A professional sound engineer is likely to say that given the effectively 4" midwoofer plus the modulation of the tweeter output by the deflection of the midwoofer cone due to the coaxial arrangement the speaker is too small to be used as a desktop monitor with a subwoofer. Many audiophiles on the other hand are likely to say it is loud enough for me to use as mains in my living area without a subwoofer. What is going on? And where do you stand?
The expensive Genelecs are coaxial, surely they wouldn't have been built this way if coaxial arrangement was deficient in nature?
But you're right that no one measures IMD when measuring speakers (at least no one I have come across). If there is a problem in that department, I simply wouldn't know.
But you're right that no one measures IMD when measuring speakers (at least no one I have come across). If there is a problem in that department, I simply wouldn't know.
The expensive Genelecs (and KEFs) are 3 ways not 2 ways. This matters more with a coaxial because of the modulation "con" which is accepted to get the coaxial "pro". What audiophiles consider to be high sound quality is not the same as what a professional sound engineer would consider to be high sound quality. Understanding why will help interpret threads like this and many similar ones.
You have to listen to a liudspeaker before purchasing it when having no idea.
Because of the box and tools if not having cnc cutting...it can be expensive.
Monitors like Genelecs in 2 ways are for near field...you need a mid field far field...
If you buy hifi speaker two ways and need later deeper bass, a sub with dsp for integration is where to go. But always here will say you a 5" or 6" will give you less nice bass below 200 hz than big surfaces drivers 10" and plus.
I had a Proac D15 two ways...each time less good than 3 ways. Asking a 6.5" driver making 40 hz to 2000 hz is a huge bad trade off imho.
If I had a dedicated little to middle sized room in a flat and not too huge yet going the diy ways and giving myself maximum luck with that difficult room bass integration question...then I would certainly go 3 or 4 ways open baffle near field one meter with electronic EQ :
18" open or baffle less
A 8" to 10" for the upper range maybe a 8" full range
Then a dipole tweeter.
More spendy than a LS meta...
But most of us needs to acomodate for a living room and family life.
18" open or baffle less
A 8" to 10" for the upper range maybe a 8" full range
Then a dipole tweeter.
More spendy than a LS meta...
But most of us needs to acomodate for a living room and family life.
It will tell you nothing as a 90s NLA 3 ways sealed model and the filter was moded with a complex mix up of caps to my likings.
I have also a modest diy I modeled myself as a learning project...it has the size of an Aberth british loudspeaker classic 2 ways size 45 cm × 28 × 33 deep, but 3 ways sealed for little rooms with 8" + 3" + 1" sligthy horned....filter passive in progress...removable back and front, british BBC homage for the look. Picture joined.
To choose a loudspeaker you must go to shops to look for something that suits your taste.
Many goid brands, not all expensive...Kef is a good one, better to me than B&W for instance. KlH310 from Neumann is certainly versatile. But it must be heard before a purchase. I am not a Steteophile writer so I am surely not the one to listen to and taste and rooms are a personal thing imho... Edit : I am too in a reflexion for a 2 ways horned or a 3 ways classic with 12" midbass driver...from PA world for all the drivers.
I have also a modest diy I modeled myself as a learning project...it has the size of an Aberth british loudspeaker classic 2 ways size 45 cm × 28 × 33 deep, but 3 ways sealed for little rooms with 8" + 3" + 1" sligthy horned....filter passive in progress...removable back and front, british BBC homage for the look. Picture joined.
To choose a loudspeaker you must go to shops to look for something that suits your taste.
Many goid brands, not all expensive...Kef is a good one, better to me than B&W for instance. KlH310 from Neumann is certainly versatile. But it must be heard before a purchase. I am not a Steteophile writer so I am surely not the one to listen to and taste and rooms are a personal thing imho... Edit : I am too in a reflexion for a 2 ways horned or a 3 ways classic with 12" midbass driver...from PA world for all the drivers.
Attachments
Nova Andromeda VS Mezzo Calapamos .... zatiz the question !
https://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/speakers.html
https://www.humblehomemadehifi.com/speakers.html
for me, it would be the andromeda with no hesitation!
but maybe its my bias. anyone compared both?
So, why not small 3ways? I believe that having the drivers in a "happy" bandwidth will always lead to better sound. This keeps breakup down on the woofer, Fs magnitude lower on mids and tweeters, and HD lower for the bandwidths used.
Not that you need 3ways with smaller drivers, but it can likely improve some situations. You can eliminate "surround dip" from 7" woofers in the 1-2k range, and the HD that goes with it. IMD is a non issue.
I have done 2 small 3ways now in 0.23ft^3 cabs, with 1 more in the works, and one in half that at 3.5 ltrs in the works.
Keeping CTC close helps.
Not that you need 3ways with smaller drivers, but it can likely improve some situations. You can eliminate "surround dip" from 7" woofers in the 1-2k range, and the HD that goes with it. IMD is a non issue.
I have done 2 small 3ways now in 0.23ft^3 cabs, with 1 more in the works, and one in half that at 3.5 ltrs in the works.
Keeping CTC close helps.
@wolf_teeth, you made also a good trade off seing your 2.5 with HDS peereless fiber drivers. Should sound very good !
Even I have sensitivity limits and don't design anything for less than 80dB after BSC. As you go larger, you get more from the woofers. To go low and keep small, you just need more power, but going below 80 has a lot more power required than the average 82-86dB spec range.
That said, using the room curve with a sloping PR alignment can keep the spectral balance rather nice in something virtually tiny. An F3 of 60 is really required for most designs, and a low F10 with a bit of room addition can gain you a half octave sometimes.
I'm not omitting the fact that 4-6" woofers that do bass both tactily and exceptionally well could be or is a fairly small list. However, there are specialized drivers for such a premise.
Clever design adds a peak at Fs due to steel laminate low DCR coils, and this can yield the illusion of bass that so many smaller designs require. Couple with additional large capacitors, and you can really tune the bass response as required as long as the xmax can take the strain.
That said, using the room curve with a sloping PR alignment can keep the spectral balance rather nice in something virtually tiny. An F3 of 60 is really required for most designs, and a low F10 with a bit of room addition can gain you a half octave sometimes.
I'm not omitting the fact that 4-6" woofers that do bass both tactily and exceptionally well could be or is a fairly small list. However, there are specialized drivers for such a premise.
Clever design adds a peak at Fs due to steel laminate low DCR coils, and this can yield the illusion of bass that so many smaller designs require. Couple with additional large capacitors, and you can really tune the bass response as required as long as the xmax can take the strain.
If you mean the EMP, those with the glass fiber 5.25" woofers, and a straight 2way. It's not a 2.5way design. Yes, it sounds VERY good, and can thunder with the right program material.
Thank you for the compliment and for noticing!
I see your Purveyor build, looks awesome! Exactly the kind of a speaker I have in mind, having been disappointed with large boxes. Maybe not as small as 7 liters, but certainly not 100. You said you've made two designs in this enclosure - what is the other one, is it publicly available?