Re: Re: low midrange
What I'm doing is a three way - If he wants to tackle that task then the more power to him - it could sound great but to me I would always be tempted to get it right (or better) and after a week or two of diddling off to the wood pile it would go. IOW I am impatient and picky. Plus I keep moving to the fourth order with adjustable damping triamp- quad amp camp - a place he doesn't want to go. I could use two drivers in the low mid with a passive low pass on the larger cone area- but if I was going to that I'd just go ahead and quad amp the beast. This would defeat what I have chosen to build, a compact (sort of) low compromise sensitive three way OB.
FlorianO said:
What I'm doing is a three way - If he wants to tackle that task then the more power to him - it could sound great but to me I would always be tempted to get it right (or better) and after a week or two of diddling off to the wood pile it would go. IOW I am impatient and picky. Plus I keep moving to the fourth order with adjustable damping triamp- quad amp camp - a place he doesn't want to go. I could use two drivers in the low mid with a passive low pass on the larger cone area- but if I was going to that I'd just go ahead and quad amp the beast. This would defeat what I have chosen to build, a compact (sort of) low compromise sensitive three way OB.
SunRa said:
Not sure you got me there, and maybe I wasn't clear enough: What I meant was that in addition to the shared 200Hz - 1kHz LR2 bandpass the 6ND410 will be HP first order at 400 Hz, leaving the 12'' to do most of the heavy lifting below that.
The problem seems to be the large capacitor required for that (colorations ? other drawbacks ?) . No wonder Lynn has drawn a clever gizmo ("composite capacitor") for that very purpose...
Re: Re: Re: low midrange
Hi Magnetar,
I also favor your 3-way design strategy.....will probably use a dipole ribbon tweeter, some magical 10" midrange, and four Lambda 15 dipole woofers.
Do you plan to use hi-Qts woofers which do not need (any) much dipole baffle compensation? If you use "normal" Qts woofers would you consider sizing the baffle size to match the -6db/octave dipole equalization, and using a 4th order on the midrange and 3rd order on the woofers.
Will you also use LR4 for the woofer-midrange? Do you have any experience with steeper...like LR8 slopes on the woofer-midrange?
Magnetar said:
Hi Magnetar,
I also favor your 3-way design strategy.....will probably use a dipole ribbon tweeter, some magical 10" midrange, and four Lambda 15 dipole woofers.
Do you plan to use hi-Qts woofers which do not need (any) much dipole baffle compensation? If you use "normal" Qts woofers would you consider sizing the baffle size to match the -6db/octave dipole equalization, and using a 4th order on the midrange and 3rd order on the woofers.
Will you also use LR4 for the woofer-midrange? Do you have any experience with steeper...like LR8 slopes on the woofer-midrange?
Hi Lynn,
IMO The problem isn't manufacturers, its us.
A product is developed, its brought to the public and if its successful then its a hit with buyers. We all shape and determine how successful a product is. All the influences and reasons for modern day substandard audio and the lack of progress you mention have been brought on by us and our buying habits. We're happy with convenience, we're happy with "good enough" if it fits in our pocket, we're happy with compression because we are cheap and have driven the market to relentlessly put out cheap cr@p. Simple fact is there's a huge market for this stuff because we made one for it.
The average person doesn't care about audio reproduction quality. I look at my relatives, friends, co workers and the passer by in the street with an Iphone and in-ears. None care for audio, they treat it like fast food ie. just there to fill a gap but it has to be convenient, superficial and cheap.
I show them what I think audio is and they think I'm unrealistic and don't have a firm grasp on reality. "Are you serious?" is a rhetorical question I quite often get when revealing my audio addiction. I'm not telepathic but I can literally feel their repulsion to such alien ideals and seemingly obsessive methodology.
I'm actually to the point were I'm embarrassed to mention it outside of anywhere other than people who have been vetted and confirm as fellow followers. I kid not! There's nothing worse than being at a dinner table or wherever and the conversation shifts to what I find interesting. I'd like to talk audio but experience tells me that my other hobbies such as cars and bikes are met with less yawning, false interest or topic changing. People understand cars and bikes so you don't get friction or come off as weird boring geek who spent £500 on a midrange driver and considers digital room correction filters to be fun. If people ask about my audio kit I say I have big speakers with four 8inch bass drivers. They understand those things and its the path of least resistance for me. Interestingly, talking about enjoying music rather the path to musical enjoyment is very widely acceptable.
There is one thing that can usually educate more understanding as to why a good system is worth it and that's to have them listen to good hifi with music they are familiar with and enjoy. The differences and improvement can shock them into realising they've been unknowingly ignorant.
audio-philia
Looks like this discussion is moving towards the unreal mode of "why doesn't the world understand our obsession"?
I recall when my brother, at 12 years old or so, and my dad bought an Eico 12 watt mono kit back in '56. He was just getting into short wave radio, and my father had been influenced by his Scout leaders' music system (everything was mono back then, at least in the Richmond area). The "WoW" factor of music reproduction was just hitting some of the public, we joined the RCA record club, "Living Stereo" records came out shortly thereafter, etc. The final assembled system consisted of a Garrard changer, the Eico kit, and an EV Wolverine IB with an 8" driver (forget the model #). This was a BIG deal, as many of my fathers' work friends were also buying various pieces of equipment (AR's, Fishers, etc.)
As it turned out, the majority of that generation quickly seemed to tire of this new way to spend money, as we stopped getting records after a few years (as did most every other family around us), so I liken it to the current IPOD situation, or perhaps any of the other mass market electronic crazes.
What's my point? I don't see the high end audio situation as being much different than it was in the late '60's as far as a market goes. The only true believers then were obsessive music junkies, either building or buying this stuff. I built my share of folded horns (anyone remember Weems "Mello Monster" from Popular Electronics), bass reflex enclosures, IB's, etc., as well as a couple of Heathkit receivers and amps? I must have built 20 sets of those for fraternity brothers in the early '70s. Then, as now, there were occasional fanatics (like me) who took audio as seriously as I do, but they were, as seems to be tjhe case now, few and far between. All that has changed is we now have this mass communication venue to communicate our efforts at audio nirvana.
I believe there are just as many luminaries out there working on the next break-through now as there were then; they just may not have been recognized as yet. I'll wager that the visionaries of 'yore had less exposure as "gurus" then than the Tooles, etc. have now, and their achievements were'nt recognized then any more than today's experts are.
It's too bad the actual experience of listening can't somehow be part of that communication, though.
John L.
Looks like this discussion is moving towards the unreal mode of "why doesn't the world understand our obsession"?
I recall when my brother, at 12 years old or so, and my dad bought an Eico 12 watt mono kit back in '56. He was just getting into short wave radio, and my father had been influenced by his Scout leaders' music system (everything was mono back then, at least in the Richmond area). The "WoW" factor of music reproduction was just hitting some of the public, we joined the RCA record club, "Living Stereo" records came out shortly thereafter, etc. The final assembled system consisted of a Garrard changer, the Eico kit, and an EV Wolverine IB with an 8" driver (forget the model #). This was a BIG deal, as many of my fathers' work friends were also buying various pieces of equipment (AR's, Fishers, etc.)
As it turned out, the majority of that generation quickly seemed to tire of this new way to spend money, as we stopped getting records after a few years (as did most every other family around us), so I liken it to the current IPOD situation, or perhaps any of the other mass market electronic crazes.
What's my point? I don't see the high end audio situation as being much different than it was in the late '60's as far as a market goes. The only true believers then were obsessive music junkies, either building or buying this stuff. I built my share of folded horns (anyone remember Weems "Mello Monster" from Popular Electronics), bass reflex enclosures, IB's, etc., as well as a couple of Heathkit receivers and amps? I must have built 20 sets of those for fraternity brothers in the early '70s. Then, as now, there were occasional fanatics (like me) who took audio as seriously as I do, but they were, as seems to be tjhe case now, few and far between. All that has changed is we now have this mass communication venue to communicate our efforts at audio nirvana.
I believe there are just as many luminaries out there working on the next break-through now as there were then; they just may not have been recognized as yet. I'll wager that the visionaries of 'yore had less exposure as "gurus" then than the Tooles, etc. have now, and their achievements were'nt recognized then any more than today's experts are.
It's too bad the actual experience of listening can't somehow be part of that communication, though.
John L.
Anyone who has heard the old acoustic recordings cannot fail to be astonished. The voice is heard in the round with great acoustic strength and beauty. This is not surprising since the recordings are embodied pneuma.
That we rapidly dumped this miraculous process into the dustbin of history is just one sign amongst many of the spiritual ice age we are suffering through.
Here, and elsewhere, the acoustic sparkle of Night has been disturbed by the noise from this damn machine.
Cilla
That we rapidly dumped this miraculous process into the dustbin of history is just one sign amongst many of the spiritual ice age we are suffering through.
Here, and elsewhere, the acoustic sparkle of Night has been disturbed by the noise from this damn machine.
Cilla
salas said:Don't worry! We audio nuts are the ones to survive 2012! Only then the world will really know!
in fact nobody else but exactly "audio nuts" are responsible for decline of HiFi market into its niche
when whole marketing is orientated towards "audio nuts" (that is their irrational obsessions) as best consumers (loyal shopaholics) no wonder that all other people are repelled
thank You Monster Cable! (and many others)
and turn from this niche marketing to mass marketing will not happen because it is not desirable, not good for business
higher investments and lower income (because we have to lower the prices)
nah! parasiting on obsessive-compulsive consumer is best thing for business
I am not talking about DIYers of course as I think that audio DIY is a separate hobby from "audiophilia"
a hobby that is driven exactly by the misery of the HiFi market caused by its "audiophilization"
for me "audio nuts" are for example those buyers of "specialty audiophile cables" or Avalon "Masterpieces" LOL
best,
graaf
My new brand of speakers is launching immediately:
ESCHATOLOGICAL SPEAKERS
The Ultimate speaker!!!
Once you've heard them, you'll never need to hear any others!
Literally the last speakers you'll ever need to own!
Get them before it's too late!!!!!
.........................................
I grew up with 78's, LPs, then came tape, cds, dvds.
The later technology, when well executed, has always sounded better than the previous.
Download the latest files from Linn records for the future sound.
http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?format=studio
Utterly gorgeous.
When I was a kid, the best over all speakers were the big horn systems.
These days the best speakers going to incorporate the new wave guide technology like Danley and Geddes are doing and like Lynn is planning.
There is too much nostalgia on the part of those who did did not live through what they're nostalgic for!
The Furies will pursue those who don't embrace better living through science.
ESCHATOLOGICAL SPEAKERS
The Ultimate speaker!!!
Once you've heard them, you'll never need to hear any others!
Literally the last speakers you'll ever need to own!
Get them before it's too late!!!!!
.........................................
I grew up with 78's, LPs, then came tape, cds, dvds.
The later technology, when well executed, has always sounded better than the previous.
Download the latest files from Linn records for the future sound.
http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?format=studio
Utterly gorgeous.
When I was a kid, the best over all speakers were the big horn systems.
These days the best speakers going to incorporate the new wave guide technology like Danley and Geddes are doing and like Lynn is planning.
There is too much nostalgia on the part of those who did did not live through what they're nostalgic for!
The Furies will pursue those who don't embrace better living through science.
FrankWW said:My new brand of speakers is launching immediately:
ESCHATOLOGICAL SPEAKERS
The Ultimate speaker!!!
Once you've heard them, you'll never need to hear any others!
Literally the last speakers you'll ever need to own!
Get them before it's too late!!!!!
.........................................
I grew up with 78's, LPs, then came tape, cds, dvds.
The later technology, when well executed, has always sounded better than the previous.
Download the latest files from Linn records for the future sound.
http://www.linnrecords.com/catalogue.aspx?format=studio
Utterly gorgeous.
When I was a kid, the best over all speakers were the big horn systems.
These days the best speakers going to incorporate the new wave guide technology like Danley and Geddes are doing and like Lynn is planning.
There is too much nostalgia on the part of those who did did not live through what they're nostalgic for!
The Furies will pursue those who don't embrace better living through science.
LOL Frank! You forgot the model name. ''Apocalypse N.O.W''* I suppose, featuring waveguide proprietary tech.
*No Other Waveguide
Applying the Geddes waveguide for a plasma tweeter
For the good Dr Geddes: Given that a plasma emitter is essentially a point source, would the optimal waveguide be a simple, straight walled conical?
Further, might a simple 6db / octave EQ do the trick in this case?
Appreciate your thoughts on this, even if you do find the idea of an arc instead of a B&C anathema
Thanks,
cv
For the good Dr Geddes: Given that a plasma emitter is essentially a point source, would the optimal waveguide be a simple, straight walled conical?
Further, might a simple 6db / octave EQ do the trick in this case?
Appreciate your thoughts on this, even if you do find the idea of an arc instead of a B&C anathema
Thanks,
cv
Re: Applying the Geddes waveguide for a plasma tweeter
I don't have any experince with this kind of source, but yes the ideal waveguide for a point source would be a cone. But there is the question about what happens to the sound wave in the directions that are not down the waveguide? If these refect somewhere and end up back at the wave guide throat then this is a big problem.
CV said:
I don't have any experince with this kind of source, but yes the ideal waveguide for a point source would be a cone. But there is the question about what happens to the sound wave in the directions that are not down the waveguide? If these refect somewhere and end up back at the wave guide throat then this is a big problem.
The first part of the "HowTo - as simple as it gets - for DIY CSD measurement" was about what CSD is good for and about some limitations applying.
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1505009#post1505009
The second part of the "HowTo - as simple as it gets - for DIY CSD measurement" was about the exceptional low setup requirements and the fairly cheap equipment needed to capture useful CSD's.
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1506069#post1506069
The third part of the "HowTo - as simple as it gets - for DIY CSD measurement" brought up that nobody has to be graduated in physics to do great CSD measurements. Interpreting the graphs is as easy as WYSIWYG to a vast extent.
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1509028#post1509028
If we recall the pictures we have seen right before one may think the next ones are from the same speaker
They are NOT .
The speaker earlier - if anybody is interested in – was in beautiful Yellow whereas this speaker comes in smart Black.
Meaning - they have quite different membrane materials – Kevlar versus sort of Polypropylene.
If you recall the single resonance CSD's of the B110 with its Bextrene membrane (thanks for correcting me in this, Lynn) like some well behaved metal cones (Viva, Excel ...) - this tells us there is NO strict material related break up characteristic one could spot.
Hemp may be magic – if you find the right blend and/or smoke it rather than auditioning – concluding from measurement only, its a rather mixed bag....
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tidbits/Hemptone-HTFR5-CSD.gif
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tidbits/Hemptone-HTLF7-CSD.gif
Cut membranes from ScanSpeak – for example – probably will perform more reliable
http://www.zaphaudio.com/5.5test/Scanspeak-15W8530K00-CSD.gif
Lest I forget, there are some extended measurements – revealing pro speaker CSD's as well - available from augerpro at
http://s139.photobucket.com/albums/q288/augerpro/
Lets do a last exercise at the smart Black speaker above and apply some equalizing at 2kHz:
And some more equalising at around 1kHz:
Wow – not that bad, considering that these are standard notch filters, having taken me 10 min to adjust each.
It's NOT possible to REALLY correct speaker resonance's though as long as you don't find a speaker with a text book breake up resonance OR using convolution technique instead of old fashioned passive or active filters.
Why NOT stupendous equalising without CSD ? - may answer my last picture ...
First - from FR only, you sometimes can have a hard time to tell which peak to notch out best.
From a CSD plot its obvious that there are peaks that are paramount to get rid of .
Second - this very speaker shows a really interesting "irregularity" in this respect:
here an annoying resonance follows a DIP in the frequency response – who would have expected that from a frequency plot only?
This isn't the speaker I want to stay with but still, I strongly prefer it to the smart Black one.
Greetings
Michael
PS
There are "new tools" (measurement and convolution software) – or toys (?) as some female would say – rather effortless available to the DIYer. So better stop lamenting about "good old times" and what (audio) industry jerks do nowadays.
Changing economy-commerce-capital-we_have_to_be_absolutely_safe_and_well_off habit would require some in depth politics-patent- private property-national_interest-put_others_under_(hot-cold-economic)_war discussion and this is STRICTLY beyond what mod's do like here
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1505009#post1505009
The second part of the "HowTo - as simple as it gets - for DIY CSD measurement" was about the exceptional low setup requirements and the fairly cheap equipment needed to capture useful CSD's.
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1506069#post1506069
The third part of the "HowTo - as simple as it gets - for DIY CSD measurement" brought up that nobody has to be graduated in physics to do great CSD measurements. Interpreting the graphs is as easy as WYSIWYG to a vast extent.
It can be found here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1509028#post1509028
If we recall the pictures we have seen right before one may think the next ones are from the same speaker
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
They are NOT .
The speaker earlier - if anybody is interested in – was in beautiful Yellow whereas this speaker comes in smart Black.
Meaning - they have quite different membrane materials – Kevlar versus sort of Polypropylene.
If you recall the single resonance CSD's of the B110 with its Bextrene membrane (thanks for correcting me in this, Lynn) like some well behaved metal cones (Viva, Excel ...) - this tells us there is NO strict material related break up characteristic one could spot.
Hemp may be magic – if you find the right blend and/or smoke it rather than auditioning – concluding from measurement only, its a rather mixed bag....
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tidbits/Hemptone-HTFR5-CSD.gif
http://www.zaphaudio.com/tidbits/Hemptone-HTLF7-CSD.gif
Cut membranes from ScanSpeak – for example – probably will perform more reliable
http://www.zaphaudio.com/5.5test/Scanspeak-15W8530K00-CSD.gif
Lest I forget, there are some extended measurements – revealing pro speaker CSD's as well - available from augerpro at
http://s139.photobucket.com/albums/q288/augerpro/
Lets do a last exercise at the smart Black speaker above and apply some equalizing at 2kHz:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
And some more equalising at around 1kHz:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Wow – not that bad, considering that these are standard notch filters, having taken me 10 min to adjust each.
It's NOT possible to REALLY correct speaker resonance's though as long as you don't find a speaker with a text book breake up resonance OR using convolution technique instead of old fashioned passive or active filters.
Why NOT stupendous equalising without CSD ? - may answer my last picture ...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
First - from FR only, you sometimes can have a hard time to tell which peak to notch out best.
From a CSD plot its obvious that there are peaks that are paramount to get rid of .
Second - this very speaker shows a really interesting "irregularity" in this respect:
here an annoying resonance follows a DIP in the frequency response – who would have expected that from a frequency plot only?
This isn't the speaker I want to stay with but still, I strongly prefer it to the smart Black one.
Greetings
Michael
PS
There are "new tools" (measurement and convolution software) – or toys (?) as some female would say – rather effortless available to the DIYer. So better stop lamenting about "good old times" and what (audio) industry jerks do nowadays.
Changing economy-commerce-capital-we_have_to_be_absolutely_safe_and_well_off habit would require some in depth politics-patent- private property-national_interest-put_others_under_(hot-cold-economic)_war discussion and this is STRICTLY beyond what mod's do like here