I am trying to identify the parameters that make a speaker sound open and dynamic.
In recent years I have spotted a trend of more CD, horns / waveguides in DIY and commercial speaker, professional bass drivers are also widely used.
Speakers that's come into my mind are
- The JBL type of speaker with a 15" and horns for the mid and high.
- Tekton Pandragon
- Emerald Physics
- Jean Hiraga Onken
All are speakers with big drivers and sensitive around 95 db. Another trend is the use of DSP and also the emerge of OB speakers, even Jamo has one (-:
The reason I want to discuss this is because I want to own a pair of speakers that can surprise. When I listen to Pink Floyd "The Final Cut" I want to jump in my seat when there is a bomb going off and at the same time enjoy the big soundstage painted on a black velvet on the track "Southampton Dock"
Today I have a pair of Dana 980. The speakers are 2 1/2 way. With two scan speak 6 1/2" drivers and a 1" soft dome also from scan speak.
The are well build, the sound is good, but the sound stays in the box.
So what do you think make a speaker dynamic? Please join the discussion.
--
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Martin H. Andersen
System developer
In recent years I have spotted a trend of more CD, horns / waveguides in DIY and commercial speaker, professional bass drivers are also widely used.
Speakers that's come into my mind are
- The JBL type of speaker with a 15" and horns for the mid and high.
- Tekton Pandragon
- Emerald Physics
- Jean Hiraga Onken
All are speakers with big drivers and sensitive around 95 db. Another trend is the use of DSP and also the emerge of OB speakers, even Jamo has one (-:
The reason I want to discuss this is because I want to own a pair of speakers that can surprise. When I listen to Pink Floyd "The Final Cut" I want to jump in my seat when there is a bomb going off and at the same time enjoy the big soundstage painted on a black velvet on the track "Southampton Dock"
Today I have a pair of Dana 980. The speakers are 2 1/2 way. With two scan speak 6 1/2" drivers and a 1" soft dome also from scan speak.
The are well build, the sound is good, but the sound stays in the box.
So what do you think make a speaker dynamic? Please join the discussion.
--
Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Martin H. Andersen
System developer
Last edited:
Dynamic head room without distorting is important. So a speaker that can play at say 90dB but have ability to hit +20dB more while still not sounding strained (less than 1% HD).
The other is a good impulse step response that is time aligned. That makes a huge difference. So even at low SPL levels,
the SR is good, it sounds more dynamic.
Other thing is the speaker need to have low group delay down to 50Hz where fundamental of kick drum is. Less than 5ms is much better than 15ms to 20ms of some bass reflex boxes. This is where OB systems have an advantage - very low group delay in an OB woofer. Sometimes this is referred to as "immediacy" in the music.
All these things come together for a "dynamic" sounding speaker.
Oh, it goes without saying that to achieve these things general requires a speaker with relatively flat frequency response without huge resonant peaks.
The other is a good impulse step response that is time aligned. That makes a huge difference. So even at low SPL levels,
the SR is good, it sounds more dynamic.
Other thing is the speaker need to have low group delay down to 50Hz where fundamental of kick drum is. Less than 5ms is much better than 15ms to 20ms of some bass reflex boxes. This is where OB systems have an advantage - very low group delay in an OB woofer. Sometimes this is referred to as "immediacy" in the music.
All these things come together for a "dynamic" sounding speaker.
Oh, it goes without saying that to achieve these things general requires a speaker with relatively flat frequency response without huge resonant peaks.
Last edited:
Speakers that are the most dynamic that I've heard or owned (altough these are not my pair, above, but a prettier pair in San Antonio).
Two-way Klipsch Jubilees with TAD TD-4002 HF drivers on K-402 modified tractrix (accelerated throat expansion) horns, Yamaha SP2060 loudspeaker processor (24/96) crossing at approx. 425 Hz. and doing EQ calibrated in the anechoic chamber in Hope AR.
What makes these speakers dynamic? Large midrange/HF horns that control their polars throughout their passband, unlike the typical collapsing polar midrange horns having a very short vertical mouth dimension. The K-402s will actually control their polars down to 200 Hz, matching polars at the crossover point with the bass bin, fully horn loaded. Sensitivity is 106 dB/metre on bass bin, 111 dB/metre on Hf horn. Dynamic--group delay plot is flat and impulse response that is almost unbelievable even at 110 dBC with extremely low (inter-)modulation distortion, with a huge soundstage that fills the end of any room they're put into. Effortless sounding--you forget that you're listening to canned music played back.
Direct radiating bass bins don't do that, IMHE and exhibit much higher levels of AM, FM, and compression distortion.
Chris
Last edited:
I also recommend looking at the straight-sided Synergy/Unity Danley Sound Lab horns, widely copied by DIYers here with DIY spreadsheet available from Bill Waslo, Liberty Instruments.
They have the advantage of point source throughout and even lower FM distortion, but at a small price in terms of emergent HOMs and higher order harmonic production due to off-center drivers, an octave higher roll-off frequency than the speakers above, and lower sensitivity relative to the above two-way modified tractrix/folded horn.
They're also smaller and are time-aligned with passive crossovers--a subject that seems to polarize the audience here.
Very dynamic speakers, too.
Chris
They have the advantage of point source throughout and even lower FM distortion, but at a small price in terms of emergent HOMs and higher order harmonic production due to off-center drivers, an octave higher roll-off frequency than the speakers above, and lower sensitivity relative to the above two-way modified tractrix/folded horn.
They're also smaller and are time-aligned with passive crossovers--a subject that seems to polarize the audience here.
Very dynamic speakers, too.
Chris
So here the context of the word "dynamic" is purely subjective and everybody can interpret it at will. I disagree to see it on the subject of loudspeakers because, in the objective domain, it has a precise meaning and applies to signals.
Impulse response, huge drivers both for bass and midrange, horns for mid-high range, all drivers of high sensitivity. A little bit of cheating by tuning the bass to have a bump of 4-5db in the 60-90Hz region. Very low group delay, preferably sealed. Amp with massive current capacity.
Lol, that makes a whole system 🙂
Lol, that makes a whole system 🙂
Interestingly, Troels Gravesen has been refining his ideas of a dynamic or lively speaker.
JA8008-HMQ
18W-8434G00
Joachim Gerhard has similarly praised high Qms as being something that makes for a lively driver. Perhaps above 3. Aluminium formers are very popular, but seem to kill the dynamics of a speaker. By way of damping overly. Below is a very simple Sony E44 8" bass driver I like a lot. And that Lojzek seems to hate me mentioning. Probably a paper former, and a rigid corrugated surround and a dustcap that is essentially transparent. Perhaps a phase plug is another way of solving the awkward noises that rigid dustcaps make? Very nice sound IMO. Possibly a soft foamed surround works well too. Anything but a damping rubber one.
FWIW, I didn't much like it with a Morel CAT 298 soft dome. Almost anything else worked better.
JA8008-HMQ
18W-8434G00
Joachim Gerhard has similarly praised high Qms as being something that makes for a lively driver. Perhaps above 3. Aluminium formers are very popular, but seem to kill the dynamics of a speaker. By way of damping overly. Below is a very simple Sony E44 8" bass driver I like a lot. And that Lojzek seems to hate me mentioning. Probably a paper former, and a rigid corrugated surround and a dustcap that is essentially transparent. Perhaps a phase plug is another way of solving the awkward noises that rigid dustcaps make? Very nice sound IMO. Possibly a soft foamed surround works well too. Anything but a damping rubber one.
FWIW, I didn't much like it with a Morel CAT 298 soft dome. Almost anything else worked better.
Attachments
Last edited:
I've always assumed it was to do with distortion being x db down. Compression driver + big woofer like a TD15M sound very "dynamic" and have very low distortion. design around minimal cone movement would seem a good way to achieve the "dynamics"
If you want some dynamics try a Fane Studio 8 M in an Oris 150 horn with a big amp behind it your neighbours may not like it though.
[Does anyone actually talk to each other on this forum or is it to ignore what others are saying?]
To the OP: why would you use a direct radiating bass bin for anything other than small loudspeaker size? I think the answer is horn loading. All the higher order distortion of a bass bin is audible, and I'm not talking about harmonic distortion, but rather the upper and lower modulation sidebands (AM, FM) that pile up on the highest frequencies played by the bass bin, unless, of course, you play only single sine waves (i.e., no harmonics) on your bass bins. These are the most audible distortion products...because they are non-harmonic.
Compression distortion is huge, too. The word "dynamic" implies to me the idea that the loudspeakers are capable of very low and very high SPL/intensity output without distortion--especially compression distortion. Why would you compromise the least efficient portion of your loudspeaker and most audible one vis-à-vis distortion products to a direct radiator (vented or sealed)? If you cannot reproduce the recording at anywhere near true concert level (whether you choose to or not each time you play it), how can you call your loudspeaker "dynamic"?
It seems to me that the bass bin is actually the most difficult thing to get right, the most expensive (overall), and the one producing the greatest improvement in "dynamic" sound without mass effects and nonlinear (AM) distortion showing up--especially in light of the 5x higher excursions required for the same driver to be direct radiating instead of horn loaded. Why would you go DR if you are really seeking "dynamic reproduction"?
Chris
To the OP: why would you use a direct radiating bass bin for anything other than small loudspeaker size? I think the answer is horn loading. All the higher order distortion of a bass bin is audible, and I'm not talking about harmonic distortion, but rather the upper and lower modulation sidebands (AM, FM) that pile up on the highest frequencies played by the bass bin, unless, of course, you play only single sine waves (i.e., no harmonics) on your bass bins. These are the most audible distortion products...because they are non-harmonic.
Compression distortion is huge, too. The word "dynamic" implies to me the idea that the loudspeakers are capable of very low and very high SPL/intensity output without distortion--especially compression distortion. Why would you compromise the least efficient portion of your loudspeaker and most audible one vis-à-vis distortion products to a direct radiator (vented or sealed)? If you cannot reproduce the recording at anywhere near true concert level (whether you choose to or not each time you play it), how can you call your loudspeaker "dynamic"?
It seems to me that the bass bin is actually the most difficult thing to get right, the most expensive (overall), and the one producing the greatest improvement in "dynamic" sound without mass effects and nonlinear (AM) distortion showing up--especially in light of the 5x higher excursions required for the same driver to be direct radiating instead of horn loaded. Why would you go DR if you are really seeking "dynamic reproduction"?
Chris
The "true" level depends of the kind of concert, the theater where it was done and the distance from the musicians to the listener.
So, if at home, one may feels obliged to fix a target in the name of "fidelity of level", it is to get the level the maker of the record intended people to listen to his work.
Efficiency and accuracy of loudspeakers wont' do anything for the dynamics of the whole sound reproduction process : dynamics, in the objective domain of numbers, is limited at the production stage of the record where there are always, at least, some traces of compression.
You've apparently introduced some baggage here, and expanded away from the question: "what factors are important in producing a dynamic loudspeaker".
The question isn't "what do you think you can get away with in terms of undersizing your loudspeakers to the reduced set of music genres that you're playing" (and I can't believe that you never listen to rock at levels approaching concert level), and introduced a very off-the-subject notion of "what the record companies think you should play your music at", which I'll not reply to. I've simply chosen to answer the question.
If you don't like the answer due to "solution aversion", then that's really not something that we're ever going to agree on. I'll stick to the OP's question for the time being. It is interesting that a solution does exist, and one that is clearly viable--if "dynamic" is important to you.
Saying that efficiency doesn't matter clearly doesn't make it true: it does matter and it will always matter. I guess you can try to convince yourself and others that it isn't important. However, I've never heard an argument that backed it up. I've heard arguments like "wow, amplifier power is cheap", and "I'll never play my loudspeakers that loud", but all these arguments beg the question: dynamic reproduction implies wide limits to audible reproduction, even if only for milliseconds...without the accompanying impulse, compression and modulation distortion that you get from direct radiators.
Chris
Last edited:
That's only assertion. It reflects an old tendency of a camp of certain audiophiles to claim that only systems able to deliver high SPLs are the unique recipe for ultimate fidelity.
This idea may come from the fact that listening at high levels flattens the isosonic curves and gives more resolution to details otherwise somewhat shaded.
For me, high efficiency systems which imply horns are satisfactory at two conditions : large rooms and sufficient distance of the listener from the loudspeaker, 20 ft minimum.
For a low efficiency system, increasing the SPL at ears can be obtained by reducing the distance between the loudspeakers and the listener : is there an objective proof that the sound is then less "dynamic" than with a high efficiency system ?
On the other side, direct emitting drivers usually offer much better impulse response than those used in high efficiency loudspeakers, and in domestic conditions, overall better spatial images and more independence relative to the seating place.
Are the lot of people, and among them professionals, who use direct emitting drivers completely wrong ?
I do not agree that "dynamic" is an adequate word to describe loudspeakers, and, if nevertheless we retain it, the high efficiency drivers hold the monopole of it.
Words can have more than a single meaning, and even nuances of the same meaning. Certainly you know that. If a speaker were like a microphone, then a "dynamic speaker" would be one that doesn't use a field-coil or powered armature. 😉
Yes it would be nice to have some object measure of what a speaker that is called "dynamic" is doing vs one thought to be not dynamic. But most people use the term in a similar way to describe a speaker that can clean peaks high above it's nominal SPL. When a speaker can reproduce peaks at are 16-20dB above the average SPL without audible strain, distortion or other artifacts, I would call it very dynamic. Hearing that for the first time can be quite a surprise.
As to the original question, I don't know what makes a speaker dynamic sounding, I just know that most I have heard spare some characteristics.
- Large Size
- Efficiency
- Horn loading - but not always
I differ between speakers that are dynamic and speakers that sound dynamic.
The first one is easily defined (but not so easily measured): the higher the max SPL of the speaker the more dynamic it is. Maximum SPL is reached as soon as hearing threshold is exceeded.
The latter one is a purely subjective POV. But I've read somewhere (can't remember where it was, afair it was a scientific publication) that a lot of resonances sound dynamic or 'lively'. If you think of speakers that sounded dynamic to you, I bet that horn speakers or big widerange drivers come to your mind. They have a lot of resonances, so this theory might be true. Also underdamped, 'lively' rooms sound dynamic (at least to me).
Well designed speakers in good rooms sound boring, on the contrary. They're more correct, though, and definitely more long-term applicable.
The first one is easily defined (but not so easily measured): the higher the max SPL of the speaker the more dynamic it is. Maximum SPL is reached as soon as hearing threshold is exceeded.
The latter one is a purely subjective POV. But I've read somewhere (can't remember where it was, afair it was a scientific publication) that a lot of resonances sound dynamic or 'lively'. If you think of speakers that sounded dynamic to you, I bet that horn speakers or big widerange drivers come to your mind. They have a lot of resonances, so this theory might be true. Also underdamped, 'lively' rooms sound dynamic (at least to me).
Well designed speakers in good rooms sound boring, on the contrary. They're more correct, though, and definitely more long-term applicable.
By that measure, my speakers are "dynamic." I had always thought of them as relatively neutral, but (as Mehitabel would say), wotthehell.
How one can recognize a dynamic driver ?
Ability to have the huger gap between the lessiest & the highest DB level of a same driver in a same FR and with same amount of distorsions ?
Or is it just the result of a global FR of all the speaker with some fine choosed bump with the ability of the highs to follow the harmonics transcient (feeling of "snap", "quick") ? Just Mms/BL ?
Ability to have the huger gap between the lessiest & the highest DB level of a same driver in a same FR and with same amount of distorsions ?
Or is it just the result of a global FR of all the speaker with some fine choosed bump with the ability of the highs to follow the harmonics transcient (feeling of "snap", "quick") ? Just Mms/BL ?
I agree with the bat. Dynamic speakers are simply dynamic speakers; they can be used to very high SPL before significant problems that didn't exist at lower SPL come into play.
The myriad of things that can result in a livelier/punchier/snappier/etc. speaker can make people use the word 'dynamic' but are not especially related to dynamics at all, and most of them are unambiguously distortions of one sort or another. Better to choose different words for that sort of thing, I think?
The myriad of things that can result in a livelier/punchier/snappier/etc. speaker can make people use the word 'dynamic' but are not especially related to dynamics at all, and most of them are unambiguously distortions of one sort or another. Better to choose different words for that sort of thing, I think?
This information would be on the recording. Maybe a speaker should give no clue as to what it can do until fed with such material.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.