MIchael
I appreciate your honesty and summation of what is happening. Measurements i would like to do as it will be another guide, but guidance is all I am expecting. I am searching for measuring equipment but so far have not been able to get something ready set up to use. Suggestions appreciated.
My heart tells me, professional drivers designed for open back use for musicians who adore tone, understand tone and undertsand the emotions it provokes. It may not sound like it, but i dont think i am a million miles away from geting what i am seeking, and not to sound too arrogant, something a lot of open baffle users may also be missing.
I will report back once I have these professional guitar hemp 12" drivers which will move air twice as much as my present Eminence speakers which were not as far as I am aware designed for open baffle use. 6mm versus 12mm- big, big difference. Hemp versus traditional paper also described as being dramatically different,
I appreciate your honesty and summation of what is happening. Measurements i would like to do as it will be another guide, but guidance is all I am expecting. I am searching for measuring equipment but so far have not been able to get something ready set up to use. Suggestions appreciated.
My heart tells me, professional drivers designed for open back use for musicians who adore tone, understand tone and undertsand the emotions it provokes. It may not sound like it, but i dont think i am a million miles away from geting what i am seeking, and not to sound too arrogant, something a lot of open baffle users may also be missing.
I will report back once I have these professional guitar hemp 12" drivers which will move air twice as much as my present Eminence speakers which were not as far as I am aware designed for open baffle use. 6mm versus 12mm- big, big difference. Hemp versus traditional paper also described as being dramatically different,
Is there no one machine with a microphone and screen with a chart to show the frequency response?? If there is the price will more than likely be prohibitive???
There are – such and such.
One is the handy XL2 / Minilyzer / Acoustilyzer of the NTI Minstrument series where you can attach a suitable mic either one from NTI or the excellent Earthworks M30BX (a combination I'm happy with...) or any other mic with internal supply and suitable FR and noise figure
http://www.nti-audio.com/Home/Products/HandheldExelLine/XL2Analyzer/tabid/261/Default.aspx
http://www.ambertech.com.au/productinfo.php?articleID=889§ionID=1&assID=54&catID=196
http://www.ambertech.com.au/productinfo.php?articleID=888§ionID=1&assID=54&catID=196
http://www.earthworksaudio.com/25.html
Another one, I was tempted to buy (used tho), is the *big* old Larsen Davis (with a pretty and huge display ) - no longer available and extremely expensive way back...
The NTI is a nice solution but not really what you are looking for, as it lacks a lot of features you want – once started.
Bottom line - best IMO is what already has been suggested here – buy a good soundcard plus mic, if you not already have and some software like ARTA, SoundEasy, AudioTester etc...
Doing own measurements is also an eye opener in other respects than mere performance control !
Michael
Last edited:
how many different drivers have you used in your open baffle arrangements??
Not many but the new ones rigged up with very basic crossovers showed that even when both are 3-way and open baffle they can sound TOTALLY different. More different than I could possibly have imagined.
I noticed today that even the high frequency instruments lacked body, and hence less inner deatil and tonal warmth.
That may be the tweeter or, more likely, it's the crossover and what happens below the tweeter. The harmony between the drivers is of bigger importance than any single driver. Waveguides might be of interest - technically they can improve reproduction a lot. Subjectively it's hard to separate them from compression drivers as the two work well together. I will have more to say when I've properly started messing with my set.
I also note the baffle it self, which obviously will resonate, may play a role here. Using mdf instead of plywood might help provide some much needed resonance
I really don't think so!! Plywood is more resonant than MDF and offers a nicer resonance by so many first-hand accounts!! MDF is not a nice-sounding material - at least that is my belief.
Simon
Just to add my 2p about measurements again. I also have little patience for learning complex software, or even for buying it for this purpose. I installed ARTA and with only (seriously) maybe a day's messing about I was getting measurements that looked realistic.
I have not set it up seriously, calibrated anything or used any recommended techniques generally. All I've done is buy a mic preamp kit, capsule (soldered to end of a piece of coax wire) and connected this to my soundcard. I've then fired up ARTA, read some instructions and tweaked things till I got sound coming in.
For me it was a revelation just how high I'd set my tweeters in level! By taking them down to match the mids I was able to find a dip in the response and fill it by adjusting x-o frequency. The result was a quantum leap forwards in sound quality, and I am a firm believer in what sounds good is good... but that doesn't mean this type of thing can't help enormously. And there was no rigorous procedure, just rigging up of a mic capsule and preamp to the pc and knocking out some steady state white noise. This wouldn't do for a Linkwitz or a Geddes but I'm not looking to sell my research, just make a speaker that sings for me - just like yourself.
Get ARTA, it's really not very involved. You barely need to use a fraction of what it can do to get some usefulness out of it. When you've adjusted component values to get a flattish curve you can then fine-tune by ear for the win!!
Simon
edit: as a bonus I identified the frequency and cause of a droning bass resonance - it was 100% from the left speaker and due to corner placement. Largely unfixable but I was able to realise what caused it and put corner traps in place to at least attenuate it to the point it's not an issue for 90% of music in my main listening positions.
I have not set it up seriously, calibrated anything or used any recommended techniques generally. All I've done is buy a mic preamp kit, capsule (soldered to end of a piece of coax wire) and connected this to my soundcard. I've then fired up ARTA, read some instructions and tweaked things till I got sound coming in.
For me it was a revelation just how high I'd set my tweeters in level! By taking them down to match the mids I was able to find a dip in the response and fill it by adjusting x-o frequency. The result was a quantum leap forwards in sound quality, and I am a firm believer in what sounds good is good... but that doesn't mean this type of thing can't help enormously. And there was no rigorous procedure, just rigging up of a mic capsule and preamp to the pc and knocking out some steady state white noise. This wouldn't do for a Linkwitz or a Geddes but I'm not looking to sell my research, just make a speaker that sings for me - just like yourself.
Get ARTA, it's really not very involved. You barely need to use a fraction of what it can do to get some usefulness out of it. When you've adjusted component values to get a flattish curve you can then fine-tune by ear for the win!!
Simon
edit: as a bonus I identified the frequency and cause of a droning bass resonance - it was 100% from the left speaker and due to corner placement. Largely unfixable but I was able to realise what caused it and put corner traps in place to at least attenuate it to the point it's not an issue for 90% of music in my main listening positions.
Last edited:
still waiting for the hempcone 12" drivers. However, i did have a pair of eminence pro delta GUITAR drivers that i had in the garage, but never got round to trying. Eminence claim a very flat response to 4.5k, and Qmax was a respectable 5mm, and much heavier magnet and frame, it certainly did sound 'smoother' overall.
There was also at long last some forward movement in the timbral texture department, not huge but significant. Male voices now had that deeper throaty voicing and the piano had slightly fuller body and was slightly more harmonically fleshed out. Is it the QMAX ??? Is the increased movement mimicking a cabinet in some form or other?? Certainly moving more air will as I understand it enhance the lower registers in an open baffle situation and it may well be that the frequency is now flatter. I definately need to find the time to start getting measurements!!! Also , this time, messing around with those tabs made little or a detrimental difference. Certainly the cone material looks thicker and more rougher on the surface than the original Eminence full rangers I was using. So does this mean the more dear the driver the better the sound quality? Eminence make few 12" which can go to 5k, its Hemp cone guitar driver with all the right stats is the Rex but does have a huge bump at its upper range 2-4k which is a common finding in guitar driver frequency response curves. However, i dont know if miss read this or not but its XMAX is less than a mm, so perhaps this will not do what I'm looking for, regardless of being made of Hemp???
So I think I am right, hemp, plus qmax is the way to go. We'll see, but I am a little more happier now and less frustrated for the time being.
I will burn these drivers in and see what further improvements could be had. I might just double them up as well.
There was also at long last some forward movement in the timbral texture department, not huge but significant. Male voices now had that deeper throaty voicing and the piano had slightly fuller body and was slightly more harmonically fleshed out. Is it the QMAX ??? Is the increased movement mimicking a cabinet in some form or other?? Certainly moving more air will as I understand it enhance the lower registers in an open baffle situation and it may well be that the frequency is now flatter. I definately need to find the time to start getting measurements!!! Also , this time, messing around with those tabs made little or a detrimental difference. Certainly the cone material looks thicker and more rougher on the surface than the original Eminence full rangers I was using. So does this mean the more dear the driver the better the sound quality? Eminence make few 12" which can go to 5k, its Hemp cone guitar driver with all the right stats is the Rex but does have a huge bump at its upper range 2-4k which is a common finding in guitar driver frequency response curves. However, i dont know if miss read this or not but its XMAX is less than a mm, so perhaps this will not do what I'm looking for, regardless of being made of Hemp???
So I think I am right, hemp, plus qmax is the way to go. We'll see, but I am a little more happier now and less frustrated for the time being.
I will burn these drivers in and see what further improvements could be had. I might just double them up as well.
Xmax - what you call Qmax - does not have any tonal influence on sound as long as you do not push the driver into extreme excursion (well "in general" !).
This said - there is Xmax and Xmax - you have to look after the *linear* max excursion of the speaker of interest. Manufacturer like to spec the mechanic Xmax (where the cone bottoms) as this one is often way larger and looks better hence.
Tonality IMO is mostly buried in two specs
- FR
- decay
Which is - especially when it comes to decay of resonant frequencies (what some call "stored energy") - two sides of the same coin.
If you like to dig into interpretation of specs - regarding upper frequency limit, there is a lot to say about - basically here it just tells you something about the construction of the motor (impedance rise) but often isn't helpful to judge tonality in particular (given a suitable XO).
One other aspect of "tonality" is uniformity of radiation - which is heavily influenced not so much by the type or brand of speaker you buy but by sheer dimension (diameter).
This has a important impact on perception of tonality too.
*If* you use two of the same speakers in parallel - as you did - there is a change in that radiation pattern too (depending on frequency involved) - you already got a teaser of the impact on tonality - no?
There are other aspect too that contribute to "tonality" - as you will find out yourself over the course....
Michael
This said - there is Xmax and Xmax - you have to look after the *linear* max excursion of the speaker of interest. Manufacturer like to spec the mechanic Xmax (where the cone bottoms) as this one is often way larger and looks better hence.
Tonality IMO is mostly buried in two specs
- FR
- decay
Which is - especially when it comes to decay of resonant frequencies (what some call "stored energy") - two sides of the same coin.
If you like to dig into interpretation of specs - regarding upper frequency limit, there is a lot to say about - basically here it just tells you something about the construction of the motor (impedance rise) but often isn't helpful to judge tonality in particular (given a suitable XO).
One other aspect of "tonality" is uniformity of radiation - which is heavily influenced not so much by the type or brand of speaker you buy but by sheer dimension (diameter).
This has a important impact on perception of tonality too.
*If* you use two of the same speakers in parallel - as you did - there is a change in that radiation pattern too (depending on frequency involved) - you already got a teaser of the impact on tonality - no?
There are other aspect too that contribute to "tonality" - as you will find out yourself over the course....
Michael
Last edited:
So Michael wold you advise i get another pair of the pro delta and have them aligned in series as for the original speakers?
Also are you saying 15" will be better than 12" for tonality. If that is the case how come very few like to use large woofers for critical mid range listening??
If X-max is important for open baffles in the lower range outputs, what info do you have to say that harmonics from the lower ranges are not important in the tonal make up of notes perceived as being mid or high range??????
A subwoofer set at sub 40hz will often improve tonal warmth in the midrange, voices tend to sound more full and real when the woofer is on. So the sub 40 hz is actually contributing significantly to the overall perceived tonality of the sound, so even a high pitched scream will have added harmonics from the subwoofer giving it just that bit more presence.
Also are you saying 15" will be better than 12" for tonality. If that is the case how come very few like to use large woofers for critical mid range listening??
If X-max is important for open baffles in the lower range outputs, what info do you have to say that harmonics from the lower ranges are not important in the tonal make up of notes perceived as being mid or high range??????
A subwoofer set at sub 40hz will often improve tonal warmth in the midrange, voices tend to sound more full and real when the woofer is on. So the sub 40 hz is actually contributing significantly to the overall perceived tonality of the sound, so even a high pitched scream will have added harmonics from the subwoofer giving it just that bit more presence.
What I try to make clear to you is that there is no *one spec* optimisation that will make you happy.
All sound may be reflected in specs – but not all useful specs have been identified yet.
What *I* possibly can contribute for you, is the rough compass *I* found useful to navigate over the endless white areas on the map...
🙂
What I was trying to tell you – it's simply not clear from scratch what comes out best *for you*.
You always have to keep in mind that you are working with an ensemble of specs, you have to balance out – once you leave known paths.
First you have to understand that FR isn't the one and only to look after (15" reaching out to 5kHz and such **) – not in the sense you get the charts in spec sheets at least.
IMO a mid speaker has to play at least up to 1kHz below its no mid (how I put it).
So for reaching a 1kHz min a 12" is perfectly suitable – even a 15" may work (as some have shown).
Remember, this is not due to a nice FR plot of that speaker measured at "chocolate side" but rather due to limits in radiation pattern and cone break up.
On the other hand - depending on specific requirements you may have - even a 5" may be too large...
You have "to distinguish" is what I was trying to tell you.
Lets assume for the moment that the speaker has a perfect behaviour unless it exceeds X-max-lin.
Under this simplified assumption you easily see that X-max-lin does not have *any* effect as long *you keep behaved* with the volume knob 🙂
So – bottom line - do not mix X-lin-max into tonality (harmonics as you call it here) – X-lin-max tells you only about SPL max under given circumstances before distorting...
Sure - so what ?
Adding a sub can be seen as a mere EQing for the lower end – have I told you, you should forget about the low registers ?
😉
Michael
All sound may be reflected in specs – but not all useful specs have been identified yet.
What *I* possibly can contribute for you, is the rough compass *I* found useful to navigate over the endless white areas on the map...
🙂
So Michael wold you advise i get another pair of the pro delta and have them aligned in series as for the original speakers?
Also are you saying 15" will be better than 12" for tonality. If that is the case how come very few like to use large woofers for critical mid range listening??
What I was trying to tell you – it's simply not clear from scratch what comes out best *for you*.
You always have to keep in mind that you are working with an ensemble of specs, you have to balance out – once you leave known paths.
First you have to understand that FR isn't the one and only to look after (15" reaching out to 5kHz and such **) – not in the sense you get the charts in spec sheets at least.
IMO a mid speaker has to play at least up to 1kHz below its no mid (how I put it).
So for reaching a 1kHz min a 12" is perfectly suitable – even a 15" may work (as some have shown).
Remember, this is not due to a nice FR plot of that speaker measured at "chocolate side" but rather due to limits in radiation pattern and cone break up.
On the other hand - depending on specific requirements you may have - even a 5" may be too large...
If X-max is important for open baffles in the lower range outputs, what info do you have to say that harmonics from the lower ranges are not important in the tonal make up of notes perceived as being mid or high range??????
You have "to distinguish" is what I was trying to tell you.
Lets assume for the moment that the speaker has a perfect behaviour unless it exceeds X-max-lin.
Under this simplified assumption you easily see that X-max-lin does not have *any* effect as long *you keep behaved* with the volume knob 🙂
So – bottom line - do not mix X-lin-max into tonality (harmonics as you call it here) – X-lin-max tells you only about SPL max under given circumstances before distorting...
A subwoofer set at sub 40hz will often improve tonal warmth in the midrange, voices tend to sound more full and real when the woofer is on. So the sub 40 hz is actually contributing significantly to the overall perceived tonality of the sound, so even a high pitched scream will have added harmonics from the subwoofer giving it just that bit more presence.
Sure - so what ?
Adding a sub can be seen as a mere EQing for the lower end – have I told you, you should forget about the low registers ?
😉
Michael
Last edited:
OK Michael Thanx for your input, got your drift now
so I will continue to experiment into the unknown at the frontiers of science and make my own observations.
so I will continue to experiment into the unknown at the frontiers of science and make my own observations.
so I will continue to experiment into the unknown at the frontiers of science and make my own observations.
Excellent !
😀
Seriousely - we are all eager to hear from your results - good or bad - you seem to have a good "ear" and also being familiar with a lot f well regarded speakers - no small gift for where you are aiming !
🙂
A last remark on two versus one speaker - two speaker do not "gel" the same at any frequency - meaning your "flesh out" experience is also a result of this asymmetry (though it could be seen as to be as a result of "directivity merging" as well)
Michael
Last edited:
Ahhrrr - forgot ...
A nice trick you possibly would like to give a try at the beginning of your scientific career :
Audio and Loudspeaker Design Guide Lines
😉
Michael
A nice trick you possibly would like to give a try at the beginning of your scientific career :
Audio and Loudspeaker Design Guide Lines
😉
Michael
Would be nice if i had the time and inclination, 2 children and a very strenuous job.
Its my ears and my soul i want to satisfy, so if I happen to stumble across some design that takes me where I want to be, then thats just fine with me. Plus, it will be fun (as it has been up until now) just messing around with lots of ideas and implementing them, good or bad.
Its my ears and my soul i want to satisfy, so if I happen to stumble across some design that takes me where I want to be, then thats just fine with me. Plus, it will be fun (as it has been up until now) just messing around with lots of ideas and implementing them, good or bad.
The Hemp cone speakers arrived today.
The Eminence Cannabis Rex 12", similar to the Tone Tubby Ceramics?? The hemp cone is certainly made by the same company I know that much.
Immediately obvious was that it had a much fuller lower end and was overall tonally warmer with more solidity to the imaging. Yes much more listen-able than my previous attempts. OK I was totally wrong this thing has an excursion of less than 1mm and yet is louder and has far more bottom end than those speakers whose cones have 3-4 x more mobility.
There is an obvious tip upwards to the sound, which I believe is at about at its limit of 3-5k. It sounds as though it extends down to I guess about 150-200 hz easily, being far superior in this aspect than all my previous Eminence drivers. Only been driven about two hours so far, so only my initial impressions.
Played havoc with my valve amps. As soon as the track gets loud there is an overall suck out/compression to the sound, immediately noticeable. Solid state seemed to prefer these speakers far more. Also adding wool to the back of the chassis or felt pads to the cone seemed to make very little difference!!!! Perhaps as the cone loosens up this will become less obvious, otherwise it will be a nightmare having to go back to my solid state amps that I felt i had now put away to bed for good!!
Imaging at the present time is also very congested towards the middle almost mono like in presentation. I must also confess that as tonally warm as it is I still do not get a feel for those harmonic textures enclosed speakers can provide, overall tonal warmth-yes but harmonic details- no.
It does also have a certain 'darkness' to the sound. Was never sure what people meant by this, but i think it is describing an overall lack of micro dynamics which in turn I believe is just removing a little bit of overall resolution. Now i may have been psychologically pre programmed to make these comments as this is how the Guitar Guru's described the sound in their own forums. So their guitar ears and comments do seem to parallel what I was hearing from listening to general music.
I am going to break them in, but if the guitar guru's are to be listened to then they describe the tone tubby as not so dark sounding and as having less veil to the sound, so perhaps this may be the way to go.
I couldn't help do one further tweak. I added some of those large magnet cylinders that can be bought from ebay weighing about a kg to the back of the speaker magnet. And although i may never be able to take them off again, i am glad i tried as it certainly tightened up the imaging and focus as a significant improvement to my ears, so they are staying.
So initial impressions are very good, but I fear getting the harmonic textures right can only ever be obtained from a box speaker. What to do what to do?? Sub 80hz is still a major problem also. I will need to try equalisation and boost sub 40-50 hz..... a simple electronic crossover is no way adequate.
Where so I now stand in this long but fun filled journey. HAZY.
I loved the dynamics, PRAT and bass of the audio note E Speakers, but only with those mega expensive caps. I loved the un matchable midrange of the QUAD ESL 57,and to a certain extent the Harbeth compact 7's. I love the iron fisted control over the sound waves and the beautiful complex harmonic textures the Yamaha NS1000 can create. I am glad to be rid of the audio physic avanti's, avantgarde duo (which is basically a good looking version of my open baffles as far as sound is concerned but certainly inferior overall, and even the over clinical sounding harbeth 30 and 40's, PMC's etc etc etc.
So what have we left out of these as a concept speaker. ???? A thin plywood large vol box with little or no padding with a tuned port and two way drivers (mid woofer being of Hemp) matched to a minimalist passive crossover. I cannot at the present time see any way of getting away from a boxed speaker to realistically match bass out put and get the correct harmonic textures needed for that emotional connection with the beauty of the sound of instruments. PRAT of course must always be correct for any speaker, to be emotionally engaging and communicative. The only other compromise is as already suggested elsewhere based on the dipole subwoofers, one speaker being boxed the other left open, could that be the ideal???
The Eminence Cannabis Rex 12", similar to the Tone Tubby Ceramics?? The hemp cone is certainly made by the same company I know that much.
Immediately obvious was that it had a much fuller lower end and was overall tonally warmer with more solidity to the imaging. Yes much more listen-able than my previous attempts. OK I was totally wrong this thing has an excursion of less than 1mm and yet is louder and has far more bottom end than those speakers whose cones have 3-4 x more mobility.
There is an obvious tip upwards to the sound, which I believe is at about at its limit of 3-5k. It sounds as though it extends down to I guess about 150-200 hz easily, being far superior in this aspect than all my previous Eminence drivers. Only been driven about two hours so far, so only my initial impressions.
Played havoc with my valve amps. As soon as the track gets loud there is an overall suck out/compression to the sound, immediately noticeable. Solid state seemed to prefer these speakers far more. Also adding wool to the back of the chassis or felt pads to the cone seemed to make very little difference!!!! Perhaps as the cone loosens up this will become less obvious, otherwise it will be a nightmare having to go back to my solid state amps that I felt i had now put away to bed for good!!
Imaging at the present time is also very congested towards the middle almost mono like in presentation. I must also confess that as tonally warm as it is I still do not get a feel for those harmonic textures enclosed speakers can provide, overall tonal warmth-yes but harmonic details- no.
It does also have a certain 'darkness' to the sound. Was never sure what people meant by this, but i think it is describing an overall lack of micro dynamics which in turn I believe is just removing a little bit of overall resolution. Now i may have been psychologically pre programmed to make these comments as this is how the Guitar Guru's described the sound in their own forums. So their guitar ears and comments do seem to parallel what I was hearing from listening to general music.
I am going to break them in, but if the guitar guru's are to be listened to then they describe the tone tubby as not so dark sounding and as having less veil to the sound, so perhaps this may be the way to go.
I couldn't help do one further tweak. I added some of those large magnet cylinders that can be bought from ebay weighing about a kg to the back of the speaker magnet. And although i may never be able to take them off again, i am glad i tried as it certainly tightened up the imaging and focus as a significant improvement to my ears, so they are staying.
So initial impressions are very good, but I fear getting the harmonic textures right can only ever be obtained from a box speaker. What to do what to do?? Sub 80hz is still a major problem also. I will need to try equalisation and boost sub 40-50 hz..... a simple electronic crossover is no way adequate.
Where so I now stand in this long but fun filled journey. HAZY.
I loved the dynamics, PRAT and bass of the audio note E Speakers, but only with those mega expensive caps. I loved the un matchable midrange of the QUAD ESL 57,and to a certain extent the Harbeth compact 7's. I love the iron fisted control over the sound waves and the beautiful complex harmonic textures the Yamaha NS1000 can create. I am glad to be rid of the audio physic avanti's, avantgarde duo (which is basically a good looking version of my open baffles as far as sound is concerned but certainly inferior overall, and even the over clinical sounding harbeth 30 and 40's, PMC's etc etc etc.
So what have we left out of these as a concept speaker. ???? A thin plywood large vol box with little or no padding with a tuned port and two way drivers (mid woofer being of Hemp) matched to a minimalist passive crossover. I cannot at the present time see any way of getting away from a boxed speaker to realistically match bass out put and get the correct harmonic textures needed for that emotional connection with the beauty of the sound of instruments. PRAT of course must always be correct for any speaker, to be emotionally engaging and communicative. The only other compromise is as already suggested elsewhere based on the dipole subwoofers, one speaker being boxed the other left open, could that be the ideal???
Last edited:
Let your cannabis baby smoke for a week or so - would be surprised if resolution (or possibly what you refer to as "harmonic richness") will not improve significantly.
No speaker out of the box ever got that right for me - quite often sound gets even worse after short operation before it starts to clear up IMO
Bottom line - never seriously compare a new speaker to a "well tempered" one. Have some patience with the Cannabis...
Michael
No speaker out of the box ever got that right for me - quite often sound gets even worse after short operation before it starts to clear up IMO
Bottom line - never seriously compare a new speaker to a "well tempered" one. Have some patience with the Cannabis...
Michael
Thanks for the encouragement Michael
Its burning in now. I will give it about 100 hrs before re listening.
Don't get me wrong it is a far better driver than any of the previous Eminence drivers I have used, and in comparison its extension at both ends is very significant indeed, so much so you could almost listen to them without a tweeter and get enjoyment from it!!! Without the tweeter it has some of the sound characteristics of a Quad electrostatic with a smooth midrange a nicely resolved but curtailed top and 'bottom'. Vocals in particular last night sounded very close to the Quad electrostatics for sheer presence palpability and tonal warmth but with some missing harmonics/details. Saxophones and flutes had lovely focus and dynamically were unhindered giving them real presence, but compared to the Yam and Quad there was less harmonic detail which made the instruments eventually become realised as slightly anaemic sounding. Those reverberations within the tubes/horns of the instruments are just not fully realised and being blatantly obvious, robs the instruments of their true identities.
I will get the Behringer to try some equalisation at the bottom end.
Its burning in now. I will give it about 100 hrs before re listening.
Don't get me wrong it is a far better driver than any of the previous Eminence drivers I have used, and in comparison its extension at both ends is very significant indeed, so much so you could almost listen to them without a tweeter and get enjoyment from it!!! Without the tweeter it has some of the sound characteristics of a Quad electrostatic with a smooth midrange a nicely resolved but curtailed top and 'bottom'. Vocals in particular last night sounded very close to the Quad electrostatics for sheer presence palpability and tonal warmth but with some missing harmonics/details. Saxophones and flutes had lovely focus and dynamically were unhindered giving them real presence, but compared to the Yam and Quad there was less harmonic detail which made the instruments eventually become realised as slightly anaemic sounding. Those reverberations within the tubes/horns of the instruments are just not fully realised and being blatantly obvious, robs the instruments of their true identities.
I will get the Behringer to try some equalisation at the bottom end.
I was perhaps feeling a little low last night after my expectations, but what a fool for not carrying out the tried and tested art of 'burning in'
Michael is right AGAIN. After now 18 hrs burn in, I am very surprised, but I have to admit RICH harmonic textures are beginning to blossom, sweetness and clarity are improving and the sound stage is opening up!!. Indeed some of those instruments are revealing more now than I may have ever appreciated in the past with complex overtones and inner timbrel details coming to life and giving the instruments a soul of their very own. Either that or I haven't fully snapped out of the bottle of Bailey's that me and the missus consumed last night. Hold the thoughts from my previous post for now, this is now getting very interesting. Will wait another 24hrs.
Michael is right AGAIN. After now 18 hrs burn in, I am very surprised, but I have to admit RICH harmonic textures are beginning to blossom, sweetness and clarity are improving and the sound stage is opening up!!. Indeed some of those instruments are revealing more now than I may have ever appreciated in the past with complex overtones and inner timbrel details coming to life and giving the instruments a soul of their very own. Either that or I haven't fully snapped out of the bottle of Bailey's that me and the missus consumed last night. Hold the thoughts from my previous post for now, this is now getting very interesting. Will wait another 24hrs.
Michael is right AGAIN. .
I LOVE that English humor !
😀

🙂
Michael
will do. Second pair ordered for arrival next few days. Thats the entire UK stock taken up I believe within one week of arriving of the 8 ohm version that is.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- My first Open Baffle Speaker