Hi Jim, funny how that works, I looked at your results to help me shape mine.
I use speakers aimed away from me to the outside and let them scatter to what they reflect off of. That makes them more diffuse and even have some tail. Have you seen Linkwitz page on his ambient speakers? He's using a Dolby Pro Logic II to extract the ambient information. I just hustle the L-R and R-L and insert a bit of L+R, all band limited (not in that picture) delayed and attenuated driven from a separate amp. I'll think about it what it would take in your case. I did also think about adding reverb, but figured this will do for now.
Linkwitz link: Surround stereo system
I do use convolution to get the FR right in basic shape. But the impulses are left scattered from the reflections which is what I was after. I can test and listen to reflections only as they are fake. They have to be somewhat convincing, right? Yours seemed remarkably clean, not that diffuse at all. Even in the TDA plot.
Surround loudspeaker This?
If so, interesting concept. But on this link anyway, he really doesn't explain or show the ambient effects the tube causes.
As you can see (attached graph), my specular Kickers dont offer much in the way of diffusion or extended decay. This is the area I am currently exploring.
Attachments
Ah, you added a link. Something like this could work.
Still would need a way to delay and perhaps reverberate the signal though.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Wonder if one of these would do for reverb?
Last edited:
So, do you have any particular goals for your ambient project? What do your current spectrograms look like? Have you gotten to the point where you have added too many delays reflections? How did that sound?
http://www.davidgriesinger.com/paris_talk.pdf
This paper adds some insight to what you want later reflections/energy to do in a room.
http://www.davidgriesinger.com/paris_talk.pdf
This paper adds some insight to what you want later reflections/energy to do in a room.
Last edited:
Attachments
Here's my graph:
Don't mind the SPL value of the peak, it's not set like that, this was for timing purposes only.
I tried aiming the speakers a few ways, first firing them up (way too strong reflection from my ceiling), but settled on firing them sideways. I think they don't go low enough to make good use of a reverb. I did briefly try a reverb tail from a hall with convolution. Though it was way too much, I think it could be quite interesting to play with. I did notice some differences with the perception of drums that was very cool.
I have also played with the timing and not done there yet. I first had them at 20 ms for quite a while. When moved to 24 ms I did notice a positive difference. The room felt a lot bigger and more open.
As I introduce the phantom center (L+R) ambient effect separately I have it timed a little earlier, but lower in level. It's quite remarkable how much that still can have an effect on tonality. Needed to work on the EQ to keep it the way I like it and keep it low enough in level not to disturb the clearness in the center. The sides are way more forgiving. But you can actually correct some tonality should you want to. Make it less like a small room and more open. Probably not an issue in your room though. I still have reflections messing with me at higher level than you have and a way longer tail. But still I like what this does, but it's not easy to get right. One day I was very pleased, played a lot of stuff only to find the next day with fresh ears I was surprised to find it messed up the clean center vocals. By a pretty large amount!
Little steps... I know I can do better!
You can pretty much steer the stage with these channels up to a certain extend. But it's easy to overdo it too. I tried to keep it natural.
If you go this way with ambient drivers, aim to get them lower than I did, aim for 60 to ~3500 Hz. Mine pretty much stops somewhere between 100 - 200
Hz. I couldn't use bigger drivers, I needed to hide them in the living room. You can do whatever you please.
Playing surround on them was pretty cool though. Much better than I had envisioned. Some movies definitely pump you up for certain scenes.
I know that's not your ball game, but boy... these arrays are very good at that! Never missed a sub yet... the ambience build up down low is terrific. More entertaining than any THX certified movie theatre I've been in. Pity I have such a small screen.
Don't mind the SPL value of the peak, it's not set like that, this was for timing purposes only.
I tried aiming the speakers a few ways, first firing them up (way too strong reflection from my ceiling), but settled on firing them sideways. I think they don't go low enough to make good use of a reverb. I did briefly try a reverb tail from a hall with convolution. Though it was way too much, I think it could be quite interesting to play with. I did notice some differences with the perception of drums that was very cool.
I have also played with the timing and not done there yet. I first had them at 20 ms for quite a while. When moved to 24 ms I did notice a positive difference. The room felt a lot bigger and more open.
As I introduce the phantom center (L+R) ambient effect separately I have it timed a little earlier, but lower in level. It's quite remarkable how much that still can have an effect on tonality. Needed to work on the EQ to keep it the way I like it and keep it low enough in level not to disturb the clearness in the center. The sides are way more forgiving. But you can actually correct some tonality should you want to. Make it less like a small room and more open. Probably not an issue in your room though. I still have reflections messing with me at higher level than you have and a way longer tail. But still I like what this does, but it's not easy to get right. One day I was very pleased, played a lot of stuff only to find the next day with fresh ears I was surprised to find it messed up the clean center vocals. By a pretty large amount!
Little steps... I know I can do better!
You can pretty much steer the stage with these channels up to a certain extend. But it's easy to overdo it too. I tried to keep it natural.
If you go this way with ambient drivers, aim to get them lower than I did, aim for 60 to ~3500 Hz. Mine pretty much stops somewhere between 100 - 200
Hz. I couldn't use bigger drivers, I needed to hide them in the living room. You can do whatever you please
.Playing surround on them was pretty cool though. Much better than I had envisioned. Some movies definitely pump you up for certain scenes.
I know that's not your ball game, but boy... these arrays are very good at that! Never missed a sub yet... the ambience build up down low is terrific. More entertaining than any THX certified movie theatre I've been in. Pity I have such a small screen
.
Last edited:
You're right, but I'm used to it to have open discussions fill this thread and even the start of some pretty neat projects. Its 2 AM here so I'm gonna close up for the day. Feel free to start something new and I'll join it later... It is fun stuff that would be very suitable for it's own thread with hopefully more people that are intrigued enough to start playing with stuff like this.
Sorry, for my own sake, I don't share my MDATS as you never know if one day I might build some arrays for others and getting paid for it. I don't want to throw everything out in the open as I wouldn't know what people could (or want to) see in it. A little self protection I guess. I post a lot, just not that much. Anyone that comes over can see them on my screen after a listening session
.So I took the plunge and ordered 40 TC9's to add to the 12 I have laying around. I have followed this thread off and on over the last year or so and I haven't been able to quite get it out of my mind. I've been fiddling around with old car audio drivers in the almighty Cornu and OB but it's just not to the level of auditory satisfaction I'm used to. My uncle, who's much like a father to me, builds vertical symmetrical Scan Speak/ Focal towers with full phenolic enclosures and I'm feeling hard pressed to get a similar experience and feel, after spending who knows how many hours reading this thread, that this is what it's gonna take. I know I'm way out of my league knowledge wise as I'm going to have to reread everything but this is my passion. Unfortunately working as much as I do this will be a lengthy endeavor.
I know it's going to take some time time to gain the knowledge that it's going to take to get similar results. I'm more of a receiver, cd player and speakers guy. My understanding of DSP, REW, jriver, and PC based dsp programs is little to none but I guess I will be spending many more hours figuring that out.
I do have one question that you, Wesayso, may have touched on, but I recall you having issues with your laminate style enclosure. If you were to start this project again would you stick with this method of building the enclosure?
Thanks for all your input and advice in this thread. I hope my project will be even 80% of what you've accomplished.
Wes
I know it's going to take some time time to gain the knowledge that it's going to take to get similar results. I'm more of a receiver, cd player and speakers guy. My understanding of DSP, REW, jriver, and PC based dsp programs is little to none but I guess I will be spending many more hours figuring that out.
I do have one question that you, Wesayso, may have touched on, but I recall you having issues with your laminate style enclosure. If you were to start this project again would you stick with this method of building the enclosure?
Thanks for all your input and advice in this thread. I hope my project will be even 80% of what you've accomplished.
Wes
Hi Wes,
Unfortunately, yes, I'd do it like that again. Why do I say unfortunately? You've got to be a little crazy to do that much work. But it worked out very well, if you follow with the steps of hacking up the enclosure, wrapping it with epoxy and mat and PU foam in the cuts. Now if I wanted to save time and materials, a more conventional build could be considered. I'm still impressed with how quiet the enclosure is while blasting music. Lay your ear gently to the sides and you get nothing. You only hear the sound coming out of the front. The speaker enclosures seem to be the only thing that's quiet in the room as everything else moves to the music. I can feel it in my keyboard while playing music. That keyboard is located at the opposite wall, next to my couch, way off center.
Unfortunately, yes, I'd do it like that again
. Why do I say unfortunately? You've got to be a little crazy to do that much work. But it worked out very well, if you follow with the steps of hacking up the enclosure, wrapping it with epoxy and mat and PU foam in the cuts. Now if I wanted to save time and materials, a more conventional build could be considered. I'm still impressed with how quiet the enclosure is while blasting music. Lay your ear gently to the sides and you get nothing. You only hear the sound coming out of the front. The speaker enclosures seem to be the only thing that's quiet in the room as everything else moves to the music. I can feel it in my keyboard while playing music. That keyboard is located at the opposite wall, next to my couch, way off center.
I just stumbled onto something that might interest you... you know... the guy that likes to analyse lots of things!
It's called "The Snail" and it's a frequency-phase analyser. I just read the introduction quickly and it looks like something you might enjoy playing with!
Check it out!
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new...il-revolutionary-tuner-analyser-software.html
It's called "The Snail" and it's a frequency-phase analyser. I just read the introduction quickly and it looks like something you might enjoy playing with!
Check it out!
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/new...il-revolutionary-tuner-analyser-software.html
That does look like a fun tool! Being able to see what you hear is quite something.
You could compare a recording to one that's played back on your system.
Hahaha, the guy that likes to analyse... (analyse, is that UK spelling and analyze the US version?) See, I'm already doing it again...
You could compare a recording to one that's played back on your system
.Hahaha, the guy that likes to analyse... (analyse, is that UK spelling and analyze the US version?) See, I'm already doing it again...
Analyze is the US spelling. Generally, if there is a question of a z or an s, the US spelling will have the z. For example: civilization vs civilisation.
(and we pronounce Z "zee", not "zed"
)
Thanks Greg, I sometimes switch between UK and US spelling check (really need it from time to time) and see different words lite up sometimes. Not difficult words, that I think I got right, only to notice I'm on the "other" spell check again. Like center and centre.
Its words like definitely (that I learned to spell right) but that I used to type like: definitly (can't say why, really) why I really need the spell check. That and psychoacoustics and stuff like that.
But my sentences will still be crooked, as I do clearly see my Dutch heritage in my own stories when I reread them. But hopefully I'm learning. Maybe I should pick either UK or US for once and stop switching. At school we learned the UK spelling. But I do pick up a lot from reading and school has been ages ago.
I figured the US spelling would fit the forum better.
Duh, as long as you guys can follow what I'm trying to say... both choices should be fine.
But I do try and improve my language skills along the way. In this thread alone I've written half a book already (at least it feels that way). As I write a lot in English on this board, I'm actually getting rusty in writing in my native tongue. I need the spell check even more when I'm typing in Dutch.
Its words like definitely (that I learned to spell right) but that I used to type like: definitly (can't say why, really) why I really need the spell check. That and psychoacoustics and stuff like that.
But my sentences will still be crooked, as I do clearly see my Dutch heritage in my own stories when I reread them. But hopefully I'm learning. Maybe I should pick either UK or US for once and stop switching. At school we learned the UK spelling. But I do pick up a lot from reading and school has been ages ago
.I figured the US spelling would fit the forum better.
Duh, as long as you guys can follow what I'm trying to say... both choices should be fine.
But I do try and improve my language skills along the way. In this thread alone I've written half a book already (at least it feels that way). As I write a lot in English on this board, I'm actually getting rusty in writing in my native tongue. I need the spell check even more when I'm typing in Dutch.
OK, enough with the language thing, this is a thread about arrays after all .
I stumbled over two comments on the big "Beyond the Ariel" thread:
And a follow up:
As we have a number of Array users following this thread, I'd rather discuss this here as I know Lynn Olsen interest isn't in line arrays.
What do you guys think if you read the above statements? Do you agree?
I'll start: I do not agree. I think if you spend enough time to correct a line array it can sound remarkably close to a horn setup. Or basically any setup with a decent potential. I do believe once we get closer to an ideal STEP and impulse, the systems, no matter how they get there, will sound more alike than different.
There are rules for that though. You need to keep reflections in mind. The sensaround (that was a new word for me) mentioned for arrays I'd blame on (to much) early reflections. Get rid of them and that sensaround is mostly gone.(*)
Another point: "characteristic audible blurring of softness" I don't think I'm suffering from this... It might take more than IIR filters to optimise but even when I first had sound, roughly put together with a crude IIR EQ, I had a lot of snappy and clear response and very good imaging. Not all of it was correct, but I played "The Pink Panther Theme" from "Henry Mancini" and it made my girlfriend jump up when the horns started to blast suddenly.
I have experienced horns, but not as much as I'd like. I had horn tweeters for more than 20 years, my next door neighbour had Altec Barcelona's and I've heard many PA setups using horns, but that's about it. I haven't heard a milked out horn setup tinkered to the max.
Can you guys, listening to arrays share your views? I know ra7 has heard Pano's Altec setup and his own arrays. More different than alike? Could you share your preliminary view on this Rahul? We know you're still busy getting more out of the arrays. But what is different and what is more alike between those two? I'm very curious about that!
Also koldby, I know you have heard a lot of different setups (even had Quads I believe), do your arrays differ from that experience? Which one do you prefer? What was the same/more alike and what was (way) different?
The reasons for these questions is I've stumbled over a comparison a long time ago, comparing Danley's synergy horns to a couple of other speakers. When they were setup, with care and shared the same bottom end it was surprising to read how many could not pick the different speakers apart. It was in a treated HT room, on another forum. But it agrees to my viewpoint that the more you get things right, with whatever solution, the more they will start to sound the same.
Any thoughts? Please help me out here if you heard many different but highly acclaimed setups in comparison to the type of arrays used here. Full range line arrays with 3.5"drivers (and preferably ones with Vifa or Scan Speak drivers). Now why did I add the Vifa and Scan Speak comment? Because they measure a lot alike.
I know there are a few members here that had other types of drivers but non the less had a fun and pleasant experience with arrays. I'm not trying to exclude you guys but it is apparent both of you (you know who you are) are having plans to build new/better performing arrays.
Am I right about better performing systems starting to sound more alike? If we take enough care of the room etc...
(*) gone so much that I created the ambient addition to get back a pleasing enveloping sound
.I stumbled over two comments on the big "Beyond the Ariel" thread:
Lynn Olsen said:
And a follow up:
As we have a number of Array users following this thread, I'd rather discuss this here as I know Lynn Olsen interest isn't in line arrays.
What do you guys think if you read the above statements? Do you agree?
I'll start: I do not agree. I think if you spend enough time to correct a line array it can sound remarkably close to a horn setup. Or basically any setup with a decent potential. I do believe once we get closer to an ideal STEP and impulse, the systems, no matter how they get there, will sound more alike than different.
There are rules for that though. You need to keep reflections in mind. The sensaround (that was a new word for me) mentioned for arrays I'd blame on (to much) early reflections. Get rid of them and that sensaround is mostly gone.(*)
Another point: "characteristic audible blurring of softness" I don't think I'm suffering from this... It might take more than IIR filters to optimise but even when I first had sound, roughly put together with a crude IIR EQ, I had a lot of snappy and clear response and very good imaging. Not all of it was correct, but I played "The Pink Panther Theme" from "Henry Mancini" and it made my girlfriend jump up when the horns started to blast suddenly.
I have experienced horns, but not as much as I'd like. I had horn tweeters for more than 20 years, my next door neighbour had Altec Barcelona's and I've heard many PA setups using horns, but that's about it. I haven't heard a milked out horn setup tinkered to the max.
Can you guys, listening to arrays share your views? I know ra7 has heard Pano's Altec setup and his own arrays. More different than alike? Could you share your preliminary view on this Rahul? We know you're still busy getting more out of the arrays. But what is different and what is more alike between those two? I'm very curious about that!
Also koldby, I know you have heard a lot of different setups (even had Quads I believe), do your arrays differ from that experience? Which one do you prefer? What was the same/more alike and what was (way) different?
The reasons for these questions is I've stumbled over a comparison a long time ago, comparing Danley's synergy horns to a couple of other speakers. When they were setup, with care and shared the same bottom end it was surprising to read how many could not pick the different speakers apart. It was in a treated HT room, on another forum. But it agrees to my viewpoint that the more you get things right, with whatever solution, the more they will start to sound the same.
Any thoughts? Please help me out here if you heard many different but highly acclaimed setups in comparison to the type of arrays used here. Full range line arrays with 3.5"drivers (and preferably ones with Vifa or Scan Speak drivers). Now why did I add the Vifa and Scan Speak comment? Because they measure a lot alike.
I know there are a few members here that had other types of drivers but non the less had a fun and pleasant experience with arrays. I'm not trying to exclude you guys but it is apparent both of you (you know who you are
) are having plans to build new/better performing arrays.Am I right about better performing systems starting to sound more alike? If we take enough care of the room etc...
(*) gone so much that I created the ambient addition to get back a pleasing enveloping sound
Last edited: