Huh? Every stage monitor I've ever seen used a full range driver. Crossovers can cause problems for stage monitors. I'm sure there's two way commercial designs, but I haven't seen them. Three way would be ridiculous.
A stage monitor is not a hi fi speaker. All it has to do is allow the vocalist to clearly hear their voice. Ultra flat doesn't even matter, but big midrange peaks are bad.
Every stage monitor I've ever seen did not sound good with background music played through them. Yet a live voice sounds very clear.
I just linked to a driver that would make a very competent stage monitor driver. Did you miss it?
i differ to your knowledge my 35+ years of experience with PA and monitors has taught me nothing.
nice oxymoron there!a little self contradictory,no?
check post #40 i'll add that without some form of tweeter it wouldn't make the cut as a stage monitor in the circles i run in.
Hi i see your point. True of course.
Maybe i am just overrating this midrange coherence illusion.
In my memory i remember an excellent midrange from a Quad electrostatic speaker. For me it was like perfection with all words very intelligible.
My friend did not have the sub and the low were actually weak and compressed during the loudest passages. But the midrange was exceptional.
And that was a unique driver for sure.
Thanks for the valuable advice.
Hi this sounds strange to me. When you say the it did not sound good with background music ... could you elaborate ? of course its aim is to have a great midrange and the audio range extremes can be even not existing.
But a great performance with voices that i what i am looking for.
The rest can Always be added. I am sure the midrange is extremely more challenging that the extreme. I am not sure even to be able to hear above 14 kHz for instance. And bass is bass. Often in a home situation can be bad anyway.
But the midrange ... with magnificent voices ... beautiful.
Also the fact of being able to understand all the words in a speech i think it is a very good sign of quality.
Not at all. There's a big difference between a region of 5 dB peaks and one or two 10-15 dB peaks. The first speaker might sound fine in some applications; the second one would sound "honky" without a crossover to mitigate the big peaks.
Nobody's forcing you to use it.
Every church and every band does not have a need for a super accurate stage monitor. Many churches and bands are poor. Many bands are composed of people with day jobs. They don't have big budgets. Those are the kind of people I help out.
If you've had the opportunity to work with professional musicians, then why don't you share some information instead of disparaging those of us on the bottom rung of the ladder? Is it a terrible thing that I help a garage band or underground DJ but not Pink Floyd?
Hi i see your point. True of course.
Maybe i am just overrating this midrange coherence illusion.
In my memory i remember an excellent midrange from a Quad electrostatic speaker. For me it was like perfection with all words very intelligible.
My friend did not have the sub and the low were actually weak and compressed during the loudest passages. But the midrange was exceptional.
And that was a unique driver for sure.
Using many drivers complicate a lot the task.
Thanks for the valuable advice.
I agree on the importance of the midrange.
I am just not convinced by your definition of "the range that is best not interrupted" as ~300 - 3k Hz. I would rather have ~1k - 5k Hz reproduced seamlessly by a dedicated midrange driver, because that is the range where the ear is most sensitive.
Below ~5kHz, the perception of seamless integration between drivers has a lot to do with how the crossover is implemented. Good phase tracking over as wide a range around the crossover freq. as possible is an important design criterion.
Above ~5kHz, instead, all that matters is obtaining a smooth summed response. Phase becomes almost irrelevant up there because the ear's response is no longer 'phase locked' at such high frequencies.
Cheers,
Marco
funktion one can do 300-5000hz reasonable well. it goes even 8000´ish but start to be little fuzzy
Last edited:
well this is not the way i intended for things to go.
linearity/proper response in the mid band is king and many a poor musician and church would benefit from the fact and yeah budgets make for compromises.
i didn't start out my career doing big shows, i did my time in the "trenches" with garage bands and DJ's and home grown theatre companies and i guess that i wish i knew then what i know now.
to clarify i was not slagging the Dayton's potential i would consider using it.
and as i go over my wording i can see how it has a negative overtone.
sincere apologies to any i have offended.
linearity/proper response in the mid band is king and many a poor musician and church would benefit from the fact and yeah budgets make for compromises.
i didn't start out my career doing big shows, i did my time in the "trenches" with garage bands and DJ's and home grown theatre companies and i guess that i wish i knew then what i know now.
to clarify i was not slagging the Dayton's potential i would consider using it.
and as i go over my wording i can see how it has a negative overtone.
sincere apologies to any i have offended.
Last edited:
I think I'm with Turk on this one because I have never seen a stage monitor that used a full-range driver.
Seen cheap ones with cone+piezo, passive ones with cone+cd and horn and similar active ones and co-axials but every single one was a 2way.
manninen: Are those F1 monitors any better than their PA tops? Because those are terrible. They sound as if the frequency response is fairly flat but the midrange is a horrible mess with the lowest intelligibility I've heard in any PA, even very cheap ones. Strangely though they sound a lot better about 30deg off axis.
Haven't heard them, i have resolution 2sh i think you have heard those, there is big difference between mid and high directivity. I havent heard these with stock passive xo.
There is some issues i dont like but i could give these 7/10 with slight mods and active xo
There is some issues i dont like but i could give these 7/10 with slight mods and active xo
anybody remember the Hot Spot monitors from the 70's they where two 4" full range drivers in a small enclosure that could be mic stand mounted?
i helped a local church out when they found 4 of these at a yard sale.
the churches sound guy was so excited about his find he quickly put them into service.
he later called me and asked me if i could help him resolve a feed back issue he was having with no shows on the calendar i figured why not.
soon after i arrived i got myself caught up in the process of trying to reset eq'ing to get rid of the feedback.
then it dawned on me that the monitors flaw was that it was 2 full range drivers separated by about 4 inches mounted on a horizontal plane which introduced a nice notch at 2k on axis and could be swept up or down based on mic position.
solution 1 turn the monitors axis 90 deg to eliminate the notch and narrow the vertical response at the same time + better off axis behavior.
solution 2 which is how it is now. make new RJ style enclosures to load the now individual drivers. the RJ loaded the drivers enough on the low end and the aperture shape allow for controlling the dispersion.
moral of the story:
i'm not above working with what i got but sometimes i have to except that what i have just ain't gonna do!
i helped a local church out when they found 4 of these at a yard sale.
the churches sound guy was so excited about his find he quickly put them into service.
he later called me and asked me if i could help him resolve a feed back issue he was having with no shows on the calendar i figured why not.
soon after i arrived i got myself caught up in the process of trying to reset eq'ing to get rid of the feedback.
then it dawned on me that the monitors flaw was that it was 2 full range drivers separated by about 4 inches mounted on a horizontal plane which introduced a nice notch at 2k on axis and could be swept up or down based on mic position.
solution 1 turn the monitors axis 90 deg to eliminate the notch and narrow the vertical response at the same time + better off axis behavior.
solution 2 which is how it is now. make new RJ style enclosures to load the now individual drivers. the RJ loaded the drivers enough on the low end and the aperture shape allow for controlling the dispersion.
moral of the story:
i'm not above working with what i got but sometimes i have to except that what i have just ain't gonna do!
the Funktion One monitors are quite similar in design to the Radians both are using co-axial drivers.
pretty much the same desing as res2.
was it some EDM shite what was coming out when you hate it?
Manninen presents: Steel is Real
around here if interested
Last edited:
No, it was a punky all acoustic skiffle band a friend of mine plays bass in.
I think F1 might be best suited for 'EDM shite' though.
I think F1 might be best suited for 'EDM shite' though.
Hi i see your point. True of course.
Maybe i am just overrating this midrange coherence illusion.
In my memory i remember an excellent midrange from a Quad electrostatic speaker. For me it was like perfection with all words very intelligible.
My friend did not have the sub and the low were actually weak and compressed during the loudest passages. But the midrange was exceptional.
And that was a unique driver for sure.
Using many drivers complicate a lot the task.
Thanks for the valuable advice.
I am joining the Italian audio army 😀
Cone shapes and dustcaps also play a major role on midrange performance, dispersion and tweeter blend.I wish more brands came up with designs like this,but in a smaller size -around 4"- Accuton Cell C90-6-724 5" Ceramic Midrange
That's an awful lot of money to plunk down for a driver that doesn't quite stack up to the tang band w4-1320sif at a fraction of the price. Looks fancy though [emoji1303]
- Status
- Not open for further replies.