Here's a good start:
http://supermegaultragroovy.com/products/FuzzMeasure/gs/
The internal help is quite good too. Short and informative.
Best, Markus
http://supermegaultragroovy.com/products/FuzzMeasure/gs/
The internal help is quite good too. Short and informative.
Best, Markus
David Gatti said:
That was my idea as well. Make subs as intergrated part of the Nathans, and then add third later in the corner, if needed. This would also make the speakers look nicer (I understand well 'nicer' is a very subjective term, so here's a compulsory IMHO).
But main problem for us Aussies is getting the drivers for not so insane money. Anyone in Oz found a source for B&C drivers that won't ask for body organs ?
Once again, you are missing the point of spatial seperation. Integrating the subs into the mains just makes a standard setup which does not result in good bass. To fix this problem you HAVE TO move the subs away from the mains, not right under them.
Poor Mans Nathan
I called the B&C aussie supplier listed on the B&C website. You can get a DE250 for around $185. The woofer is very pricey though, I can't remember the figure he quoted, was over $250 each though.
I'm in the process of making a "poor mans Nathan". I manged to find a pair of Eminence Beta 10" for AUD$80 each and I got a pair of B&C DE10s from parts express with a pair of Dayton 10" "waveguides" and screw thread adapters for AUD$207 (including shipping).
Iv'e had the boxes made for around AUD$190 and painted in a car paint shop for AUD$200. They are coming along really well. I'm not expecting them to be anywhere near as good as the real thing but they are already sounding awesome in comparison to the little 5" seas I was using prior. I'm using all electronic crossovers and a DSP for tuning.
Don't want to hijack this thread though as the setting up discussion is very good.
col.
I called the B&C aussie supplier listed on the B&C website. You can get a DE250 for around $185. The woofer is very pricey though, I can't remember the figure he quoted, was over $250 each though.
I'm in the process of making a "poor mans Nathan". I manged to find a pair of Eminence Beta 10" for AUD$80 each and I got a pair of B&C DE10s from parts express with a pair of Dayton 10" "waveguides" and screw thread adapters for AUD$207 (including shipping).
Iv'e had the boxes made for around AUD$190 and painted in a car paint shop for AUD$200. They are coming along really well. I'm not expecting them to be anywhere near as good as the real thing but they are already sounding awesome in comparison to the little 5" seas I was using prior. I'm using all electronic crossovers and a DSP for tuning.
Don't want to hijack this thread though as the setting up discussion is very good.
col.
David Gatti said:
until only a few days ago I would have agreed with you entirely David.
I was absolutely convinced (for ages) that I could hear/feel/detect the 'different arrival times' of distributed subs.
In the past Earle had expressed doubts that I could, I vaguely even remember his words..'there is no scientific evidence' that I could.
Long story short, a few nights ago I sat at the LP with the dcx in my lap, and manually dialled in varying amounts of delay to the four subs.
I simply could not hear a difference no matter how much delay I dialled in, I think at one stage (using the long delay setting) I had over 100 m dialled in and I still could not hear any difference!!
Was I surprised? you bet I was, I had totally convinced myself that the 'rumblings' I sensed were 'out of time with the mains' and that the cause was difference in arrival times.
For me, at least, the question is settled.
Markus can of course do exactly the same experiment regarding 'time delay' in the bass.
markus76 said:
nahh, that was my first point to check, did I have it turned on. (I'd had a few beers, so made sure the next day sober, and yes it was turned on. And that is how I did it, dialled in an arbitrary delay and simply turned it on and off. Sure, you hear a little 'click' as it switches, but musically? No difference what so ever.
Try it and let us know. You may detect a difference at 10m, I dunno. Still judging from your room pictures that would essentially mean nothing in practical terms. Just a thought, my music room is probably as large as your entire flat, wonder if that would change things?
Anyway, would love to read your experiences.
I think (maybe) what earle said earlier about having time to let the note develop applies here.
The essential point is not that it was 100 m or not, the point is that any realistic setting of delay of the subs in a domestic setting (what, max of 1m difference in the normal room??? whatever) had absolutely no effect.
the additional point I guess is that prior to that test of my own, I was completely and absolutely convinced that it was critical to account for the difference in travel paths.
I now know I can concentrate on other things.
markus76 said:
XO would be for integrating the main speaker. For remote subs, I agree with gedlee.gedlee said:
Your concern about dynamic performance, which I would interpret as transient performance, is precisely why I would recommend the mains extend to the full spectrum. Adding scattered subs are a plus if they are setup right.David Gatti said:
If one uses a software such as SoundEasy, you can look at where the room mode nodes and anti-nodes are and place the subs at the right locations. However, if you have lots of furniture in the room, it would be best that they are somewhat modeled in the analysis.
I'm not understanding why the response doesn't continue falling to -20 dB and below as the off-axis angle approaches 90°.
http://www.gedlee.com/Nathan data.htm
Reflecting off the front wall as the speaker is rotated, is it?
http://www.gedlee.com/Nathan data.htm
Reflecting off the front wall as the speaker is rotated, is it?
My guess is that too. Reflecting off wall. I think that on the other hand, Earl's data is in anechoic chamber 2m.
But there is enough living room resolution to know that it works right at least. See them 2 sets above 1K and for 50deg. Remarkable coherence.
Its like having a noisy, old spectrum analyzer and trying to measure instrumentation electronic devices. Can't see their real THD and noise floor, but can see their trends.
But there is enough living room resolution to know that it works right at least. See them 2 sets above 1K and for 50deg. Remarkable coherence.
Its like having a noisy, old spectrum analyzer and trying to measure instrumentation electronic devices. Can't see their real THD and noise floor, but can see their trends.
terry j said:
Thanks Terry. That sounds promising.
What frequency and slope are your subs running at. What music did you listen to?
David Gatti said:
Music? dunno, can't remember. something with enough bass tho. I only wanted to test if I could hear the delay. maybe ween
have not set it up, just about to do it now tho. anyway, for that test I had a but 12 @56hz low pass.
Just noticed an important part of earles approach (this thread or the other..) that I missed before, ie not a traditional sub setup with the mains hi-passed, rather the subs 'overlapping'. I took that to mean not so much the frequencies overlapping but essentially don't hi pass the mains.
Which is lucky! because that is how I have to hook the dcx into the deqx in my system, let the bass drivers roll off naturally and fill in with subs.
maybe my life has finally taken a turn for the better?? ha ha
will re-read it tho before rolling up sleeves tonight.
Zilch, there should be no room artefacts in my data. The speaker was positioned in the middle of the room equidistant from all walls. I rotated the speaker around the mid-point of the front baffle. -12 dB between 0° and 90° is the maximum.
Best, Markus
P.S. What vertical angles would be enough?
ZilchLab said:
Why should it fall to below -20 dB at 90 degrees? You seem to be assuming that it should and I don't see any reason why that would be the case. The sound will diffract around the mouth and cabinet to some degree at virtually ALL angles - thats just physics. -20 dB means that this is only 1% of the energy at the mouth going off at 90 degrees, which is not unreasonable at all.
I will post the vertical at some point, but owing to the fact that its not as good AND its not as important as the horizontal, I'm not in a hurray to do that. The point here is that no one else ever shows this data at all!!
Thats about the best data examples that I have seen (the presentation, not the results), but the polars are very course. I like to see a lot more detail in the polars. The multi-tone plot is a great idea (I may do that), and I like the max SPL data. The speakers are OK, but I understand that they are quite expensive.
Here's vertical data. There ARE artefacts in this data as I had to put the whole speaker with stands on a table:
All diagrams are windowed 1 ms so they are valid from 1 kHz on. Mic distance 1 m.
0° - 90° up:
0° -75° down:
Best, Markus
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
All diagrams are windowed 1 ms so they are valid from 1 kHz on. Mic distance 1 m.
0° - 90° up:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
0° -75° down:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Best, Markus
- Status
- Not open for further replies.