Hi All,
Thanks for the comments and discussion. The SB65 is a very delicate driver and if you don't watch the pressure on it, it may break. I didn't allow for wire strain relief in the enclosure as I chose to not make access panels in the back. If I do this build again (surround channels
?) I would make access panels for easier wiring as this is taking forever!!!
When I tried the different gauges and solid core hanging off the end of the SB65 terminals the thicker sheath and thicker gauge wiring seemed to put a lot of weight on the terminals. Since I've been known to attached thicker wires to pcb boards for testing and occasionally rip off pads due to wire weight I'm hypersensitive this so I've erred on the side of caution in hopes to not open the case again. Tracking down the problem unit will prove difficult.
What I've learned from this project is there are a number of additional considerations with the LA design that do not apply to your conventional speakers. With the added number of drivers playing the same frequency range and design goals there could be a few gotchas not easily anticipated. I'm hoping my wire choice is not one of em..
To shed some light on the system I've ordered 1200AS2 ICE power board for the LAs. Page 23 contains the amp damping factor vs frequency chart.
The foam came in and speaker 2 should be ready for driver installation by the end of the weekend! Will have speaker 1 wired up in 2 days!!!
P.S. Wiring takes a while and mounting screws have to put in by hand to watch the pressure on the frames.
Thanks for the comments and discussion. The SB65 is a very delicate driver and if you don't watch the pressure on it, it may break. I didn't allow for wire strain relief in the enclosure as I chose to not make access panels in the back. If I do this build again (surround channels
?) I would make access panels for easier wiring as this is taking forever!!! When I tried the different gauges and solid core hanging off the end of the SB65 terminals the thicker sheath and thicker gauge wiring seemed to put a lot of weight on the terminals. Since I've been known to attached thicker wires to pcb boards for testing and occasionally rip off pads due to wire weight I'm hypersensitive this so I've erred on the side of caution in hopes to not open the case again. Tracking down the problem unit will prove difficult.
What I've learned from this project is there are a number of additional considerations with the LA design that do not apply to your conventional speakers. With the added number of drivers playing the same frequency range and design goals there could be a few gotchas not easily anticipated. I'm hoping my wire choice is not one of em
..To shed some light on the system I've ordered 1200AS2 ICE power board for the LAs. Page 23 contains the amp damping factor vs frequency chart.
The foam came in and speaker 2 should be ready for driver installation by the end of the weekend! Will have speaker 1 wired up in 2 days!!!
P.S. Wiring takes a while and mounting screws have to put in by hand to watch the pressure on the frames.
Was able to see this "art installation" at the Vancouver art gallery. Was in a large room and a bunch of diffusers with Tape and Reel, Vinyl and Tubes! Vinyl only allowed.
Playlist:
Devin Townsend - Storm
Behemoth - The Nephilim Rising
EST Trio - A Picture Of Doris Travelling With Boris
EST Trio sounded the best, seemed a bit muddy and lost control on the metal songs but pretty cool. They are large!
. Was in a large room and a bunch of diffusers with Tape and Reel, Vinyl and Tubes! Vinyl only allowed.Playlist:
Devin Townsend - Storm
Behemoth - The Nephilim Rising
EST Trio - A Picture Of Doris Travelling With Boris
EST Trio sounded the best, seemed a bit muddy and lost control on the metal songs but pretty cool. They are large!
Attachments
After an epic push, these things are labor intensive! The single sweep is the bass-horns that were in this room before the LAs. The dual sweep is L and R RAW frequency dependent window sweep. Phase between the 2 are pretty close. FIR phase correction was done on the bass-horn. Non-needed on the LAs for the phase to remain pretty flat. All sweeps done in the listening position. Fun is just starting.
With eq these get down to 30hz in room, I have a mode right at 30hz so this helps out a lot. Fullrange these sound a bit light. Blended subs at 60hz brings back the weight I'm used to; however, the subs smooth out a 60hz hole in frequency response the is deep and wide with only the LAs playing. Major room problem with all the speakers located in this area when only 2 are playing. Not sure how much the weight thing is due to the hole in FR at 60hz.
Quick comparison to the bass-horn speakers that were in here before. Lost a bit of sensitivity. Have to turn the volume up a bit more on the LA. They sound pretty close to the same. Both sound good. The LA are better at different locations in the room, not as much problem with off axis. The LA sound better at back of the room in the kitchen so that is nice. Bass-horn seem to image better in the sweet spot but the spot is smaller as compared with the LA.
These 2 speakers sound more alike than different. The controlled directivity vs wide dispersion sound different and the presentation between the 2 is a different but overall they both play very nice. The LA are easier in that eq is needed but no XOVER. LA need more power.
Only have like 30min listening on the LA so will spend some time tweaking and evaluating. The LA are very labour intensive.....like building 12 pairs instead of 1. Lots of material needed. The raw price difference of the 2 speakers is negligible.
Its neat hearing a 2.5" play 30hz lol
With eq these get down to 30hz in room, I have a mode right at 30hz so this helps out a lot. Fullrange these sound a bit light. Blended subs at 60hz brings back the weight I'm used to; however, the subs smooth out a 60hz hole in frequency response the is deep and wide with only the LAs playing. Major room problem with all the speakers located in this area when only 2 are playing. Not sure how much the weight thing is due to the hole in FR at 60hz.
Quick comparison to the bass-horn speakers that were in here before. Lost a bit of sensitivity. Have to turn the volume up a bit more on the LA. They sound pretty close to the same. Both sound good. The LA are better at different locations in the room, not as much problem with off axis. The LA sound better at back of the room in the kitchen so that is nice. Bass-horn seem to image better in the sweet spot but the spot is smaller as compared with the LA.
These 2 speakers sound more alike than different. The controlled directivity vs wide dispersion sound different and the presentation between the 2 is a different but overall they both play very nice. The LA are easier in that eq is needed but no XOVER. LA need more power.
Only have like 30min listening on the LA so will spend some time tweaking and evaluating. The LA are very labour intensive.....like building 12 pairs instead of 1. Lots of material needed. The raw price difference of the 2 speakers is negligible.
Its neat hearing a 2.5" play 30hz lol
Attachments
Thanks! Break time. I'm noticing they have to be rolled off in the high end as with compared with my last setup, of course its loading the room differently so.......
Can listen in the kitchen at the far back of the room now, cooking will be more fun! I think a highShelf boost at like 2khz and a lowShelf boost at like 55hz is all that is needed here but we'll see. It sounds good with reverse baffle step compensation actually. Time to re-read all the line array DSP settings.
. I'm noticing they have to be rolled off in the high end as with compared with my last setup, of course its loading the room differently so....... Can listen in the kitchen at the far back of the room now, cooking will be more fun! I think a highShelf boost at like 2khz and a lowShelf boost at like 55hz is all that is needed here but we'll see. It sounds good with reverse baffle step compensation actually. Time to re-read all the line array DSP settings.
You can make quite a few steps forward in imaging once you go to FIR filtering.
But I'd look at measurements first, avoid (or treat) very early reflections (0-5 ms) if you want to maximise imaging. Then again, if you're happy with what you've got...
Each step forward has other consequences. It is a never ending rollercoaster ride if you're not careful. Different processing does a lot! Try some different house curves first.
Take multiple measurements and average them to see what happens around the sweet spot.
But I'd look at measurements first, avoid (or treat) very early reflections (0-5 ms) if you want to maximise imaging. Then again, if you're happy with what you've got...
Each step forward has other consequences. It is a never ending rollercoaster ride if you're not careful. Different processing does a lot! Try some different house curves first.
Take multiple measurements and average them to see what happens around the sweet spot.
Ok! Finally had some time with these! Setup horns beside the LAs, eq and some AB listening!
Blue is the Horns, red is the LA, both 1/6 smoothing. Dialed the frequency response kinda close. Quick impressions are:
- Soundstage moved a little higher with the LAs. When I stand the stage moves with up as well, pretty different! Soundstage seemed a tad more diffused with the LA, a bit bigger and moved back a bit.
- Horns seems a tiny bit darker than the LAs. Horns imaged a bit better than LA. LAs seemed to exaggerate the ambiance of recordings more than the Horns. Maybe horns sounded cleaner?
- Voices sounded a bit more realistic on LA when watching movies.
The differences are only slight. When volume is the same both sound pretty close.
Watched Blade Runner 2049 while switching back and forth. Both sound great and both perform well. They are different, one is not better than the other. Depending on the day I might prefer one over the other.
Blue is the Horns, red is the LA, both 1/6 smoothing. Dialed the frequency response kinda close. Quick impressions are:
- Soundstage moved a little higher with the LAs. When I stand the stage moves with up as well, pretty different! Soundstage seemed a tad more diffused with the LA, a bit bigger and moved back a bit.
- Horns seems a tiny bit darker than the LAs. Horns imaged a bit better than LA. LAs seemed to exaggerate the ambiance of recordings more than the Horns. Maybe horns sounded cleaner?
- Voices sounded a bit more realistic on LA when watching movies.
The differences are only slight. When volume is the same both sound pretty close.
Watched Blade Runner 2049 while switching back and forth. Both sound great and both perform well. They are different, one is not better than the other. Depending on the day I might prefer one over the other.
Attachments
What frequency range do the line arrays cover? Do they hand over to a (or multiple) sub(s)? I think you can win quite a lot in bass management (for both setups).
Work on it (or work on both of them) and you can improve a lot.
Can you show a longer time frame on the impulse? Like 0 to 20 ms?
Work on it (or work on both of them) and you can improve a lot.
Can you show a longer time frame on the impulse? Like 0 to 20 ms?
The LA are running full range right now (30hz to 20khz). I have 2 subs "distributed" that I'm currently NOT using. Wanted to see how far I could push the LAs. If I use the subs it smooths out everything below 100hz, fills in that dip at 40hz and sounds smoother.
I have 4 problems in the current room that are not going away.
1. Couch on the right hand side of listening position. Creates interference on 1 speaker.
2. TV in the middle.
3. Only half the back wall opening up to another room.
4. reflections from listening position couch on measurements.
Seems like the worst offender is #3 above. Seems to pull the stage around if I'm not careful. Probably worth it to add some large absorption to that wall in the back but I don't think I'd be able to swing the permissions
.Will work on it and report later. There are a number of things in the impulse that can be fixed. I took out the FIR in the hornBass speaker as well. You can see that in the impulse.
Starting the amp enclosure this weekend!
Got some more time on setup. Moved some things around, added some more wall panels. Attached is an impulse measurement out to 10mS. You can see the periphery couch at 8mS. There are some TV reflections in there as well. I'm sure there is some reflection from the main couch where the mic is setup.
Got some more time on setup. Moved some things around, added some more wall panels. Attached is an impulse measurement out to 10mS. You can see the periphery couch at 8mS. There are some TV reflections in there as well. I'm sure there is some reflection from the main couch where the mic is setup.
Attachments
Where was the mic? The reason I ask is that at 8 ms, the couch would probably be closer to the mic than 8ms.
Not a bad result. What do you do, processing wise? I've experienced big differences in how I treat the IR, as far as filtering goes. You can practically determine how you want the imaging to present itself, based on the variables used in processing.
I'd recommend playing with that extensively, if you do use FIR filtering.
Somewhere in my (huge) thread I even have some templates etc. as a download from what I use(d) in DRC-FIR.
What I want to say is: it is remarkable how the way you process thing can influence what you get to hear/experience. There's a lot to gain there, it just takes time.
Your IR is clean enough (due to the damping panels and their nature to average out a lot of reflections) to process and really get audible and perceptual results.
Not a bad result. What do you do, processing wise? I've experienced big differences in how I treat the IR, as far as filtering goes. You can practically determine how you want the imaging to present itself, based on the variables used in processing.
I'd recommend playing with that extensively, if you do use FIR filtering.
Somewhere in my (huge) thread I even have some templates etc. as a download from what I use(d) in DRC-FIR.
What I want to say is: it is remarkable how the way you process thing can influence what you get to hear/experience. There's a lot to gain there, it just takes time.
Your IR is clean enough (due to the damping panels and their nature to average out a lot of reflections) to process and really get audible and perceptual results.
The main couch is at the listening position, the other couch is smack dab in the middle between the listening position and the LineArray. Currently I use miniSharc to do some eq and light FIR (only 800 taps to work with). Also I watch a lot of movies with this system so latency is a factor.
Could do some jriver with longer taps for music listening. Will investigate. I'm finding little adjustments improve the sound quite a bit. The soundstage is much better now but it took some time to get the balance correct. I'm finding I use the volume button a bit more than my previous setup.
Could do some jriver with longer taps for music listening. Will investigate. I'm finding little adjustments improve the sound quite a bit. The soundstage is much better now but it took some time to get the balance correct. I'm finding I use the volume button a bit more than my previous setup.
I balance the music trough JRiver (so it sounds like the same level) and basically never touch the volume. As recordings can vary way too much for me to hassle with that. Volume also has quite the effect on how things get experienced, so settling with a known basic level helped me a lot to be able to judge it better.
That 8 ms wiggle is quite small though, I would not worry about it too much just yet. Earlier reflections have way more influence on things like imaging.
If you end up experimenting with JRiver, try the mid/side tricks I use, just for fun. They are described in my thread and fluid's thread. More than one array user have stated the results were favourable.
Your measurements look pretty clean (good room!), is this the left+right or one of them? Balancing left and right channels (based on frequency dependent windows of about 6 cycles) goes a long way towards very stable phantom imaging.
Why the frequency dependent window? Because most imaging queues are picked up from the first wave of sound, tonality takes longer to settle. But as I see those first 10 ms, getting that first wave right will also make the unfiltered results look (and more important, sound) better.
I like to make little projects for myself, holding myself to a single theme to learn. So I may spend up to a month just working on tonality. And at another time on imaging. Balance is everything in tonality, little tweaks go a long way. Play lots of different material, don't end up with one genre (or just a few songs) that sounds great.
That 8 ms wiggle is quite small though, I would not worry about it too much just yet. Earlier reflections have way more influence on things like imaging.
If you end up experimenting with JRiver, try the mid/side tricks I use, just for fun. They are described in my thread and fluid's thread. More than one array user have stated the results were favourable.
Your measurements look pretty clean (good room!), is this the left+right or one of them? Balancing left and right channels (based on frequency dependent windows of about 6 cycles) goes a long way towards very stable phantom imaging.
Why the frequency dependent window? Because most imaging queues are picked up from the first wave of sound, tonality takes longer to settle. But as I see those first 10 ms, getting that first wave right will also make the unfiltered results look (and more important, sound) better.
I like to make little projects for myself, holding myself to a single theme to learn. So I may spend up to a month just working on tonality. And at another time on imaging. Balance is everything in tonality, little tweaks go a long way. Play lots of different material, don't end up with one genre (or just a few songs) that sounds great.
Thanks for the feedback! Will try some music specific tricks in jriver to test out things. If music presentation could improve a bit, I'd call this a win!
The sweep is L+R. I played with some FDW in REW but have to look closer at the settings. The generic settings did not sound right even though it measured ok. Will have to re-read your posts regarding FDW and jriver settings for side/mid ect. Thanks for posting that stuff in your thread!
The sweep is L+R. I played with some FDW in REW but have to look closer at the settings. The generic settings did not sound right even though it measured ok. Will have to re-read your posts regarding FDW and jriver settings for side/mid ect. Thanks for posting that stuff in your thread!
Just looked up a link for another thread: here's some of that mid/side stuff in graphs:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/242171-towers-25-driver-range-line-array-393.html#post5218329
Around that post, either before or after I think I have posted way more detailed information. My thread is huge, and that can make stuff hard to find.
Here it is...
Be aware as it is very important to already have a pleasurable starting curve with a good general balance. In my room, that wasn't a flat curve.
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/242171-towers-25-driver-range-line-array-393.html#post5218329
Around that post, either before or after I think I have posted way more detailed information. My thread is huge, and that can make stuff hard to find.
Here it is...
Be aware as it is very important to already have a pleasurable starting curve with a good general balance. In my room, that wasn't a flat curve.
Last edited:
Hi All,
Instead of muddying up the message boards I thought I'd post here. Has anyone done an LCR front stage using straight fullrange linearray integrated with ATMOS height channels?
Thoughts on the pros and cons of this? I'm in the process of adding some channels to the listening space. Movies are becoming higher in the queue lately.
I like the midbass presentation of the linearrays vs my other speakers and since the mains are done, might as well do the center!
Pros.
- 2 channel stays the way I like it.
- Looks good in room.
- Can hear it better in the kitchen.
- Front stage stays the same.
- Can upgrade surround channels to linearrays later (this is dream land though!).
Cons
- Limiting viewing position because of the differences in doubling distance drop off but there will be only one 3 seat couch to deal with so front to back distance of viewers will not change.
- Cost. Getting pricey.
- Might not play nice with the ATMOS height channels. Would this REALLY matter that much though?
Any random thoughts welcome! Thanks,
Instead of muddying up the message boards I thought I'd post here. Has anyone done an LCR front stage using straight fullrange linearray integrated with ATMOS height channels?
Thoughts on the pros and cons of this? I'm in the process of adding some channels to the listening space. Movies are becoming higher in the queue lately.
I like the midbass presentation of the linearrays vs my other speakers and since the mains are done, might as well do the center!
Pros.
- 2 channel stays the way I like it.
- Looks good in room.
- Can hear it better in the kitchen.
- Front stage stays the same.
- Can upgrade surround channels to linearrays later (this is dream land though!).
Cons
- Limiting viewing position because of the differences in doubling distance drop off but there will be only one 3 seat couch to deal with so front to back distance of viewers will not change.
- Cost. Getting pricey.
- Might not play nice with the ATMOS height channels. Would this REALLY matter that much though?
Any random thoughts welcome! Thanks,
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.