I think I can, which is why I said to dial in similar tonal balance. 🙂
That will make the usual measurements seem different if the directivity is different.
Is that close to what you are getting at?
That will make the usual measurements seem different if the directivity is different.
Is that close to what you are getting at?
So, if you EQ for the same curve it's apples and oranges.....(not apples to apples gentlemen)
Last edited:
Hmm, you either have a good 'ear' for pace, rhythm & timing [PR&T] or you don't and the systems are either designed to be accurate reproducers or not and since both are a relatively precious few IME, comparing them 'apples to apples' is an exercise in futility, especially cone/dome Vs compression horn unless you develop an 'ear' for whatever live performance type you're most interested in and/or the 'little things' that a system must excel at to guide you.
IOW 'stating the obvious...' you're the reference 'apple' and you can either EQ the DUT to suit or not and for me the Danley system does everything performance wise I've wanted/accomplished with horn systems plus the one I couldn't, so all that was left for me to critique was a too 'brash'/'sharp' extreme HF for my [much damaged] 'ear'.
IOW 'stating the obvious...' you're the reference 'apple' and you can either EQ the DUT to suit or not and for me the Danley system does everything performance wise I've wanted/accomplished with horn systems plus the one I couldn't, so all that was left for me to critique was a too 'brash'/'sharp' extreme HF for my [much damaged] 'ear'.
More opinion from the Audio Fruit Stand
Points I'd not considered. Very well, if one can listen in an anechoic room, the comparison would be easier. But we rarely have that. So more decisions. What is the standard? Direct field? Diffuse field?
I've just refreshed my memory about the Schroeder frequency. Isn't Google great? Read one or two articles and you're instantly an audio engineer 🙂 OK, for argument, let us assume that the claim of for a "normal" living room, that frequency will be 100-200 Hz. Returning to my earlier idea of just having the SM60M for the real Danley, this means, compared to a larger speaker, we are guaranteed to lose directivity below about 300 Hz. A bigger horn would have given us an octave lower, perhaps more.
How important is that? But the point can't be escaped that, given the larger horn, one would reasonably expect to get directional control well below a room's Schroeder frequency. Nice to have certainly, but it comes at a price. And the price is probably several thousand dollars, plus a much larger speaker.
But, probably, control down to 300 Hz is acceptable, and allows one the option of dodgy subwoofers that play well up into the mid-bass, that I outlined earlier 🙂
Points I'd not considered. Very well, if one can listen in an anechoic room, the comparison would be easier. But we rarely have that. So more decisions. What is the standard? Direct field? Diffuse field?
I've just refreshed my memory about the Schroeder frequency. Isn't Google great? Read one or two articles and you're instantly an audio engineer 🙂 OK, for argument, let us assume that the claim of for a "normal" living room, that frequency will be 100-200 Hz. Returning to my earlier idea of just having the SM60M for the real Danley, this means, compared to a larger speaker, we are guaranteed to lose directivity below about 300 Hz. A bigger horn would have given us an octave lower, perhaps more.
How important is that? But the point can't be escaped that, given the larger horn, one would reasonably expect to get directional control well below a room's Schroeder frequency. Nice to have certainly, but it comes at a price. And the price is probably several thousand dollars, plus a much larger speaker.
But, probably, control down to 300 Hz is acceptable, and allows one the option of dodgy subwoofers that play well up into the mid-bass, that I outlined earlier 🙂
Last edited:
Outdoors !
Doesn't have to be loud, or neighbor disturbing.
Doesn't have to be far away from house or garage.
Because reducing any room boundaries and reflections, helps comparisons ime.
(and will probably make the speakers sound better than ever heard before 😀
outside is the best room in most everybody's house 😉)
Last edited:
Why would you want that? I've never heard a dedicated sub driver to play well that high at all, I'd rather use dedicated midbasses in between. Which is exactly what I've been doing for over a decade; Unity/midbass/subs with xovers at 350 and 60Hz.
I agree completely that a "normal" sub should never play up to the 300 Hz range. I was brain storming using a Synergy horn (e.g. the SM60M) that couldn't get much below 300 Hz. I am curious what most likely, DIY solutions could provide acceptable bass from 300 Hz down as low as possible. The 1/4 wave rule says if you can get within about 29 cm or 1 foot of the horn, you are fine. In other words, there's nothing wrong with the sub playing up to 300 Hz in such a case.
Unless I totally misunderstand the concepts, the Schroeder frequency makes the directivity of a horn below that frequency irrelevant. As such, there is no benefit having midbass within the horn. Seems to me this allows much simpler, smaller, cheaper Synergy/Unity solutions.
Unless I totally misunderstand the concepts, the Schroeder frequency makes the directivity of a horn below that frequency irrelevant. As such, there is no benefit having midbass within the horn. Seems to me this allows much simpler, smaller, cheaper Synergy/Unity solutions.
An 'exception to the rule' is the late, lamented Altec 3182, 3184 [HE] with a 20-2000 Hz BW and while rated at 200 Hz in their 20 ft^ft cab it's only due to the prosound 'sub' duty needs of the mid '80s, though known to work quite well in a prosound app XO'd at 500 Hz/2nd order to any of its 1.4" throat horns.
Can't recall any known HIFI apps, but are/were rare, so not surprised and yet to read/hear anything about GPA's replica 3184: http://greatplainsaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/3184.pdf
Can't recall any known HIFI apps, but are/were rare, so not surprised and yet to read/hear anything about GPA's replica 3184: http://greatplainsaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/3184.pdf
Assuming no leakage, so must be measured............
Regardless, the goal is to have no reflections between you and the speaker and then become diffusive behind you, so draw a plan view of the room and play with various/desired speaker, LP position
Minimise the room - go outside or sit in the nearfield, so that you aren't hearing much room / non direct sound.
I have an awkward living room (funny shape, lots of glass, no good options for a stereo layout). I use a mono system that tries to keep the sound off the glass:
80-700Hz: OB 18"
Above 700Hz: 60cm wide horn
I still find it sounds best when I listen nearfield. Room sound = bad.
I have an asymmetrical room as well and went a similar loudspeaker route. Dual AE IB15 woofers in a dipole to 450hz, above them a SEOS 24 and BMS coaxial compression driver. They sound wonderful and minimize my room issues.
I imagine that is a very good sound. Do you observe what I do - that it is pretty good normally, but even better up close?
I started sitting about 150cm from the baffle for late night (low volume) listening, and found that I really like the near field sound.
I started sitting about 150cm from the baffle for late night (low volume) listening, and found that I really like the near field sound.
Before we get too off topic, I haven't given nearfield a try with them as this configuration really pleases me. I do have a nearfield rig in the same room on another wall consisting of KEF Q100. Up close and even for background noise, they sound like toys in comparison.
We (some) don't respect it as such, but nearfield is the listening position of higher fidelity...that is if the design will support such a position.
IMO, nearfield properties are not OT.
a) one of the positives people talk about with reference to Synergy (+ other multiple entry horns) is that they sound like a point source at any distance, even if you stick your head right in the mouth.
That is: despite being big, they suit nearfield listening.
b) my home system was inspired by the above - here is the prototype (I used 1x2" and 1x6" in the horn):
https://i.imgur.com/a5a9weX.jpg
I expect that the observations I'm making will hold true for other MEH of similar shape + dimensions.
a) one of the positives people talk about with reference to Synergy (+ other multiple entry horns) is that they sound like a point source at any distance, even if you stick your head right in the mouth.
That is: despite being big, they suit nearfield listening.
b) my home system was inspired by the above - here is the prototype (I used 1x2" and 1x6" in the horn):
https://i.imgur.com/a5a9weX.jpg
I expect that the observations I'm making will hold true for other MEH of similar shape + dimensions.
- Nearfield increases direct energy vs indirect energy. Being able to listen nearfield is one the benefits of this type of design. I am biased towards large systems that can be used nearfield though. Nearfield.
Except they typically sound awful that high, hence why I use midbasses, then subs.
I agree. Subs have no business going to 300Hz..
I use subs up to 100-120Hz, but i wish i could hold them to 80hz.....