What does DSP-Digital sound like ?
The only way i would ever be convinced that DSP crossovers are the "way-to-go" is if I knew what they sounded like. Or, if they didn't sound at all.
The scenario for testing would be to replace an active/analogue crossover currently being used in a well executed 3, or 4-way active speaker system, with a digital crossover set to the exact same settings as the analogue, to start with, and then listen.
The analogue crossover would have to be a TRUE high quality unit, not one of those $299 specials that are made for bang-bang rock bands.
All the theory/Shmeery about FIR/FUR/IIRC would immediately be exposed as being a truism, or a falsehood.
The proof is always in the listening.
The only way i would ever be convinced that DSP crossovers are the "way-to-go" is if I knew what they sounded like. Or, if they didn't sound at all.
The scenario for testing would be to replace an active/analogue crossover currently being used in a well executed 3, or 4-way active speaker system, with a digital crossover set to the exact same settings as the analogue, to start with, and then listen.
The analogue crossover would have to be a TRUE high quality unit, not one of those $299 specials that are made for bang-bang rock bands.
All the theory/Shmeery about FIR/FUR/IIRC would immediately be exposed as being a truism, or a falsehood.
The proof is always in the listening.
A few things to consider. A DSP has way more potential than an analog or active-analog filter. Simply put - the things you can do with software and a DSP is way more complex and can be finetuned precisely - which an analog filter can never truely be - without to big of a compromise - read tons of components - often costing alot more than simply going active to begin with.
Yes - quality has to be good, both of the measurements and the adjustment of the filters. But the effeciency and control of an active filter clearly kicks out analog filters. I do get that an analog filter seems simple. But the new packages that take up almost no room , but with build-in volume, DSP, streaming and amplifiers..... that is hard to beat.
But I do accept that active filters is more of a gift to DIY. If you just have a system at home to sit down and listen to music and really dont care much about technology and someone else build everything for you..... then analog might work really well - no doubt about that
Don't entirely agree. As each drive unit sees a 1D signal (and creates a 3D soundfield) with DSP on each driver you can do tricks that are incredibly hard to do in the analog domain, which is where B&O, Kii and D&D have headed. You cannot turn a pigs ear into a silk purse (hope that makes sense outside uk) but you can make some concepts practical and add cherry on the cake for others. But first you have to understand the acoustical aspects.
I (possibly unfairly) consider the LS1 to be the trial run for the Kii so now is one behind the state of the art. Bruno has done a lot in the last 6 years!
Yes - I totally agree with that. But the B&O - which I have listened to, both the Beolab 50 and 90 - kinda like the Kii3 - they use multiple drivers to control sound dispersion - which still do not change the fact that 3D( acoustics if you will) is something a DSP cant change with one driver.
The acoustical output is still controlled mainly by the drivers shape, size and the baffle/horn/waveguide that it is mounted in.
So all I try to say - is, that if you EQ a speaker to be linear on any axis - it will change on any others axis' too - the sound comes from the same driver - so it is impossible to change that with a DSP.
But yes - the cardioid-principle, can do intersting stuff. But like any other loudspeaker.... the basic design has to work well - cabinet design, driver choices, placement etc.
You can squeeze maybe "ok" sound out of a bad speaker with EQ. But one magic trick like a DSP - cant carry the whole load
Yes, very unfair actually.
Grimm LS1 is a totally different design (wide baffle), and not Bruno's.
The only thing Kii and LS1 have in common is DSP and Ncore amplification.
Bruno didn't do the acoustic design for the Kii either. But a 2-way with DSP EQ is a step behind the latest systems esp as it costs more. I do note some of the high end stores stock all 3 so you can at least compare. If you are in the market for a 10k speaker you can also afford a 16k speaker after all.
Plus, multiple improvements were made over time, e.g. the motional feedback subwoofer, a Be tweeter for the new top model, filter improvements...
At the last XFi show in NL they sounded very fine in combination with their new streamer. Which contains a ton of FPGA/DSP based filter processing as well...
Fedde
With integrated sub it is three way. The Ls1a (without sub) costs 13000 euro. Still quite a chunk of money though....
Fedde
Just hopping in to the discussion. I might have missed some parts.
Those are indeed the drivers in use in the Kii three. Very cheap, but if you can get drivers for little money that still meet the requirements, why not?
The real art is in implementation. They use 6x 250W Ncore amplifiers (custom variants) with power feedback (as Bruno calls it). They are not the NCores you can buy off the shelf that are just voltage feedback amplifiers.
This means that in some area's the amps operate as transconductance amplifiers. This linearises certain driver parameters (i.e. Le(x)) and can drasticly reduce distortion. These kind of tricks are the core strength of active loudspeakers and simply can't be made with passive systems like ATC's.
Yes they are inherently different designs. However they both strive to solve the same problems; controlled directivity over a wide band.
The Kii solves this with extra drivers, the grimm solves it with a very wide baffle.
I have yet to hear the Kii Three, but the Grimm LS1be with DMF is probably the finest loudspeaker I know.
And I agree... it's aparently cheap:
Kii Three — ImgBB
SBS-160F35AL01-04 Peerless by Tymphany | Audio Products | DigiKey
FSL-0512R01-08M Peerless by Tymphany | Audio Products | DigiKey
SEAS Prestige 27TBCD/GB-DXT (H1499) Tweeter
But hey... if it works.... then they just made the best out of it all... by simply using the right components that seems to do the job just fine
Those are indeed the drivers in use in the Kii three. Very cheap, but if you can get drivers for little money that still meet the requirements, why not?
The real art is in implementation. They use 6x 250W Ncore amplifiers (custom variants) with power feedback (as Bruno calls it). They are not the NCores you can buy off the shelf that are just voltage feedback amplifiers.
This means that in some area's the amps operate as transconductance amplifiers. This linearises certain driver parameters (i.e. Le(x)) and can drasticly reduce distortion. These kind of tricks are the core strength of active loudspeakers and simply can't be made with passive systems like ATC's.
AFAIK Bruno was involved in amplification and AD-DA conversion.
Yes they are inherently different designs. However they both strive to solve the same problems; controlled directivity over a wide band.
The Kii solves this with extra drivers, the grimm solves it with a very wide baffle.
I have yet to hear the Kii Three, but the Grimm LS1be with DMF is probably the finest loudspeaker I know.
£16000 from the UK distributor without subs. Which puts it above the others. It does have a certain look which I can see some would like but there is very stiff competition in this price range. Good time to be a well heeled music lover. Of course audiophiles will dislike all of these as they cannot synergise it.
Precisely... I think we agree
I just bought a set of DXT to maybe use instead of my Seas Excel.... cause.... I agree with you
Precisely... I think we agree
I just bought a set of DXT to maybe use instead of my Seas Excel.... cause.... I agree with you
The driver behind the SEAS DXT isn't too spectecular. The wave guide design is what makes it so great.
The seas Excel tweeters are much better when it comes to parameters other than distortion. What you could try is mount the DXT on a Excel tweeter. I think they have the same mounting holes.
Of course the waveguide won't be perfect for the driver. Developing your own waveguide is a project on your own.
Hmmm... interesting idear..... I will most certainly look into that... cause why not... we only live ones
Hmmm... interesting idear..... I will most certainly look into that... cause why not... we only live ones
You have nothing to lose and plenty to gain when you already have both drivers anyway!
A few things to consider. A DSP has way more potential than an analog or active-analog filter. Simply put - the things you can do with software and a DSP is way more complex and can be finetuned precisely - which an analog filter can never truely be - without to big of a compromise - read tons of components - often costing alot more than simply going active to begin with.
Yes - quality has to be good, both of the measurements and the adjustment of the filters. But the effeciency and control of an active filter clearly kicks out analog filters. I do get that an analog filter seems simple. But the new packages that take up almost no room , but with build-in volume, DSP, streaming and amplifiers..... that is hard to beat.
But I do accept that active filters is more of a gift to DIY. If you just have a system at home to sit down and listen to music and really dont care much about technology and someone else build everything for you..... then analog might work really well - no doubt about that
I insist on reiterating my point. If any given digital crossover does not sound equally as good as what I am currently using, then no amount of extra features, bells, or whistles would make me choose a lessor sound quality.
I have read through these discussions many times over. The common theme seems to be that digital crossovers feature all sorts of band-aides to speaker systems that are poorly implemented to start with. But, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. I have listened to tens of thousands of dollars worth of digital crossover gear, and so-called digital amplifiers all thrown together like money was the end-all/be-all, and they seriously failed to hit the mark. However, they did measured perfect.
But, you can't measure the conveyance of the emotional state of mind of a music artist, nor can you measurement just how captivating and emotionally involving a music playback system is.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.