" I can make tweeter membranes out of a roseleaf " Tore Tambs-Lyche.
" The soft is the enemy of the hard. It´s not the hardness, it´s the shape."
Joachim Gerhard.
" The soft is the enemy of the hard. It´s not the hardness, it´s the shape."
Joachim Gerhard.
Coustic (the car audio brand) was using Curv cones 10 years a go. So how is it a new and unproven technology?
There used to be pictures of the Coustic subwoofer on the Sea Galleon website...they (the Coustic subs) have been in print ads for SG in Voice Coil way way before Seas came out with their Curv coned speakers.
There used to be pictures of the Coustic subwoofer on the Sea Galleon website...they (the Coustic subs) have been in print ads for SG in Voice Coil way way before Seas came out with their Curv coned speakers.
Last edited:
Last edited by a moderator:
Aurasound NS3-193-8A 3" Fullrange
Any comments on this one for lxmini use?
The Madisound Speaker Store
Dan
Any comments on this one for lxmini use?
The Madisound Speaker Store
Dan
I wonder if there's been compromises in that driver's midrange to get the bass response, which isn't needed . If I were considering using another driver I think it would be crazy to not first build it as designed, then compare the two. Every little thing is adjusted to work with the spec'ced driver. Of course the EQ for the miniDSP would have to changed. The mini DSP people do sell a nice mic that plugs in to analyze the response. The rear tube? probably needs to be changed., how? I have no idea.
We'd want directivity to kick sooner so that the directivity is not affected by dipole 'garbage' at higher frequencies. So in fact we'd want a *bigger* driver. But then with bigger driver = worse high frequency response.
These are competing factors.
FWIW. For those that aren't interested in second-guessing the driver selection and design, the kit is now available to order on Madisound.
The Madisound Speaker Store
Dave.
The Madisound Speaker Store
Dave.
And it is easy to see why, look at the resonance peak of W22! Another benefit from Curvs is smoother transition to directivity, because of the curved cone profile vs. straight of W series. There are many other manufacturers use curved and fibre-reinforced cones too.
By measurements SS10F is smoother that FU10, but I haven't heard either of them. Both are excellent and we should see more nice 3-ways done with them or 12-models!
A bigger driver would concentrate highs to the rear right? So what do you do with those?
Dan
This breakup can easily be addressed in an active crossover to avoid its effect in the LP curve.
But of course the cautious designer will want to LP that driver at max 1/3 of the frequency of that breakup to avoid the associated 3rd distortion peak...
I wonder if significant IMD products will also hit that breakup.
Metal cones are though to work with.
I got downvoted into oblivion for mentioning this on Reddit, but Gary Eickmeier's speakers beat the Orion years ago. And Gary's speakers are based on Bose.
I know it's heresy to study Bose, but it might be worth listening to the 901s and seeing if there's something to be learned from them. The 901s send most of their sound backwards, and a fraction of their sound forward. If you think about it, that's the reverse of the Linkwitz LX Mini
Here's some things that Gary had to say about this, almost ten years ago:
Take, as just one example, our discussion above of the sonic effect of
Linkwitz's Orion design. Most contributors stated and knew that the
dipolar pattern of the speaker contributed immensely to its sound,
especially the soundstaging. A side benefit of this multi-directional
pattern is that it makes the instruments sound more real, more detached
from the speakers themselves, more right there in the room with you.
This is an enormous realization, something that must be studied and
taken into account in any loudspeaker research or design program. I
don't think that the Canadians have caught on to that yet.
I can't even figure out how to link to Gary's post; it's from Usenet, specifically "rec.audio.highend"
I found the discussion on groups.google.com
I know it's heresy to study Bose, but it might be worth listening to the 901s and seeing if there's something to be learned from them. The 901s send most of their sound backwards, and a fraction of their sound forward. If you think about it, that's the reverse of the Linkwitz LX Mini
Here's some things that Gary had to say about this, almost ten years ago:
Take, as just one example, our discussion above of the sonic effect of
Linkwitz's Orion design. Most contributors stated and knew that the
dipolar pattern of the speaker contributed immensely to its sound,
especially the soundstaging. A side benefit of this multi-directional
pattern is that it makes the instruments sound more real, more detached
from the speakers themselves, more right there in the room with you.
This is an enormous realization, something that must be studied and
taken into account in any loudspeaker research or design program. I
don't think that the Canadians have caught on to that yet.
I can't even figure out how to link to Gary's post; it's from Usenet, specifically "rec.audio.highend"
I found the discussion on groups.google.com
got a kick out of this on Audiogon...
"Amar Bose's basic theory in his design was predicated on the basic assumption that 89% of all sound is 'reflected'. He then designs a speaker which actually points direcly into the wall with 88.8% of it's drivers (call it 89 lol).
Doesn't that, then change his basic plan since we can safely assume that most performers aren't 'singing into the wall directly'?
"Here's Michael Bublé, singing, 'Fly Me to the Moon', of course he's facing the wall, so that all you Bose fans out there can better understand the lyrics."
'mmmfllllllllly...mnnnneeee tnnooow de moonnnnnnesh, nand,' "
"Amar Bose's basic theory in his design was predicated on the basic assumption that 89% of all sound is 'reflected'. He then designs a speaker which actually points direcly into the wall with 88.8% of it's drivers (call it 89 lol).
Doesn't that, then change his basic plan since we can safely assume that most performers aren't 'singing into the wall directly'?
"Here's Michael Bublé, singing, 'Fly Me to the Moon', of course he's facing the wall, so that all you Bose fans out there can better understand the lyrics."
'mmmfllllllllly...mnnnneeee tnnooow de moonnnnnnesh, nand,' "
Actually, I think the Bose theory is flawed since 89% of people don't listen to orchestral music. 😀
Perhaps the downvoters objected to the "beat" term. Under what conditions? A Superbowl of Speakers? Probably Bose was right that some sound reflected from the rear is a good thing. Did he get the percentage right? not necessarily. Maybe he was also hurt by trying to make those poor cheap little drivers do it all. Talk about EQ! 🙁
It was a three way blind listening test. Linkwitz Orion came in last:
SLReport10.05
It's the same doc that's discuseed in the thread here on DIYAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/177403-linkwitz-orions-beaten-behringer-what.html) but everyone seems to focus on the fact that Behringer beat Linkwitz, not that a Bose knockoff beat 'em both.
"constant directivity is not important"
"polar response is not important"
utter nonsense!
does anyone really take this blindtest seriously? theres no way on earth the listeners would prefer the behringer over the orion if they spent some time with both in theyr own environment.
"polar response is not important"
utter nonsense!
does anyone really take this blindtest seriously? theres no way on earth the listeners would prefer the behringer over the orion if they spent some time with both in theyr own environment.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.