I was just disagreeing Waysayso saying "Cost may be a very good reason we don't see it more often. "
I agree with him here. I personally would love to have a cardioid woofer array from floor to ceiling (or even closed in a wall), but can't afford it. Some people can, few of them...
I already have line arrays in walls. Unfortunately, woofers are 12" drivers in concrete boxes...
Why would you place them this far apart? What are the plans, will you place the tweeter in between them? Or are they (the mid array and tweeter) going to be placed side by side.
Cardioid woofer closed in a wall? How is that relevant to the discussion?. Seriously though, how does that work?
I hope that question was valid or otherwise I'd feel like a fool
.I read his post as: A cardoid floor to ceiling woofer array -or even- a sealed floor to ceiling woofer array in a wall.
A free interpretation of what was typed
.I have more questions than answers at this point...haha
Assuming a 6-driver arrange, I imagine it would either go to the side of the tweeter, or MTM with each M representing 3 drivers. But certainly no tweeter in between each midrange driver.
From the Griffin paper, I want to make the array height as large as possible to push the near/far field transition as far as possible, and c-t-c should be kept smaller than one wavelength at the xo point to keep the wavefront even. At 2kHz the wavelength is 170mm, so 150mm c-t-c keeps it under one wavelength and allows spreading out the 6 drivers to extend line length more than if I put them closer together.
Does it make sense, though?
Well I did not assume a tweeter between each pair of mids
An MTM like:
OOO[__]OOO
was what I originally assumed. But it's always better to assume nothing, so I asked.
You could play with the mid spacing to do some of the shading. Patrick once did a thread about that. He spaced the center drivers close together and spacing got wider for the outer (upper and lower) drivers. That would still make it a longer array but shaded due to the spacing.
Sort of like this:
O OO[__]OO O
Or as it would look in a separate mid array:
Do you get the idea?
Found Patrick's post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/301259-improved-array-6.html#post4952773
His conclusion was that conventional shading worked better though.
An MTM like:
OOO[__]OOO
was what I originally assumed. But it's always better to assume nothing, so I asked.
You could play with the mid spacing to do some of the shading. Patrick once did a thread about that. He spaced the center drivers close together and spacing got wider for the outer (upper and lower) drivers. That would still make it a longer array but shaded due to the spacing.
Sort of like this:
O OO[__]OO O
Or as it would look in a separate mid array:
Code:
O O OO O OFound Patrick's post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/301259-improved-array-6.html#post4952773
His conclusion was that conventional shading worked better though.
Last edited:
Well I did not assume a tweeter between each pair of mids
An MTM like:
OOO[__]OOO
was what I originally assumed. But it's always better to assume nothing, so I asked.
You could play with the mid spacing to do some of the shading. Patrick once did a thread about that. He spaced the center drivers close together and spacing got wider for the outer (upper and lower) drivers. That would still make it a longer array but shaded due to the spacing.
Sort of like this:
O OO[__]OO O
Or as it would look in a separate mid array:
Do you get the idea?Code:O O OO O O
Found Patrick's post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/301259-improved-array-6.html#post4952773
His conclusion was that conventional shading worked better though.
Yes, I get the idea. I was avoiding the definition of MTM vs midrange array to the side because the tweeter is a Beyma TPL-150H, so a large one at about 220mm top to bottom of horn, and I know MTM with such large spacing leads to lobing issues. Maybe in MMMTMMM the lobing isn't as bad?
What are your thoughts about the importance to be in the near field of the array? From Griffin's paper I would think it's very important, but from all the pictures you posted, plus Nola and others, I highly doubt those arrays put the listener in the near field.
Cardioid woofer closed in a wall? How is that relevant to the discussion?
Did not I write that either cardioid, or CLOSED in a wall?
If not in a wall, I would prefer it to be cardioid.
By the way. JBL made a PA speaker, with a woofer box, and an array on top. You would say, nothing special?
A first, such thing made Bose. They just simply added a bottom woofer for a mid-hi array. The result was, very different dispersion, and loss of low frequencies with the distance in respect to higher frequencies. Other manufacturers started copying this fashion, until JBL finally solved the problem, making the array section curved. Yes, they lost some advantages of the array, but as the result improved consistency of frequency response with distance.
A first, such thing made Bose. They just simply added a bottom woofer for a mid-hi array. The result was, very different dispersion, and loss of low frequencies with the distance in respect to higher frequencies. Other manufacturers started copying this fashion, until JBL finally solved the problem, making the array section curved. Yes, they lost some advantages of the array, but as the result improved consistency of frequency response with distance.
The cost of the drivers probably is just a small part of these type of speakers anyway. You missed the point.
Check out this post: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/284371-corner-floor-ceiling-line-array-using-vifa-tc9-27.html#post5183809
People that have similar taste to you can enjoy other flavors as well
. I never heard the Dynaudio's, I do have experience with Altec though, my neighbor next door had them for years. I loved listening to those, especially the midrange. What was more important to me is learn just what it was that made them so attractive to me.
Last edited:
You're over-asking me (lol). I would not know what a MMMTMMM would do. I only have experience with FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF (lol).
I'd try and simulate it just like Patrick did, to see if it has any merit.
All the arrays I showed, well not all but most, are symmetrical arrays that are designed around that center tweeter. That would be at the optimum listening height. My arrays are not sensitive that way. Basically I'm always in the near field. So again, I'm of little help.
If I were to build an MTM, I'd start with a 3-way Synergy, extend the bottom end (that's why I need it to be a 3 way) and put multiple woofers above and below it. With the Synergy being part of that array. That way I'd circumvent the usual floor dip while being able to use the horn to avoid lighting up the whole room. I really see the Synergies as the ultimate MTM. As they hold their pattern over their entire coverage area.
But this isn't helping you, is it? All you could take from it is the advice to use the array principle for the lower bits as well. Make sure that the usual 'floor dip' is avoided. That would depend on a couple of things, but don't stop at the midrange. Unless it covers everything down to ~80-100 Hz. That would be tough to achieve with 6 midrange drivers and shading.
Last edited:
Let me elaborate a bit on this, no harm meant...
If you can get away with MP3, why use FLAC or Wave, if you can get away with plastic why use wood, if you can get away with one driver why use multiple drivers. This is the trend today. Not my way, I try and stay clear of that road for the things I love.
My speakers cost me about € 2500 to make (including me getting some tools) and many thousands of hours of my time. No kidding. I did not cut any corners, I went all out. I still believe in quality and not the quantity and lust for profit of today's world. If I had a bigger room I would have played with Altec, no doubt about it. Because that stuff comes from a period in time that quality came before quantity and profits. We forget more than we learn sometimes...
Fair enough.
Skimming through Patrick's thread it seems he used Hornresp to simulate the array? I know how to use Hornresp for horns, but wasn't aware it could be used for arrays, or passive radiators for that matter. I have to look into it.
Altec has a limited bandwidth, so its midrange is emphasized, and I guess its point source nature also adds some positive effects to the midrange frequency. I like it, too, and I listen to UREI version of it everyday.
Good thing about the speakers with multiple midrange is they tend to project larger and more stable soundstage than regular WMT (or coax, FR) configuration, and they do sound impressive for stereo mic recordings such as orchestra, piano, or multiple mic-ed wet studio recordings. On the other hand, they literally sound a little scattered and phase-y for single closed mic-ed materials such as intimate dry lead vocal. The difference should be clearly heard especially when only one (mono) speaker is playing, although I could not clearly measure the difference. This is my conclusion based on my own single vs multiple midrange test, and based on my experience with MTM, array, and the other speakers in general. I can hardly say one type of speaker is better than the other.
I remember you love ZEP (and I do, too), and my speaker choice for ZEP is also MTM, or array (if I own), for above reasons.
I see a lot of generalizations here that I don't necessarily subscribe to.
If you would use multiple midranges, uncontrolled, you may have a point. However when we adjust accordingly, multiple midranges can do a lot of things more right than a single source could with a bit of care.
Intimate dry vocals are no problem either. However, you'd need to work on it to get it right, meaning every detail counts. But I wouldn't point at the multiple speakers but would question their integration.
What did you look at in measurements. Don't spot at FR and/or Phase. There's much more to be seen and I'm pretty sure you can measure the difference.
I did not play any ZEP until I knew my setup sounded (and measured) just right.
Many times we react to other things and blame the speakers. Measure right where you sit and listen. Observe more than one graph, start by staring at the IR for a while.
Look for changes in the waterfall plots, for changes in reflections and a lot of other things. You will find it if you're willing to look.
My arrays can sound big, if it's in the recording. They can sound small too, if it's in the recording. The IR will be the first clue.
If you would use multiple midranges, uncontrolled, you may have a point. However when we adjust accordingly, multiple midranges can do a lot of things more right than a single source could with a bit of care.
Intimate dry vocals are no problem either. However, you'd need to work on it to get it right, meaning every detail counts. But I wouldn't point at the multiple speakers but would question their integration.
What did you look at in measurements. Don't spot at FR and/or Phase. There's much more to be seen and I'm pretty sure you can measure the difference.
I did not play any ZEP until I knew my setup sounded (and measured) just right.
Many times we react to other things and blame the speakers. Measure right where you sit and listen. Observe more than one graph, start by staring at the IR for a while.
Look for changes in the waterfall plots, for changes in reflections and a lot of other things. You will find it if you're willing to look.
My arrays can sound big, if it's in the recording. They can sound small too, if it's in the recording. The IR will be the first clue.
Waysayso, I'm trying to share my general impression about multiple and single midrange replying OP's question. I don't see any people besides me who actually compared them directly in this thread. I and my friend did our own comparison last spring when I demoed MTM Amphion with his single Amphion. The result was interesting, so I later tested my own multiple amp driven MTM speaker turing on/off one speaker.
IR could not tell me any meaningful difference between single and multiple midrange, but the sound is clearly different to my ears. I actually didn't want to hear the difference that is not measured, but unfortunately I did.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.