When I heard the Orions what struck me was the mid-bass as it was very good (I was disaappointed with the rest). I find the low bass of multple subs better but just above there, where I have agreed that dipoles have some advantage, the sound was very good. Thats when I seriously looked at what kind of compromises would have to be made to do that in a system. As I said, I did not find the trade-offs worthwhile.
You still have no measurements that have been demonstrated to be audible and no unbiased listening tests. I'm quite sure these designs were not optimized as well. Otherwise you'd have evidence for them. Change this and I'll change my mind if the evidence is in your favor. I don't like spending money on a guess or someone's belief. I'd have a room full of pricey cables if I did.
Spending money on guesses is not something I enjoy and no where can you site that I've said the 220 is better than any of the CDs you've mentioned. If it's lame to not spend money on evidence that's not audible, then I'll be guilty with a smile on my face all day. By your standards the Celestions should be better than what you are using. It's just more incongruent argument filled with falsehoods from your POV based on belief. IOW, a P$$ing contest as best I can tell.
You should then be using your Celestions. If an expert says something contrary to all available evidence on the subject, I'd say he/she has an irrational bias and I don't consider their opinion on the subject as reliable evidence. That seems reasonable to me.
I know Dr. Geddes not perfect (no one is), but he hasn't led me astray so far.
You CAN hear distortion when it's either of high level or high order. I play electric guitar. You don't have to tell me. It's just the amount and order of distortion we're talking about that doesn't matter--or hasn't been shown to matter. I know I can't hear the distortion difference in fractions of a percent low order harmonics. If you can you are extremely blessed or cursed. Please demonstrate it if you can. You have to show me if you want me to believe it--in the Freg Range we are discussing.
I chose the cheapest that would work in my design. I'm thankful that I did. Every WG is a horn. The PE WG is as much of a WG as any other--not that I care what it's called anyway. You have no evidence to the contrary. I have evidence for my claim. wanna see? I've NEVER said I follow in everything Geddes does, but I would if I could for a low price. I have said I haven't found him to be wrong in a PM to you. Please don't put words in my mouth. It only makes things more complicated. Again this is a fruitless waste of time. If I were to spend the money on a commercially produced speaker at this point, it would be one of his. You can quote me on that if you'd like, but it certainly isn't a point for your argument. I bet he wouldn't like either the PE WG or the QSC. I personally don't care either way I don't want to build/buy one that performs as well as his. Not yet anyway.😉 Too much time or money.
I made no strong statements about the QSC. I even stressed that in the post that it may just be my paranoia. Nothing has changed there, I'm just not willing to spend a lot of money to try something that may sound worse, better, or neither. I ignore no facts that I'm aware of. Can you show me something that I have? If you have facts that I don't, please show me. Do you want to argue whose made strong statements of which they'd ignored strong evidence against. Let's not do this. It is stupid.
The old saying "If the rooster crows on the donkey's in the morning, the weather will stay the same......... or it will change." Still rings true. You are saying nothing of consequence. Bring evidence for your argument and I'll believe you. I'm easy. You won't have to show me multiple times--just once. I see no point in your (or anyone's) argument w/o evidence. As far as I can tell your mucking up the thread with your pride at this point. You have brought no new facts.
I don't care to argue something that no one has evidence for, but don't expect me to not step to the plate when you try. Bring something(seriously), or waste our time. You decide.
Dan 🙂
I heard Linkwitz's Orions the same day as his lecture at NorCal DIY several weeks ago and found them very pleasing indeed in the large demo space, well away from walls.
In the Q&A part of the lecture, which was primarily focused upon controlled directivity, someone asked if the Geddes waveguide using extreme toe-in alignment could accomplish the objective, his response was, and I believe this is verbatim, "Yes, very well...."
A large element in the attraction of OB for DIYers is its simplicity, in my view. Take a woofer from an old console, better yet, a coax, stick it in a hole on a piece of plywood, and it's a speaker for next to nothing.
Well, no, there's a bit more to Orions than that, more like $2500 in parts alone, and over $8000 to purchase them complete, including the particular set of compromises we are discussing here.... 🙂
To try and label me a subjective audiophile is more of a stretch then you can remotely imagine. Anyone that knows me on any forum will laugh at that suggestion. I would rather stick to the discussion then labels.
As for the waste of time... Why so defensive about your PE 10"/D220 choice. You still believe the PE 10" horn is a "waveguide" defined by Geddes (its not!!) and you believe the screw on D220 is a qaulity CD choices (its not!!).
I do not use the Celestions on my current build because the BMS4550 is a better driver (measurement and sound wise). I spend about $1k to find out what I liked the best and I will sell or give the rest away. I have many builds and many friends to give speakers too so I have no cost limitations.
I still find it very amusing that you post "but Geddes hasn't led me astray so far." You are ignoring the fact that he would never recommend the horn and CD you own....He has posted in the past that its not what he considers a waveguide at all. If you are following Geddes designs you have already made a major diversion from his design principles.
As for the waste of time... Why so defensive about your PE 10"/D220 choice. You still believe the PE 10" horn is a "waveguide" defined by Geddes (its not!!) and you believe the screw on D220 is a qaulity CD choices (its not!!).
I do not use the Celestions on my current build because the BMS4550 is a better driver (measurement and sound wise). I spend about $1k to find out what I liked the best and I will sell or give the rest away. I have many builds and many friends to give speakers too so I have no cost limitations.
I still find it very amusing that you post "but Geddes hasn't led me astray so far." You are ignoring the fact that he would never recommend the horn and CD you own....He has posted in the past that its not what he considers a waveguide at all. If you are following Geddes designs you have already made a major diversion from his design principles.
Repeat after me, now:
"Zilch was right and Doug was wrong...." 😀
That longer tube may in fact define an exit characteristic that more optimally matches a particular horn/waveguide throat contour.
Earl has taught that this matters significantly, and we know that, with throatless ones, particularly, compression driver exit angles are in very large measure a crap shoot.
Lay that one on me, too, if you like, but.... 😉
Last edited:
Hah, I never said you were wrong but everything needs testing. I didnt have the test conclusions...you just wanted me to believe you.
...Zilch is always right though and a great source of info 😉
Last edited:
Nah, In general the Screw on choice is not as good as the bolt on choice. I wll wait for the data that proves this the other way. We already have many threads with this discussion in the past. Its it impossible to have a great sound?? Obviously we know that answer from what Emerald Physics has done with it.
We both have been there in the Horn thread with the JBL discussion. I know your position to well. Im just pointing out that if he is going to post "Geddes has not led me down the wrong path" Then he should realize what Geddes thinks about a the PE 10".....its not as much about the real conclusion its just about who is following who and what they should realize about some of the particulars involved. Meaning his current choices tell me he is not really following Geddes but following Zilch a little bit more then he realizes 😉
Last edited:
I think there's a wide spectrum of DIY OB designs. One end would be the "stick any driver on a sheet of plywood" as you described, the other extreme might be 3 or 4-way designs with all-nude drivers and complex EQ / crossovers, and there's a wide range in between. Not all of these designs are very simple. The polars Keyser presented are from a design that's probably closer the the Orion than the "any driver on plywood" concept, at least when you're talking about complexity.
So I think you have a valid point for some of the DIY OB designs. There are others that are trying to achieve uniform polar response and other design goals.
Hehe, that is your complete speaker design mindset not just an OB design suggestion. You take crap looking old speakers throw some new drivers/waveguides in them and call it a day.
Why bother with putting on some new cloths when the clothes from 20 years ago still fit 😉
{***Searches for Doug's spycam....***}
It's environmentally conscious to recycle via adaptive reuse what the OB guys would otherwise send to the landfill.
[It's also cheap....
]
Last edited:
Damn cheap, treehuggin' DIYers 😉
I guess posting that my electric/gas/water bill monthly > $900 would exclude me from being energy/environmental conscious. 😱
I guess posting that my electric/gas/water bill monthly > $900 would exclude me from being energy/environmental conscious. 😱
Last edited:
No one has said that. However, making claims of superiority w/o proof isn't objective no matter how you cut it.
Evidence? Your making a claim, I want evidence. You haven't presented any. This is quickly turning into another cable thread.
Not by your standards--unless you have something to add to them. I'll take your throwaways and see what they can do. 🙂 I'll even admit if you are right.
He just recommended it as a waveguide over modifying another horn just a few weeks ago.
Check here for proof: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/166322-modifying-horn-flare-cutting-horns-mouth.htmlGedlee said:
Can you show where he says it's not a WG? He either changed his mind or just slipped up when he called it a WG. Either way doesn't matter to me, but he did recommend this type of device to me long before I ever bought it. This fit the criteria for "what he looks for." It is as much of a WG as any other--same goes for its CD behavior--evidence previously posted, but I do have more. I know he would not recommend this particular device as a spreme fidelity option and I'm sure he'd be correct. I don't claim it is either. It may well not even be the best for the money--but I have no proof of that. I'm not sure why you think I'm being so defensive of it. Odd.
If you want proof of your beliefs, I'm willing to give it a shot. If you're ready to move on with a productive thread, I sure am.
Dan
Well, I was looking for a correlation between CSD plot and off axis performance. It seems as if there is none.
A nice CSD plotted at Zaph|Audio
Sorry that these graphs are not all in the same frame. I wasn't good with the software at this time. I wish I knew I had this evidence. I had forgotten about it.
Off axis performance of this driver as measured by me and similar to Zaph's:
Zaph's looks like this:
from Zaph|Audio
33.75 off axis:
45 degrees off axis:
56.25 off axis:
and my last 90 degrees off axis:
Looks like you have to take off axis response into account. I still want to see some poly woofers off axis performance. I'm hoping to make good, CD 2 ways easier to build. I guess this shows that a clean CSD does not equal good off axis behavior. I was hoping CSD would show something known to be useful.
Dan
A nice CSD plotted at Zaph|Audio
Sorry that these graphs are not all in the same frame. I wasn't good with the software at this time. I wish I knew I had this evidence. I had forgotten about it.
Off axis performance of this driver as measured by me and similar to Zaph's:
Zaph's looks like this:
from Zaph|Audio
33.75 off axis:
45 degrees off axis:
56.25 off axis:
and my last 90 degrees off axis:
Looks like you have to take off axis response into account. I still want to see some poly woofers off axis performance. I'm hoping to make good, CD 2 ways easier to build. I guess this shows that a clean CSD does not equal good off axis behavior. I was hoping CSD would show something known to be useful.
Dan
Last edited:
Let's see the CSDs you are talking about compared with these.Unfortunately as you know CSDs have never been demonstrated to have any real impact on SQ. Improving on the throat of the PE WG/Selenium is exactly what I was talking about. I can see where the way I wrote it my point was less than obvious.
By your standards, the Celestion 1425 is the best of the bunch judging by Brandon's measurements. There's nothing there on the 10" PE WG, the similar Celestion WG (but it's pictured), or the Selenium's ability to load a WG(something that matters). You have nothing but a CSD and 2 tone IMD measurements that have little if anything (nothing I know of demonstrated), especially in the frequency range we're talking about, to do with audible SQ. I'm saying show me some measurements that demonstrate the audible superiority of the devices in question. They very well may be better--I don't completely doubt it--but until there's some evidence, it's just a fruitless discussion about nothing. I know I've said this before. IOW, we can go around and around about this, but until you do, there's nothing to go around and around about. There's no reason to discuss what we cannot show. You want to show that they are better, show me a smoother polar response than what I've got. Dr. Geddes has shown that 30%THD was inaudible in CDs! So by your standards you should go back to that cheap Celestion. What I'm concerned about is how the CD loads the WG and the pattern the WG puts out. That's what's been shown to matter.
I have a pair of speakers with a good CSD plot and they do not sound better than my good dispersion speakers. Not even close.
This is courtesy of http://www.zaphaudio.com/smalltest/compare.html:
Those same speakers do very well in the HD graph as well, but those graphs don't tell use much at all. I've made that mistake already.
Oh, and I can state AGAIN that I don't like the screw on CDs. It doesn't help your cause--only evidence of the results does. We don't need Dr. Geddes to tell us what's obvious and what we agree on. No need to waste his time as well.
I find this useless back and forth just that--useless. Hopefully someone is getting something from it. I gotta say, it seems you like to argue without an argument. I don't, but I won't let you do it either. I know you don't like when others do it as evidenced by your posts in the cable thread. Give me a good argument and I'll believe you whole heartedly. Until then, I'd rather not waste time. I'm only planning on living once.😉
Dan
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Remember, CSD is looking at the data and only parital apects. For example, paper/soft material diaphragms are generally going to show better CSD characteristics. However, these type of drivers are going to perform badly when you listen at very low levels.
Last edited:
It is a conical horn. No?
There has been lots of discussion on the fact that conical is not a shape Geddes recommends.
That thread just has him saying cheap waveguide from PE. I didnt see a link and maybe you are not aware of it but There are other cheap "waveguides" on PE.
If you want to make it better though cut off the screw on throat and make it a bolt on.
I posted data which is called evidence for most people. its your choice to ignore it. I do not ignore it, I use it as part of my conclusions.
At this point I think we have beaten the side debate to death. You do not care for CSDs or Distortion measurements and I do. Nothing wrong with that! Its a choice we all have.
You are extremely confusing.
CSD do not show off axis behavior UNLESS you actually take an off axis response and generate the CSD for it.
You can have CSDs for every measurement you want. You should not be looking for off axis information from an on axis CSD.
CSD simply is a 3D look at a single FR plot, it will show stored energy in any driver (ripples) and that does equate to SQ. Im sure many people can see that same issue by looking at FR plots and Impulse but 3D models makes it as plain as day for the rest of us. Wavlets is another great tool IMO. It just makes things clearer in terms of comparisons.
btw, I though 2 way CD builds are extremely easy already. Zilch has done incredible things already. He has built many different options using the QSC waveguide. Augerpro has a build, I have a build, 7 other guys have 2 way CD builds over on AVSForums
Im just confused on what you think so hard that you think you have to make it easier?
btw, you should overlay those responses...its very confusing to look at and what driver is it?
Last edited:
As I mentioned before, tone balance. However, when it comes to listening, best understanding of the effects is always have a very dead room to listen in, or learn to distinguish through listening, the difference between, direct sound, reflected sound, and the effects of excited room modes.Well, I was looking for a correlation between CSD plot and off axis performance. It seems as if there is none.
A nice CSD plotted at Zaph|Audio
Sorry that these graphs are not all in the same frame. I wasn't good with the software at this time. I wish I knew I had this evidence. I had forgotten about it.
Off axis performance of this driver as measured by me and similar to Zaph's:
Zaph's looks like this:
from Zaph|Audio
33.75 off axis:
45 degrees off axis:
56.25 off axis:
and my last 90 degrees off axis:
Looks like you have to take off axis response into account. I still want to see some poly woofers off axis performance. I'm hoping to make good, CD 2 ways easier to build. I guess this shows that a clean CSD does not equal good off axis behavior. I was hoping CSD would show something known to be useful.
Dan
- Status
- Not open for further replies.