At least Linkwitz did eliminate some enclosures: he does it for the midrange, which usually is found as being enclosured in a box in a box in a box - It's not an error: The room, the (woofer enclosure), the midrange sub-enclosure.Can my house be a speaker enclosure first?
it sort of covers everything
Accurate speakers. Essentially sound the same. Setup that is appropriate. Specific design. Some people know how to choose words for statement that can never be wrong.
It makes a succinct point though. Many think the sound of speakers is all there is. In other words, the worst malady of the speaker might not be the speaker 🙂
Compare the impedance plot of a driver to any other component in your system and it is hard to come to any other conclusion.
Well, yes, the electronics is job done (relatively speaking), he's referring to the room and physical setup
"The loudspeaker is by far the weakest link in the reproduction chain. Unless you have really poorly designed associated equipment you cannot get significant improvement in accuracy by going to very expensive equipment. Marketing departments like to tell you otherwise. Hearing a change is not an indication of greater accuracy. Some products are designed to make an audible change so the customer will notice it. Other products rely on the power of suggestion which works the better, the higher the price tag." SL
"The loudspeaker is by far the weakest link in the reproduction chain. Unless you have really poorly designed associated equipment you cannot get significant improvement in accuracy by going to very expensive equipment. Marketing departments like to tell you otherwise. Hearing a change is not an indication of greater accuracy. Some products are designed to make an audible change so the customer will notice it. Other products rely on the power of suggestion which works the better, the higher the price tag." SL
Last edited:
But with a DSP, my experience is, that you can fine tune the compromise at a very fine level.There are a lot of approaches to that question. It would be big, multiple ways, active with a dsp and still be a lot of compromises.
When there's a small peak at - lets say 180hz. That will sound very different and mostly better, when attenuated with a PEQ - even though it's the room that created the problem to begin with.
The art - IMO - is to understand that a measurement is only a part of the truth. It can look good in the software, but still sound bad in reality 🙄😀
But with a DSP, my experience is, that you can fine tune the compromise at a very fine level.
When there's a small peak at - lets say 180hz. That will sound very different and mostly better, when attenuated with a PEQ - even though it's the room that created the problem to begin with.
I completely agree there. With a dsp are things possible which cannot be done passive or would pose a lot of harsh compromises.
The art - IMO - is to understand that a measurement is only a part of the truth. It can look good in the software, but still sound bad in reality 🙄😀
Again: That's right. Absolutely true. Some claim speakers with the same response will sound exactly the same. That's simply wrong, even if the speakers got the exact same dispersion pattern. Speakers sound different because of the membrane material differences, different impulse response and especally how they handle dynamics. You can't tell at every and each driver from the membrane material how it will sound but you can at a lot. On the dynamics part, you'll quickly realize the different sound if you compare a speaker with a long excursion 6" and a 12" or 15" driver, even if the response of the speaker might be exactly the same. You simply don't get the physical 'kick' of a huge membrane.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- What is the worst malady of a loudspeaker?