but you havent answered my question:
Please, point to me where you see, in the measurments:
soundstage quality
tone quality
weight in the midrange
musicality
coherancy
dynamics
details
Read Toole "Sound reproduction" which pretty much recaps what we know and what we don't know.
With this I bow out of this "discussion" because:
can you answer my points. what he says about this. I will definitely not read the book. maybe you could tell me...
It's strange grown up people from pro manufacture and pro experienced speaker builders try to argument against one member that a parameter as frequency response that is used as reference all over the world for building all various studio equipment doesn't matter. These equipment is used to produce the music we listen, how can you say frequency measurements doesn't matter. Think some go to far for winning arguments, look inside and maybe see yourself use frequency response measurements for getting results and get progress.
This time arguments was frequency response is useless, earlier in another thread it was measurements microphones used by diy'ers was too cheap, well you say a A7.3 can be reference speaker for a sum of around 100$, why can a microphone around 120$ not be good for a diy'er, at less it must be good enough as comparing different drivers.
This time arguments was frequency response is useless, earlier in another thread it was measurements microphones used by diy'ers was too cheap, well you say a A7.3 can be reference speaker for a sum of around 100$, why can a microphone around 120$ not be good for a diy'er, at less it must be good enough as comparing different drivers.
hmmm,
Ive got no time to loose at this point.
all ive said is that measurments shows only a small aspect of sound reproductiona dn that you cannot evaluate
dynamic
inner details
musicality, coherancy
of a speaker with measurments. therefore, in my experience, measurments prrove next to useless to determine I like a speaker or not.
Ive got no time to loose at this point.
all ive said is that measurments shows only a small aspect of sound reproductiona dn that you cannot evaluate
dynamic
inner details
musicality, coherancy
of a speaker with measurments. therefore, in my experience, measurments prrove next to useless to determine I like a speaker or not.
we argue because the user spkr seems to imply that since fullrangers measures relativly poorly, that it must not be good. which is totally false assumption.
I well know what Floyd says. And an important one s that he believes if your measurements are not anechoic they aren't all thet ueful.
All amplifiers interact with the speaker. Anyone who has yet to understand how much information can be lost in the electronics is working with one hand tied behind their back.
dave
Is a very good book. And has a lot of valuable information. Still it has big holes and only scratches the surface.
Olive's papers are from the same work.
Even the best speakers are, in terms of where they will be, not that good -- maybe 10% of the way. There are a lot of ways to skin the cat.It is amazing that we can get so much enjoyment out of them.
dave
compared to what, headphones? how can they be 10%, 10% of the real instrument, the live event? I think then th eproblem is not loudspeaker, but microphone and how we actually record the live event that is the ultimate limit.
compared to what i think is possible... the reason why the number is WAG. Recording tech is certainly primitive as well.
Our hifis are still quite primitive, and that they work as well as they do is a huge pointer to how well the ear/brain can fill in missing information. They less information it has to fill in, then the less work it has to do, the more relaxed we can be when listening, and the more enjoyable it becomes.
dave
interesting. our state of mind certainly effect what we perceive. im not sure that we are really in a primitive SOTA though.
from some psychadelic experience, its quite mesmerizing how my affected brain detect details that are there (why and how else could I hear all those details), but simply unavailable to my normal sober state of mind. This is a really interesting subject, as its obvious and while it cannot be measured, anyone who do a psychedelic, or even smoke a little, will notice how better he perceive music
I can only offer my experience with the 7.3 in a FH3. In a nutshell, I am extremely satisfied with it. I have compared it to other speakers I own which cost at least twice as much to build, and which are very nice speakers, and the FH3 MA7.3 seriously holds its own, to say the least. As for bass, it depends what you're looking for. It won't rattle the windows or thump your chest. It will give accurate bass for most music. I sometimes use a small sub with mine (Voxel - a mini-sub+).
Sensitivity isn't an issue to me. My amp has plenty of power and has shown to be very clean. The combination works very well.
I hope I helped at least a little.
Mike
Thanks for detailed info..
I was just checking the different drivers to see which would be suitable for me...
As of now haven't finalized the amplifier, and first looking to finalize the speaker drivers and then will be looking for its enclosure. And based on them, will be building the amplifier (could be class A low power solid state amp or a chip amp like lm3668 or ta2020 or tpa3116 etc).
Looking at cost and performance reviews, thinking of A7.3 or others in that range..
heard from forum/people , A7.3 would be giving good mids and highs, but not much bass, which could be enhanced by the cabinets like FH mk3 and others ... but its sensitivity of this is bit lower.. so checking about A7p..
Some were saying 6 inch one will be better as it will give better bass.. so checking about the alpair 10s and fe166en etc..
Regarding my living room size its about 15 feet x 9 feet with a one side big opening to other room..
with this size of room will the A7 be ok with good balance of bass (with the help of suitable cabinet ) and mids/highs...??
Also regarding music source, mostly will be mp3 format song files... whether they will sound good with these or do we need to look for speakers with bit lesser sensitive to source of music files (played with a good amplifier)...
thanks and regards
S Sarath
I consider 8 inch driver to be the minimum size for good bass without the need of a subwoofer. As a 4 inch driver is 4 time smaller, I do not think its merely enough for reasonable spl or good bass. With the MA 7p, I would add a subwoofer.
That said, ive lived for 6 month with a fonken fe127 driver without any subwoofer and it was still enjoyable.
if you dont plan on using a subwoofer, I would never get a 4 inch driver as it might definitely not be enough for you. It wasnt even close to enough for me.
about the use of mp3, I say it is not relevant. a good speaker will still make the sound of mp3 better then a less good speaker.
Last edited:
No matter the full range driver, any 4 inch driver will benefit highly from a subwoofer.
metal cones has a sound
paper cone has a sound
I tend to prefer paper and would always opt for paper, but some find metal better, ect. theirs no strict rule. you will have to test it yourself and see which you prefer. I personally prefer paper and would get the a7p. I used to have the a12p and would have gotten a MA A7 instead but since A7 only came in metal format, I chose the A12p. now that this has changed, i will likely get the A7p down the line to play with.
oh and has price/performance ratio, a fullrange kick ***. Its seriously the best bang for the buck. You can build a amazing full range system with 150$ worth of fullrange drivers and a 75$ subwoofer + 75$ sub amp.
Last edited:
the 7P may have a brighter top end than the 7M .. just to confuse things more
because of the good sensitivity, maybe the 7P in a TL design would work nicely in that size room
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.