Ultimate real fullrange driver

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#62
joensd said:
Hi soonqsc,
I´ve scanned the graphs but somehow have problems with imageshack. Can you drop me a mail then I´ll send them to you.
(Veravox 3,5S,5X and Visaton B200; last three together on one page)

At the weekend I was on a hifi-show next to my place and I finally had a chance to listen to some really cool speakers.
Room acoustics and chosen cabinets do play a role of course but anyway here´s my impressions:

Jordan JX-92 "the wall" got lost in the room and had not much "life" to it. Actually a bit disappointing after all I´ve read.

Visaton´s B200 played in the "Solitude" but was even better together with 2*BG20 from Visaton (and cheaper).Well tuned and big dynamics. Great speaker!!!

Veravox 5X played with a supertweeter EB surface slim in "little wing", a mini Onken-cabinet. The 5X has got the best resolution of all the fullrangers I´ve heard. (Dynamics were slightly better with the bigger speakers though.) Nils Lofgren never sounded that good!

Moth´s audio cicada is similar to the bigger Fostex speakers; quite nice but too expensive for it´s sound.

The "quasar" from bd-design.nl had a AER MD2B working in it, together with two 15"-basses in open baffle.
Financally out of reach (together with amplifiers well over 10000€) but certainly the best "fullranger" at the show.

greets
Click to expand...

You mentioned the Veravox 5X was played with a super tweeter. That actually makes it a two way. Properly designed two way systems will always have better dynamics than a pure full range. The same would be with the Griffin design with a ribbon tweeter. Also, if "the wall" you mentioned uses a similar compensation as on the Jordan site, there will be some loss of highs.

So I think it comes to a question, if someone did a good design with good drivers versus a not so good design with the same drivers. I think one would have to sample at least 3 designs made by three people using different methods to determine whether a bad sounding speaker is due to speaker design or driver.

Another issue is that at shows, unless there are separate rooms that isolates noise quite well, it is easy to misinterpret sound signature.

A third issue would be whether the listener prefers a specific sound signature, or whether the listener prefers somthing realistic.

I don't want to get into other areas, becasue they really are insignficant factors during noisy shows.

I was listening to a pair of Dynaudios last week, and I though: Golly, these sound great! But when I tried to remember the live instrument signature and dynamics, I noticed the differences.

Now I'm really interested in boxing my JX92S into some test boxes to hear how they sound with my compensation design.😎
 
#63
Greets!

Thanks, but unfortunately they are thumbnail size so can't be viewed/enlarged enough.

GM
Click to expand...
Did you "click" on them?

Properly designed two way systems will always have better dynamics than a pure full range.
Click to expand...
I have a FE167E from Fostex playing. With and without a super-tweeter and to me there´s no change in dynamics.
Dynamics is the ability to go from "quiet to loud" and nothing else.

I certainly agree with the rest you said.

greets

http://www.audiodiskussion.de/foren/allgemein/msg.php?idx=19073
 
#64
Greets!

Did you "click" on them?
Click to expand...

Yes, they are only a few kb in size.


quote:
Properly designed two way systems will always have better dynamics than a pure full range.

I have a FE167E from Fostex playing. With and without a super-tweeter and to me there´s no change in dynamics.
Dynamics is the ability to go from "quiet to loud" and nothing else.
Click to expand...

Hmm, 'dynamics' (AKA dynamic range) defines the speaker's peak SPL capability over 'x' BW. A driver's impulse response (AKA transient response, or its 'attack/decay') defines its ability to go from 'quiet to loud' and back, i.e. faithfully track the signal without falling short (overdamped) or ringing (underdamped).

Anyway, whether a super tweeter helps or not with the latter will depend on how 'fast' the transients are, how wide the BW is and the main driver's HF response. IOW if the source (everything in the signal chain up to the driver) doesn't send a wide enough dynamic range transient or the LF BW is limited, then HF response need not extend well into the infrasonic BW. Indeed, until the mid '50s, ~flat to 12 kHz was all that was needed.

Since the (temporarily? discontinued) Babb Lorelei is the only driver I'm aware of with a ~flat 20-20kHz BW and sufficient power handling/excursion to qualify as having a low distortion wide dynamic range, I mostly agree with the poster's assertion in that without a LF system to take the high excursion burden off the FR driver it will not perform to the limits of its capability at any acceptable average SPL for serious listening in other than a very small room or apartment. Once in a two way, any shortcomings in the HF will become obvious to anyone with good hearing since one of the more interesting things about how we process sound is that as the LF BW is increased, the more HF we perceive (or lack thereof), I guess due to the fact that the lower the LF cutoff the wider the BW, with DC being infinite BW.

GM
 
#67
What was second? Which one was better?
Click to expand...
Second is from a DIY-magazine and uses 2*BG20 in the bass.
XO is around 700Hz and more than likely much simpler than the one for the solitude.
Back of the separate B200-enclosure is open on the back.
http://www.visaton.de/vb/showthread.php?threadid=10045&perpage=15&pagenumber=3
I prefered the DIY-version. Looking at the complex XO from Visaton to get the sensitivities right one might easily think why.

Further details will be published in the next edition of the online-magazin that is only available to subscribers.
Maybe Visaton will publish it later?

greets
 
#68
joensd said:


I have a FE167E from Fostex playing. With and without a super-tweeter and to me there´s no change in dynamics.
Dynamics is the ability to go from "quiet to loud" and nothing else.

greets

http://www.audiodiskussion.de/foren/allgemein/msg.php?idx=19073
Click to expand...

Of course if the crossover point is high enough that one driver does not share a good portion of the audio band, then you will not notice increase in dynamics. Most people add super tweeters withtout crossover and without taking the effort to acoustically align them by testing the acoustic centers, then you will also not notice change in dynamics.
 
#71
#72
Question for GM

GM said:
... since one of the more interesting things about how we process sound is that as the LF BW is increased, the more HF we perceive (or lack thereof), I guess due to the fact that the lower the LF cutoff the wider the BW, with DC being infinite BW.

GM
Click to expand...

This makes me really think. Do you refer to an increase of LF BW to lower frequencies or to higher frequencies?
Could you give any source where this phenomenon is explained in more detail?

My interest stems from a recent experience when fuddling with the LF response of a BB horn. Changing it made a huge difference for the reception of high frequencies and the overall spatial resolution. I hadn´t expected that much influence of LF changes on HF impression.

Thanks
Rudolf
 
#73
GM said:
Greets!


Hmm, 'dynamics' (AKA dynamic range) defines the speaker's peak SPL capability over 'x' BW. A driver's impulse response (AKA transient response, or its 'attack/decay') defines its ability to go from 'quiet to loud' and back, i.e. faithfully track the signal without falling short (overdamped) or ringing (underdamped).

Anyway, whether a super tweeter helps or not with the latter will depend on how 'fast' the transients are, how wide the BW is and the main driver's HF response. IOW if the source (everything in the signal chain up to the driver) doesn't send a wide enough dynamic range transient or the LF BW is limited, then HF response need not extend well into the infrasonic BW. Indeed, until the mid '50s, ~flat to 12 kHz was all that was needed.

Since the (temporarily? discontinued) Babb Lorelei is the only driver I'm aware of with a ~flat 20-20kHz BW and sufficient power handling/excursion to qualify as having a low distortion wide dynamic range, I mostly agree with the poster's assertion in that without a LF system to take the high excursion burden off the FR driver it will not perform to the limits of its capability at any acceptable average SPL for serious listening in other than a very small room or apartment. Once in a two way, any shortcomings in the HF will become obvious to anyone with good hearing since one of the more interesting things about how we process sound is that as the LF BW is increased, the more HF we perceive (or lack thereof), I guess due to the fact that the lower the LF cutoff the wider the BW, with DC being infinite BW.

GM
Click to expand...

Dynamics is more a general term. IF there is very complicated instruments in the music, due to current carrying characteristics in the VC, the sound could seem compressed. In a pure full range, this is quite common. In multi-way systems, if the XOs are well designed, then the signal will not sound so compressed. In two way systems, if the crossover is very low or very high, then at some point it is easier to detect compression/or distortion. That's why some people may think that XO is best located to equally divide the power spectrum.
 
#74
Does anybody have listening experience with that unit?
 

Attachments

  • fal.gif
    fal.gif
    16 KB · Views: 1,229
#76
The unit is from the FAL company from Japan and it is used in sealed enclosures. It is 60 to 19000 Hz. Previously the FAL units were used with AMTs but now they have made the leap towards fullrange. The diaphragm is said to consist mainly of air, from looking at it I would assume that it is a silica foam/aerogel combination. It has an array of several linear drive units. You find more information at
http://www.sibatech.co.jp
 
#78
The price is extremely high, but I am going to make them a suggestion for a much cheaper diaphragm material that may also meet the requirements. It would be nice if everybody else who`s got an idea would do this, too, so that the average music lover ís going to profit from this technology one day.


Oliver
 
#79
Do you think that it's expensive only because of the diaphragm material? I'm not sure...

I think orthophase is very good too, but it's difficult to find it know... even in france... I think this technology is better, because in orthophase, the diaphragm is pushed on around 40% of his surface, it's much similar from ribbon, near ideal therory : a flat rigid diaphram pushed from all his surface.

Hugues
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom