the answer is
The resolution to all this discord is really quite simple:
To wit:
Who is trying to proffer speakers for profit on a DIY site vs. those trying to share useful information.
The answer is obvious
BTW: I tend to agree, this thread is kind of mindless, other than the out of phase speaker stuff... that's kinda interesting... I've used that for years, analogous to nulling instrumental measurements in other scientific pursuits
John L.
The resolution to all this discord is really quite simple:
To wit:
Who is trying to proffer speakers for profit on a DIY site vs. those trying to share useful information.
The answer is obvious
BTW: I tend to agree, this thread is kind of mindless, other than the out of phase speaker stuff... that's kinda interesting... I've used that for years, analogous to nulling instrumental measurements in other scientific pursuits
John L.
Ah, but Earl - you specifically focused on this very minor statement of Dave's:
Pulling a quote like this and "picking at it" rather than replying to the the entire post/quote,
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...-pattern-stereo-speakers-205.html#post2813161
or even by far the most *relevant* portion of the post, raises a very strong presumption that you are engaging in obfuscation - which could be deemed as violating the #2 rule of the forum.
*EASILY* the most relevant portion of Dave's post, the paragraph immediately before the one you objected to, is:
If you are going to take issue with a post, please respond to the stated issue of that post.
Intentional or not, it's actions like this that people find "hinky" - and of course generally disruptive to a thread.
Last edited:
Good discussion!
The title of this thread was a purposefully simplistic question. The underlying issues are about:
- Direct/reflected ratio.
- Early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Very early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Reverberent field (level and decay time)
If we are considering personal preference, these questions lead to a free for all. Anything will do. But what about accuracy? If we are talking accuracy, I think we are talking standards with universal criteria.
Because very early reflections (say <10 ms) have such a huge effect on the sound, I guess you can say that those are to be avoided - even though their effect is appreciated by some. When it comes to the other criteria, I'm still not sure. I guess the more I learn, the less I know .
The title of this thread was a purposefully simplistic question. The underlying issues are about:
- Direct/reflected ratio.
- Early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Very early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Reverberent field (level and decay time)
If we are considering personal preference, these questions lead to a free for all. Anything will do. But what about accuracy? If we are talking accuracy, I think we are talking standards with universal criteria.
Because very early reflections (say <10 ms) have such a huge effect on the sound, I guess you can say that those are to be avoided - even though their effect is appreciated by some. When it comes to the other criteria, I'm still not sure. I guess the more I learn, the less I know
.
Including early diffraction in with reflections, doing this in my opinion leads to the headphone effect. Subjectively this gives clarity, and may contribute to the ability to turn up the volume without affecting the sound apart from its level.
I'm pleased to hear Tom Danley suggesting that the room is somewhat optional. I find my current system to sound relatively dry. It is not a bad thing, I prefer it that way, it's just not like other systems.
That is my perspective to this topic. Optimize a speaker to get the best result in a average living-room. For a normal user it isn't a argument to change the living-room acoustically for good sound reproduction
The solution make a speaker design so mart it is immune negative effect of reflection of back-wall and side walls, and relative low sealing.
Or let it perform good when placed near back-wall side wall low sealing. So when the placement is specified to get a optimum result.
It is really not of this time to specify anechoic results of a speaker when knowing it is used in a living room.
Last edited:
Good discussion!
The title of this thread was a purposefully simplistic question. The underlying issues are about:
- Direct/reflected ratio.
- Early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Very early reflections (time, direction, spectrum).
- Reverberent field (level and decay time)
If we are considering personal preference, these questions lead to a free for all. Anything will do. But what about accuracy? If we are talking accuracy, I think we are talking standards with universal criteria.
Because very early reflections (say <10 ms) have such a huge effect on the sound, I guess you can say that those are to be avoided - even though their effect is appreciated by some. When it comes to the other criteria, I'm still not sure. I guess the more I learn, the less I know
I also find this thread a fantastic discussion, thanks for starting this one!
Does your system has a 10ms reflection free zone? I barely get 3.5ms when I place my system in the middle of the room on a stand for measurement purposes (see attached impulse response) At their normal position, it is even worse.
So to really appreciate the effect of (almost) no VERs, we need to figure out how to make good vertical directivity also...
Attachments
I'm definitely with Dave on that point.
I find a highly reverberant room is uncomfortable to live in, even for non-music listening activities like eating, (clattering cutlery and plates) conversation within the room, talking on the telephone, watching TV, and so on.
If you've had a long stressful day at work and/or been exposed to lots of noisy traffic on the way home, a live (and therefore "loud") acoustic environment in the room that you spend most of the evening relaxing in I find just makes me feel more stressed and tense, whilst a moderately well damped room has a calming, relaxing feel to it.
The modern trend of houses with bare wood floors, bare sparely ornamented walls, very large exposed glass areas, (sometimes an entire exterior wall mostly glass with thin ineffectual vertical blinds) marble, cold smooth leather sofas and so on is complete anathema to me. I can't imagine a worse place to live and relax in, (or listen to music) no matter how expensive it might be.
Give me carpeted floors, plush floor to ceiling curtains over windows, fabric sofas, a couple of rugs, a couple of book cases, walls that actually have things on them, (like Dave's oriental rug) and you have an environment that is much nicer to live in, both acoustically and otherwise, IMHO.
As far as music goes, I've always found that whilst a live room can sound more, well, "live" for lack of a better word, and that can be good on some music, it becomes tiring after a while. I recently removed a number of items from our living room whilst tidying that help damp the acoustics of the room and spent the afternoon listening to music.
My initial reaction was "hey that sounds pretty good, maybe it was too dead before", yes things did sound more lively but after a while it became quite tiring, the flutter echo become annoying (plainly obvious on some music) and I found listening to music at higher volume levels was a bit "overwhelming" and uncomfortable. I wanted the room back the way it was and when I restored things it was almost a sigh of relief, "Ah, that is better after all".
No, not quite as spacious on some recordings, but the definition was much better, I could play it loud again without feeling overwhelmed by all the reverberation, (with loud music also having considerably more "kick" and "punch", perhaps partly due to reduction of upper bass cancellation from standing waves) and it was just generally a more enjoyable experience.
No, I don't want to live in an anechoic chamber either, I think there is definitely a "comfortable range" of reverberation in a living environment, both for music enjoyment and general living comfort within that space when people are talking or otherwise making noise.
In my personal experience a room that has a level of reverberation that is comfortable and relaxing to live in is also about the right range for good sound reproduction.
Last edited:
Is listener distance really a variable? For a correct perspective of the virtual soundstage, the listener triangle should be a equilateral 2.5 to 3.5 meters. Does anyone disagree? If you accept Geddes' statement about imaging and spaciousness as true (paraphrased by a_tewinkel as: 'Eliminate early reflections for imaging, preserve later reflections for spaciousness') and consider the room dimensions fixed, doesn't this simply put a requirement on the amount of directivity?
Lets take an extreme case for this. It should be possible to have perfect imaging with omni's if the room is big enough (7.3 x 6 meter for an equilateral listening triangle of 3 meters, www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/1...-pattern-stereo-speakers-111.html#post2717283). Obviously, a room of this size would be the living room for 'mere mortals' (whose wifes would not accept these speakers protruding far into the room) and not the spare room which can be furnished as listening room.
I've heard high end omnis in what could be called a big living room. I thought they imaged very well on classical recordings. Other who heard the same setup on pop and jazz said they did not image well. I don't know why they would not.
Ejee posses;
Lets take an extreme case for this. It should be possible to have perfect imaging with omni's if the room is big enough
Yes but what I think is important to remember is that the impression one gets is the result of several separable things, the recording, the loudspeakers and chain and the room.
What seems weird is that there are a lot of assumptions made about what is desirable with little or no reference to the condition where there are no room reflections at all.
What does the recording and reproduction chain alone sound like (without the room)?
Set up omni (or any) speakers outdoors and sit in the normal configuration and listen to what NO room effects sounds like as a point of reference. Do this away from buildings if you can, try your favorite recordings and focus on imaging.
In this case, omni’s or any speaker could image superbly or not, depending on the loudspeaker itself because that is another variable. All good Loudspeakers do not image equally well, not by any stretch of the imagination, there is a large variability here to.
So far as room reflections being desirable, I think it’s hard to say that once you spend an afternoon or two with good imaging speakers outdoors with no reflections I bet many would say more like they are only unavoidable.
Directivity when compatible with the geometry is only fix other than large scale room treatment to extend the near field farther into the room.
In large scale sound where the cubic volume rises faster than the absorptive surface area, even surface treatment becomes a limited option while a high directivity index requires no room treatments..
Best,
Tom
Lets take an extreme case for this. It should be possible to have perfect imaging with omni's if the room is big enough
Yes but what I think is important to remember is that the impression one gets is the result of several separable things, the recording, the loudspeakers and chain and the room.
What seems weird is that there are a lot of assumptions made about what is desirable with little or no reference to the condition where there are no room reflections at all.
What does the recording and reproduction chain alone sound like (without the room)?
Set up omni (or any) speakers outdoors and sit in the normal configuration and listen to what NO room effects sounds like as a point of reference. Do this away from buildings if you can, try your favorite recordings and focus on imaging.
In this case, omni’s or any speaker could image superbly or not, depending on the loudspeaker itself because that is another variable. All good Loudspeakers do not image equally well, not by any stretch of the imagination, there is a large variability here to.
So far as room reflections being desirable, I think it’s hard to say that once you spend an afternoon or two with good imaging speakers outdoors with no reflections I bet many would say more like they are only unavoidable.
Directivity when compatible with the geometry is only fix other than large scale room treatment to extend the near field farther into the room.
In large scale sound where the cubic volume rises faster than the absorptive surface area, even surface treatment becomes a limited option while a high directivity index requires no room treatments..
Best,
Tom
I can think of many reasons why on wall speakers are sub optimal.
* Because their position is fixed, its unlikely to be ideal, and can't be adjusted if its not right, (if in wall at least) not to mention if the owner wanted to change the listening orientation in the room. (Many room orientations wouldn't have a suitable place for them to go, even if they did just hang off a wall hook)
* Significant problems with diffraction from the wall unless the speakers were in wall flush mounted instead of just shallow cabinets hanging on a wall, but then they are fixed in place as above.
* Significant problems with diffraction from objects in front of the wall, for example a TV. Even if the direct line of sight from the speaker to listener is not blocked by the TV the sound will be diffracting off the TV screen because the source is behind the TV.
* Lots of midrange colouration from the surrounding wall, which now becomes a part of the baffle. Most interior walls are not inert well damped panels like a well designed speaker baffle, thus will resonate at various frequencies in the upper bass lower midrange region, no matter how rigid the speaker cabinet itself is.
* Difficulty of making a high performance speaker with a very shallow internal cabinet depth but with reasonable volume - small drivers are required, issues with front/back internal wall standing waves and so on.
* Speakers being that much further away than usual will make attaining a good direct/reflected ratio even more difficult.
That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are plenty more reasons.
In the end I just don't think it's possible to get as good results from an in/on wall speaker as a standalone, and whilst they don't protrude into the room they introduce a whole host of other issues.
Last edited:
1. The position of any speaker is fixed if symmetry of the sound field is one of the top priorities (and I think it is).
2. All speakers have diffraction problems. Boundary effects of all other speaker concepts are much worse.
3. See 2 and if sound quality is of any concern the there is nothing between the speaker and the listening position.
4. Only a problem in US homes
5. True.
6. Nobody will stop you from moving closer to the speaker
2. All speakers have diffraction problems. Boundary effects of all other speaker concepts are much worse.
3. See 2 and if sound quality is of any concern the there is nothing between the speaker and the listening position.
4. Only a problem in US homes
5. True.
6. Nobody will stop you from moving closer to the speaker
Example of a DIY on-wall design:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.