Stereolith Loudspeakers Question

Jump to Latest
#63
markus76 said:
graaf, no need to get rude.
Click to expand...

I agree
so don't be! please 🙂

because criticising without listening something someone other have listened to and likes is rude and arrogant IMHO

markus76 said:

I don't ask you to believe my experience.
Click to expand...

ok! what is Your experience then? with Stereolith or Stereolith-like set ups?

markus76 said:

But you don't show any data that supports your claims whereas all my claims can be found in so many books and papers.
Click to expand...

? what claims? what are You taking about?
first "assertions and conclusions" now "claims" 🙁

my only claim is that I can hear better imaging and soundstaging with Stereolith-like set up and that I like it

what data can I show to support that I can hear and that I like?

what books? what papers?

show me any book or paper where Stereolith or Stereolith-like set up is discussed - I am very interested 🙂

markus76 said:

Do you want me to list some?
Click to expand...

no I don't want You to list 🙂
but how about some listening instead? 😀

best!
graaf
 
#65
markus76 said:


The Nathan 10 uses a 10" woofer:

http://www.gedlee.com/images/nathan_polar_FR.GIF

http://www.gedlee.com/images/nathan_polar_map.GIF

Best, Markus
Click to expand...


Impressive polar response. I wonder whether a Carlsson-like orientation works with CD-horns / waveguides too.

Meanwhile I have tried a 180°-phase-shifting allpass filter that inverts the phase of one channel in the treble, and this works as well. But this can´t be the Stereolith-principle since it only has one tweeter.
Other recordings however work much better without these dirty tricks (I didn´t try so many because I have to load/store/transfer them and can´t play them directly). So my recommendation for people who have problems with phantom image location is the "native" version.
 
#66
Elias said:
Hello,
I never understood Moulton's reasoning it being same as direct sound missing.
Click to expand...
I quoted directly from Moulton. This is not just my interpetation - this is what he says.

Elias said:

How can you localise a sound source behind a corner? Because that is effectively the situation if you take out the direct sound, you are behind a corner.
Click to expand...
this is not the situation, not "behind a corner"
in stereo it is rather as if You were "behind a pillar"
You have reflections form the left and from the right

Elias said:

What are the other methods you are refering to?
Click to expand...
they are discussed here and in "Loudspeaker and room" thread: Beveridge set up, Carlsson corner set up etc.

Elias said:
Hello,

Graaf wrote:
"off course crosstalk is not really cancelled but it's negative effect is sufficiently diminished

but of course a question - how?
well, what about directivity of a dynamic driver on a baffle?"


Well, directivity of the speaker element would then make sound go towards side wall, and the first (i.e. 'direct') sound would come from the reflection which would be at even higher angle from median plane than in stereo would have
-> pinna error is even worse.
Click to expand...
no - the first sound is not coming from reflection - there is no dipole like null on axis of stereolith like set up

let my say it again: crosstalk is not eliminated - but it's negative effect is sufficiently diminished

Elias said:
Hello,
If we take out the direct sound, then we don't know where the sound is originally coming from, right?
Click to expand...
no - not right in case we have two - left and right - coherent reflections
this is how stereo works according to Moulton and I agree

Elias said:

Reflections do not carry all the information, because we cannot assume that we have precise knowledge of the space those reflections are produced. A space will produce an early reflection pattern. But more than one space can produce same early reflection pattern.
Click to expand...

? two spaces with the same reflection (not only early but total - up to RT60) pattern are acoustically identical from perspective of sound reproduction

Elias said:

So from reflections only we cannot define the space and so we don't know the location the initial sound event took place.
We will define the space in our brain by hearing the direct sound AND reflections alltogether, but cannot do with either alone.
Click to expand...

no - absolutely not, the first two coherent lateral reflections are sufficient - they carry all information about lateral location of a sound source, later reflections form every direction carry the rest - information about vertical position, distance etc.
all information is passed from one reflection to the next - and all recorded reflections are mirrored by speakers-as-reflections

read the interview with Moulton carefully
he explains all this very clearly
certainly more clearly than me with my limited English skills, limited time I can spend writing all this and limited technical knowledge 🙂

best regards!
graaf
 
#67
I am away from home now, but I plan to start experimenting with positioning some bookshelf speakers I already have in my room. Are there some examples of say "reference" recordings for different recording approaches so that I could compare different speaker setups?
 
#68
I have just read the interview with Mr. Moulton again - and to use his words, my ultimate goal is to "be in a really interesting room with the performers". I have had this kind of feeling (from standard stereo coaxial speakers) with one Nightwish recording, where Tarja Turunen is singing solo for a while - that was just as sitting a few feet in front of her in a completely different room than the one I had the speakers in. The room was quite "live" with carpet on the floor and cloth on the ceiling (my cellar room in my parents' house).

After my short experiments with ambiophonics - that gives similar results, but the electronic crosstalk cancellation screwes the sound I am used to.
 
#71
SO . . . after reading both the Stereolith and Duetto sites and all this thread, I have yet to see anything that leads me to believe that anything mysterious is going on inside those cabinets, or in the signal chain.

It's basically two back-to-back bookshelf speakers, perhaps with different tone-shaping than front-firing speakers, but component-wise nothing special.

Am I right? It seems that the main reason for using a front firing tweeter (current Stereolith) is to give sone stability to the frequency response, as that is the one area that is most unpredictable when using a (substantially) reflecting speaker in wild-card rooms.

Can anyone substantiate (not speculate, please - 3 pages of that already) that the required technology is pretty much speaker-building 101?

Maybe I'm nuts here . . . but we can probably move on to doing some tests now!

-- Mark
 
#72
Yes, to me Duetto are just two back-to-back bookshelf speakers. Hopefully I will make some experiments on Friday - but first I need some reference tracks (mentioned above🙂 ), so that I could describe differences as precise as possible (and that anyone can try the same with the same tracks). Maybe some chamber orchestra recording...or a string quartett - something with real space and not too many instruments.
 
#73
markus76 said:
graaf, that's how the land lies. Where are the studies that proof that Moulton is right? It's just a thesis, nothing more. Did you read Theiles paper (http://www.hauptmikrofon.de/theile/ON_THE_LOCALISATION_english.pdf)? Hopefully this leads to a more objective discussion.

Best, Markus
Click to expand...

hey Markus! 😀

thanks for the link! 🙂

on the other hand I am still waiting to know something about Your experience with Stereolith or Stereolith-like set ups 😉

and for listing books You know where Stereolith or Stereolith-like set up are discussed 😉

as to Moulton - for me the proof of his thesis is in what I can hear
I am HiFi hobbyist
and who are You? 😉
what is your hobby? studies, assertions, claims?

enough listing books and papers! start some listening !

Your attitude remind me of something a fellow diyer wrote on this forum:
Poor Graaf. Most people will rather invest an hour to tell you it can´t work than five minutes to test it themselves.
Click to expand...

he is so right!

it is sad and... funny at the same time

best!
graaf
 
#74
pelanj said:
And one more thing - how much "stereo" information is there below say 150 Hz? A "Duetto" like speaker could easily find its place on a L+R dipole H-frame sub...
Click to expand...
no problem with using mono sub even up to 150 Hz
in fact Duetto and Stereolith offer such a subs which serve as stands for the main units

pelanj said:

Yes, to me Duetto are just two back-to-back bookshelf speakers.
Click to expand...
I also think that this is not far from the truth

pelanj said:

Hopefully I will make some experiments on Friday - but first I need some reference tracks (mentioned above ), so that I could describe differences as precise as possible (and that anyone can try the same with the same tracks). Maybe some chamber orchestra recording...or a string quartett - something with real space and not too many instruments.
Click to expand...
try many different recordings

best!
graaf
 
#75
Tubamark said:
SO . . . after reading both the Stereolith and Duetto sites and all this thread, I have yet to see anything that leads me to believe that anything mysterious is going on inside those cabinets, or in the signal chain.
Click to expand...
exactly! nothing misterous

Tubamark said:

Can anyone substantiate (not speculate, please - 3 pages of that already) that the required technology is pretty much speaker-building 101?
Click to expand...
certainly no "rocket science" is required 🙂

Tubamark said:

Maybe I'm nuts here . . . but we can probably move on to doing some tests now!
Click to expand...
good luck!

best!
graaf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom