.
Still busy, getting closer...
Didn't bother to clean up for a series of high tech photographs...
As there may be some critters walking around, everything get's sealed in-between sessions
.
Closed up the first baffle today, second beauty baffle still needs some repairs on seals...
Ran some control measurements to check all filters...
All looking good so far, next step is to attach the drivers...
One check open, one check closed (but not yet bolted down)... that's where it ends today.
All in all, I'm happy to have gotten this far (Monday being my day off from work). Soon I'll start to hear something that might resemble music!
Didn't bother to clean up for a series of high tech photographs...
As there may be some critters walking around, everything get's sealed in-between sessions
.Closed up the first baffle today, second beauty baffle still needs some repairs on seals...
Ran some control measurements to check all filters...
All looking good so far, next step is to attach the drivers...
One check open, one check closed (but not yet bolted down)... that's where it ends today.
All in all, I'm happy to have gotten this far (Monday being my day off from work). Soon I'll start to hear something that might resemble music!
The reason I first tested a line array approach (few years ago) in mono was because of money. I was using L/R monitors that, by design, might couple most wavelengths well enough in vertical alignment, but doubling up on them for a stereo line array trial would’ve run me a minimum of USD $2000. Mine may be a bit of a DIY hack (stacking monitors instead of discrete woofers/tweeters/crossovers), but that’s still a crazy entry fee for a project that may/may not work, IMO. Better that I started with the kit I already owned, for free!
Just curious - what’s the reason you downmix certain stereo recordings to listen in mono? Specifically for testing certain aspects of the speaker? Or just because no mono mastering of certain titles you wanted was available?
When you tested with mono tracks, did you play it through one or two speakers?
Sorry if I’m unwittingly inventing the wheel of questions. Been lurking here since 2015, plenty of time for me to forget things 😉
Same here!
I started with a 9-driver mono array, just to have an idea of what happens with LAs. It was just an introduction, it couldn't play very loud, and bass was limited to 100Hz... but I could hear the potential, and what kind of sound I could expect.
I went with LA with 16 drivers per side, supported by a pair of subs.. I was too scared of building with 25 drivers, fearing they would topple down because we have very frequent earthquakes over here, and things can shake a lot.
To judge a speaker it can be useful to listen to a single speaker in mono. Now I do have some mono tracks, but sometimes you want to hear familiar voices etc. to be able to judge what you hear that much quicker. Down mixing is to hear the song in it's full glory. If you listen to one channel of a stereo track it will sound weird, because some detail will be lost as it was panned/mixed to the other channel. There's also the level of bass to consider. Bass usually get mixed to both channels as it is taxing on the speaker to pan it to a single channel. Due to the long wavelength at these low frequencies we have difficulty hearing where it originates anyway and most of the imaging queues for bass are the higher harmonics we hear or the plucking of strings etc. That is not to say you can't hear bass note direction below 80 Hz. Some do better than others. And there are times that the bass is shifted to one side. Mixing to mono will help.
Another test can be to play mono recordings on a Stereo system, meaning both speakers. The reason for that can be to see if you can find the origin of the sound. Are some notes stuck to the speaker position or does everything present itself as a phantom sound from in-between the speakers? I test for that phantom experience. I absorb early reflections and don't want to hear the true origin of the sound (the speaker position). Having that slippery shaped enclosure helps a great deal. No clues from the nearby walls further help to achieve this.
That's about it why I use mono signals, some others might have other reasoning though. I didn't use it because of a lack of funds
. As the cross talk within Stereo is very real, mono can be a quicker way to judge a speaker, especially if you place it well away from walls etc. (or outside).
I certainly haven't given up on Stereo, I may have made it a little complicated (for myself) but that's
because when you get it right it is nothing less of awesome.
I noticed that Bacch has a digital software service these days (with a bit of hardware on the expensive versions) for the Mac: https://www.theoretica.us/bacch4mac/
Not cheap but very advanced stuff with head tracking in the more expensive versions...
There's a couple of satisfied users on ASR... I have no doubt it works, sadly no plans for a Windows or Linux version.
I just might have tried to trial run the budget version if they had it available on Windows... I can't deny that I still feel
that that's where the answer is to truly unlock Stereo, at least, that's what a multitude of experiments have shown me.
I'm quite happy with my hack experiments, but would love to hear what one of my bigger inspirations actually sounds like.
(aside from hearing a couple of loose tracks years ago)
because when you get it right it is nothing less of awesome.
I noticed that Bacch has a digital software service these days (with a bit of hardware on the expensive versions) for the Mac: https://www.theoretica.us/bacch4mac/
Not cheap but very advanced stuff with head tracking in the more expensive versions...
There's a couple of satisfied users on ASR... I have no doubt it works, sadly no plans for a Windows or Linux version.
I just might have tried to trial run the budget version if they had it available on Windows... I can't deny that I still feel
that that's where the answer is to truly unlock Stereo, at least, that's what a multitude of experiments have shown me.
I'm quite happy with my hack experiments, but would love to hear what one of my bigger inspirations actually sounds like.
(aside from hearing a couple of loose tracks years ago)
Dang! Not cheap, you say?
I know it includes a $1,000 Babyface Pro (except for the intro version) but still....
I hope the head tracking is not behaving like the spatial audio offered by Apple. I just tried it, and it was annoying. It feels fake, too pronounced. It changes the tone adding a lot of midrange frequencies, and adds a ton of reverb like you were in a cathedral! I'll pass on that one.
I'm sure your extensive daisy-chain of plugins and fx will come close enough (or at least good enough for most mere mortal ears) to the sound you could get with that Bacch setup.
I know it includes a $1,000 Babyface Pro (except for the intro version) but still....
I hope the head tracking is not behaving like the spatial audio offered by Apple. I just tried it, and it was annoying. It feels fake, too pronounced. It changes the tone adding a lot of midrange frequencies, and adds a ton of reverb like you were in a cathedral! I'll pass on that one.
I'm sure your extensive daisy-chain of plugins and fx will come close enough (or at least good enough for most mere mortal ears) to the sound you could get with that Bacch setup.
Amazing work as always Wesayso! I haven’t been active in the DiY community for a few years now and when I was, it was always about the potential for innovation mixed with the need for a solution that didn’t exist commercially. IMO that’s all changed now with the innovations and trends in immersive audio mastering a formats……today‘s image based steering technology has shattered the decades old stereo model in what I believe to be a final blow. We had a chance to visit an immersive mastering studio last year and after that experience, I can quite comfortably say that 2 channel stereo is beyond retro in comparison…..it’s down right primitive. It’s quite possible that these and your approach to full range line arrays offer up a new and yet specialized potential for multi channel playback where height and distance cues can be effectively presented with object based cues. Keep at it……coming along nicely……..systems like yours certainly maximize the potential of all that’s left in 2 channel playback.
I know, the new systems out there have way more potential than Stereo ever had... indeed mind blowing what can be done today.
But... and for me it's a big but.... Stereo can be fun, especially with a bit of trickery and as I've said a couple of times:
The soundtrack of my life is locked inside that format, so what can you do.
I love the challenge to get the most out of it. And for what I've achieved so far, it would keep me happy for the rest of my days...
But there's always that next step waiting... what if...
But... and for me it's a big but.... Stereo can be fun, especially with a bit of trickery and as I've said a couple of times:
The soundtrack of my life is locked inside that format, so what can you do
.I love the challenge to get the most out of it. And for what I've achieved so far, it would keep me happy for the rest of my days...
But there's always that next step waiting... what if...
Is the hammer for drivers that don't want to stay in line? Beat them into shape?
My guess is that it is working! Here's the right system impedance:
Exactly as planned, so I'm pleased with that. I'll rerun it after a few weeks, as this was still in the garage (18 degree Celsius) and with fresh
new drivers out of the box (aside from a few impedance runs). First dinner, after that the move back into the house.