Here's a ten inch 2 way with a dome tweeter:
On the bright side, this speaker is efficient!
Dan
On the bright side, this speaker is efficient!
Dan
No, the polar pattern is too broad for that.
These are a friend's. He is another flaky musician that flirts with your girlfriend and claims these are unbelievably accurate. Enthusiasts often think these are too cheap to be taken seriously. 😉
Dan
These are a friend's. He is another flaky musician that flirts with your girlfriend and claims these are unbelievably accurate. Enthusiasts often think these are too cheap to be taken seriously. 😉
Dan
Well they are kind of not flat +/- 5dB on axis even and the directivity control is not so good and there is a huge hole in the midrange from 700-2K which suggest high order crossover or bad phase. Genelec or Events? You are not pulling my chain with a cheap PA speaker are you??? HAHA a $250 Phonics!??
The speakers you're looking at are a famous DIY design that is well regarded for the money. They definitely sound colored next to the graphs on the previous page which are even cheaper, plus no work to be done by the end user. They do get nice and loud easy enough to their merit. So yea, they are kind of a cheap PA speaker, but I think they actually sound better than the cheap PA speakers I've heard as they don't get harsh. The dome will probably burn out though before most cheap PA Compression Drivers. Don't know for sure, but that's my guess.
The problem is at least partly that the woofer is crossed too high and the break up isn't compensated for and the hole is actually partly caused by the woofer's response and poor phase integration. These are tough woofer to build a speaker around. The dome tweeter only complicates the situation. Maybe I should flip the polarity on the tweeter? Might turn out something good? Or better anyway.
This woofer response is similar to this shape:
Interesting enough for me.
Dan
Last edited:
To me, the line colors are too close to eaisly view which trace is which, but this looks like a two way system where the tweeter probably has a wave guide that terminates quite abrubtly either because the small termination radius, or because the edge is very close to baffle edge. Certainly would be much better to look at CSDs. Also there is no information on what window length was used and what kind of smoothing if any. I'm assuming the window length is set to keep first reflection out.
Here's some nice measurements. Anyone care to guess what made these?
Polar:
impulse:
AVG of polar response from 11.25 degrees off axis to 90 degrees off axis:
Any thoughts? Personally I wish the pattern was a bit more narrow, but I'm not complaining.
Dan
Last edited:
I know this is off topic but would really like some clarification as it has come up in this thread often. What is pretty loud? My 6.5" mid will do 108dBa continuous and peak 110dBa and the tweeter will do more, 110dBa and peak 113dBa. Is this loud? Is this pretty loud or not loud at all? Thanks for the clarification.
All in their pass band of course!
All in their pass band of course!
Quite interestingly, loud is actually perceived differently under different situations. My wife often complains that range hoods are loud when they are turned on. Out of curiousity, I measured ours at normal cooking location. somthing like 59db. While I was driving on the freeway I measured the SPL in car to be 89db, and it did not sound as annoying as the range hood. Something to figure out.😉
Wouldnt your listening distance, amount of amplication, max peak in the content all be part of figuring out what driver dB is required?
All my builds require 115dB potential and >= 95dB sensitivity requirements because I have specific amps/power requirements and specific listening distances. Movies and Music can have > 25dB peaks so I make sure my speaker performance will not be choked off during any peaks.
My normal listening level is in the 70-80 dB range. I consider anything over a hundred darned loud. So Doug's requirements are loud, but dynamics in movies sure add to the experience--same goes for music. In music though it seems like too many recordings are squashing the dynamic range.
Soongsc gets the prize for typology. Specifically it's a Behringer B2031P. Not bad for $160/pr. First reflections gated out. It's funny b/c they are near field monitors. Earlier in the thread someone stated that polar response is less important for near field monitoring. I argued otherwise. Not sure if it's a good thing or not that the fine folks at Behringer apparently agree with me. Ha Ha. It does seem obvious though that smaller movements would cause larger difference in listening angle when closer to a speaker.
As far as how loud something is perceived, look at the equal loudness contour. That may well explain your phenomenon Soongsc.
Dan
Soongsc gets the prize for typology. Specifically it's a Behringer B2031P. Not bad for $160/pr. First reflections gated out. It's funny b/c they are near field monitors. Earlier in the thread someone stated that polar response is less important for near field monitoring. I argued otherwise. Not sure if it's a good thing or not that the fine folks at Behringer apparently agree with me. Ha Ha. It does seem obvious though that smaller movements would cause larger difference in listening angle when closer to a speaker.
As far as how loud something is perceived, look at the equal loudness contour. That may well explain your phenomenon Soongsc.
Dan
Last edited:
I actually never posted what my listening levels are so you are making an incorrect assumption.
Generally they are way below 80dBs (same as yours), minus maybe a party or two but since we have young kids that doesnt happen as much. Some movies in the HT room have scenes that require a little more so its nice to have head room.
of course when I can be > 15 feet back that means the SPL @ 1m is much higher then you add +25db to find out what the peak requirements of the speaker is.
Remember even 75dB listening levels require the speakers should have > 110dB performance specs all other designs will fail in my rooms.
Generally they are way below 80dBs (same as yours), minus maybe a party or two but since we have young kids that doesnt happen as much. Some movies in the HT room have scenes that require a little more so its nice to have head room.
of course when I can be > 15 feet back that means the SPL @ 1m is much higher then you add +25db to find out what the peak requirements of the speaker is.
Remember even 75dB listening levels require the speakers should have > 110dB performance specs all other designs will fail in my rooms.
Last edited:
Saw the measurements on Geddes program. Even Geddes commented on his thread about the Behringer perormance. Of course I think he had the active designs and not the passive designs.
Studio mixing seemed to like mixing at 85db most of the part while sitting at the console. I demoed a pair that just missed it by 2db. It matters.🙂
Heh, I've been trying to develop the intuition to feel how it would sound like just by looking at data😉. So I wish CSD data were available.😀
Yes, I understand that part. Just wonder how meters average spectrum to value. Both were measured by the same meter. When people talk about ear damage when long exposure in some 90db evironment, it make me wonder what they are taling about.
Actually Doug, I made no assumptions. I said nothing about what I thought your listening levels are, just that your requirements are what I consider loud in response to SUM's post. Seems you are the one reading into my post--IOW making assumptions. I've learned it's just your thing. I know my wording wasn't the clearest to make that point. Loud is not a derogatory term in my book.
I certainly don't disagree w/ your requirements for dB BTW. Speakers that can't get extremely loud w/o breaking a sweat seem like a natural for HT. That's what I was getting at in my last post. I don't think the Behringers are capable of what some AE, JBL, B&C, etc... speakers are that is. They'd make for an awesome computer or small HT speaker or something, but I don't think a full blown THX or whatever HT was really in their design purpose. If you don't need the full output level and enjoy the broader dispersion or sit fairly close to the speakers, these things would be great on the cheap. I know many home recording enthusiast brag about them being able to do house parties, but I sure don't think they'll do them like a speaker designed for such things. IOW, I'd stick with your AE woofers and whatever else you are driving for HT, but for the HT in a box type of crowd....
I listened to some music through them and was mightily impressed FWIW.
Dan
I certainly don't disagree w/ your requirements for dB BTW. Speakers that can't get extremely loud w/o breaking a sweat seem like a natural for HT. That's what I was getting at in my last post. I don't think the Behringers are capable of what some AE, JBL, B&C, etc... speakers are that is. They'd make for an awesome computer or small HT speaker or something, but I don't think a full blown THX or whatever HT was really in their design purpose. If you don't need the full output level and enjoy the broader dispersion or sit fairly close to the speakers, these things would be great on the cheap. I know many home recording enthusiast brag about them being able to do house parties, but I sure don't think they'll do them like a speaker designed for such things. IOW, I'd stick with your AE woofers and whatever else you are driving for HT, but for the HT in a box type of crowd....
I listened to some music through them and was mightily impressed FWIW.
Dan
Last edited:
So 108dBa at one meter is probably loud. This in not a PA. I tend to sit pretty close, 1.5 meter, as I like the sound the conductor hears at the podium as opposed room reverb mud.
As for movies and signal range, not dynamic range, I squash them with the DSP. This whole notion that the average signal needs to change 40-50dB to have "effects" in a movie simply annoys me. To quite to hear and then to loud. Heck with that.
Dynamic range is the smallest signal which can be resolved while producing a larger signal and is not signal range. Signal range is simply the range of average signal. That would be noise floor to clipping. Having measured dynamic range on a lot of speakers, 40dB is HUGE where cheap speakers tend to be in the 15-20dB of dynamic range capability at 90dB output.
My 2 cents worth- most ear damage from to loud is caused by distortion. On the last PA we did a few weeks ago when finished everyone said why does it not sound loud? They were looking for distortion so the PA would have the "loud" sound. Most PAs are really loud with distortion even when the meter says the SPL is very reasonable. Just my experience...
As for movies and signal range, not dynamic range, I squash them with the DSP. This whole notion that the average signal needs to change 40-50dB to have "effects" in a movie simply annoys me. To quite to hear and then to loud. Heck with that.
Dynamic range is the smallest signal which can be resolved while producing a larger signal and is not signal range. Signal range is simply the range of average signal. That would be noise floor to clipping. Having measured dynamic range on a lot of speakers, 40dB is HUGE where cheap speakers tend to be in the 15-20dB of dynamic range capability at 90dB output.
My 2 cents worth- most ear damage from to loud is caused by distortion. On the last PA we did a few weeks ago when finished everyone said why does it not sound loud? They were looking for distortion so the PA would have the "loud" sound. Most PAs are really loud with distortion even when the meter says the SPL is very reasonable. Just my experience...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.