I'm preparing to make an LXmini of SL(RIP). I have no doubt the sound will be great because a lot of people are praising it and believe in SL.
I've already done most of prior knowledge and preparation, but there's one question that remains.
Can a 4-inch full range really express treble?
Even if the axial response is flat, a full range over 3-inch starts beaming at too low frequency and the total power response rolls off too quickly.
This is my common sense. They're mostly used on cheap PC speakers.
So what characteristics of LXmini compensate these shortcomings?
I think there must be a reason for this. Does anyone have a simple theoretical idea.
Thanks.
I've already done most of prior knowledge and preparation, but there's one question that remains.
Can a 4-inch full range really express treble?
Even if the axial response is flat, a full range over 3-inch starts beaming at too low frequency and the total power response rolls off too quickly.
This is my common sense. They're mostly used on cheap PC speakers.
So what characteristics of LXmini compensate these shortcomings?
I think there must be a reason for this. Does anyone have a simple theoretical idea.
Thanks.
@year98
Although the LXmini does have other issues (SPL/dynamic restrictions, limited low end extension, etc…), I would disagree that they have less treble subjectively. You will see that the extension is still there even up above 10khz but not all the way to 20khz. Most individuals (other than children) have a difficult time hearing/appreciating 20khz. Moreover, there is comparatively very little musical info at that frequency range as well.
It would be much more illustrative to examine both the horizontal and vertical polar response curves of this speaker as measured on a Klippel NFS instead of JUST the direct axial (0 degree) response which is yes, significant but only one part of the total equation. Acoustically, your ears hear all of it in a complex conglomeration. The polar plots will give tremendously more information in that regard.
I have listened to the LXmini, Pluto, Orion and LX521 numerous times and a few times at SL’s home. When we switched from the LX Mini to LX521 the primary differences were in dynamics and bass response/extension, especially with recordings that called for it. Or else, they were very much indistinguishable from each other which tells you that even with the diminutive measuring software that SL had at the time, he did achieve one of his goals, i.e. controlling directivity. The different driver complement really didn’t matter which was thought provoking. The LX521 does have more extension on the top end, but these ears couldn’t appreciate it and this was about 10-15 years ago when I was much younger!
If I were you, I would try hard to find someone who has a pair of LXMini’s so you can make an informed decision.
LX Mini thorough measurements
Best,
Anand.
Although the LXmini does have other issues (SPL/dynamic restrictions, limited low end extension, etc…), I would disagree that they have less treble subjectively. You will see that the extension is still there even up above 10khz but not all the way to 20khz. Most individuals (other than children) have a difficult time hearing/appreciating 20khz. Moreover, there is comparatively very little musical info at that frequency range as well.
It would be much more illustrative to examine both the horizontal and vertical polar response curves of this speaker as measured on a Klippel NFS instead of JUST the direct axial (0 degree) response which is yes, significant but only one part of the total equation. Acoustically, your ears hear all of it in a complex conglomeration. The polar plots will give tremendously more information in that regard.
I have listened to the LXmini, Pluto, Orion and LX521 numerous times and a few times at SL’s home. When we switched from the LX Mini to LX521 the primary differences were in dynamics and bass response/extension, especially with recordings that called for it. Or else, they were very much indistinguishable from each other which tells you that even with the diminutive measuring software that SL had at the time, he did achieve one of his goals, i.e. controlling directivity. The different driver complement really didn’t matter which was thought provoking. The LX521 does have more extension on the top end, but these ears couldn’t appreciate it and this was about 10-15 years ago when I was much younger!
If I were you, I would try hard to find someone who has a pair of LXMini’s so you can make an informed decision.
LX Mini thorough measurements
Best,
Anand.
Last edited:
Hello Year98,
Anand just sent this link to me and I thought I’d jump in and provide my 2¢.
I first started my Linkwitz travels through the Orion. Like Anand, I met SL several times and he was always such a gentleman and as smart as they come. We all pick "our guys” to follow and revere. He is very much one of my guiding lights in Audio. After I lived with the Orion for a few years, SL came out with the LX521. I built that using the passive crossover between the upper and lower mids. It was great but I just couldn’t help myself when SL and Dave Reite came together to build the miniDSP file to provide for a 4 way fully active crossover. This was the LX521.4. Once SL passed away, Frank Brenner assumed the reigns. He now has many very professional and sexy models (Linkwitz.store) ready to just set up and play music rather than the kit form SL was always such a proponent of. You can still get the kit from Madisound and I believe Frank has them too.
Then I moved to a home with a much smaller listening room (18'x16.5'x8’) and I opted to build a pair of LXminis. Then after a few months of listening, I opted to expand it with the +2 open baffle subs.
For your technical questions, I refer you to Linkwitzlab.com. All of SL’s analysis is provided intact from his original writings.
My personal impression of treble from the 4” driver is that is it outstanding. My main system includes Revel Salon2s and the treble response is very nearly as clear, accurate and present as it is on the Salon2s. I have the LXminis pointed directly at me and moving them ever so slightly changes the sound stage and the treble response. But believe me, you won’t want for more high frequency information. Remember, the tweeter for the LX521 comes in at 7500hz. This 4” driver is outstanding!
Where the LXminis fall short is in deep bass response. Thus it isn’t surprising that there are at least 3 different subwoofer solutions. Dave designed a sealed sub, but there is also an open baffle sub (+2) and then the Studio (same as the subs for the LX521). I felt the sound from the basic LXmini was exceptional: very rich and with a tremendous sound stage. I have not heard too many other systems that have a sound stage this realistic. It has punch, it is dynamic and it is intoxicating. You feel like you are immersed and among the musicians rather than listening to the musicians behind the speakers.
IMHO, your question should be how loudly do you like to listen? If you listen above about 85dB, then these may not be for you (opt for the LX521). But if you’re like me and listen at more modest levels (80dB), then you will be thrilled with their performance.
Good luck with your decision! I hope my comments helped.
Paul
Anand just sent this link to me and I thought I’d jump in and provide my 2¢.
I first started my Linkwitz travels through the Orion. Like Anand, I met SL several times and he was always such a gentleman and as smart as they come. We all pick "our guys” to follow and revere. He is very much one of my guiding lights in Audio. After I lived with the Orion for a few years, SL came out with the LX521. I built that using the passive crossover between the upper and lower mids. It was great but I just couldn’t help myself when SL and Dave Reite came together to build the miniDSP file to provide for a 4 way fully active crossover. This was the LX521.4. Once SL passed away, Frank Brenner assumed the reigns. He now has many very professional and sexy models (Linkwitz.store) ready to just set up and play music rather than the kit form SL was always such a proponent of. You can still get the kit from Madisound and I believe Frank has them too.
Then I moved to a home with a much smaller listening room (18'x16.5'x8’) and I opted to build a pair of LXminis. Then after a few months of listening, I opted to expand it with the +2 open baffle subs.
For your technical questions, I refer you to Linkwitzlab.com. All of SL’s analysis is provided intact from his original writings.
My personal impression of treble from the 4” driver is that is it outstanding. My main system includes Revel Salon2s and the treble response is very nearly as clear, accurate and present as it is on the Salon2s. I have the LXminis pointed directly at me and moving them ever so slightly changes the sound stage and the treble response. But believe me, you won’t want for more high frequency information. Remember, the tweeter for the LX521 comes in at 7500hz. This 4” driver is outstanding!
Where the LXminis fall short is in deep bass response. Thus it isn’t surprising that there are at least 3 different subwoofer solutions. Dave designed a sealed sub, but there is also an open baffle sub (+2) and then the Studio (same as the subs for the LX521). I felt the sound from the basic LXmini was exceptional: very rich and with a tremendous sound stage. I have not heard too many other systems that have a sound stage this realistic. It has punch, it is dynamic and it is intoxicating. You feel like you are immersed and among the musicians rather than listening to the musicians behind the speakers.
IMHO, your question should be how loudly do you like to listen? If you listen above about 85dB, then these may not be for you (opt for the LX521). But if you’re like me and listen at more modest levels (80dB), then you will be thrilled with their performance.
Good luck with your decision! I hope my comments helped.
Paul
Attachments
Thank you for your response.
Of course I agree with your point that there will be no problem with the treble of the lxmini. I'm sure there will be.
However, what I want to know is why is the lxmini special than other normal 4-inch.
I am wondering if there was any other engineering reason.
Erin's measurements also clearly show treble fast roll-offs.
However, it's exceptional that there's very little uniform power response and very little vertical variation. It's impressive.
Anyway I will try to make it and I will post my impressions then. Thank you.
Thank you for telling me your experience in detail. I also learned about the history of speakers provided by SL.
If I lived there, I would definitely have liked to participate. It's a pity.
Of course I have great expectations for lxmini that I'm sure about, and I'm excited before it even starts.
It is only curiosity, "how on earth can it do that? 4-inch makes treble satisfying?"
I read most of SL's papers, but I didn't find out why.
I'm guessing it's probably related to the radiation pattern of the open baffle speaker.
@year98
That 4 inch driver was selected obviously for it’s linearity but if you are wondering if it is special in any other sense I would say no. It does beam above a certain frequency, that’s absolutely true (simple physics). And it does have a gentler breakup (like all drivers but the operatigve word here is ‘gentle’). However, it’s on an open baffle and very little baffle to be honest which is contrary to a design that is on a typical loudspeaker with a flat baffle. Surface reflections are greatly reduced. Until you hear it, I think you will continue to question it! My own personal speaker starts rolling off at 10khz and is about 6 dB down at 20khz. If one were to compare the LX Mini to another speaker design with more extension (specifically 10khz to 20khz), it would be a difficult comparison or an apples to oranges comparison to be honest. You would be comparing frequency extension along with different baffle design, different drivers, etc…you won’t know why A/B is better or worse. The best comparison I can make is to the LX521. And in those comparisons, the differences in the top end were small which basically means to me that the lack of flat FR primarily from 10khz to 20khz is of minor importance and that SL had carefully designed each speaker to have very similar polar response curves.
One thing that I am surprised by after reviewing Erin’s measurements is the narrower dispersion pattern (around 100 degrees horizontal to 80 degrees horizontal from 1000Hz on up), I was expecting a wider pattern after listening to the speaker.
At some point I’m going to venture up and listen to Paul’s setup to remind myself of this sound. I remember enjoying it! That 4 inch driver is only $85, so quite a special little unit.
Best,
Anand.
That 4 inch driver was selected obviously for it’s linearity but if you are wondering if it is special in any other sense I would say no. It does beam above a certain frequency, that’s absolutely true (simple physics). And it does have a gentler breakup (like all drivers but the operatigve word here is ‘gentle’). However, it’s on an open baffle and very little baffle to be honest which is contrary to a design that is on a typical loudspeaker with a flat baffle. Surface reflections are greatly reduced. Until you hear it, I think you will continue to question it! My own personal speaker starts rolling off at 10khz and is about 6 dB down at 20khz. If one were to compare the LX Mini to another speaker design with more extension (specifically 10khz to 20khz), it would be a difficult comparison or an apples to oranges comparison to be honest. You would be comparing frequency extension along with different baffle design, different drivers, etc…you won’t know why A/B is better or worse. The best comparison I can make is to the LX521. And in those comparisons, the differences in the top end were small which basically means to me that the lack of flat FR primarily from 10khz to 20khz is of minor importance and that SL had carefully designed each speaker to have very similar polar response curves.
One thing that I am surprised by after reviewing Erin’s measurements is the narrower dispersion pattern (around 100 degrees horizontal to 80 degrees horizontal from 1000Hz on up), I was expecting a wider pattern after listening to the speaker.
At some point I’m going to venture up and listen to Paul’s setup to remind myself of this sound. I remember enjoying it! That 4 inch driver is only $85, so quite a special little unit.
Best,
Anand.
iv had a pair since the first version kit version from Frank. my first impression was that they were somewhat bright, which was years later shown in Erin`s measurements. the 4" fullrange driver also doesnt sound like a real tweeter to me, fine on simple tunes, but more complex music with lots of stuff going on it kinda collapses.
compared to other small monitors its a nice speaker with some unique imaging properties, but very limited in scale compared to a large 3-way, not anything i would use as a primary speaker.
compared to other small monitors its a nice speaker with some unique imaging properties, but very limited in scale compared to a large 3-way, not anything i would use as a primary speaker.
I can't comment on the original LXmini since I built a clone using different drivers (Vifa TC9FD18-08 and Seas L16RNX), so I had to develop my own filtering in de DSP. Well at least the TC9 and the FU10RB are the same size and probably comparable in high frequency extension and dispersion.
I can assure you the high frequency performance of my version leaves little to be desired. With the side note that my hearing is limited to around 12-13kHz due to my age. I think the open baffle concept attributes greatly to the above average results. And the fact that the small driver is mounted by it's magnet, so the basket is eliminated from the transfer of force between mounting, motor and membrane. The DSP smoothing out any irregularities in the transfer curve of the small driver is a third contributing factor.
This is a speaker you have to hear in order to believe how amazing it performs and I am sure the same goes for the original Lxmini. I also have Quad ESL63 and Audiostatic ESL's for reference here to compare them with and it's an amazingly close call. There is sometimes a very slight trace of hardness in the mini's that ESL's do not have, I do think this is in fact due to the limitations of using a 3 inch driver up to 15 or 20k. But in general my LXmini lookalikes come unbelievable close to the performance of electrostatics when it comes to clarity, lack of coloration, natural reproduction of voices etc. When it comes to imaging and low frequency response they beat any box speaker or ESL with easy. SL really had the radiation pattern spot on and the pipe design is highly efficient at eliminating enclosure resonances.
I can only encourage you to go for it. Good luck!
I can assure you the high frequency performance of my version leaves little to be desired. With the side note that my hearing is limited to around 12-13kHz due to my age. I think the open baffle concept attributes greatly to the above average results. And the fact that the small driver is mounted by it's magnet, so the basket is eliminated from the transfer of force between mounting, motor and membrane. The DSP smoothing out any irregularities in the transfer curve of the small driver is a third contributing factor.
This is a speaker you have to hear in order to believe how amazing it performs and I am sure the same goes for the original Lxmini. I also have Quad ESL63 and Audiostatic ESL's for reference here to compare them with and it's an amazingly close call. There is sometimes a very slight trace of hardness in the mini's that ESL's do not have, I do think this is in fact due to the limitations of using a 3 inch driver up to 15 or 20k. But in general my LXmini lookalikes come unbelievable close to the performance of electrostatics when it comes to clarity, lack of coloration, natural reproduction of voices etc. When it comes to imaging and low frequency response they beat any box speaker or ESL with easy. SL really had the radiation pattern spot on and the pipe design is highly efficient at eliminating enclosure resonances.
I can only encourage you to go for it. Good luck!
I don't have LXmini or its 4", but I have lots of small fullrange drivers, and some are quite good and extended enough without EQ, so the HF phase response without conventional XO (active or passive) is nearly perfect. If one could live with the ~1° narrow dispersion above 10khz, then (head-in-vise) holographic soundstage and perfect transcients....
LX: 4" fullrange time-aligned and in closer proximity with the up-firing midwoofer, whose residual HF naturally falls off toward the listener but smoothes vertical dispersion, while cancelling the OB backwave so as to not reflect/diffract. DSP response-shaping a plus. A conventional box speaker has none of the above features and advantages.
In a word, brilliant. So much so, that one could diy very good LX with a pair of compatible-sounding drivers, using only minimalist XO or even XO-less, and without DSP. I've done quite a few; some reported in the Fullrange Photo Gallery etc. My first such:
I hope some day mine will look and sound as good as yours.
My minimalist XO-less "LXmidi" uses 8" and 4" fiberglass-honeycomb drivers of the same make (cone material and FR similar to Mivoc XAW-208-HC/XAW-110-HC), using off-axis attenuation as low-pass and open-baffle fall-off as high-pass; I could not hear "two" drivers. Inside the can is a folded concentric transmission line which the 8" loves. The 4" later got treated to a "plast & whizzer" that nulled the HF cone breakup and extended very HF to go tweeterless.
My minimalist XO-less "LXmidi" uses 8" and 4" fiberglass-honeycomb drivers of the same make (cone material and FR similar to Mivoc XAW-208-HC/XAW-110-HC), using off-axis attenuation as low-pass and open-baffle fall-off as high-pass; I could not hear "two" drivers. Inside the can is a folded concentric transmission line which the 8" loves. The 4" later got treated to a "plast & whizzer" that nulled the HF cone breakup and extended very HF to go tweeterless.