This. Add out of axis measurements and you will know what I mean.
Attachments
Pma, no for sure speaker and instruments are NOT The same, but then you have to realize than what you try to mimic in an inverse microphone. Then the difference in characteristics is perhaps not so grand. With good speakers you can actually get pretty close to the real deal. Close enough to create magical moments.
I agree that 'a really good illusion' even momentary is a great test for an audio system, and it might only achieve this on certain source material, like a human voice, for example, and be more compromised on others, like a full symphony orchestra. Or visa-versa. This is the tradeoff we have to make when building our audio system.
I find the debate on optimum speaker characteristics both useful and important, but obscuring what we have to center on to get optimum performance in the reproduce electronics. In fact, I have known a number of speaker designers who seem to be so obsessed (and sensitive) to speaker problems, that they regard electronics as a minor departure from total realism. This is unfortunate, because there are people who can hear the electronics 'signature' through relatively poor loudspeakers, and even better with better loudspeakers, and I know that there are several here on this thread.
I think that digital source is the best and very true, that cd is sufficient, that all digital formats are severely compromised in terms of interfacing to electromechanic speakers, here tape and TT fares better as they essentially are reverse electrodynamic transducers. I believe they the least explored amplifier area is the interfacing to speakers, back emf/current, the inflence of GND and power supply.
Ohh then speakers never sound good when they are spl linear
Ohh then speakers never sound good when they are spl linear
Had you considered reading some of the basic texts? These subjects have been covered in great detail.
I did answer your question.... understanding the answere is the problem. let me try again... simplifying maybe too much but here goes.....
The more narrow the dispersion, the more you hear only what was recorded (that of course includes the acoustic characteristics contribution to the sound). An extreame example is a headphone... no additional playback room contribution ... only that which was recorded.
Another example is a fig 8 pattern such as a panel type speaker.... side dispersion is minimal and thus lowers the reflections horizontally to nearby walls which would tend to obscure the recorded acoustics/music.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
SY yet we continue to measure with sines throug resistors. We listen and understand music in transients throug dynamic changing loads but we primarily evaluate and measure in steady state through resistive loads. To be objective we need a new measurement paradigm where better measurement results also offers better listening exprience
Not really, John, I agree some trade-off will occur, but it can be a truly minor one. I find my speakers equally convincing when playing Joan Baez with a classical 6 string guitar only and when reproducing the thunder of The Blue Man Group hitting thei gigantic drum (diameter of some 8 ft). And, given the amplfication I use, I have no problem with power delivery or source, but unafortunately far too many home systems do have just that problem as much as the problem of speakers.
If there's anything I agree with you Americans with it's the fact that for a realistic sound stage one does need quite a lot of power, and not just any power, but quality power.
Oh, I think MiiB goes out quite enough. He put some statements here which if he was out would get his *** wet from the pour of tears of some measurements freaks, but personally, I think he's quite right. We've been stuck in the basically same static system of measurement unnaturally long, time to introduce new, rewised standards and make them COMPULSORY. Leaving it to the industry will inevitably cause them to slide downward.
It's like travelling abroad - you can have with you any and all the papers you want, but first, let's see your passport, mister.
It's like travelling abroad - you can have with you any and all the papers you want, but first, let's see your passport, mister.
I am looking at this from the speaker side of things right now and I will try and present my idea here correctly. In a typical multi-driver enclosure we have the problems of frequency division between devices and also the phase response at the crossover frequency.
To get this anywhere near correct it seems takes both passive and active elements in the crossover networks. A passive conjugate network for impedance correction on the speaker terminals and an active section before power amplification for frequency division and any phase correction.
Now here is where I would like to see some discussion. The active circuitry used before an amplifier for the crossover, how would the gurus do that here.
John,
If you were building an active crossover network to go between a preamp and amplifier sections, and this could be plural such as three or even four sections, how would you do that? Would you use discrete op-amps or what?
Anybody else have a preferred method besides DSP?
To get this anywhere near correct it seems takes both passive and active elements in the crossover networks. A passive conjugate network for impedance correction on the speaker terminals and an active section before power amplification for frequency division and any phase correction.
Now here is where I would like to see some discussion. The active circuitry used before an amplifier for the crossover, how would the gurus do that here.
John,
If you were building an active crossover network to go between a preamp and amplifier sections, and this could be plural such as three or even four sections, how would you do that? Would you use discrete op-amps or what?
Anybody else have a preferred method besides DSP?
Apparently not enough to read the basic texts (e.g., Self, Cordell, Baxandall) -or even to look at the Measurements section in a popular magazine- where reactive loads and response to various test signals are discussed extensively.
I would once again suggest ears-only experiments, but that is anathema to folks dedicated to the idea of not trusting their ears.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.