Steve,
You asked about impedance. I see no problem with my 845 driving 4 ohms. Let's do it!
Regarding CD and turntable, I'm sure you have better than me:
Mitsubishi DP-EC7 (bet you've never heard of it!) + dubious Ortofon MM. My MC is broken 🙁 . Got one I can buy at a good price?
Pioneer DCD-825. It sounds very reasonable through one of my own broadcast DAC's, even though it's an oversampler 😱
It's all coming very soon!
Cheers,
You asked about impedance. I see no problem with my 845 driving 4 ohms. Let's do it!
Regarding CD and turntable, I'm sure you have better than me:
Mitsubishi DP-EC7 (bet you've never heard of it!) + dubious Ortofon MM. My MC is broken 🙁 . Got one I can buy at a good price?
Pioneer DCD-825. It sounds very reasonable through one of my own broadcast DAC's, even though it's an oversampler 😱
It's all coming very soon!
Cheers,
Just curious about something, Steve...
Hi Steve,
Could you comment on the phasy-ness / lobing in the vertical sense with your design? I assume that you run all four drivers full-range, but at the higher frequencies, say 4.5k and up, you'll get lobing in the vertical. I'm curious to know your thoughts on this and if this is a practical issue or not.
Thanks,
Brendon
Hi Steve,
Could you comment on the phasy-ness / lobing in the vertical sense with your design? I assume that you run all four drivers full-range, but at the higher frequencies, say 4.5k and up, you'll get lobing in the vertical. I'm curious to know your thoughts on this and if this is a practical issue or not.
Thanks,
Brendon
Re: Just curious about something, Steve...
Yes, I run all four drivers full-range. The drivers are only 2" diameter each and I also use a special front panel so that they are as close together as possible.
These are 'concert speakers'. Lobing doesn't take place, provided:
1. The listener is seated so that his ears are roughly on a level with the middle of the drive units. Stand and you will lose high frequency response.
2. The listener is 4 feet or more from the speakers.
I have the inner two drivers and the outer two drivers on separate terminals. This way I can easily disconnect the outer two units for when I want to listen while standing or walking around ('cocktail party' mode).
There is a downloadable spreadsheet from the FRD Consortium which models this. It is called VPR (Vertical Polar Response - Line Array) and can be quite useful.
Steve
Brendon said:
Yes, I run all four drivers full-range. The drivers are only 2" diameter each and I also use a special front panel so that they are as close together as possible.
These are 'concert speakers'. Lobing doesn't take place, provided:
1. The listener is seated so that his ears are roughly on a level with the middle of the drive units. Stand and you will lose high frequency response.
2. The listener is 4 feet or more from the speakers.
I have the inner two drivers and the outer two drivers on separate terminals. This way I can easily disconnect the outer two units for when I want to listen while standing or walking around ('cocktail party' mode).
There is a downloadable spreadsheet from the FRD Consortium which models this. It is called VPR (Vertical Polar Response - Line Array) and can be quite useful.
Steve
Comb Lines and Such no Nonsuch 4s
Brendon and Steve,
As Brendon posted, I too have wondered about the benefits of an array of 4 small (2” or 50mm diameter) drivers such as the Nonsuch 4s. As Brendon points out these drivers would be typically spaced flange to flange but their center-to-center spacing would be 3” (~75mm) or perhaps a bit greater. Hence, these drivers would be a wavelength apart at about 4500 Hz and two WLs apart at 9000 Hz. This separation would start to generate vertical axis comb lines above 4500 with the first cancellation at 9000 Hz. Therefore, you would have significant comb lining across the 10-20 kHz range. Concurrently, the directivity of the array starts to suffer above 4500 Hz so you will have frequency response peaks and dips above 9000 Hz. The only forgiveness for the listener is that the human ear is less sensitivity to sound (per the Fletcher-Munson curves) in the 10-20 kHz range so the comb lines may not be as audible as across lower frequencies. Another forgiveness would be the degradation of hearing with age that may help mask these effects.
If that was not enough, typically a 2” (50mm) cone (or dome) will start to beam (decreasing horizontal dispersion in this case) as frequency rises. That is why high quality 0.75” dome tweeters sound more spacious than even 1” diameter dome tweeters—the smaller dome has better dispersion characteristics than the larger one. In the Nonsuch 4s case a 2” diameter cone will have reduced horizonal dispersion as frequency extends into the 10-20 kHz band. Now the Bandor drivers may have relatively good off axis dispersion in this octave, but I doubt that they would equal the better 1” or 0.75” dome tweeters.
Bottom line is, as Steve previously pointed out, is that the Nonsuch 4s speakers have limited vertical coverage in this axis so you better be in the exact location (exactly on axis you always have a response peak) but if you move just a little then you could miss the high frequencies. Furthermore, I would conclude that they would have horizontal dispersion limitations as well and sound less airy than competing speakers.
As Steve points out, the Nonsuch 4s’ length is too short (about 12 inches long) to generate anything but a far field response which means that they operate with 6 dB per doubling of distance from the speakers sound decrease—the same as a conventional point source speaker. It would take a 6 feet (1.8 cm or more) long line of drivers to create a near field situation within most listening room. Near field line arrays have the advantage of maximizing the direct sound versus reverberant sounds (lessens ceiling and floor reflections), have a sound decrease of 3 dB per doubling of distance from the source (half as much as the Nonsuch 4s), and a wider sound stage than speakers that operate only in the far field.
My take on the Nonsuch 4s is that they may find a niche in the market because for their visual characteristics but I don’t envision how they are acoustically superior to a large number of excellent two-way and three-way speakers already in the marketplace. The tradeoff is between a no crossover speaker versus those that have better sound dispersion and likely better bass and more even high frequency dispersion. That decision must be decided by the buyer.
Jim
Brendon and Steve,
As Brendon posted, I too have wondered about the benefits of an array of 4 small (2” or 50mm diameter) drivers such as the Nonsuch 4s. As Brendon points out these drivers would be typically spaced flange to flange but their center-to-center spacing would be 3” (~75mm) or perhaps a bit greater. Hence, these drivers would be a wavelength apart at about 4500 Hz and two WLs apart at 9000 Hz. This separation would start to generate vertical axis comb lines above 4500 with the first cancellation at 9000 Hz. Therefore, you would have significant comb lining across the 10-20 kHz range. Concurrently, the directivity of the array starts to suffer above 4500 Hz so you will have frequency response peaks and dips above 9000 Hz. The only forgiveness for the listener is that the human ear is less sensitivity to sound (per the Fletcher-Munson curves) in the 10-20 kHz range so the comb lines may not be as audible as across lower frequencies. Another forgiveness would be the degradation of hearing with age that may help mask these effects.
If that was not enough, typically a 2” (50mm) cone (or dome) will start to beam (decreasing horizontal dispersion in this case) as frequency rises. That is why high quality 0.75” dome tweeters sound more spacious than even 1” diameter dome tweeters—the smaller dome has better dispersion characteristics than the larger one. In the Nonsuch 4s case a 2” diameter cone will have reduced horizonal dispersion as frequency extends into the 10-20 kHz band. Now the Bandor drivers may have relatively good off axis dispersion in this octave, but I doubt that they would equal the better 1” or 0.75” dome tweeters.
Bottom line is, as Steve previously pointed out, is that the Nonsuch 4s speakers have limited vertical coverage in this axis so you better be in the exact location (exactly on axis you always have a response peak) but if you move just a little then you could miss the high frequencies. Furthermore, I would conclude that they would have horizontal dispersion limitations as well and sound less airy than competing speakers.
As Steve points out, the Nonsuch 4s’ length is too short (about 12 inches long) to generate anything but a far field response which means that they operate with 6 dB per doubling of distance from the speakers sound decrease—the same as a conventional point source speaker. It would take a 6 feet (1.8 cm or more) long line of drivers to create a near field situation within most listening room. Near field line arrays have the advantage of maximizing the direct sound versus reverberant sounds (lessens ceiling and floor reflections), have a sound decrease of 3 dB per doubling of distance from the source (half as much as the Nonsuch 4s), and a wider sound stage than speakers that operate only in the far field.
My take on the Nonsuch 4s is that they may find a niche in the market because for their visual characteristics but I don’t envision how they are acoustically superior to a large number of excellent two-way and three-way speakers already in the marketplace. The tradeoff is between a no crossover speaker versus those that have better sound dispersion and likely better bass and more even high frequency dispersion. That decision must be decided by the buyer.
Jim
Re: Comb Lines and Such no Nonsuch 4s
It's certainly an interesting take, Jim and I feel flattered that you have indulged in so much 'envisioning' and theorising about the Nonsuch 4s acoustic superiority or inferiority to a 'large number of excellent two-way or three-way speakers already on the marketplace'.
Might I humbly suggest that, before you make your final pronouncement on the speakers, you perhaps listen to them. I realize that this is an extreme approach to the testing of loudspeakers but it is nevertheless one that I've often found rewarding in the past.
Jim Griffin said:
It's certainly an interesting take, Jim and I feel flattered that you have indulged in so much 'envisioning' and theorising about the Nonsuch 4s acoustic superiority or inferiority to a 'large number of excellent two-way or three-way speakers already on the marketplace'.
Might I humbly suggest that, before you make your final pronouncement on the speakers, you perhaps listen to them. I realize that this is an extreme approach to the testing of loudspeakers but it is nevertheless one that I've often found rewarding in the past.
Stew320 said:That’s a nicely finished set of speakers and subs you’ve got thereHope you sell plenty. How much are you charging for a pair of Nonsuch 4's ?
Thanks Stew320. The UK price of the Nonsuch 4s is £4,495.00.
Steve
Hi,
Why can't one have both?
I know for a fact it can be done with the Bandors amongst other FR speakers.
From were I'm sitting I'd rather have a x-over-less design with a bit of a compromose on dispersion than a huge compromise that virtually all x-overs inevitably are.
De gustibus et coloribus non discutandum est...
Cheers,😉
Why can't one have both?
I know for a fact it can be done with the Bandors amongst other FR speakers.
From were I'm sitting I'd rather have a x-over-less design with a bit of a compromose on dispersion than a huge compromise that virtually all x-overs inevitably are.
De gustibus et coloribus non discutandum est...
Cheers,😉
Frank,
You can avoid the vertical dispersion limitiations previously cited by Steve in his post #23 and discussed in my posting via the use of a single full range Bandor driver per side. However, I will still contend that you'll miss the bass range plus have less airy treble versus a truly full range loudspeaker system if you use a small, full range driver or driver(s). For the cost of the Nonsuch 4s I would expect more. Now these speakers may sound great, but to me the basic design has shortcomings as discussed in both postings #23 by Steve and 24 by me.
Jim
You can avoid the vertical dispersion limitiations previously cited by Steve in his post #23 and discussed in my posting via the use of a single full range Bandor driver per side. However, I will still contend that you'll miss the bass range plus have less airy treble versus a truly full range loudspeaker system if you use a small, full range driver or driver(s). For the cost of the Nonsuch 4s I would expect more. Now these speakers may sound great, but to me the basic design has shortcomings as discussed in both postings #23 by Steve and 24 by me.
Jim
Well, lets see now. What precisely did I cite in my post #23?Jim Griffin said:
These are 'concert speakers'. Lobing doesn't take place, provided:
1. The listener is seated so that his ears are roughly on a level with the middle of the drive units. Stand and you will lose high frequency response.
2. The listener is 4 feet or more from the speakers.
and what did you say?
... which 5 seconds listening will demonstrate, is not the case at all.
In fact, at the Frankfurt High End Show we had a speaker using single Bandor driver which we could swap for the Nonsuch 4s. Again, listening to the Nonsuch 4s demonstrated no 'vertical dispersion limitations' relative to the single driver system (provided the listener was seated).
The Bandor 2" driver has a free-air resonant frequency of 65Hz and we're using four of them. We're also using a sub woofer below 100Hz. There's no problem with the bass.
The treble is one of the strongest features of the system. It's totally seamless in a way that cannot be obtained by a speaker that swaps over to a tweeter, particularly one with totally different sonic characteristics such as a dome tweeter.
This is my view, based upon my listening impressions. It is only by listening, and comparing the sound to live music, that you will know whether this holds for you or not.
- And let me add another one (from your previous post) ...
If quality of imagery is any guide to horizontal dispersion then this too is clearly nonsense. No one who listens to the Nonsuch 4 for even the briefest period of time would be in any doubt about the quality of its imaging.
Hmmm, for my next speaker I'll try for a better basic design with a worse sound.
Jim, speaker design is more than just an intellectual exercise.
In its essence, speaker design is a quest for truth and beauty. I know it sounds corny but that's how it is. We're trying to make music, not speakers. It is only by listening to live music and listening to speakers that we can refine our understanding of the theory and come to know what it really means.
Steve
fdegrove said:
Frank, I'm afraid my Latin's not up to much (this is Latin, right?).
Does this saying mean that there's no point arguing over matters of taste?
Steve
Lobing - Predicted Response
My previous responses to this question dealt mainly with whether lobing in the vertical plain is a practical issue. I gave the answer that broadly speaking, provided the listener is sitting, it isn't.
Perhaps, I was a little short in my response and perhaps I was a little hard on Jim who is, after all, new to our forum and who I believe (from his postings in "another place") to be a first class designer of linear array systems. So, this posting I will try to give a more precise theoretical answer.
I had hoped by now to be posting the actual measured frequency response curves, waterfall plots, impulse measurements, etc. Why I haven't is a long story but can be summarized as follows ...
Bought software - bought calibrated microphone - discovered soundcard on notebook pc isn't up to the job - bought new soundcard for USB port - discovered new soundcard doesn't work with Windows 98 - bought Windows XP Pro upgrade - attempted to install - discovered this is quite a job - put everything back in the boxes - wait until I have time.
So, no measurements yet. In a previous posting, I referred to a spreadsheet called Vertical Polar Response - Line Array. This program was an important tool in the design process.
If we feed the parameters into the program - 4 drivers, 50mm diameter, 25mm gap, distance to listener 3m - we find the following:-
On axis: Flat Response (+0dB/-1dB, 0-20kHz)
5 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -2dB at 20kHz
8 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -3dB at 20kHz
10 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -5dB at 20kHz
16 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -11dB at 20kHz
I suspect that most people would have difficulty detecting a drop of below 5dB at 20kHz and these figures bear out the subjective impressions. As long as the listener is approximately on axis, the response is more or less flat. If the listener is a bit fidgety, the response is still more or less flat (as far as the majority of us can hear). Stand up and, as I said before, you lose the high frequencies.
To put this into perspective, the diffraction drop (which I have smoothed with the oval enclosure but is still going to be there) is probably more significant.
I had to make decisions regarding whether or not I used a crossover and a separate tweeter and also whether I used active equalization to compensate for the diffraction effect. In both cases my view is that the listening benefits of keeping the path from source to speaker as simple as possible are much greater than the possible problems caused.
So I have gone for purity. No crossovers, no separate tweeters, no equalization.
And I'd do it again tomorrow - with the Nonsuch 4.
However, and now we hit on the topic of mini-arrays which was brought up in another thread, if I were to make a larger array I would have to take a slightly different approach.
I hope that this clarifies things.
Steve
Brendon said:
My previous responses to this question dealt mainly with whether lobing in the vertical plain is a practical issue. I gave the answer that broadly speaking, provided the listener is sitting, it isn't.
Perhaps, I was a little short in my response and perhaps I was a little hard on Jim who is, after all, new to our forum and who I believe (from his postings in "another place") to be a first class designer of linear array systems. So, this posting I will try to give a more precise theoretical answer.
I had hoped by now to be posting the actual measured frequency response curves, waterfall plots, impulse measurements, etc. Why I haven't is a long story but can be summarized as follows ...
Bought software - bought calibrated microphone - discovered soundcard on notebook pc isn't up to the job - bought new soundcard for USB port - discovered new soundcard doesn't work with Windows 98 - bought Windows XP Pro upgrade - attempted to install - discovered this is quite a job - put everything back in the boxes - wait until I have time.
So, no measurements yet. In a previous posting, I referred to a spreadsheet called Vertical Polar Response - Line Array. This program was an important tool in the design process.
If we feed the parameters into the program - 4 drivers, 50mm diameter, 25mm gap, distance to listener 3m - we find the following:-
On axis: Flat Response (+0dB/-1dB, 0-20kHz)
5 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -2dB at 20kHz
8 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -3dB at 20kHz
10 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -5dB at 20kHz
16 cms vertically off axis: gentle roll-off to -11dB at 20kHz
I suspect that most people would have difficulty detecting a drop of below 5dB at 20kHz and these figures bear out the subjective impressions. As long as the listener is approximately on axis, the response is more or less flat. If the listener is a bit fidgety, the response is still more or less flat (as far as the majority of us can hear). Stand up and, as I said before, you lose the high frequencies.
To put this into perspective, the diffraction drop (which I have smoothed with the oval enclosure but is still going to be there) is probably more significant.
I had to make decisions regarding whether or not I used a crossover and a separate tweeter and also whether I used active equalization to compensate for the diffraction effect. In both cases my view is that the listening benefits of keeping the path from source to speaker as simple as possible are much greater than the possible problems caused.
So I have gone for purity. No crossovers, no separate tweeters, no equalization.
And I'd do it again tomorrow - with the Nonsuch 4.
However, and now we hit on the topic of mini-arrays which was brought up in another thread, if I were to make a larger array I would have to take a slightly different approach.
I hope that this clarifies things.
Steve
Listening Angle
Steve,
If you use your 5 dB criterion at 20 kHz, then at 3 m distance and 10 cm vertical you are talking about a listening angle of about 2 degrees. That strikes me as very narrow angle. As I previously stated, the saving grace for the restricted vertical listening angle is the Fletcher-Munson effects and the normal degradation of hearing versus age. While seated listeners may not detect the narrow listenign angle but if they stand, the highs will go away.
Jim
Steve,
If you use your 5 dB criterion at 20 kHz, then at 3 m distance and 10 cm vertical you are talking about a listening angle of about 2 degrees. That strikes me as very narrow angle. As I previously stated, the saving grace for the restricted vertical listening angle is the Fletcher-Munson effects and the normal degradation of hearing versus age. While seated listeners may not detect the narrow listenign angle but if they stand, the highs will go away.
Jim
Hi,
No offense, but does that really matter?
I mean we do usually seriously listen to music sitting down, don't we?
Cheers,😉
No offense, but does that really matter?
I mean we do usually seriously listen to music sitting down, don't we?
Cheers,😉
Re: Listening Angle
Actually, whether the angle is narrow or not is not really relevant. It's easier for most people to think in terms of how much height they have to move up and down before they noticeably lose treble.
As you said, seated listeners may not detect the narrow listening angle but if they stand, the highs will go away. Isn't that what I've said from the start? I'll settle for that; the Nonsuch 4 is a 'concert speaker'.
The Fletcher-Munson effects are not just a 'saving grace' but a fundamental attribute of human physiology.
As speaker designers it behoves us to use such effects. We have evolved as humans to be able to recognize thousands of different voices from just the first word or two spoken. We are skilled at interpreting emotion and meaning from tone of voice alone. Our survival and acceptance into our society depended on it.
So it is no surprise that the human hearing is considerably more sensitive to subtle changes in the mid-range than to similar differences in the bass or treble. As speaker designers we must use this fact.
Most speaker manufacturers cross over in the mid-range where the hearing is most sensitive. All crossovers are imperfect in terms of phase and/or amplitude (although some are more imperfect than others). Worse still, many manufacturers even cross over - at the frequencies where we are most sensitive - from a cone bass unit to a dome tweeter or even a ribbon, both of which have a totally different character to the cone bass.
Do they think we won't notice?
Yet because this the norm, it generally passes without comment. There's a 'mix & match' attitude to speaker design that says that if we choose the best high-frequency device and match it to the best mid-frequency device and add the best bass device we'll end up with the best speakers.
Well, no we won't.
The reason we won't is that the synergy, the magic of music reproduction is in the coherence, integration and wholeness of the whole speaker.
The full-range speaker guys know this. I do too.
So Jim, are you seriously suggesting that I should change a characteristic of my Nonsuch 4s that virtually none of my customers are going to notice or care about while they're listening to music for a mid-range crossover unit that would rob the music of its magic?
I don't think so.
Steve
Jim Griffin said:
Actually, whether the angle is narrow or not is not really relevant. It's easier for most people to think in terms of how much height they have to move up and down before they noticeably lose treble.
As you said, seated listeners may not detect the narrow listening angle but if they stand, the highs will go away. Isn't that what I've said from the start? I'll settle for that; the Nonsuch 4 is a 'concert speaker'.
The Fletcher-Munson effects are not just a 'saving grace' but a fundamental attribute of human physiology.
As speaker designers it behoves us to use such effects. We have evolved as humans to be able to recognize thousands of different voices from just the first word or two spoken. We are skilled at interpreting emotion and meaning from tone of voice alone. Our survival and acceptance into our society depended on it.
So it is no surprise that the human hearing is considerably more sensitive to subtle changes in the mid-range than to similar differences in the bass or treble. As speaker designers we must use this fact.
Most speaker manufacturers cross over in the mid-range where the hearing is most sensitive. All crossovers are imperfect in terms of phase and/or amplitude (although some are more imperfect than others). Worse still, many manufacturers even cross over - at the frequencies where we are most sensitive - from a cone bass unit to a dome tweeter or even a ribbon, both of which have a totally different character to the cone bass.
Do they think we won't notice?
Yet because this the norm, it generally passes without comment. There's a 'mix & match' attitude to speaker design that says that if we choose the best high-frequency device and match it to the best mid-frequency device and add the best bass device we'll end up with the best speakers.
Well, no we won't.
The reason we won't is that the synergy, the magic of music reproduction is in the coherence, integration and wholeness of the whole speaker.
The full-range speaker guys know this. I do too.
So Jim, are you seriously suggesting that I should change a characteristic of my Nonsuch 4s that virtually none of my customers are going to notice or care about while they're listening to music for a mid-range crossover unit that would rob the music of its magic?
I don't think so.
Steve
Here's a thing, dhaen
Hey John, how's the amp construction proceeding? Do you have an estimated time of arrival?
Here's something I thought I'd float to you ...
When the time comes, how would you feel about an open demo in the London area where we could invite local forum members to come and listen?
Are you feeling brave?
Steve
PS: Are there any locals out there who might be up for it?
Hey John, how's the amp construction proceeding? Do you have an estimated time of arrival?
Here's something I thought I'd float to you ...
When the time comes, how would you feel about an open demo in the London area where we could invite local forum members to come and listen?
Are you feeling brave?
Steve
PS: Are there any locals out there who might be up for it?
Hi Steve, I've been a bit busy to get back to you😉
Well, I suppose I ought to pop down and see these speakers at some point. I might even be able to bring down a Gainclone or two, might as well see how they sound with a SS amp🙂
Well, I suppose I ought to pop down and see these speakers at some point. I might even be able to bring down a Gainclone or two, might as well see how they sound with a SS amp🙂
Re: Lobing - Predicted Response
I have no trouble whatsoever relating to tales of extended computer woes.
I have found great results using the freeware Right Mark Audio Analyzer for my sound card. It only requires a single cable, with two stereo 1/8" plugs, available at any audio accessories store, (Walkman to Walkman). It costs about $3 at Radio Shack here in the USA.
I used the earlier version to give me graph of my card's frequency response. For a cheap card, it wasn't half bad-down 6 dB at 20 Hz.
Just click on the "RMAA 5.1". Assuming you actually have a functioning sound card in your computer, you should be off and running.
http://audio.rightmark.org/download.html
Posts #18 and 19 give the reading of my own very cheap soundcard. Don't let those squiggles fool you-most of them are less than 0.5 dB. Check the calibration on the side.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...&perpage=15&highlight=sound card&pagenumber=2
The Right Mark seems to be a nice freeware program. 🙂
7V said:
I have no trouble whatsoever relating to tales of extended computer woes.
I have found great results using the freeware Right Mark Audio Analyzer for my sound card. It only requires a single cable, with two stereo 1/8" plugs, available at any audio accessories store, (Walkman to Walkman). It costs about $3 at Radio Shack here in the USA.
I used the earlier version to give me graph of my card's frequency response. For a cheap card, it wasn't half bad-down 6 dB at 20 Hz.
Just click on the "RMAA 5.1". Assuming you actually have a functioning sound card in your computer, you should be off and running.
http://audio.rightmark.org/download.html
Posts #18 and 19 give the reading of my own very cheap soundcard. Don't let those squiggles fool you-most of them are less than 0.5 dB. Check the calibration on the side.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...&perpage=15&highlight=sound card&pagenumber=2
The Right Mark seems to be a nice freeware program. 🙂
By the way, the point of the above post was simply to say that even a relatively cheap OEM sound card, such as the one which came with your computer, probably has flat enough response to perform frequency response tests on speakers. Especially when you can see the sound card's response curve and make such adjustments in your readings as necessary. 😎 😎
- Status
- Not open for further replies.