If you look at the first pic, on the lower right below the video monitors, you will see the Neo-8 Line Array. Next pic is the amp room for all of those
WHOA!!!
what is that???Where is that??
_-_-bear
ScottG, as far as a thin ESL for highs, you'd have to make ur own. No one makes it.
Not that difficult.
My concern with doing EQ on the mids is that ur going to put quite a bit of power in there, depending on how low you go, reducing the headroom, increasing distortion and IM and maybe most importantly adding heat to the driver (which is not good for them, especially if you really want to play at high SPL).
So then you drop in a high slope xover, right?
The other thing is that the wider you can make the midrange span the more coherent the system is likely to sound. See, I'd want to get below 300Hz if I could and above 3kHz as well.... that puts most of the key parts of the spectrum coming from one surface. My philosophy is that the more that you can get out of the same driver/source the greater the harmonics will sound "correct" to the ear. Obviously, the better the drivers in a multi-way the better it sounds, but that's not exactly a real solution.
The idea can be seen by exaggerated example: if you take a concert pianist and have them play half of the spectrum (pick ur note = some frequency xover point) on one hand played on a small spinet piano and the other hand or half on a full size concert grand. How's that going to sound? Well, how it sounds will depend in part on the nature of the splits between the two, if any... well you get the point.
(actually, the point is that the unintended harmonics - ie. distortions - between different drivers never match properly, and that is heard, albeit as something subtle in better systems)
_-_-bear
Not that difficult.
My concern with doing EQ on the mids is that ur going to put quite a bit of power in there, depending on how low you go, reducing the headroom, increasing distortion and IM and maybe most importantly adding heat to the driver (which is not good for them, especially if you really want to play at high SPL).
So then you drop in a high slope xover, right?
The other thing is that the wider you can make the midrange span the more coherent the system is likely to sound. See, I'd want to get below 300Hz if I could and above 3kHz as well.... that puts most of the key parts of the spectrum coming from one surface. My philosophy is that the more that you can get out of the same driver/source the greater the harmonics will sound "correct" to the ear. Obviously, the better the drivers in a multi-way the better it sounds, but that's not exactly a real solution.
The idea can be seen by exaggerated example: if you take a concert pianist and have them play half of the spectrum (pick ur note = some frequency xover point) on one hand played on a small spinet piano and the other hand or half on a full size concert grand. How's that going to sound? Well, how it sounds will depend in part on the nature of the splits between the two, if any... well you get the point.
(actually, the point is that the unintended harmonics - ie. distortions - between different drivers never match properly, and that is heard, albeit as something subtle in better systems)
_-_-bear
Last edited:
I have had a brainstorm. I'll create the love child of the IRS-V and the Quad ESL57 that the world has been waiting for. I will call it... IRS-57.
The 'panel' will comprise a 24" wide (say) curved baffle that is ~84" tall. Mounted on it will be a narrow center tweeter line (Mundorf AMT?) and on either side, butted right up to the AMT, will be a line of Neo 10s. That's right, *two* lines of Neo 10s per panel... just like the center tweeter plus flanking mids of the ESL57, the speaker beloved of all true audiophiles the world over. The panel will run down to 150Hz. Having two lines of Neo 10s on a relatively wide panel will provide more midbass dynamics than this excursion-limited unit would otherwise be capable of.
Each 'tower' will be a sealed box with six 12" AE Lambda TD12s. Simple enough.
So now we're back to a three-way, it has sealed-box bass (no fighting with dipole problems), it's a real live dipole from 150Hz on up, and it has a frightful amount of dipole radiating area between the tag-team Neo 10 lines and the Air Motion Transformers (Hair Motion Transformers? Maxell, are you listening?).
Whaddya think??
The 'panel' will comprise a 24" wide (say) curved baffle that is ~84" tall. Mounted on it will be a narrow center tweeter line (Mundorf AMT?) and on either side, butted right up to the AMT, will be a line of Neo 10s. That's right, *two* lines of Neo 10s per panel... just like the center tweeter plus flanking mids of the ESL57, the speaker beloved of all true audiophiles the world over. The panel will run down to 150Hz. Having two lines of Neo 10s on a relatively wide panel will provide more midbass dynamics than this excursion-limited unit would otherwise be capable of.
Each 'tower' will be a sealed box with six 12" AE Lambda TD12s. Simple enough.
So now we're back to a three-way, it has sealed-box bass (no fighting with dipole problems), it's a real live dipole from 150Hz on up, and it has a frightful amount of dipole radiating area between the tag-team Neo 10 lines and the Air Motion Transformers (Hair Motion Transformers? Maxell, are you listening?).
Whaddya think??
WHOA!!!
Where is that??
_-_-bear
Thats "The Ride"...Its a hybrid of a Broadway show and a tour that runs in NYC. Each bus cost $1.4 million and has a $100,000+ sound system. If you are ever in the city check it out. Its really fun.
Jarvis, I live in NYC -- one question -- if I allow myself to be taken for The Ride, can I drink along the way?
Meanwhile, I've looked up one of the Peter Walker papers... I want to think about this dual-Neo 10 idea some more.
And I'm wondering, if I need a woofer that goes to 150Hz xover rather than say 400-500Hz, could I put together a dipole woofer array that would get to the mid 20s in satisfying fashion. I.e. could I get that low 3-way and leave the monopole subs out.
Meanwhile, I've looked up one of the Peter Walker papers... I want to think about this dual-Neo 10 idea some more.
And I'm wondering, if I need a woofer that goes to 150Hz xover rather than say 400-500Hz, could I put together a dipole woofer array that would get to the mid 20s in satisfying fashion. I.e. could I get that low 3-way and leave the monopole subs out.
It's a tour bus ride that goes through the streets of NYC??
Or a fixed virtual bus ride?
What's it cost??
I live north of the City by a bit, but I come through town often enough...
_-_-bear
I have had a brainstorm. I'll create the love child of the IRS-V and the Quad ESL57 that the world has been waiting for. I will call it... IRS-57.
The 'panel' will comprise a 24" wide (say) curved baffle that is ~84" tall. Mounted on it will be a narrow center tweeter line (Mundorf AMT?) and on either side, butted right up to the AMT, will be a line of Neo 10s. That's right, *two* lines of Neo 10s per panel... just like the center tweeter plus flanking mids of the ESL57, the speaker beloved of all true audiophiles the world over. The panel will run down to 150Hz. Having two lines of Neo 10s on a relatively wide panel will provide more midbass dynamics than this excursion-limited unit would otherwise be capable of.
Each 'tower' will be a sealed box with six 12" AE Lambda TD12s. Simple enough.
So now we're back to a three-way, it has sealed-box bass (no fighting with dipole problems), it's a real live dipole from 150Hz on up, and it has a frightful amount of dipole radiating area between the tag-team Neo 10 lines and the Air Motion Transformers (Hair Motion Transformers? Maxell, are you listening?).
Whaddya think??
Actually it will provide *less* "dynamics" as a subjective character.. but greater dynamic/spl ability.
The more drivers you connect results in less air compression per driver - resulting in a lower sensation of "dynamics".
An abrupt change from low mass planar Dipole to high mass dynamic driver monopole around 150 Hz will be "odd" sounding.
Also, it's subjectively worth while to extend the dipole character down to most fundamentals (or about 40 Hz).. near, though not at the average.
Basically it isn't a good idea.
I have no idea of the quality (or lack thereof), or the pricing on these..
-BUT in an array they may provide *just* enough low-end output to get you your 2-way panel, a resistive impedance, AND the efficiency you desire.
http://www.usfps.com/Spec_FPS2030M3P1R.pdf
FPS INC. Flat Panel Speakers - Products
Sold through these people:
Tenacious LTD
-BUT in an array they may provide *just* enough low-end output to get you your 2-way panel, a resistive impedance, AND the efficiency you desire.
http://www.usfps.com/Spec_FPS2030M3P1R.pdf
FPS INC. Flat Panel Speakers - Products
Sold through these people:
Tenacious LTD
It actually drives through the streets and there are miked performers at various points along the route. Its $65 peak but they run a lot of specials so you could go for probably $40. Here's a good write up that just published on the show:
The Ride tour: On New York's magic bus, you'll be a part of it | Philadelphia Inquirer | 02/13/2011
hey Scott,
Just to extend this point a little bit -- while I try to get around a 4-way system -- what would be the primary 'bad ideas' of a three-way like I've described, but with a dipole/ripole/cardioid woofer tower rather than a monopole.
I understand your point that subjective dynamic 'punch' will be reduced with more Neo 10s, but that should also come with lower overall distortion. And the tradeoff with dipole woofers is again less punch -- but also less annoyance to my neighbors (less total power radiated for a given SPL) and potentially better pitch definition, etc.
That is, if I'm willing to trade some dynamic punch for good integration (dipole/cardioid radiation at all frequencies), lower distortion, and fewer boxes in the room, is that a trade that knowledgeable audio enthusiasts could debate, or is it an open-and-shut bad idea from a performance perspective?
Just to extend this point a little bit -- while I try to get around a 4-way system
-- what would be the primary 'bad ideas' of a three-way like I've described, but with a dipole/ripole/cardioid woofer tower rather than a monopole. I understand your point that subjective dynamic 'punch' will be reduced with more Neo 10s, but that should also come with lower overall distortion. And the tradeoff with dipole woofers is again less punch -- but also less annoyance to my neighbors (less total power radiated for a given SPL) and potentially better pitch definition, etc.
That is, if I'm willing to trade some dynamic punch for good integration (dipole/cardioid radiation at all frequencies), lower distortion, and fewer boxes in the room, is that a trade that knowledgeable audio enthusiasts could debate, or is it an open-and-shut bad idea from a performance perspective?
hey Scott,
Just to extend this point a little bit -- while I try to get around a 4-way system
I understand your point that subjective dynamic 'punch' will be reduced with more Neo 10s, but that should also come with lower overall distortion. And the tradeoff with dipole woofers is again less punch -- but also less annoyance to my neighbors (less total power radiated for a given SPL) and potentially better pitch definition, etc.
That is, if I'm willing to trade some dynamic punch for good integration (dipole/cardioid radiation at all frequencies), lower distortion, and fewer boxes in the room, is that a trade that knowledgeable audio enthusiasts could debate, or is it an open-and-shut bad idea from a performance perspective?
Higher non-linear distortion at lower freq.s., lower degree of subjective dynamics, differing mass character transition between drivers in the mid-range - potentially exacerbated by a steep crossover.
I see it as a matter of having "it all" or having "most of it" - in either case it's going to be a series of compromises, but it's always a matter of which compromises you are willing to live with.
IMO get everything but the lower fundamental octave as "transparent" as possible in a form factor you can live with.. THEN augment it with lower freq.s.. (..your target then is between 60 and 80 Hz.)
Note that you can overcome the tactile sensation issue in a number of ways..
1. Monopole, high force low qe driver in a small cabinet..
2. Move the low freq. source much closer to you..
3. Use tactile transducers in your seat or sofa..
Both 2 & 3 can be used in conjunction with a dipole/ripole/cardiod design. You could use the nearfield sub, but instead of monopole consider a construction format more similar to Kimmo's cardiod bass rig in the KS-2125. Or, continue with a dipole "tower" array, and use tactile transducers (..and some format to limit vibration from chair/sofa leg to floor). Or.. use both methods.
VERY pricey. Checked into these last year before Neo10 came out. Lets just say, you could buy a line of the Neo10 for one of these things.
Greg
See my build here for some Neo10 impressions:
Raal 140, Neo10, AE Dipole 15 in the works
I switched from full open baffle back to sealed subs rolling in under 60Hz. Much better seem of "slam" now.
Greg - tech - Phat Planet Recording Studios - Orlando Florida - Audiophile Quality Recording, Mixing, Mastering, Production
Raal 140, Neo10, AE Dipole 15 in the works
I switched from full open baffle back to sealed subs rolling in under 60Hz. Much better seem of "slam" now.
Greg - tech - Phat Planet Recording Studios - Orlando Florida - Audiophile Quality Recording, Mixing, Mastering, Production
..Thinking of large panels as *blocking* sound (out-of-phase cancellation), how about large panels *making* sound (..while also blocking it)?
NXT exciters rely on a panel's dominate resonance, the larger the panel, the lower the freq.. A greater number of exciter's should increase spl's for a given input (..or make it more sensitive).
It's not a technology I'd consider at higher freq.s.. but in the mid-range and lower mid-range it might work well, especially considering the ability to eq. digitally.
http://www.parts-express.com/1/3/nxt-exciters
Here's a Youtube using just two small panels and a cheap sub and tweet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyJxxvIBCIw
Just a thought..
NXT exciters rely on a panel's dominate resonance, the larger the panel, the lower the freq.. A greater number of exciter's should increase spl's for a given input (..or make it more sensitive).
It's not a technology I'd consider at higher freq.s.. but in the mid-range and lower mid-range it might work well, especially considering the ability to eq. digitally.
http://www.parts-express.com/1/3/nxt-exciters
Here's a Youtube using just two small panels and a cheap sub and tweet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyJxxvIBCIw
Just a thought..
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.