ShinOBIWAN said:
Opps. I better not show the surrounds I've done as well.
Since you are trying to do to the international DIY community what Clouseau did to Dreyfus nerves with your relentless production of impeccable masterpieces, here is what I am thinking to build next. Any suggestions about the finish?
Attachments
Room treatment
Since the subject of room treatment was brought up, I thought maybe the listening room of Stig-Erik Tangen might be interesting.
He has been deep into speaker building and acoustic treatment and recording for a long time. And to call it a listening room is an understatement since he has set up a dedicated building.
http://member.newsguy.com/~stigerik/html/listening_room_measurements.html
His speaker building projects are also very interesting material.
Since the subject of room treatment was brought up, I thought maybe the listening room of Stig-Erik Tangen might be interesting.
He has been deep into speaker building and acoustic treatment and recording for a long time. And to call it a listening room is an understatement since he has set up a dedicated building.
http://member.newsguy.com/~stigerik/html/listening_room_measurements.html
His speaker building projects are also very interesting material.
Re: Room treatment
Excellent link Bernt, thanks for that. Impresive work on all levels, I particularly like how he uses console with Waves plugins for loudspeaker DSP - something I was/am very fond of myself. His room treatments and listening space are something to aspire to especially considering the importance these make to sound reproduction. Clearly the guy is dedicated.
Is he a member on here?
BTW I thought the name Stig-Erik Tangen rang a bell and I was pleased to see I wasn't imagining it when I discovered the 'Almighty' subs. If I'd get the space in my little listening room then I'd definitely be looking at something like that, sadly as it stands I'm already sat on top of the LGT's when listening to them! Well almost
Excellent link Bernt, thanks for that. Impresive work on all levels, I particularly like how he uses console with Waves plugins for loudspeaker DSP - something I was/am very fond of myself. His room treatments and listening space are something to aspire to especially considering the importance these make to sound reproduction. Clearly the guy is dedicated.
Is he a member on here?
BTW I thought the name Stig-Erik Tangen rang a bell and I was pleased to see I wasn't imagining it when I discovered the 'Almighty' subs. If I'd get the space in my little listening room then I'd definitely be looking at something like that, sadly as it stands I'm already sat on top of the LGT's when listening to them! Well almost
stryker1959 said:
You can't have those mains and a center channel without surround to match
Ya taking orders yet shin?
I know, for the surround design I've got in mind its looking unreasonably expensive considering their multichannel only use.
I find the M&K tripole designs to work well for the duties of a surround speaker so naturally I followed form. But to have a 'matched' design with the LGT then I'd have to go with RAAL and Audiotechnology drivers. Bear with me here, I'm always long winded in everything I do including explanations for my motives
Soooo that means a couple of possibilities such as:
3x RAAL's and an AT(prob 6.5")
1x RAAL and 3x AT's
The price, in drivers, for the surrounds wouldn't be a million miles off that of the mains which is daft considering their much lesser role. Or maybe just do a monopole design with a single tweeter and mid/bass? These never seem to work well regarding ambience on movie track, at least when compared to the alternatives such as those tripoles I mentioned.
Much better would be dome tweeter and some Seas poly cones so as not to leave a bitter taste in the bank managers mouth. But boy what a cop out!
Another interesting point is that with the console setup I use its possible to add effect plugins into the loudspeaker DSP. These can take the form of stereo expanders, multichannel steering processors as well as more basic reverbs, delays and such like. Of course these are useless, not to mention detrimental, for 2 channel stereo playback but for a surround speaker doing movies? I bet some interesting if not entirely natural effects can be produced.
PS. Website will be up shortly to take orders on the LGT, LGT-C and LGT-SR. Payment via Western Union only please
ScottG said:
-top right column.
Grumpy_Git said:Bottom middle would be the best match for the LGT's. IMO
Nick.
PS: Are you taking orders yet?
Those two are the ones that I prefer. The only difference between them is the aesthetics of the baffle insert - one rounded one more angular.
The overall design is 3x AT 5" mid/woofers with the smaller RAAL 70-10 ribbon.
I'm not sure about crossover specifics, I'd like to suggest that identical one to the LGT's would be best but I suspect that might be short sighted.
If that was to be the case then a 3 way with crossover points at 200hz and 2.5Khz would be the choice. The two flanking 5" mids doing from about 70hz-200hz with the vertical mid-tweeter running from there on up.
However possibly more wise might be running 2.5way with all three 5" mids running upto 200hz but with the exception of the center 5" which carries on upto 2.5Khz and hands over to the RAAL. My reasoning being slightly more headroom in the bass but possibily at the expense of some mid clarity related IMD from asking the mid driver to also do bass.
I think because of its heavy vocal nature a center speaker should have more presence in the vocal range so 150hz - 800hz should be optimised and perhaps even boosted for great clarity.
I don't think wads of bass is needed so the 5" drivers should be OK, althought it might be better to slightly modify the design to allow the flanking woofers to be the 6.5" variety for a little more weight during on screen effects which a center speakers is often asked to play.
If anyone has a random thought they'd like to add please do so! This will be my first center and whilst I think I know what needs to be done I'm probably missing some important points.
First I must say I have no experience with surround
But I must also say that from experience and a theoretical point of wiev, with the standard setup center with midwoofers placed on either side of the mid/tweeter phase issues are bound to occur ... especially when you think of the fact that movie listening is a social event where you are not positioned in the "sweet spot"... man, I hate that word
To me the logical choise would be a coaxial unit ... which could be made 2.5way but unfortunately not many of those arround
But I must also say that from experience and a theoretical point of wiev, with the standard setup center with midwoofers placed on either side of the mid/tweeter phase issues are bound to occur ... especially when you think of the fact that movie listening is a social event where you are not positioned in the "sweet spot"... man, I hate that word
To me the logical choise would be a coaxial unit ... which could be made 2.5way
but unfortunately not many of those arround
tinitus said:First I must say I have no experience with surround
But I must also say that from experience and a theoretical point of wiev, with the standard setup center with midwoofers placed on either side of the mid/tweeter phase issues are bound to occur ... especially when you think of the fact that movie listening is a social event where you are not positioned in the "sweet spot"... man, I hate that word
To me there seems to be no way around a coaxial unit ... which could be made 2.5way
I know what your saying, horizontal MTM is not good.
However the proposed design uses a vertical mid tweeter arrangement from 200hz up and only below 200hz do the flanking woofer come into play where frequency wavelength are much larger and the output from the two effectively couples in an almost omnipolar way with little to no created lobes. This in effect allows the center to very similarly operate as a traditional design would.
tinitus said:That design may help a lot, but as you say yourself, not very cost effective
I am in doubt whether if looking at movies is worth such an effort
I think that a good pair of stereo speakers gives plenty ... and maybe subs
Yes it is a fair amount of money in drivers just for a center channel. Not cost effective at all but I guess something similar from commercial land would be a couple of thousand pounds? I don't know I'm just guessing, there doesn't seem to be many commercial center designs that are using quality drivers like the audiotechnology and RAAL.
Maybe just switch the center channel to 'phantom' and let the left and rights do all the work? I'm sure they're more capable than any center channel would be.
I always find a good center channel locks audio, related to what your seeing on the screen, firmly to the screen and can have the effect of further heightening the envelopement. Sometimes, with things such as 5.1 music DVD's it is much better to turn the center channel off and route signals to the left and right though so it isn't always positive.
salas said:
Since you are trying to do to the international DIY community what Clouseau did to Dreyfus nerves with your relentless production of impeccable masterpieces, here is what I am thinking to build next. Any suggestions about the finish?
Here's another project that might need the input of someone who combines perfection with actually finishing projects.
The locals have been mucking around with it for approximately a century now...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Apart from that... impressive work Shin! I'm following your thread closely, although not posting a lot. Your stuff on PC based filters is very interesting. I'm using a DEQX myself, and am very pleased with it. For my it's hard to understand why people are still torturing themselves with caps and coils.
I'd like to ask a few questions for my own understanding, if you don't mind Shin. And further to that, I suspect you will be the perfect guy to be able to explain it so I CAN understand ha ha.
I know that at some stage you too have used a deqx, and have now gone to a computer based solution.
(Please pardon my ignorance that follows)
From what i can gather from an earlier comment of yours, the current computer based solution you feel produces better results than the deqx, and if I followed you correctly that is due to the number of taps able to be employed??(not that I really know what that means mind), but I assume that it allows for more and finer adjustments on the measured signal??
Concurrent with that however is a commensurate longer delay of the signal??(no free lunches in audio eh) which is less useful for movies I'd assume.
At times I've looked at some of the types of systems you are using, but due to computer idiocy they go way over my head and unless I suddenly get some sort of dawning light I doubt I'll ever have the nous to implement any of them.
Another thing i haven't quite grasped yet, seeing as how it's all set up on the computer, does that also mean that the computer is now an integral part of the system??? I mean I use a computer (as you know) to set up the deqx, but after that the deqx is it's own standalone unit in the chain. But you need to continue to use the computer no? (I'm not saying it's good or bad, just trying to understand it).
By the way, I did try and follow your computer based guide...failed miserably ha ha.
I know that at some stage you too have used a deqx, and have now gone to a computer based solution.
(Please pardon my ignorance that follows)
From what i can gather from an earlier comment of yours, the current computer based solution you feel produces better results than the deqx, and if I followed you correctly that is due to the number of taps able to be employed??(not that I really know what that means mind), but I assume that it allows for more and finer adjustments on the measured signal??
Concurrent with that however is a commensurate longer delay of the signal??(no free lunches in audio eh) which is less useful for movies I'd assume.
At times I've looked at some of the types of systems you are using, but due to computer idiocy they go way over my head and unless I suddenly get some sort of dawning light I doubt I'll ever have the nous to implement any of them.
Another thing i haven't quite grasped yet, seeing as how it's all set up on the computer, does that also mean that the computer is now an integral part of the system??? I mean I use a computer (as you know) to set up the deqx, but after that the deqx is it's own standalone unit in the chain. But you need to continue to use the computer no? (I'm not saying it's good or bad, just trying to understand it).
By the way, I did try and follow your computer based guide...failed miserably ha ha.
fgroen said:
Here's another project that might need the input of someone who combines perfection with actually finishing projects.
The locals have been mucking around with it for approximately a century now...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The Holy Family must be the prettiest construction site in the world - by far! And personally, I like it better than Notre Dame and a few other prestige churches.
I was in Barchelona earlier this year, and those who knew the town said that the building progress had become an attraction. So be careful with the progress if you decide to give them a hand. I don't think they wish to complete the church for quite some time yet.
I wonder how a Gaudi speaker design would look like. He would probably have dealt with diffraction issues in a way not seen before.
Re: Re: Room treatment
Not only is he dedicated. He doesn't compromize. He is the kind of person that tries everything that he suspects might improve the sound quality. And he knows what he's doing too.
He also played a central part in the design of the first Griffin speaker (The same as the largest speaker on the picture - or it's predecessor): http://www.griffinaudiousa.com/ .
ShinOBIWAN said:
Not only is he dedicated. He doesn't compromize. He is the kind of person that tries everything that he suspects might improve the sound quality. And he knows what he's doing too.
Is he a member on here?
BTW I thought the name Stig-Erik Tangen rang a bell and I was pleased to see I wasn't imagining it when I discovered the 'Almighty' subs. If I'd get the space in my little listening room then I'd definitely be looking at something like that, sadly as it stands I'm already sat on top of the LGT's when listening to them! Well almost
He also played a central part in the design of the first Griffin speaker (The same as the largest speaker on the picture - or it's predecessor): http://www.griffinaudiousa.com/ .
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.