And I've come to the same subjective conclusions that below 1.4khz, localization becomes very difficult.....and that's a good thing in my book. I guess I'm wondering where's the dome tweeter that's 30mm or less with a resonant freq of 500hz and flat on axis response to 20khz??????? The SS and Vifa Ring radiators of made just a tad bit more robust might do the job but in their current state fall just slightly short of the mark.
Now we can take a dome like the Scanspeak HDS which has excellent distortion characteristics down low and place it in a shallow waveguide. In doing so, we can effectively boost output from 6khz on down as much as 4-6 db once we get to 1.2khz. Shaping the response back to the desired acoustic slope would then push the HD artifacts as low as any dome on the market in its prime passband..............BUT that still hinges on the midwoofers response to 1.2khz or so. I gotta think a 4" midrange driver will simply sound better than this option too. Too many choices!!!!!!
It's not my stance on the topic so don't shoot the messenger!😉......but you read enough hifi forums to know the consensus as it stands.
I wanted to ask if you've had any experience with some of the newer planar/ribbon type drivers like the Beyma TPL or the Aurum aero- strict ions than can be crossed below 1khz. Measurement look fantastic but that doesn't tell the whole story either............
I think the excellent directivity ( I've owned some Amphions and loved em!) came from a crossover point much lower than 2.5khz. I think even the older Helium2 was 1.6khz.
I did also get to listen to their flagship tower which is a hybrid cardoid in the midrange and that is truly a fantastic speaker!
Some more food for thoughts, compiled by S Linkwitz http://www.linkwitzlab.com/TMT-Leipzig'10/TMT-Hearing%20spatial%20detail.pdf
Amphion Helium II (discontinued) Amphion Helium 2 and http://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/105amphion/
Current models from Amphion , Kuopio Finland (100 miles from here!)
Some of my measurements of it. The xo is said to be asymmetric, I swapped polarity and summed response was about the same but phase changed. Blue is standard in the last picture ( I listen to them modified, bass polarity inverted if I remember right). I use them for HT rear channels now. I was unable to hear a difference in sound when switching polarity. Perhaps I should do some more tests with them now, I might learn something
Amphion Helium II (discontinued) Amphion Helium 2 and http://www.stereophile.com/standloudspeakers/105amphion/
Current models from Amphion , Kuopio Finland (100 miles from here!)
Some of my measurements of it. The xo is said to be asymmetric, I swapped polarity and summed response was about the same but phase changed. Blue is standard in the last picture ( I listen to them modified, bass polarity inverted if I remember right). I use them for HT rear channels now. I was unable to hear a difference in sound when switching polarity. Perhaps I should do some more tests with them now, I might learn something
Attachments
Last edited:
----------------------
You have misunderstood and mis-represented Blauert's research. Folks are actually quite capable of localizing sounds in this frequency region
Why don't you just explain it then correctly?
That would be a lot more constructive than just being contrarian which helps no one other than massaging your ego.
I thought I did. Folks are quite capable of localizing sounds in that frequency region.
Far from being a contrarian (with a weak ego), these findings are plentiful and well known. What the other guy did was to bring up some results from about 4 decades ago regarding "directional bands". There are a number of red-herrings with those kinds of results and they would need to be viewed in a very different context.
? Are You a kind of a psychic?
oh but of course of course of course of course of course of course of course of course 🙄 it doesn't, at least not in the sense discussed here, in sensu stricto, because here the pros and cons of having a separate midrange to put the crossover frequencies beyond 1-4 kHz range is discussed.
You want to cross from a midrange to a subwoofer? Then You loose at least two very important octaves of music (80-160-320 Hz). Can't You see it?
A SUBwoofer requires a woofer or a midwoofer.
So a system with a SUBwoofer is either a 2-way plus a SUBwoofer or a 3-way plus a SUBwoofer.
Last edited:
Are you trying to say that 80Hz is not out of the 1-4KHz range ? Geez, could've fooled me 😀
Where did i wrote that ? Quote me please 🙂
Check this out and look where are xover points. 80Hz and 650Hz. I guess you'll call it two way with the subwoofers in the same box xD
Now that's just plain rubbish. If you need three drivers to cover the spectrum that is a three way in my book. But let us play by your rules - if you want a good bass from a two way, you need a subwoofer. If you want high quality bass you need couple of them. Yet again, the two way is defficient at some point.
You don't have to like what i'm saying but that doesn't make it false 🙂
Regards, Psychic 😉
Last edited:
I wish that I could read German because something there just doesn't sound right. The claim is that we have zero ability for frontal sounds, but perfect ability for reward sounds at the same frequency. How could this be? It just doesn't make sense because of symmetry front to rear for wavelengths of about 1 foot. The Pinna effects are much higher.
Those percent scores are not "percent correct scores". This is a red herring.
At this frequency range, localization acuity is fine. The OP has mis-understood and mis-represented the findings
Now that's just plain rubbish. If you need three drivers to cover the spectrum that is a three way in my book. But let us play by your rules - if you want a good bass from a two way, you need a subwoofer. If you want high quality bass you need couple of them. Yet again, the two way is defficient at some point.
you can have incredible bass with a two way. Limited in spl, yes, but incredible at normal listening volume. A 2 way doing f3 40hz is good enough for me. I disagree with the statement that you need a 2 way + sub or a three way to have good bass. Its not true.
you can have incredible bass with a two way. Limited in spl, yes, but incredible at normal listening volume. A 2 way doing f3 40hz is good enough for me. I disagree with the statement that you need a 2 way + sub or a three way to have good bass. Its not true.
Last edited:
Then you haven't heard a properly set up system with multiple subs. No standard pair of loudspeakers even comes close to what you can achieve if you add in the subs and this isn't just talking about extending the response down to 20Hz, although that helps.
So what is Blauert showing in that plot? I mean he is "the man" when it comes to this stuff.
.... and haven't heard midrange from bassmid that isn't forced to go under the 80-100Hz, i might add.
About Blauert, he is a pioneer. The science of psychoacoustics is growing and expanding all the time
Jens Blauert
Books in English http://books.google.fi/books/about/Spatial_Hearing.html?id=wBiEKPhw7r0C&redir_esc=y
Jens Blauert
Books in English http://books.google.fi/books/about/Spatial_Hearing.html?id=wBiEKPhw7r0C&redir_esc=y
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Finally on a theorical point of view, what seems the best trade off (assuming good of axis curves and no collapsing of the 1.4 Khz between the two speakers at listening position...)
A: 1 or 1.5 CD for a : 700 > xo < 1800 : the lower the better in relation to the C-C with the mid unit. (assuming some choices possibiklity with the cone membrane for the tone quality?!). Let say here Mister Geedle design to simplify the discusssion or à la Zingali speaker e.g.
B- a classic 1" or less dom tweeter but horned (or not with some North European units) to try Xo near: >1k hz < 1.5 khz
C: planar tweeters but much higher in the M&F curve sensibility ? In the hope to match a better time domain and the tonal color of some beloved expensive ones ?
D : horned planar à la TPL 150 to try lower xo around 2 k hz (which seems not to be a miracle in any design as far I understand in some long thread).
With C & D : each time diyers going too low they have always a too tiny sound and a difficult match with the thicker & heavier sound of the driver below : each time the higher XO the better result (not in the relation the datasheet says !).
Here my question is theoric with just those parameters (driver efficienty, WAF sensibility, owner money susceptibility not involved) ?
If curves seem very important, some driver matching just don't work because tones and transcient missmatchs between treble and mid unit !
A: 1 or 1.5 CD for a : 700 > xo < 1800 : the lower the better in relation to the C-C with the mid unit. (assuming some choices possibiklity with the cone membrane for the tone quality?!). Let say here Mister Geedle design to simplify the discusssion or à la Zingali speaker e.g.
B- a classic 1" or less dom tweeter but horned (or not with some North European units) to try Xo near: >1k hz < 1.5 khz
C: planar tweeters but much higher in the M&F curve sensibility ? In the hope to match a better time domain and the tonal color of some beloved expensive ones ?
D : horned planar à la TPL 150 to try lower xo around 2 k hz (which seems not to be a miracle in any design as far I understand in some long thread).
With C & D : each time diyers going too low they have always a too tiny sound and a difficult match with the thicker & heavier sound of the driver below : each time the higher XO the better result (not in the relation the datasheet says !).
Here my question is theoric with just those parameters (driver efficienty, WAF sensibility, owner money susceptibility not involved) ?
If curves seem very important, some driver matching just don't work because tones and transcient missmatchs between treble and mid unit !
Last edited:
Best trade-offs can be different for different people.
Most of driver matching problems in my oppinion origin from transition from direct radiator to horn loaded mid-hi driver and also heavy and thick membrane of midrange to a very light and thin CD membrane - all of that happens in a very sensitive area of our hearing spectrum.
I think that real improvement in driver matching area would be hornloaded midrange with hornloaded CD. Maybe it is not so important for horn to have effect down low to a couple hundred Hz. Maybe the poent is for hornloading to have effect in the xover region and maybe few hundred Hz below it. I don't know, never tryed it but one day i just might 🙂
Something like - xover points at 200Hz and 900Hz
Tom Danley did that with his sinergy horn. He hornloaded everything in one cabinet 🙂
Most of driver matching problems in my oppinion origin from transition from direct radiator to horn loaded mid-hi driver and also heavy and thick membrane of midrange to a very light and thin CD membrane - all of that happens in a very sensitive area of our hearing spectrum.
I think that real improvement in driver matching area would be hornloaded midrange with hornloaded CD. Maybe it is not so important for horn to have effect down low to a couple hundred Hz. Maybe the poent is for hornloading to have effect in the xover region and maybe few hundred Hz below it. I don't know, never tryed it but one day i just might 🙂
Something like - xover points at 200Hz and 900Hz
Tom Danley did that with his sinergy horn. He hornloaded everything in one cabinet 🙂
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.