Why are fullrangers more intelligible ?

[gpapag]

Were there was no need for filling large space or high sound level, a single full ranger would have been the final choise for me.

I have made use of the miniDSP flexibility to reduce the frequency bandwidth of my multiway loudspeakers to emulate that of a fullranger’s (while keeping SPLs low).
Close enough, 60%-70% I would say but not the same. The other 30%-40% or so has to be due to crossover and multiple sound sources issues.

The highest understanding of the content of speech, songs and complex music I get in mono and from reduced bandwidth sound sources.

I admit, my most intense emotional contact with Shostakovich 7th was a listening through a handheld transistor radio while painting the fence on the balcony.

George

[KaffiMann]

Originally Posted by gpapag

Were there was no need for filling large space or high sound level, a single full ranger would have been the final choise for me.

Agreed, and like you say: the surrounding experience and the "moment" can certainly have a big impact on the listening experience.

However, I have yet to experience that one single driver completely on its own can provide me with the desired listening experience. Often find that even though small FR's can sound quite sweet, but when they make an ambitious attempt at any kind of bass everything just falls apart, like everything gets a bit blurred or muddy despite listening to relatively low volume.

The only place I can wholeheartedly agree to using a single driver would be headphones.

Also agree on the mono thing.
If I move my speakers out to the lawn it is much better to sum in mono and angle the speakers out from a specific point, mono is so much easier and more "coherent" when going "stupid loud". Stereo is just for getting my smug on when listening to music in my den.

[tmuikku]

I used to have fullrange speakers for many years and now that I'm trying to tune sound of a multiway speaker prototype I tend to make it mid forward frequency response wise which I find amusing I guess fullrangers are more intelligible since I've got some sort of lust to search for the sound. Anyway, I think I've got the best crossover yet with S.Harsh XO guideline which aims for less phase rotation than typical LR crossovers have. Next speaker is going to be a multiple entry horn though, searching for the ultimate fullrange sound Reduced bandwidth and maybe phase seem reasonable candidates that make for intelligibility.

[gpapag]

Originally Posted by KaffiMann

Often find that even though small FR's can sound quite sweet, but when they make an ambitious attempt at any kind of bass everything just falls apart, like everything gets a bit blurred or muddy despite listening to relatively low volume.

Most probably due to largish axial excursion and cone breakup.

The Jordan JX29S has a descent excursion and a rigid cone. I have tried it on almost any enclosure type mock up.

The one on which it produced the cleanest sound was a hybrid construction, which loaded it acoustically in a way that the cone didn’t visibly move while it ‘punched’ gloriously. Coincidence?

George

[planet10]

Originally Posted by scottjoplin

Possibly a faulty pair then, who knows, condemn the model generally, why not, it's only an opinion.

Matt,

Not just my opinion.

Who knows, they didn’t seem to be broken, but who knows, we only got around to having 1 pair. If we had liked it — we liked enuff to take on the later ones, we could not get amymore as they quit building them.

We felt it a clear sign that they had taken what was learned and came out with something better.

dave

[Discopete]

The Monitor 3 as I mentioned are essentially the X, just raised off the floor 12" and without the boxy sides that in conjunction with the panels at the floor gave them the tubbiness and rolled off top end that were the only complaints. I would agree with that as I did have a pair years ago. The Monitor 3s are remarkably better in those regards as I can attest.

[mark100]

I'm only familiar with the X and the Monitor 3, both of which used the Servodrive Amp.
No experience with any of the following models which moved away from that amp.

My understanding is that the Servodrive amp became too much of a liability issue, high voltage, fire, etc.

Twas a crying shame, the amp really does give the early acoustats a special place in the realm of electrostats ime/imo

[Discopete]

Me too. I have two pairs running right now with two sets of panels in isobaric on Monitor 3 frames. Absolutely world class..imo


especially with a Linn 5150 behind each

[scottjoplin]

Originally Posted by gpapag

I admit, my most intense emotional contact with Shostakovich 7th was a listening through a handheld transistor radio while painting the fence on the balcony.

Perhaps it was the fumes Spoken like a true music lover

[mark100]

VERY nice, enjoy

I've been a big fan of 'stats and planars since the mid 70's, after hearing the Acoustat, Dayton-Wright, Magneplanars etc, at local hi-fi shops.
Bought 2 pair of X back then. Removed the panels from one, and free air mounted them. Left one pair as is, which i don't intend to part with.

Then in the 80s-90s, living in Manhattan, i was always grabbing any auditions i could arrange of all big planars, ribbons, stats. Lot's to compare to.
Took top of line Stax headphones to demos to be able to get a feel for source material, to help judge speaker sound....when dealers would permit/indulge.

I'm quite certain there is nothing sonically inferior about well running Acoustat X