DI has a Direct effect on the Power Response, A Rising DI represents a rising strength in Transfer Function of DI. Now maybe a true expert would of worded that differently but if you can't comprehend that statement, then you have a problem with reading comprehension.
To speak for everyone, is a narcissistic trait. Its seems you do not have a neutral transfer function. I do not speak as a classically trained learned man... But I agree with what he says. I also enjoy swing jazz and its like you want me to play on beat, because you can't keep up... I will literal play "Take 5"... in 3... just to watch the confused face you make because you can't find 1. Any musician knows exactly what I just said lol.
@Sonce, I totally get that you're passionate, we all are!
Just a thought, though, maybe we could keep things focused on the topic and steer clear of the personal stuff?
It helps keep the discussion about acoustics and loudspeakers more constructive for everyone.
As I mentioned before, context is extremely important, keep that in mind.
Camplo's personal topic (by now) has been going on for a while.
I think at this point it's pretty obvious what he's looking for and why.
I don't think I will agree with all his choices, but at the end of the day those are his choices, not mine.
That just means we are all human and have our preferences, that's all 🙂
Just a thought, though, maybe we could keep things focused on the topic and steer clear of the personal stuff?
It helps keep the discussion about acoustics and loudspeakers more constructive for everyone.
As I mentioned before, context is extremely important, keep that in mind.
Camplo's personal topic (by now) has been going on for a while.
I think at this point it's pretty obvious what he's looking for and why.
I don't think I will agree with all his choices, but at the end of the day those are his choices, not mine.
That just means we are all human and have our preferences, that's all 🙂
😀 😀 😀
Well that only makes sense if your purpose was to catch flies 😉 😀
Maybe you just wanted to enjoy the honey by yourself on a sunny day.
All jokes aside, context is paramount here.
I don't think both of you are either wrong or right.
Depending how you put things (nit-picky things aside obviously, also on both sides)
Other than the title of this thread, I don't think it is obvious what he is talking about or looking for.
You are implying that you could do it better but proof remains to be seen. This thread will go on