For a driver to work well in both the lower region of the bandwidth and the top region of the bandwidth, the bandwidth is preferably limited, the driver should be suitable for that limited bandwidth. For midrange this is rather complex. We cannot apple to apple compare the floppiness of a soft dome with the floppiness of paper cone as the way they work is different.
So how about comparing big metal dome with soft dome? Let's forget the effect of better motor that will also skew the comparison. The biggest factor causing differences is actually in the implementation. Hard cones and metal domes are known to produce fatiguing break ups. To combat these, often a designer uses LCR solutions that throw away all the benefits of being rigid and lightweight in the first place.
Combating the rigid cone/dome is not an easy task, that's why implementation can be the dominant factor, which is to tame rigid cone without throwing the baby with the bath water. Same with soft dome. It is equally difficult to make soft dome to sound like metal, i.e. producing accurate cymbal crash sound. I only know Dynaudio soft dome that can do that. Probably ATC to some degree can too? Of course, with large dome size the job is harder, but what will we compare it too? Something like Scan-Speak 10F? Then may be it will be harder to cross with woofer and especially with dome tweeter to make a 3 way speaker.
How about buying the cheapest driver and amplifier and then use cheap DSP to flatten the response at ears position? Taa daa.. we have a system that is comparable with the most expensive system in the world.
More extension towards the low end sounds subjectively "slower" than a limited bass extension, plus if you have the same SD and box size, the more extended bass speaker has lower efficiency. A very strong motor usually not help for bass extension, so very deep bass needs a not so strong motor. You can see a recipe for "slow" bass here.
Last edited:
With respect to fast vs slow bass, I completely agree that the impulse response and frequency reaponse are equivalent - look up Fourier Transform if you disagree.
However, I do wonder if what we perceive as fast or slow bass might have more to do with group delay? Considering a typical bass reflex enclosure, generally the sound is characterized as less tight and slower than a sealed enclosure with equivalent response. Thoughts?
However, I do wonder if what we perceive as fast or slow bass might have more to do with group delay? Considering a typical bass reflex enclosure, generally the sound is characterized as less tight and slower than a sealed enclosure with equivalent response. Thoughts?
How about buying the cheapest driver and amplifier and then use cheap DSP to flatten the response at ears position? Taa daa.. we have a system that is comparable with the most expensive system in the world.
Partially yes, as long as the system is not forced too much and stays within its motor lineairity. After listening to the 25 Vifa TC 9 oer side full range, digitally in-room-equalized Wesayso system (see the 4000+ posts thread Tale of Two Towers here on diyaudio) I am even more convinced about that. Best system I heard ever, regardless of price.
Another example is the Kii 3 system: cheap bread'nbutter drivers plus extensive DSP correction. Regarded by many as on of the the best compact systems around. Kef LS50 active is another great example.
But hey, who am I to say all this? Feel free to spend away money at exotic components and throw them in a box and then have the illusion of owning the best system in the world.
Partially yes, as long as the system is not forced too much and stays within its motor lineairity. After listening to the 25 Vifa TC 9 oer side full range, digitally in-room-equalized Wesayso system (see the 4000+ posts thread Tale of Two Towers here on diyaudio) I am even more convinced about that. Best system I heard ever, regardless of price.
Another example is the Kii 3 system: cheap bread'nbutter drivers plus extensive DSP correction. Regarded by many as on of the the best compact systems around. Kef LS50 active is another great example.
But hey, who am I to say all this? Feel free to spend away money at exotic components and throw them in a box and then have the illusion of owning the best system in the world.
Those are like plane vs helicopter or catamaran vs mono-hull discussions; there is no best, both have strong and weak point, use which suits the situation best.
I agree that on/off axis response also plays a big part in the truth of this matter.
What is your take on diaphragm mass on detailed sound?
I 'm under the impression that smaller/lighter drivers reveal more details. But as I am writing this I am wondering if sound levels do play a big role in this.
I have not compared my column style 4x3.3" with mini planer vs the JBL control 5 monitors (5"+tit. dome) or 12"+ horn at war volume at 10 or more meter distance..... but with normal room levels and especially with low volume, the columns win hands down in SQ and detail resolution.
They have very a wide hor off axis response and I created them with the idea that I enjoy music mostly together with others so no listening spot but area and a 40-45 degree toe-in which gives a very nice balanced stereo sound in most parts of the room, where the other 2 have listening spots and even on them, they just don't sound as good.
But for large PA use where many people are standing further away, you probably want to use speakers with a more narrow hor. directivity to get more direct sound further away.
I think both narrow and wide directivity speakers have their best uses, and it is also a matter of taste.
An interesting thing I remember about reading many discussions and research papers about directivity is that only experienced listeners seem to have a little preference for more controlled directivity, but they and the unexperienced listeners can enjoy both.
My idea about this is, that this could well be because of the systems they listen to at home, they have a different reference or idea of what is natural or good.
Last edited:
and yet the "fastest" sounding bass Ive ever heard came from an open baffle woofer with a tiny motor.
This system was -3db at 30 hz
Fast slow??
Seems to me fast bass comes with a low Q.
As far as mid and up "resolution"...
Seems to me any time a cone or dome is flexing, then it is making a sound thats "colored" by the material properties
If the material has a high loss factor then it also has complex mechanical property that is hysteric. Theres a time delay between stress and strain and this property is non linear , hence the coloration's.
Sooo soft cones with high internal loss that are operated well into the flexy regions can have noticeable color AND at least subjectively some loss of detail.
I suspect the detail many hear with metal cones is simply that they are using them in the piston range and avoid the lossy effects of damping. So long of course that they have properly supressed the higher freq resonances of the metal or the breakup is out far enough that u dont have to
That said I also think this is where art meets science and those who have been refining their skills in this area have gotten better and better at manipulating ALL the nitty gritty details of materials and constructions to achieve a well balanced use of all the tricks available to end with most of the strengths maximized and most of the weaknesses minimized.
There are an infinite number of variables in this "stiff but well damped" thing and seems to me they are not all covered by what we think we know
Not so humble opinion looking for correction ha..
This system was -3db at 30 hz
Fast slow??
Seems to me fast bass comes with a low Q.
As far as mid and up "resolution"...
Seems to me any time a cone or dome is flexing, then it is making a sound thats "colored" by the material properties
If the material has a high loss factor then it also has complex mechanical property that is hysteric. Theres a time delay between stress and strain and this property is non linear , hence the coloration's.
Sooo soft cones with high internal loss that are operated well into the flexy regions can have noticeable color AND at least subjectively some loss of detail.
I suspect the detail many hear with metal cones is simply that they are using them in the piston range and avoid the lossy effects of damping. So long of course that they have properly supressed the higher freq resonances of the metal or the breakup is out far enough that u dont have to
That said I also think this is where art meets science and those who have been refining their skills in this area have gotten better and better at manipulating ALL the nitty gritty details of materials and constructions to achieve a well balanced use of all the tricks available to end with most of the strengths maximized and most of the weaknesses minimized.
There are an infinite number of variables in this "stiff but well damped" thing and seems to me they are not all covered by what we think we know
Not so humble opinion looking for correction ha..
Well, the mass issue seems an attractive assumption at first sight. But then, if you take the very low (driving) force into account, the discussion about a possible advantage of low mass diaphrams such als ESL's and magnetostats have, it is no longer an advantage, but rather a necessity. The driving forces of a conventional vc/cone/dome assembly are substantially larger than those driving thin film transducers.
I am quite willing to believe the 3x3 planar combi wins from the JBL's . My explanation for that is that most of us have a preference for splashing sound against the walls creating artificial spaciousness, regarded as detail. In comparison, controlled (narrower) directivity systems tend to sound dryer or duller. But that does not mean that they perform worse, but actually better. At least the phantom image is supposed to be created superior to very wide, but oncontrolled directivity systems. But alas: at the end it depends on the recording of the programme material: very few recordings nowadays are capable of creating true stereo.
I am quite willing to believe the 3x3 planar combi wins from the JBL's . My explanation for that is that most of us have a preference for splashing sound against the walls creating artificial spaciousness, regarded as detail. In comparison, controlled (narrower) directivity systems tend to sound dryer or duller. But that does not mean that they perform worse, but actually better. At least the phantom image is supposed to be created superior to very wide, but oncontrolled directivity systems. But alas: at the end it depends on the recording of the programme material: very few recordings nowadays are capable of creating true stereo.
I have two ribbon designs on development bench now. They are identical constructions ( mass, shape size, materials etc.) There is one very small difference between the two. They have same freq response within a db and are both =- 1.5 db from 1k to 20 k
At 95 db at 1 meter..
One measures 3rd harmonic at 5 % distortion at 1 khz
The other measures less than 0.5%
2nd, 4th , 5th are all way down on both, just 3rd harm is high on one.
In many blind tests no one has been able to hear a difference between the two.
I suspect the distortion thing is ether overblown or there are many many different ways something can distort with an infinite number of complex combinations all confused by any number of other parameters all working together on our perception to produce confusion in this matter??
Better leave the amp out of the question as it evidently has an influence as in crap in, crap out (of the speaker).
I would love to hear Wesayso system and compare it with 2 planar tweeters and ~5k x-overs added.
After hearing it, do you think all the "Christmas" whistles and bells are there? As I have not heard 1 broadband driver reproducing this as a good as a decent tweeter can. IMO Having 25 drivers or any processing can not fix this.
about good drivers:
To me good off axis response is a quality of a good driver as you can't fix/dsp off axis response without changing on axis response.
Last edited:
I suspect that as well, but isn't difference much bigger when putting single frequencies through them, when compared to music?
Or don't the sine wave test tones distort the output of a planer more then music does?
A thing I am wondering for some time now; can't distortion be measured by playing music instead of test tones?
Or test tones created with instruments instead of the single frequency sine waves.
So you mean that even tho the response is flat, if there is other factors such as motor non-linearity, the sound will not be good?
No need 25x. Even 2x you should hear the difference. To get to certain spl, two drivers do not need to move as far as a single driver. You will have an equivalent of a very low distortion driver.
With larger area of sound source, and small cone displacement as if the cone is a light material, you have an equivalent of a planar system. What best planar system that you have ever heard? Is it worse than the 25xTC9?
First time i heard a Martin Logan, i knew that i would never be able to produce such sound with cone driver regardless of price. And even 25x cheap TV speakers will sound so difference with any normal speakers. And when you like the sound, no one will argue with your taste.
Think,
About the only thing I "know" from that experiment is that the distortion likely wasn't due to diaphragm breakup or non linear flux from larger peak to peak moves.
Sorry cannot talk yet what the difference is between the ribbons, BUT the typical distortion producing issues seem to not be the problem here and that makes me wonder if certain distortion producing phenoms make a more unpleasant sound than others??
About the only thing I "know" from that experiment is that the distortion likely wasn't due to diaphragm breakup or non linear flux from larger peak to peak moves.
Sorry cannot talk yet what the difference is between the ribbons, BUT the typical distortion producing issues seem to not be the problem here and that makes me wonder if certain distortion producing phenoms make a more unpleasant sound than others??
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.