Thy, this is pretty rude system:
http://www.kharma.com/_images/products/enigma/e-800.jpg
100dB/1w/5m 🙂
You could take yours round to that chaps house and have a stand-off, last man without his ears bleeding is a wuss!
http://www.kharma.com/_images/products/enigma/e-800.jpg
100dB/1w/5m 🙂
You could take yours round to that chaps house and have a stand-off, last man without his ears bleeding is a wuss!
thylantyr said:
That is very good result, if the setting was "slow" and/or if the room doesnt add 15 db.
Anyway, line sources are very cool stuff, aren't they, but as with everything else in life, when you gain something, you loose something else. Dynamic range is a measure that includes low level treshold, too. Having 140 dB on top, usually means that you don't have anything that resembles the input signal below 50dB SPL. F1 engine revs up to 20k, but idles at 3k. Same thing here.
The question of "quality"(whatever that may be) remains, because with line or array sources, quantity doesn't necessarily turn to quality. The biggest problem is THE Issue of "ignoring small signal". Multiplying of speakers, multiplies the problem, as for "normal" SPL, the signal power delivered to each speaker reduces dramatically, and if we keep adding speakers, we'll end up with currents undetectable by each speaker. The system seen on pictures, does it with about 60 grams of moving mass per channel above 50 Hz, with drivers that can detect very very small signal current(30dB less current will move it from 0 than cone or dome speaker needs), usually ignored by cone drivers and dome tweeters. That is why some of the most appreciated system are not line arrays. It is better to force larger currents into speaker(use 1)if you don't want to cut the dynamic range from below. On the other hand, this increases the distortion, and so on....
There are no wonders in this world, just good compromises.
With small budget, you can choose between "high rev limit-high idle" or "low rev limit-low idle". The latter being preffered among audiophiles.
IMO, only wth high budget, you can get "high rev limit-very low idle".
Sorry, I've hit the wrong button.ScottG said:
I totally understand you. Thanks for trying! A friend of mine here, is pushing that concept, with the same explanations, but we could never agree on "is that is the right way to go?". He was building a line of soft dome-horn loaded speakers and if he wasn't lazy as he is, he would already have built the speakers using horn loaded RAALs. I have no doubt that that would be quite impressive, but I won't do it myself for number of different reasons.
I'm glad that I guessed right! It was based on assumption that, by rule, people with certain level of knowledge and experience, converge to similar opinions and conclusions.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I MUCH prefer the other design with the Raven (or a modified RAAL)..
The new design has 2 (possibly 3) problems:
1. The woofers*..
2. The midranges will require a greater listening distance (..still VERY nice midranges that do "buck the trend" that low mass drivers have going for them).
3. Vertical dispersion of the ribbon (unless its the RAAL with the foam vertical waveguide), when considering a higher crossover.
The Air Cir tweeter (the one that Zaph has measured), looks quite nice. It however will not give you that special "something" that a good true ribbon will.
*For a high force driver consider 4 (per side) of the 16 ohm Bandor 150 (150DW/16).. all 4 paralleled to 4 ohm nominal load. That should give you between +9/12 db (with a voltage amp).
http://www.bandor.com/products_frame.htm
lol @ million dollar speaker.
I was thinking 3-way with either RAAL, AC G1 or maybe even the SA if I can get around the mounting problems. Coupled with a pair of Accuton C90-T6 midranges and something like a pair of Seas W26 or Accuton C220-T6.
You can only change your mind three times per week
I sense confusion
Lets start from the beginning. This is how I would approach
the problem.
You made a TMW. You feel that it doesn't offer something,
what is it exactly about the TMW that lacks?
1. Is it tweeter dispersion?
2. Is it SPL?
3. Is it synergy amongst drivers?
4. Is it lacking holographic sound ?
5. Is it 'slam' from the music, aka hard hitting drum solos don't hit hard?
Migrating from a dome tweeter to planar or ribbon has it's
own set of issues. If you like the wide dispersion of your dome
tweeter, then you won't get that sensation with the common
planar or ribbon. You will need a short true ribbon driver like
the LCY or even the Raal, but I'm only asssuming Raal has wide dispersion only based on the pics I've seen.
Any other planar or ribbon solution will weak vertical dispertion
and the drivers need to be aimed at the listener to get the sweet spot. Years ago I drew up some small designs where the TM driver cabinet has 'tilt' + 'rotate' function so you can aim the
tweeter and midrange box at the optimum listening position.
With line array, because the array is tall, ideal from floor to
ceiling, this isn't a problem really, stand up, sit down, it's all good
provided that you have good coverage from floor to ceiling.
By chosing a high end planar or ribbon, you might take a step
backwards by using one of those drivers *if* you don't know
the weakness and you need to compensate for that in your
design, aka tilt function.
If SPL is the issue, then a single tweeter, midrange or two,
woofer or two isn't enough.
If you sense driver synergy problems with your current setup
then you will also have driver synergy problems with the new
setup unless you audition drivers {expensive to order samples}.
Holographic sound? I hear some killer holographic sound from
headphones, I consider this a problem that needs solving from
from the front end of the sound system to the back end, not just
a loudspeaker problem.
Slam? Do you want to feel the music not just hear it? You want
impact in the drums when they are hit? *crack*, uncompressed
transients? if so, a few drivers won't do the job unless you
do horns.
After you prioritize the goals, try to visualize on what drivers
that might solve your problem. You can already see that
the tweeters are the hardest quest and you should only think
about tweeters first, forget about which midranges or woofers.
Isolate the problem, find a tweeter solution first.
Second, order one of those tweeters and only do experiments
with the tweeter becoming familiar with it's performance. This can
take a few weeks.
Third, knowing what the performance envelope is from the tweeter, now make your liste of midrange candidates and you
have no choice but to order one of each and do experiments. These midrange/tweeter experiments can take a while to resolve.
Sometimes midranges playing solo might not be the chosen one
once mated to your tweeter.
This is pretty much what I do with audio. Find the killer tweeters
since that quest is the most difficult one, know and understand
your tweeter by doing extensive auditions playing the driver solo,
then try to visualize a midrange driver for the job and order samples as the market has alot of midrange candidates. Do auditions until you find driver synergy.
Now that you have tweeter/midrange synergy, you can
evalute if those drivers can be suitable for TM, MTM, line array, etc.
The best instrument is your ears and common sense judgement.
I was thinking 3-way with either RAAL, AC G1 or maybe even the SA if I can get around the mounting problems. Coupled with a pair of Accuton C90-T6 midranges and something like a pair of Seas W26 or Accuton C220-T6.
You can only change your mind three times per week
I sense confusion
Lets start from the beginning. This is how I would approach
the problem.
You made a TMW. You feel that it doesn't offer something,
what is it exactly about the TMW that lacks?
1. Is it tweeter dispersion?
2. Is it SPL?
3. Is it synergy amongst drivers?
4. Is it lacking holographic sound ?
5. Is it 'slam' from the music, aka hard hitting drum solos don't hit hard?
Migrating from a dome tweeter to planar or ribbon has it's
own set of issues. If you like the wide dispersion of your dome
tweeter, then you won't get that sensation with the common
planar or ribbon. You will need a short true ribbon driver like
the LCY or even the Raal, but I'm only asssuming Raal has wide dispersion only based on the pics I've seen.
Any other planar or ribbon solution will weak vertical dispertion
and the drivers need to be aimed at the listener to get the sweet spot. Years ago I drew up some small designs where the TM driver cabinet has 'tilt' + 'rotate' function so you can aim the
tweeter and midrange box at the optimum listening position.
With line array, because the array is tall, ideal from floor to
ceiling, this isn't a problem really, stand up, sit down, it's all good
provided that you have good coverage from floor to ceiling.
By chosing a high end planar or ribbon, you might take a step
backwards by using one of those drivers *if* you don't know
the weakness and you need to compensate for that in your
design, aka tilt function.
If SPL is the issue, then a single tweeter, midrange or two,
woofer or two isn't enough.
If you sense driver synergy problems with your current setup
then you will also have driver synergy problems with the new
setup unless you audition drivers {expensive to order samples}.
Holographic sound? I hear some killer holographic sound from
headphones, I consider this a problem that needs solving from
from the front end of the sound system to the back end, not just
a loudspeaker problem.
Slam? Do you want to feel the music not just hear it? You want
impact in the drums when they are hit? *crack*, uncompressed
transients? if so, a few drivers won't do the job unless you
do horns.
After you prioritize the goals, try to visualize on what drivers
that might solve your problem. You can already see that
the tweeters are the hardest quest and you should only think
about tweeters first, forget about which midranges or woofers.
Isolate the problem, find a tweeter solution first.
Second, order one of those tweeters and only do experiments
with the tweeter becoming familiar with it's performance. This can
take a few weeks.
Third, knowing what the performance envelope is from the tweeter, now make your liste of midrange candidates and you
have no choice but to order one of each and do experiments. These midrange/tweeter experiments can take a while to resolve.
Sometimes midranges playing solo might not be the chosen one
once mated to your tweeter.
This is pretty much what I do with audio. Find the killer tweeters
since that quest is the most difficult one, know and understand
your tweeter by doing extensive auditions playing the driver solo,
then try to visualize a midrange driver for the job and order samples as the market has alot of midrange candidates. Do auditions until you find driver synergy.
Now that you have tweeter/midrange synergy, you can
evalute if those drivers can be suitable for TM, MTM, line array, etc.
The best instrument is your ears and common sense judgement.
omega87 said:
Line array performance is no different than any other loudspeaker, it's only as good as the design, construction,
and installation. There is no need to make generic statements about line arrays. It's best to judge the particular
loudspeaker in question. Since nobody here has auditioned my current line array, you don't know what I lost, LOL
What I find interesting is this. I've been watching the DIY
sector and taking notes on line array testimonials. Roughly
speaking, I'd say that 8 of every 10 people who listened to
a good one, love them. Those are pretty good odds. I haven't
seen a commerical or DIY line array that takes 100% advantage
of what the line array can offer. Makes the ball game interesting ?
ScottG said:
After talking to a few folks about the R3.2 I'm getting the overriding feeling that it isn't suitable for use at anything like where I want to use it. Most likely is 1Khz at the minimum and preferable 1.3Khz.
Physics state the a surface area of 26 cubic centimeters and with a linear displace of just 0.5mm will not and cannot ever be considered to be able to produce 800hz at decent SPL and certainly not without the most gross forms of distortion. Thy with his 8xSA planars per side noted during testing that the sound was hardened and sharp when crossed at anything below 1.5Khz. The combined abilities of all those drivers shame a single R3.2 so what hope does it have?
Gotta be realistic, the R3.2 is something to lust after and isn't a solution to a driver that will do 800hz and up with low distortion and higher SPL's.
I do understand that the distortion is low 😉
Really though, what is this special rubbish you keep rattling on about? Its more confusing than anything because its so ill defined. I ban you from using that word in any of my threads from now on 😀
.5mm will not and cannot ever be considered to be able to produce 800hz at decent SPL and certainly not without the most gross forms of distortion. Thy with his 8xSA planars per side noted during testing that the sound was hardened and sharp when crossed at anything below 1.5Khz.
I've only tested four SA per side. The driver is not at fault,
it's my personal preference to choose a higher crossover frequency no matter what tweeter I use. I prefer >1.5khz
using a steep slope at normal to higher SPL levels. At
very high SPL, 2khz works for me.
I can easily run the SA's at 1khz no problem, sounds fine
but I like the vocals to eminate from the midrange drivers
as my brain is biased and trained to hear it from that source.
SA's are used in prosound gear with 2nd order 1.2khz crossover
points, regardless, steep slope and higher crossover is my
preference.
I have yet to hear 8 SA per side. One per side is enough
to beat anything in the high end elite store. Eight SA's in a 5000 person club
drives the place with no probems. 😎
kill
maim
destroy
SA at high spl.
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/winter/images/atomic-bomb.jpg
I've only tested four SA per side. The driver is not at fault,
it's my personal preference to choose a higher crossover frequency no matter what tweeter I use. I prefer >1.5khz
using a steep slope at normal to higher SPL levels. At
very high SPL, 2khz works for me.
I can easily run the SA's at 1khz no problem, sounds fine
but I like the vocals to eminate from the midrange drivers
as my brain is biased and trained to hear it from that source.
SA's are used in prosound gear with 2nd order 1.2khz crossover
points, regardless, steep slope and higher crossover is my
preference.
I have yet to hear 8 SA per side. One per side is enough
to beat anything in the high end elite store. Eight SA's in a 5000 person club
drives the place with no probems. 😎
kill
maim
destroy
SA at high spl.
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2004/winter/images/atomic-bomb.jpg
thylantyr said:
I may not know what you lost, but I know what you could not gain.
Count me in line source lovers.
I think this thread has gotten out of hand.
I'm really, really confused.
Its turned into me lusting after stuff for the sake of it based purely on reputation/graphs/numbers or whatever. All that stuff will likely end in disaster.
My last attempt was something that goes back to ground I'm familiar with - a 3-way with conventional and fairly run of the mill drivers, infact the drivers aren't particularly hyped.
The line array suggestions are OTT for me, I'll be the first to admit that the sheer impact of the setup will be formidable but I think its all a little too much when you've got an WMT design that you feel needs smaller improvements to reach what would be a perfected design. I'm essentially saying that I want to extend the idea's and implementation I did with the v2's and not jump on another bandwagon that 'seems' to hold more promise. I like what I've got so the logical thing is an extension and refinement of that rather than a radical step in a potentially(for me) wrong direction. Throwing expensive drivers at the problem isn't the solution either.
Does that make sense?
I'm really, really confused.
Its turned into me lusting after stuff for the sake of it based purely on reputation/graphs/numbers or whatever. All that stuff will likely end in disaster.
My last attempt was something that goes back to ground I'm familiar with - a 3-way with conventional and fairly run of the mill drivers, infact the drivers aren't particularly hyped.
The line array suggestions are OTT for me, I'll be the first to admit that the sheer impact of the setup will be formidable but I think its all a little too much when you've got an WMT design that you feel needs smaller improvements to reach what would be a perfected design. I'm essentially saying that I want to extend the idea's and implementation I did with the v2's and not jump on another bandwagon that 'seems' to hold more promise. I like what I've got so the logical thing is an extension and refinement of that rather than a radical step in a potentially(for me) wrong direction. Throwing expensive drivers at the problem isn't the solution either.
Does that make sense?
ShinOBIWAN said:
BUT the Raven is "horn" loaded (and the magnetic gap is deeper). It also has a lower resonance. It also requires a VERY steep crossover for a lower freq. cut-off (..and I doubt most have used such). Then there is the problem of integrating such a low mass driver with midbasses - but the 215 GMF's might just be able to do this.
Note that the SA planars have their resonance around 1.5 kHz, so it isn't surpising that you can't (or shouldn't) cross them lower without serious problems.
On the topic of "special" and true ribbons (..not indicating people with learning disabilies 😀 ):
..eerily REAL sounding (and "real" as in "life-like"), an ability to suspend disbelief in something synthetic/reproduced. A greater ability to "fool you" into believing the reproduction is live. Note that some people do not hear this quality - AND that it is more easily heard with an amplifier that has an output impeadance almost double that of the low mass driver's nominal impeadance (..with transformer of course in the case of a smaller true ribbon).
btw, did you look over the Bandor drivers? Note that Susan Parker, (the person that designed the amps I mentioned), uses these for a push-pull subwoofer.
ShinOBIWAN said:
Eh.. You are not that confused.
You just don't want the Line Array's cost or esthetic requirements.
In effect you want to maintain the esthetic you have envisioned while still having signficantly greater performance both technically and audibly.
At some point however some (or several) compromises will be required. The question is: which compromises will be made?
I think this thread has gotten out of hand.
The thread is fine, nothing abnormal. Visit AVS forum if
you want chaos :hehe:
I'm really, really confused.
I have a prescription to help you.
Pick a bottle;
http://parkwayreststop.blogspot.com/booze.jpg
One of these;
http://www.psychiatric-disorders.com/images/imgSA-marijuana.jpg
Wait 1 hour. The mind is clear.
Its turned into me lusting after stuff for the sake of it based purely on reputation/graphs/numbers or whatever. All that stuff will likely end in disaster.
You can also donate the R3.2 to me when the project doesn't work. /joke
My last attempt was something that goes back to ground I'm familiar with - a 3-way with conventional and fairly run of the mill drivers, infact the drivers aren't particularly hyped.
The ATC dome is special, nothing like it. It's not talked about
because nobody in the DIY world wants to spend $500 on a
single driver.
The line array suggestions are OTT for me, I'll be the first to admit that the sheer impact of the setup will be formidable
Piece of cake if you use the powers of the Sith Lord.
I'm essentially saying that I want to extend the idea's and implementation I did with the v2's and not jump on another bandwagon that 'seems' to hold more promise. I like what I've got so the logical thing is an extension and refinement of that rather than a radical step in a potentially(for me) wrong direction.
A refinement of Pv2.0 would imply using the same drivers,
change of electronics, etc., or using most of the same drivers
in a newer design. I don't really see how you can really improve
on the Pv2.0 using the same drivers. I can see Pv3.0 as an
WMTW using the same drivers but why? more bass?
Replacing the tweeter, replacing the mdirange, replacing the
woofers isn't a refinement of the Pv2.0, it's a new design with
a new set of personalities.
You have to think of each loudspeaker design as it's own
unique animal. Different personality, etc. Let the Pv2.0
offer you what it offers and accept it. Lets your new v3.0
loudspeaker offer a new personality based on a new design.
Accept both as unique and both bring something different to the
party.
Throwing expensive drivers at the problem isn't the solution either.
I think the cost of the drivers suggested is a byproduct. We look
at performance first then say "holy cow, it cost alot of money".
We don't say "I don't know anything about this driver, but hey, it cost alot therefore it must be good"... LOL
I've been in similar boats as you. I solved my problems by
taking risks and buying samples of interesting drivers. I hook
up the drivers and experiment in the garage. I bypass the middleman and find the answers. Peace of mind for me, the only
problem is -> expensive to order samples.
Once you have done enough driver experiments you know
the limitations of each type of technology. Example, I've messed
around with enough dome tweeters that I know their limits.
Any new 'whiz bang' tweeter on the market in the same category
can be analyze to see if it can exceed that performance envelope.
I'm a big believer in 'hands on experience'. Take time, cost
money, but the mind is clear.
The thread is fine, nothing abnormal. Visit AVS forum if
you want chaos :hehe:
I'm really, really confused.
I have a prescription to help you.
Pick a bottle;
http://parkwayreststop.blogspot.com/booze.jpg
One of these;
http://www.psychiatric-disorders.com/images/imgSA-marijuana.jpg
Wait 1 hour. The mind is clear.
Its turned into me lusting after stuff for the sake of it based purely on reputation/graphs/numbers or whatever. All that stuff will likely end in disaster.
You can also donate the R3.2 to me when the project doesn't work. /joke
My last attempt was something that goes back to ground I'm familiar with - a 3-way with conventional and fairly run of the mill drivers, infact the drivers aren't particularly hyped.
The ATC dome is special, nothing like it. It's not talked about
because nobody in the DIY world wants to spend $500 on a
single driver.
The line array suggestions are OTT for me, I'll be the first to admit that the sheer impact of the setup will be formidable
Piece of cake if you use the powers of the Sith Lord.
I'm essentially saying that I want to extend the idea's and implementation I did with the v2's and not jump on another bandwagon that 'seems' to hold more promise. I like what I've got so the logical thing is an extension and refinement of that rather than a radical step in a potentially(for me) wrong direction.
A refinement of Pv2.0 would imply using the same drivers,
change of electronics, etc., or using most of the same drivers
in a newer design. I don't really see how you can really improve
on the Pv2.0 using the same drivers. I can see Pv3.0 as an
WMTW using the same drivers but why? more bass?
Replacing the tweeter, replacing the mdirange, replacing the
woofers isn't a refinement of the Pv2.0, it's a new design with
a new set of personalities.
You have to think of each loudspeaker design as it's own
unique animal. Different personality, etc. Let the Pv2.0
offer you what it offers and accept it. Lets your new v3.0
loudspeaker offer a new personality based on a new design.
Accept both as unique and both bring something different to the
party.
Throwing expensive drivers at the problem isn't the solution either.
I think the cost of the drivers suggested is a byproduct. We look
at performance first then say "holy cow, it cost alot of money".
We don't say "I don't know anything about this driver, but hey, it cost alot therefore it must be good"... LOL
I've been in similar boats as you. I solved my problems by
taking risks and buying samples of interesting drivers. I hook
up the drivers and experiment in the garage. I bypass the middleman and find the answers. Peace of mind for me, the only
problem is -> expensive to order samples.
Once you have done enough driver experiments you know
the limitations of each type of technology. Example, I've messed
around with enough dome tweeters that I know their limits.
Any new 'whiz bang' tweeter on the market in the same category
can be analyze to see if it can exceed that performance envelope.
I'm a big believer in 'hands on experience'. Take time, cost
money, but the mind is clear.
Troels has some measurements on 215GMF in this article
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/HES_II.htm
A friend has just made a system with double C90-T6, Raven, and Thiel bass
He had to use FOUR 220N-T6 to keep up with sensitivity and they dont go very low - but the system should sound very good
I would think you could achieve a fine result with one 90-T6 and a ribbon
Bass ......ScSp...?
But I think that drivers that depend on steep filter slopes wont ever give the result you want
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/HES_II.htm
A friend has just made a system with double C90-T6, Raven, and Thiel bass
He had to use FOUR 220N-T6 to keep up with sensitivity and they dont go very low - but the system should sound very good
I would think you could achieve a fine result with one 90-T6 and a ribbon
Bass ......ScSp...?
But I think that drivers that depend on steep filter slopes wont ever give the result you want
Thanks for that Tinitus.
That breakup is disgusting and the fact it starts at ~1Khz would render it useless for use with the R3.2. The supravox website shows nothing along those lines.
I've got reservations about that company: no distortion data, inaccurate FR plots that don't match up to the products being sold, creative CSD's. They may as well not bother with the data shown.
I've emailed Troels for an opinion on the subjective performance.
That breakup is disgusting and the fact it starts at ~1Khz would render it useless for use with the R3.2. The supravox website shows nothing along those lines.
I've got reservations about that company: no distortion data, inaccurate FR plots that don't match up to the products being sold, creative CSD's. They may as well not bother with the data shown.
I've emailed Troels for an opinion on the subjective performance.
omega87 said:Is it just me, or this thread is just a waste of time?
Mind ya tongue 😀
This thread gave birth to these:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.